Joe Bauer

Corey, did any theater seated audience member proven present before the police came in ever say that Oswald kept changing seats more than normal or even sat right next to other patrons in this unusual musical chairs action? Was it more than one or two that said this? Or was it just a single theater usher who said this? Were these statements made to the police or members of the press and restated in published or recorded testimony form? Oswald's reported seat changing is mentioned in the following Popular Mechanics article: There Are Secrets in the Texas Theatre - Popular Mechanics https://www.popularmechanics.com › texas-theatre-lee-harvey-oswald Don’t bother trying to find the infamous seat. There is no marker, and Oswald moved seats several times as the movie played. Besides, the theater owner may have removed the seat before the FBI seized it. No one really knows where Oswald sat or what became of the seat. If I personally saw this action by another theater patron I wouldn't have reported this to the theater management. It wasn't arm waving and shouting behavior. I would have just given it a brief curious thought and even if I was sat next to, if the person who did this got up within a few seconds I probably wouldn't even have moved to a new seat. But, after the crazy scene that followed with the arrival of the police I would have mentioned it because it involved the person who was hauled off and was instantly notorious. I guess the question is, how many theater patrons actually mentioned this action by Oswald? If it were more than one, two or three, I would consider this a serious point of witness testimony to consider regards Oswald's possible motive for going into the theater besides just a random desperately selected hideout.

The thread Kathy is linking you to Rich is extensively posted. I just very briefly browsed it because I too have had specific interest in Oswald's behavior once he left the Texas School Book Depository and ending with his arrest and a perfectly incriminating photo-op display to an instantly large lynch mob crowd ( with shouts of "kill him"-"hang him" ) outside of the Texas theater. That whole outside crowd and press scene seemed too instantly large to me. Also, you read about Oswald walking up to single and couples theater audience patrons in the Texas theater and sitting "right next to them" even though the theater was a large seat number one and sparsely attended. Here we have another odd fact reported by at least some of the theater patrons, but we can't prove Oswald did this. Because if Oswald really did this sidling up to others in a seat right next to them, there has to be some other reason behind this odd action besides his just liking to be shoulder to shoulder with others versus sitting by himself while watching the movies. Like all of us here, I have gone to the movies hundreds if not thousands of times in my 67 years. I have never had anyone ( a stranger ) sit "right next to me" if the theater was only 20% full and there were many open seats all around my single one. If they did ( and they didn't look like Pamela Anderson ) I would feel so uncomfortable I would instantly move. This reported theater seat moving action on Oswald part ( if true ) is clearly worthy of suspicion beyond meaningless.

Too off thread.

Citing Dallas PD Patrolman Joe Murphy's recounting of the stalled truck and who came and went from it as credible is laughably absurd knowing he had left the area (for what, a 1/2 hours time? ) to take one of these men back to get another truck. Julia Ann Mercer obviously saw what she saw regards the truck and it's occupants when Murphy was on this drop off errand because she mentions seeing only two men, not three. Speaking of Julia Ann Mercer seeking attention regards her story, have any of you ever been confronted by armed policemen in uniform and out-of-the-blue told to come with them for any reason? My common sense guess is that they did this to Julia Ann Mercer without polite apologies and reassuring smiles and explanation. I never have, but I am sure it would be a very alarming and even scary experience during any normal time let alone 11,22,1963. You would logically assume that if Julia Ann Mercer made up her story including her "SS not so secret" comments to other coffee shop patrons for attention, she was probably cursing herself for doing so within earshot of these two officers. And who would keep reciting this story of the stalled truck and gun case removal under even more stressful face to face questioning if it was all exaggerated in the first place. We'd probably admit it was all an embarrassing attention seeking mistake. Yet, even under these stressful circumstances, Mercer stuck with her story throughout her questioning. She stated her original story consistently that day and the next day and both times before Ruby shot Oswald. And were these officers in the coffee shop having coffee and doughnuts themselves? If they were, then JFK must not have been shot at that point, otherwise they would have been called back out to the frantic "attention all units" scene all over Dallas. And since when does a worker in a stalled truck get something several feet long out of the back of the truck to try to restart a dead engine? An item stored in a bag with a handle? And what's up with walking with this gun carrying case looking item up the grassy knoll farther and farther away from his stalled truck and not returning right away? Did this younger truck exiting worker just decide to do something more productive and interesting with his wait time like metal detecting or pipe bending on the top of the knoll rather than sit there with a paunchy old guy who looked like Jack Ruby? Maybe he just needed to take a leak and this long bagged item was a false excuse ruse to any one who might have wondered why he walked up there? Maybe there really was a rifle in the case and this beany cap, checkered jacket wearing fellow was planting it up somewhere behind the picket fence? Mercer's 1968 claim of alteration of her signature and deposition statements isn't far fetched when you consider the Dallas FBI destroying important file evidence regards Oswald and agent Hosty keeping this fact from the Warren Commission with the outrageous explanation of "they didn't ask me." How could the Warren Commission ask about something they had no knowledge of? Who's doing the lying or truth withholding here? If Hosty had told the WC about the Oswald file destruction, it would have turned the investigation upside down and all around. Could you imagine the questions the Warren Commission would then have to ask the FBI regards Oswald and what they knew about him and their motives in destroying such evidence? Geeminy. My point here is that the credibility factor of Mercer was higher than the FBI's in this matter imo, especially after we eventually knew how much was held back from the WC by them. Fact is, no one ever found the "stalled truck." Mercer's story is more important than the coverage it received imo. You have a young, sharp eyed, reputable eye-witness mere feet away with a clear straight ahead view stating she watched a young man take a gun case looking item from the back open bed of this coincidently "stalled" truck up to the top of the grassy knoll. She had to move on but in her time there she didn't see this man return or return with the case. There would be no rational reason for anyone removing such an item from a stalled truck and taking it as far away from the truck as the man did. Again, you are forced to consider this illogical action with logical suspicion. The man could have taken a gun up on top of the knoll and left it there for ...well, who knows what?

I read Marita's testimony about seeing Lee Harvey Oswald in person from 1960 thru 1962. On it's face it seems illogical and contrived. Her standing by her Oswald encounter testimony was very frustrating for her questioner who had to keep reminding her that Lee Harvey Oswald was out of the country during the time Marita claims she interacted with him. Only one explanation could be possible to make Marita's story about Oswald true. And that is there was an Oswald impersonator during this time. Either the one in Florida Marita claims to have occasionally seen during those two years. Or, the one living in Russia and living with Marina Oswald.

What's this latest Alabama Trump crazy talk embarrassment? "Every day" any comparison of Trump versus JFK is a cringing embarrassment.

E. Howard Hunt says on the recorded tape, "I had a reputation for honesty" ??? The Sarti thing in my mind is a purposeful sidetracking distraction. We just want to know if the people Hunt mentions in his end of life confession actually organized this plan. Cord Meyers estranged JFK mistress wife dies by gunshot on a morning hike? Ben Bradlee and his wife Tony are in competition against James Angleton to get to Mary Meyers studio within hours of her death to find "her diary?" Nothing unusual about her death and this dairy hunt by Bradlee and Angleton? No connection of the two events? Please. Hunt isn't the only one to characterize LBJ's obsession to be president as so extreme, Hunt describes it as a "maniacal urge." There is video ( on You Tube if you want to access it ) of Richard Nixon suggestion cryptically and with a suspicion indicating smile that "Johnson never liked being number 2" heh heh. Nixon in an interview by Part Buchanan of Crossfire in 1982 is recorded off camera as mentioning a Caro book on LBJ were Nixon says "xxxx, it makes him ( LBJ) appear to be a G#d D#amn Animal!" And a second later Nixon laughingly adds to Buchanan, "which he was." Ha, ha, ha. LBJ was capable of something as dastardly as organizing a coup against JFK...imo.

Curious ... What does Jim DiEugenio believe regards Marita Lorenz and her claims about all the aspects of the entire story from her experience?

Fair enough.

Dave, E.Howard Hunt was voice recording his JFK tale by reading from a written script. Debunkers of the Hunt tape propose that Hunt's son St. John crafted that script either totally or to a great degree. It's hard for me to accept that premise without some doubt. Just the wording of the script seems more like Hunt himself ( he had a well documented literary style in his multiple spy novel portfolio ) than his son although I am assuming such because I have never read anything written by St. John Hunt. But the specific naming of LBJ and Meyer and Hunt's cohort team as the main conspirators in the JFK event is so intriguingly thought provoking imo. Why implicate these specific political figures in the most treasonous criminal act in America's history? If Hunt's story was ever officially accepted, LBJ's name would be forever known in annals as the most despicable criminal President in American history. And his later generations would have to bear the awful reputation burden that family name would conjure up for a long, long time. Remember "his name is Mudd?' Side story: There is a mountainous tract of land right on the Coast here, on the Southern border of the City of Carmel and at the ocean/Carmel Bay front facing beginning of Carmel Valley that for many years was titled "The Mudd Ranch." I believe the owner was a direct descendant of Dr. Samuel Mudd who treated John Wilkes Booth's broken leg and was imprisoned himself as a co-conspirator in Lincoln's assassination but who was pardoned by President Andrew Johnson and released from prison in 1869.

It's always frustrating to hear the memoir and or confessional claims of legitimately credentialed figures directly involved in some of our most important historical events and see their claims divided into sub-categories of true, not quite true and untrue and try to figure out whether this categorizing is valid. I've read some of Lorenz's statements about her deep involvement with Castro and Frank Sturgis. What part of her recollection accounts are true...not true? There are always interjections by media connected outsiders with obvious self-interested agendas that try to tell you which of Lorenz's stories and claims to believe. You can believe she had a long term intimate relationship with Castro including being impregnated by him and then pressured to abort the fetus. You can believe that she didn't go through with her end of a plan to murder Castro. You can believe that Sturgis was her handler and that he once came to her New York residence to threaten her or even harm her years after the Castro affair because his arrest in Lorenz's apartment is in the public record. But we are told to not believe any of Lorenz's claims that Sturgis was involved in some aspect of the JFK event in Dallas on 11,22,1963. Of all the recollection claims by Lorenz, that particular one is untrue. How the Lorenz claims judges came up with their true versus untrue lists is never quite well explained with facts that are easily checked out and seemingly just thrown out there with a "trust us" mentality. If we ( Lorenz claim judges ) have the clout to be published and quoted in the media, we obviously know more than you "Average Joe" peons. Hey! I am one of those "Average Joe" peons ... literally! And I am not going to dismiss any of Marita Lorenz's claims simply because someone with their own agenda and access to the media says to.

Yes, could be Dave. You offer a plausible motive scenario which aligns with Hunt's life long duplicitous spy craft history. Offer up something about the JFK assassination that he thought might be grabbed onto by the national media as a shocking blockbuster story that might give his son some financial boon and security, thinking that perhaps his end of life confessional might bring some big bucks via a co-written book deal, film rights, speaking fees, etc. ? But as far as Hunt's story goes in implicating LBJ, Cord Meyer and his fellow covert action agents as the main guilty parties ( incredibly "all the way!" ) Hunt's personal role is conveniently diminished to such a benign degree that it pretty much gives him an out for any truly serious blame and any accompanying family name tarnish his greater participation in this monumentally despicable treasonous act might possibly have laid upon his son and other children after his passing? Still, to me, the Hunt confessional is an amazing story. One that I thought would garner a much more serious reaction from our national media than the brief and dismissive coverage they gave it. Hunt was a highest level agent provocateur for decades directly involved in several of the most important political historical events of our time. A person who could call the White House on a whim and be put through to some of the closest aides to the President himself. Nixon knew Hunt by name and fretted over what he knew and could do him legally. Hunt was so close to William F. Buckley he chose him to be his son's Godfather. Hunt was connected to the highest levels of politics and power. This wasn't Madeline Brown or Billie Sol Estes stating LBJ's involvement in JFK's killing ( although I don't dismiss their stories ) this was a true, deep state, highest clearance insider. Someone who could actually frighten a President with what he knew and had been involved with. And Hunt hadn't gone off the deep end although he was noticeably feeble and weak physically when he put out his confessional. Too bad some highest credibility news organization couldn't have had even one meeting with E. Howard Hunt to question his mind blowing LBJ guilt claims before he was too weak to handle such an interview.

Good stuff.

Hill was on top of JFK'S prone body and so much of the blood from JFK's head wound was leaking down onto the seat, not above onto Hill. Hill also is wearing a dark suit which would not have shown blood stains so easily. Jackie had extensive blood stains not just on the front of her skirt but also very visibly on her lower exposed legs. You can see this in the pictures of her leaving Air Force 1 and walking to the ambulance with Robert Kennedy. I think the pictures of shell shocked Jackie standing next to LBJ at his swearing in on Air Force 1 may have been cropped to avoid showing how gruesomely pronounced the blood stains on Jackie's legs were.

Also, some thoughts about the proposition that E. Howard Hunt's son St. John Hunt fabricated and controlled his father's end of life confession about who was responsible for the JFK assassination. I have a hard time believing St. John Hunt could come up with such a detailed false story as his father recounted and recorded and with the names of so many characters involved that his father knew so well on a professional as well as personal level and scripting it with the language his father uniquely used in his extensive writing style without the entire story sounding amateurishly hokey, which it didn't.

Didn't know Morales was as young as he was at death. Heavy alcohol consumption for years can do that. Knock 20 years off your life span. If you accept that even 25% of all these deaths happening just before or during the HSCA investigation were actually murders related to protecting JFK assassination perps and secrets, then you would probably consider these actions more likely being planned and carried out by just a few ( if not one or two ) powerful single interest groups versus unconnected personal vendetta motivated individuals for each victim. And if you accept that scenario, then you are faced with having to consider that whoever this group was, they had power, authority and control of matters well beyond the highest levels of our elected constitutional government. As shown by their successfully exercising this power unfettered and behind a wall of secrecy so well designed and constructed, to this day it has never been breached. A true life scenario like this is simply too frightening to contemplate as it would mean that we have all been living in a false reality society world in America since JFK times. One in which our democracy/constitution based governance as we understand it has been a completely powerless mirage, fabricated by the real forces of control. Just going near this postulation is too much for anyone who fears being labeled a true conspiracy nut. I'm throwing this out only as an idle conversation scary thought to consider if too many of these deaths were truly murders versus naturally caused, accidental or suicidal deaths.

Flower petals? Hmmm. I think you may be right. Looks like the same material lies between John and Nellie's jump seats. I could see the bouquet being scattered about in all that terrifying chaos.

Why would anyone stage this picture?

I recall once hearing someone else say something very close to these same words " I truly don't care in any deep sense who killed JFK." It was William F. Buckley during his December 1st, 1966 "Firing Line" interview of Mark Lane. Access the link below to hear Buckley's exact words at the 36:20 mark of the interview: Firing Line - William Buckley debates Mark Lane - YouTube https://www.youtube.com › watch I always like to hear or read comments by anyone who was right there in the JFK Dallas motorcade crowd on 11,22,1963, especially if their location was in or even nearby Dealey Plaza as member Karl Hilliard was. I will be interested to know more about your "right there" experience Karl. The initial thread here is a worthy one. Let us honestly examine ourselves in this light for our own sense of facts and logic versus biased emotion validity regards the LN/Conspiracy debate to see which side is more rational and credible. I can't come close to the erudite discussion between the main posters here but in my own way I would like to throw in my two cents. The back-and-forth exchanges here are stimulating in an intellectual way and also kind of fun to read. Kind of like watching William F. Buckley's "Firing Line' interviews. Especially the Mark Lane one which in my view was a huge win for Lane in the debate realm. Lane often had Buckley stumbling for credible responses to Lane's well researched assertions about the JFK event and his belief it was the result of a conspiracy. I highly recommend to our members here to view the "Firing Line" interview in its entirety. When one reads more about the JFK event besides the National Enquirer and actually reads the testimonies of the Warren Commission report and reads or listens to hundreds of other testimonies outside of the WC by people who were in some way witnesses to many things connected to the event and the main characters involved, you feel you have no choice but to believe there is so much more to the public record account of the event and this attention seeking lone nut who just got lucky conclusion. In the "Firing Line" debate between William F. Buckley and Mark Lane, Lane puts much weight on Jack Ruby and his improbable access into the Dallas PD building basement to whack Oswald. This action by Ruby and the ability to carry it out ( which ruined any chance at finding out the truth behind Oswald's guilt and possible motives or innocence and who else might have been the guilty parties ) is obviously a "key stone" in Mark Lane's proposition of conspiracy as it should be. Buckley was by and large shut down by Lane when it came to Jack Ruby and Ruby's easy access to do what he did, which was to destroy the most important piece of evidence in the entire JFK event investigation...Lee Harvey Oswald himself. I have off-and-on through the years done self-reflection evaluations on myself regards whether I am an emotionally insecure Payette type person prone to conspiracy thinking to an irrational degree. Sometimes I do think I spend more time on the JFK event than is healthy and actually just drop out for some period of time just to take a mental break from the heaviness of it. However, like Payette, I can't help my curious interest in things besides the most "right in front of your eyes" matters. I have seen, heard and experienced enough in my 67 years to at least keep an "open mind" to things not always being what they seem on their face in this world of 8 billion humans all doing whatever it takes to survive and meet their basic and often extra-curricular physical, emotional, and ego and monetary needs and desires. The world is and has always been one filled with secrets. You don't have to be a conspiracy nut to know this reality. I unlocked a major secret in my own life after 60 years of suspicion and yet most often pushing this suspicion aside as too conspiracy crazy. My older brother agreed to so a "sibling" DNA test 7 years ago where he and I submitted swabbed samples of our saliva individually to a reputable lab. One and a half months later I learned my "conspiracy" belief was true. My birth father was different than his and all my six older brothers. A secret my mother kept from me until her death at 86 years of age right in front of me in her rest home room. She could never tell me this conspiracy truth, for whatever reasons. I can't tell you how effecting this new reality was in my thoughts. My whole perspective on my life changed to different degrees. Of course I wondered about who my actual birth father was and had some angst about this being someone ... well ... less than upstanding? My mother once had an elevator operator job very briefly in her younger days before I was born and her most bragged about experience was that a famous actor named "Billy Barty" once climbed in and he flirted heavily with her? Could this had led to a one night stand? Barty was a midget. And even though I am 6 ft. tall certain parts of my body are much smaller than normal in size. But the point of my personal story is that millions of people do keep secrets to their grave. It seems reasonable that this human trait isn't totally absent in regards to most other conspiracy secrets, including the JFK event.

So many of these mass shooters over the years turn out to be young to middle age men who have never married or are divorced. Almost all experiencing extreme social frustration, disfunction, isolation and failure to the point of deep depression culminating in a final act of suicidal rage. What always struck me about Lee Oswald was here he was alleged to have committed multiple seemingly senseless violence murders and one attempted murder explained by the Warren Commission as motivated by the same emotional and social frustration that these mass shooters are described as possessing, yet Oswald was much less this way in reality. He had two children that he apparently was so enamored with even his wife claimed he truly loved and cared for them. Yes, Oswald's marriage was on the rocks and he probably sensed it ending. But he still had his children and their welfare and future to give him more grounded feelings of sane living purpose than most of these raging mass shooters. Also, those close to Oswald the months before and right up to 11,22,1963 didn't describe him as exhibiting the typical traits of senseless violence acting out killers such as extreme depression, anger, social isolation etc. He showed healthy paternal love to his children, he interacted with several people in intelligent conversation on and off such as George De Mohrenschildts, Michael Paine and who knows who else in his time in Dallas and New Orleans, etc. And he had at least some half-way pleasant social conversation with others like Buell Frazier, Ruth Paine and maybe his brother from time to time. And Oswald wasn't so unsuccessful in the ladies department that losing Marina was the end all. He flirted with the ladies in Russia. He flirted quite engagingly with a cute Japanese girl at one of the Dallas White Russian parties. He may have had a hot affair in New Orleans with Judyth Vary Baker. He jumped at the invite to a social party from a cute female secretary in the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City ... according to her. Maybe he would have even chased the beautiful Sylvia Odio if she had given him just a little more interest than nothing? It seems that a fair amount of women even found Oswald attractive in his clean cut grooming, Marine bearing and overall polite manner. Oswald also had some personal pride in his Marine duty service in that he wore his Marine ring all the time. Oswald also had healthy personal recreational outlets such as reading, taking walks, listening to classical music, some photography and playing with his daughter. He loved the movies and would even go to some by himself according to Marina. Oswald had a sense of adventure and traveled the world. He had enough drive, self discipline and confidence he taught himself an extremely hard to learn foreign language. He health mindedly watched his eating, never smoked or drank. He paid his rent and bills on time and even his loan from the U.S. government. He watched his money to the point of penny pinching cheapness. Never offered Buell Frazier a dime for shared gas costs. He finally tipped someone when he told his cab driver on 11,22,1963 to keep the left over nickle from his 95 cent fare when all he had to pay with was a one dollar bill. In my opinion, if Oswald did shoot JFK, Tippit and Connolly and shot at General Walker, or even had some part in these acts, his motivations were no where near the one the Warren Commission ascribed to him to frame his actions in a way that they felt bolstered their conclusion. The same one we know and associate with others who commit seemingly senseless acts of violence like mass shootings. Oswald's motivations only make sense if you look at them in a conspiratorial way versus a raging social loser way. Oswald had things much more together emotionally and socially than the great majority of these typical mass shooters. Just speculating.

Mitch McConnell received 1 MILLION dollars from the gun lobby... just last year alone! Money is a big part of this tragedy.

The dent in the upper windshield chrome frame is still an enigma. It has been stated that putting the bubble top on and perhaps ramming it into place due to some misalignment made this. I'm guessing no one ever looked at the bubble top itself to examine if some part of it's front was pointed? If it was the forcing of the bubble top into place that created that dent there must have been a pointed heavy metal part that protruded out from the bubble top front to make such a clearly defined hole into solid steel. Even if this was how the dent was created, you would think that at least one of the personnel responsible for the limo's transportation, maintenance, cleaning and driving ( a lot of this leading right up to Dealey Plaza ) would have seen it and reported it for cosmetic attention and correction as it was so obvious and ugly. Or, this dent was not created before the limo was traveling on Elm street in Dealey Plaza on 11,22,1963. In that case of course, the dent's presence, bullet size and shape and angle of entry combined with the weak testimony about it's provenance forces you to keep it in mind with logical suspicion.

So intertesting.

I tried but the contents of that link do not copy. You have to access the link yourself to see this. If they made an A-list film of Bolden's story I could think of two great actors to portray Bolden. David Oyeleo: David Oyelowo interview: The 'Selma ... independent.co.uk Mahershala Ali: Mahers

I don't remember if I saw that particular scene. Of course I remember seeing video of Air Force one having landed at Andrews Air Base with RFK helping Jackie off of this and into a waiting ambulance, and soon after LBJ delivering a short "with your help and Gods" speech into microphones, again, right there at the landing location. What I am not sure of is if I actually saw this scene live, or later through replayed newsreel footage.