Joe Bauer

Basic question ( I know it's been asked 1,000 times already-sorry ) about the more plain casket that O'Conner and Jenkins say they lifted JFK's body out of versus the heavy and ornate bronze one loaded onto Air Force 1 back in Dallas.

Was the switch made on Air Force one before the plane landed back at Andrews?

Or was JFK's body simply lifted out of the bronze casket and placed into the plain one after the bronze one was already at Bethesda Naval hospital?

If the switch was made on Air Force 1, how grotesquely disrespectful it was to Jackie Kennedy to let her think she was actually lovingly accompanying her husband's body to Bethesda. However, it seems logical that the switch was made at Bethesda for practical reasons such as the cumbersome weight and size of the bronze casket.

Jenkins definitely feels that LBJ and Hoover were involved with the assassination.

That's no wedding ring.

It's a Marine Corp one...right?

Oswald's wearing of this "Semper Fi - Always Faithful" Marine Corp ring suggests to me that he felt at least "some" pride and loyalty feelings tied to it's symbolic brotherhood meaning.

A Marine Corp ring worn on the wedding finger of a person who allegedly just brutally blew apart a President's head only inches from his wife's face and mere hours before is a strange thing but even more strange considering Oswald was supposedly such a devout Marxist commie as described by the national media that very day.

A USA hating commie wearing a U.S. Marine Corps service honoring ring?

And wouldn't that big hunky top ring possibly have been a hindrance in handling, firing and reloading the chambers of that piece of junk Italian rifle?

And If Oswald did do the JFK act, you'd think he wouldn't want to shame his fellow Marine brothers by keeping the corps honoring ring on throughout his embarrassing world viewed arrest perp walks.

And what is that metal bracelet Oswald is wearing on his wrist?

And wouldn't the Dallas police have done a complete body pat down and search of a violently resisting murder suspect and removed any jewelry off of him  as identification evidence at some point especially when he was placed in a jail cell?

I want to repost this edited version of my previous Earlene Robert's one in response to L.Payette's last post countering my points and views regards Mrs. Roberts and her DPD  car story and her personal credibility.

I would like to restate his feedback to this edited post of mine and regards other points he made as well.

L. Payette quotes:

"For those of us who have not imbibed the Conspiracy Kool-Aid and donned our Conspiracy Blinders, there is just no mystery to this sequence of events.  Roberts' tale is simply not credible.  She was a goofball who embellished the actual events, simple as that.  If you're going to prove me wrong, it's going to take a scenario that plausibly deals with all of the above points and affirmatively presents something more than raw speculation."

"I know, I know:  I keep saying I’m moving on.  But then the little Monty Python demon on my shoulder eggs me on:  ( “Come on, Lance, you old fart, have another Guinness Stout and play along with the wackiness for a little while - it'll be fun!”)

Lance, you call Roberts a "goofball" ... who embellished the actual events, simple as that."

You also say that Robert's didn't mention the police car until a week after 11,22,1963.

In whatever documents that are available concerning what Earlene Roberts did or did not say to the press and the authorities right after 11,22,1963, can you say with researched certainty that she never mentioned the police car to anyone in that week?

Ms. Roberts said she was stressed to the max with all the reporters and authorities descending on her every day that week.

I could easily imagine a single, older woman in quite poor health and struggling to make necessity ends meet in a low pay physical job, being discombobulated and exhausted enough to not easily organizing all her thoughts and recollections of her experience that day after being descended upon by a horde of press, police and other authorities on the most crazy and stressful day and week of her life.

And maybe she was "afraid" to share everything she heard or saw that day. Afraid of saying something that might jeopardize her job with "the scrooge" Mrs. Johnson as well?

And as far as embellishing what she saw and heard that day, Ms. Roberts shared a very succinct and sparsely described bare bones account ( very true to what people who knew Oswald would expect ) of what she saw and heard regards her personal encounter with Oswald bustling in past her to his room and the fact he said nothing in response to her saying to him he sure was in a hurry and with absolutely nothing said back to her by Oswald as he left minutes later as well.

That's embellishment? 

What are the points of embellishment in that sparcely described encounter statement?

And Mrs. Roberts sure didn't present herself in any "goofball" manner, tone or rattling on in any of the video recordings of her being interviewed that I have found and viewed.  Exhausted yes. Not well spoken regards proper English yes.

If Roberts was such a teller of "tall tales" and who did this for attention, wouldn't someone like this embellish her encounter with the "now world famous" Oswald more than she did ( which she didn't at all ) for some "real" attention instead of just her later added on, off-the-wall weird "tall tale" about a DPD car parking in front of her residence and honking twice, which even she had the sense to know would bring her the wrong type of attention and just add to her greatly stressed situation?

The reality of Mrs. Robert's not at all exaggerating or embellishing her personal one-on-one encounter with Oswald around 1:pm on 11,22,1963  is starkly contrary to the extremely negative and discrediting image assigned to her by her critics who don't address this dichotomy.

And I also believe Robert's DPD car story is just too illogically removed from the strongly pushed motive of her making up exaggerated "tall tales" for attention for at least two reasons.

One:

it is too detailed an account with car color and type descriptions, honk types and numbers, two uniformed officers inside, exact time of and time length of occurrence, direction and speed of departure and even some comparative past police car pull up visit claims ( which were actually verified by DPD officer Alexander ) to be made up just for the purpose of attention in that any story with that many details is an extremely risky one to present because so many of those details could be easily proven to be false if they were simply made up.  And the reported official documentation and under oath testimony record countering Robert's story details seems weak with poorly explained holes at best.

Two:

This car parking and honking story would not immediately make Roberts anymore attention popular to the press and others simply because it's is so off-the-wall and it's relevance and importance would not be easily and quickly understood. If Roberts was as dumb as one Dallas police officer claimed she was, then she herself would have a hard time explaining why she would make up such an odd and highly detailed story just for attention.

And on another note;  neither I nor several other newer non-researcher members who are posting fairly regularly on this forum now are trying to create an "illusion" that we are credible and deep researchers.

We all say often we are not. However,  I think we still feel our respectfully presented observations and views of well known aspects of the assassination truth research are worthy of sharing if for any other reason than their pure JFK truth seeking passion and enthusiasm. And this forum has had a large influx of such posters and readers from what I remember seeing just a couple of years ago ( when it almost shut down ) and seems much more  participatory and popular now as a result imo.

Your quote Lance:

"Roberts’ affidavit of December 5, 1963 doesn’t mention any car.  (Even though the FBI report of a week earlier does mention car number 207, and Valentine and Westbrook had already nailed down the whereabouts of this car, the omission is highly suspicious to a true conspiracy theorist."

Lance, as it should be.

And lastly, addressing Mrs. Roberts blindness in one eye and how this handicap supposedly taints and weakens the credibility of her DPD car parking and honking story from a visual aspect.

One of my longest and best friend friendships ( 57 years going back to elementary school ) is with a practicing lawyer who was completely blinded in one eye in a tree trimming accident 30 years ago. He is 67 now. He lives a completely full and productive life and drives his car alone everywhere.

We occasionally have lunch together at a local "subway" sandwich shop. He can see very well even at some distance with his one good eye.

Mrs. Roberts rooming house front windows were what...maybe 30 to 40 feet away from the curb in front of her residence?

The ability of her with one good eye ( even if aided by glasses ) to identify a car pulling up there as a police car and to see how many occupants were in this car at that relatively close distance is easily possible. 

Roy, that "tit-tit" horn honk sound description is a direct quote in Earlene Robert's WC testimony.

For those of us who have not imbibed the Conspiracy Kool-Aid and donned our Conspiracy Blinders, there is just no mystery to this sequence of events.  Roberts' tale is simply not credible.  She was a goofball who embellished the actual events, simple as that.  If you're going to prove me wrong, it's going to take a scenario that plausibly deals with all of the above points and affirmatively presents something more than raw speculation.

I know, I know:  I keep saying I’m moving on.  But then the little Monty Python demon on my shoulder eggs me on:  “Come on, Lance, you old fart, have another Guinness Stout and play along with the wackiness for a little while - it'll be fun!”)

Lance, you call Roberts a "goofball" ..."who embellished the actual events, simple as that."

You also say that Robert's didn't mention the police car until a week after 11,22,1963.

In whatever documents that are available concerning what Earlene Roberts did or did not say to the press and the authorities right after 11,22,1963, can you say with researched certainty that she never mentioned the police car to anyone in that week?

Ms. Roberts said she was stressed to the max with all the reporters and authorities descending on her every day that week.

I could easily imagine a single, older woman in quite poor health and struggling to make necessity ends meet in a low pay physical job, being discombobulated and exhausted enough to not easily organizing all her thoughts and recollections of her experience that day after being descended upon by a horde of press, police and other authorities on the most crazy and stressful day and week of her life.

And maybe she was "afraid" to share everything she heard or saw that day. Afraid of saying something that might jeopardize her job with the scrooge Mrs. Johnson as well?

And as far as embellishing what she saw and heard that day, Ms. Roberts shared a very succinct and sparsely described bare bones account ( very true to what people who knew Oswald would expect ) of what she saw and heard regards her personal encounter with Oswald bustling in past her to his room and the fact he said nothing in response to her saying to him he sure was in a hurry and with absolutely nothing said back to her by Oswald as he left minutes later as well.

If Roberts was such a teller of "tall tales" and who did this for attention, wouldn't someone like this embellish her encounter with the "now world famous" Oswald more than she did ( which she didn't at all ) for some "real" attention instead of just her later added on, off-the-wall weird "tall tale" about a DPD car parking in front of her residence and honking twice, which even she had the sense to know would bring her the wrong type of attention and just add to her greatly stressed situation?

The reality of Mrs. Robert's not at all exaggerating or embellishing her personal one-on-one encounter with Oswald around 1:pm on 11,22,1963  is starkly contrary to the extremely negative and discrediting image assigned to her by her critics who don't address this dichotomy.

And I also believe Robert's DPD car story is just too illogically removed from the strongly pushed motive of her making up exaggerated "tall tales" for attention for at least two reasons.

One:

it is too detailed an account with car color and type descriptions, honk types and numbers, two uniformed officers inside, exact time of and time length of occurrence, direction and speed of departure and even some comparative past police car pull up visit claims ( which were actually verified by DPD officer Alexander ) to be made up just for the purpose of attention in that any story with that many details is an extremely risky one to present because so many of those details could be easily proven to be false if they were simply made up.  The reported official documentation and under oath testimony record countering Robert's story details seems weak with holes at best.

Two:

This car parking and honking story would not immediately make Roberts anymore attention popular to the press and others simply because it's is so off-the-wall and it's relevance and importance would not be easily and quickly understood. If Roberts was as dumb as one Dallas police officer claimed she was, then she herself would have a hard time explaining why she would make up such an odd story just for attention.

And on another note;  neither I nor several other newer non-researcher members who are posting fairly regularly on this forum now are trying to create an "illusion" that we are credible and deep researchers.

We all say often we are not. However,  I think we still feel our respectfully presented observations and views of well known aspects of the assassination truth research are worthy of sharing if for any other reason than their pure JFK truth seeking passion and enthusiasm. And this forum has had a large influx of such posters and readers from what I remember seeing just a couple of years ago ( when it almost shut down ) and seems much more  participatory and popular as a result imo.

"Roberts’ affidavit of December 5, 1963 doesn’t mention any car.  (Even though the FBI report of a week earlier does mention car number 207, and Valentine and Westbrook had already nailed down the whereabouts of this car, the omission is highly suspicious to a true conspiracy theorist."

Lance, as it should be.

And lastly, addressing Mrs. Roberts blindness in one eye and how this handicap supposedly taints and weakens the credibility of her DPD car parking and honking story from a visual aspect.

One of my longest and best friend friendships ( 57 years going back to elementary school ) is with a practicing lawyer who was completely blinded in one eye in a tree trimming accident 30 years ago. He is 67 now. He lives a completely full and productive life and drives his car alone everywhere.

We occasionally have lunch together at a local "subway" sandwich shop. He can see very well even at some distance with his one good eye.

Mrs. Roberts rooming house front windows were what...maybe 30 to 40 or even a few more feet away from the curb in front of her residence?

The ability of her with one good eye ( even if aided by glasses ) to identify a car pulling up there as a police car and to see how many occupants were in this car at that relatively close distance is easily possible. 

If there is a film made using this book as a template, will they allow any of these JFK  assassination related accounts to be in the script?

My guess is...no.

There is a classic MO you so often see in Organized Crime ordered murders of high profile or status targets.

And that is the use of team conspirators posing as police officers with real police uniforms either assisting in the actual murder or providing secure actual police free space for the murder and/or escape cover for the real murderers.

You see this in organized crime themed movies all the time ( the Godfather 2 film showed this ) and who can forget Capone's Valentine's Day massacre was carried out by his hit men dressed as cops.

In Dealey Plaza there were reports by real policemen stating they confronted civilian suit wearing individuals who they didn't instantly recognize in the Rail Road parking lot and around the Texas School Book Depository building just minutes after the fatal shots, and who pulled out identification as Secret Service men when there were officially no SS men present there.

Jimmy Hoffa was interviewed on the Dick Cavett show on 10,31,1973. You must view this.

There are many fascinating comments by Hoffa in this interview regarding JFK and RFK and Hoffa's feelings and even actions on the day each was murdered.

I think this nationally broadcast television appearance by Hoffa may have sealed his future murder fate.

It was one of those "the guy is talking too much" Mafia things where they probably thought and decided Hoffa was playing against their rules by trying to gain back his Teamsters presidency with an end-around national publicity angle when they didn't want him back in this position.

There are speakers who put you to sleep after about 20 minutes.  Vince keeps you awake!

It is his still youthful energy and kind of innocently sincere, Pittsburgh raised regular guy "Gosh, can you believe THAT" exuberance along with his always interesting research subject matter that keeps me listening to his talks and interviews.

VP seems to me like a fun, upbeat, unpretentious, non-confrontational, down to Earth but still smart and interesting guy you'd want to share  pizza, beer and working class jokes with.

Vince, I still think Clint Hill fell in love with Jackie Kennedy during his extremely close and personal protective bodyguard role ( for years ) with her and that a real part of his post 11,22,1963 depression, drinking and strained marriage stress was due to living and struggling with this unfulfilled yearning.

Also, just watched the Zapruder film in real and slow motion time for the 10,000th time and Clint Hill arrived to the limo trunk top "after" Jackie had climbed on this to retrieve part of her husband's skull or brain and had clearly already turned and pulled herself back and was almost back in the rear seat by the time Hill actually made contact with her.

Not trying to diminish Hill's attempts but he didn't need to push Jackie back into the limo rear seat as much as she herself got back to it, where upon Hill did throw himself over her and JFK  in a brave body shielding way.

Curious what Jim D has to say about this release.

Roy and Steve, Mrs. Johnson was an extremely hostile witness towards Earlene Roberts. 

To me Johnson's WC testimony is suspicious in her blatant attempt to paint Mrs. Roberts in a negative and bad credibility light.

She had to point out to the WC that Roberts was blind in one eye, that she exaggerated and liked to embellish stories and talked too much to residents of the rooming house. Johnson described Roberts as "overweight" which caused her "handicapped problems" and how she was "disagreeable" to residents.

It's almost as if a prosecutor trying to depreciate Mrs. Robert's credibility and honesty and dismantle her testimony and specifically her story of the DPD car with two uniformed police officer occupants parking in front of her residence and honking twice ( especially at the time she states this happened ) put Mrs. Johnson on the stand for this purpose by having her state highly subjective and pejorative views of Mrs. Roberts as an employee and a person in general.

You would've hoped that at least one of Mrs. Johnson's WC questioners might have pointed out how clearly hostile Mrs. Johnson seemed toward Mrs. Roberts in her testimony about her personal feelings and takes on Robert's and asked her to try to stick to more objective facts in responses to their questions to her about Roberts. And maybe asked Johnson why she kept Roberts as an employee as long as she did if she was as bad and personally flawed as Mrs. Johnson stated she was?

Mrs. Johnson hardly gave Ms. Roberts any credit at all for what appeared to be good and honest work on Robert's part in doing this obviously physically demanding and low pay housekeeper domestic work and for years at a time. And in bad health and tired later years to boot?  No empathy for Roberts and her difficult hard work life at all from Mrs. Johnson.

And incredibly, Johnson  ( who left this part out of her WC testimony) actually "lowered" Ms. Robert's salary at a time when Robert's situation with her job had become incredibly stressful on her due to the Oswald affair!

Talk about a Scrooge mentality and treatment on Johnson's part toward her employee Roberts.  No wonder Roberts quit.

Johnson further revealed her money obsessed cheapness when she boldly inquired about getting the original Oswald related paper she gave to the WC back, telling them it was worth money to her.

Talk about character flaws?

Mrs. Roberts sweated through her low pay, no respect domestic work until the age of 59. 

Mrs. Johnson couldn't hold Robert's shoes in the category of work integrity and commitment under their disparate life and burden circumstances.

Yet here she is, telling the WC what a flawed character Ms. Roberts is and was. And how she had the gall to walk off her job without notice. 

Ms. Roberts obviously finished her daily work before she left ( there's integrity ) and cheapskate, character disparaging Johnson didn't deserve notice.

I believe Robert's story regarding a DPD car and two uniformed men parking and honking at the exact time Oswald was in his boarding house room.

Roberts was right there at 1026 North Beckley on 11,22,1963.. And if any event would be clearly, honestly and powerfully etched into ones memory, it would be specific words, actions and observations on the day JFK  was killed.

And in Robert's case especially. She was interacting with Oswald himself! 

And Roberts wasn't so feeble minded that she would have a hard time remembering details of such a dynamic encounter just 5 months previous to her testimony.

Roberts shared her Dallas PD car parking and honking story to other authorities before the WC. Kind of hard to keep a " made up" story straight telling it several times under stressful conditions. Sounds like the only part of her story that equivocated much was the actual car number.

And with all of Mrs. Johnson's disparaging remarks about Roberts, did Johnson ever have any situation with Roberts where she caught Roberts flat out lying to her? Or doing anything else unethical like going through boarder's belongs when she was alone in their rooms?

I worked and still work in hotels. Every day, housekeepers ( almost all relatively low paid and struggling ) go into 6 or 7 guests rooms and are surrounded by personal items that are often of great value.  Talk about temptation! Yet, only once in 10 years did I ever hear a complaint or charge by a guest that they felt a housekeeper had stolen something from their room.

It's a huge sign of good character that housekeepers are almost universally honest, humble and hard working persons in my experience.

I believe that the WC knew Ms. Robert's was telling the truth regards the DPD car pulling up to and parking in front of her residence and honking twice and then slowly pulling away at the exact same time Lee Harvey Oswald was in his room briefly ( just 50 feet from them!) after bustling in minutes before.

And the WC knew what the potential was with this scenario altering the entire truth of the "Oswald as lone gunman" script and narrative they needed to establish to justify their final no conspiracy finding.

That is why I think Earlene Robert's story and WC testimony ( as true ) is so incredibly important.

On 12/2/2018 at 7:57 PM, Ron Bulman said:

 

Regarding the development of suspicions that there was something fishy about the lone nut story, I think for me that started with Watergate.  I remember the assassination in that I'd just turned seven, walked home three blocks for lunch from Gust elementary in Denver, mother had the radio on the whole time I was there which was unusual and she got a phone call and seemed excited.  I went back to an empty school and a crying teacher that told me to go back home.  Then nothing but news on the black and white tv for days.  No Friday night movie, Saturday morning cartoons.  Don't remember anything about Oswald getting shot.  Do remember watching the funeral.  But I don't ever remember it being discussed in our house then or later.  Both my parents voted but they weren't "political".

Then as a high school senior in 1974 our civics teacher told us to pay attention to what was happening to the President, that it was historical.  Wow, the President was a crook.  He had to quit or get kicked out of office.  All of the people in government were not necessarily the good guy's wearing white hats.  At the same time, living in the middle of the D/FW (now) metromess one of myself and friends cruises to get out of town was to head down the still relatively new 2 lane each way airport freeway through Irving to Dallas.  Our turnaround was to get off on Commerce and make a loop through Dealy Plaza to head back home.  I remember thinking the angle from the sixth floor could have made it a tough shot to a moving target small as a head (had no idea who Greer was then or that he damn near stopped).  I'd seen my dad, a good shot, miss a deer from a steep slope in Colorado shooting first high and breaking her back then over correcting low and breaking a leg.  Much as I like venison (though I've not hunted in years) I've always felt sorry for that deer.  I was taught not to shoot unless you thought you had a clear clean kill shot.  The man who taught me that thought he could kill the deer with one shot, but elevation increases difficulty, I've read about it since.  That made me think as we passed the TSBD that Oswald must have been a real good shot to hit him twice.

Then 3-4 years after high school I started seeing articles in news papers and magazines and news clips on tv about JFK and new investigations but I didn't pay close attention.

I think the next time I wondered about something being not right about our government was when the day Reagan took office the Iranian hostages were finally released.  I wondered, why did they hate Carter so much, why do they like or trust Reagan so much to do this on this significant day?

In the late 80's I came across mafia did it books like Contract on America and Mafia Kingfish and I jumped on the Blakey train though I didn't know who he was.  Though misguided these did make me come to the conclusion Oswald didn't do it alone.  He wasn't a lone nut.

Then 91 came around with High Treason and the movie JFK.  Holy Cow, could rouge elements of the CIA have possibly been involved?  In 93 the paperback version of Crossfire came out and I bought it a year or so later.  By then I Really didn't believe Oswald acted alone.  In the late 90's this thing called the internet came to my house.  In the early 2000's I started seeing the JFK assassination become a subject of interest.  Which led me to books like Destiny Betrayed, Best Evidence, the Radical Right and the Murder of JFK, and The Man Who Knew Too Much and ultimately many more.  Then I found this site a little before the 50th along with JFKFacts and CTKA which led to even more reading and finally commenting.  So in essence I'm still a newby in the search for the Truth still trying to catch up.  But I think I have developed a healthy skepticism.  There is a lot of BS out there, best to evaluate info trying to use reason as well as using it and facts for backup in any speculation.  For example I've come to doubt Oswald took a shot at anyone, likely he was just a patsy after all, I.E., he likely didn't shoot Tippit either.  Beware of false idols, or misdirection.  LBJ didn't have the power, imagination or gumption to plan, organize, direct and control it, for example.  

The above post is an excellent and honest summary of decades of thoughtful and rational common sense thinking, reading and reasoning imo.

Vincent Bugliosi proclaimed, almost frantically, over and over and over in his 10 pound lead heavy 1,600 page high-toned dogmatic book "Reclaiming History" how those who believed the JFK assassination was the result of a conspiracy were kooks, loons and nut cases. As if he repeated this dismissive mentally deranged characterization of CTers enough somehow the American people ( his jury ) would accept this as reality.

The truth over time however is more and more relegating Bugliosi's book and his hyper-promoted, and irrationally over -repeated CT loon characterizations throughout it as more worthy as a super heavy doorstop versus a literary effort of any honest truth revealing value.

The Lansdale Dealy Plaza pics are much more convincing to me than the so-called Bush one strongly because of General Victor Krulak's and Colonel Prouty's firm belief the photos are of him.  And they knew him well over many years.

George H.W.Bush's sending a personally written response to George De Mohrenschildt's frantic letter asking Bush for help in DM's later chaotic stressful life situation proved Bush was on a first name social connection basis with DM and had been for many years, even if off-and-on.

That fact alone forces one to consider Bush logically wanting to know more about a fellow oil man who he personally knew in 1963 and who had many one-on-one personal meet ups with Lee Harvey Oswald himself for several months before 11,22,1963. 

I could imagine George musing to Barbara, when all the De Mohrenschildt/Oswald interaction details became public ...  Barb, this business of George DM and that  "deluded gunman'" Oswald having one-on-one discussions is mighty odd if you ask me. That guy's always had some strange stuff in his background. 

With Barbara perhaps responding...Oh Poppy, don't think or worry about such silliness.  Nobody cares about nonsense like that. Here, put your feet up and I'll get you a nice little cocktail.

8 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Ian,

The link above is to an FBI interview of Capt. O.A. Jones, of the DPD Forgery(!!) Bureau. Valentine and Putnam should have been aggressively interviewed about the issue of car # 207, but I can find no indication that either was.  Why not?

Whatever the number on the police car Earlene Roberts saw park in front of her rooming house and honk just at the moment Oswald had entered into his room there, the point is the illogically unbelievable to beyond coincidence fact that a DPD car would do this and be within 50 feet of Oswald himself while doing so.

You would expect it would be easy for the DPD to simply ask all their officers on duty that day whether any of them were in this car when it pulled up to Earlene Robert's residence and parked and honked their horn? Obviously no DPD officers ever admitted to this action.

Ms Robert's story describing this event had many specific details including time of day and just when Oswald briefly entered his room, different car number, different type of DPD car, color of the car, number and types of horn honks, two uniformed officers inside, the direction the car headed after slowly pulling away.

Either those DPD car occupants refused to identify themselves...or Ms. Roberts made this entire highly detailed story up.

I choose to believe Ms. Roberts would not do this in front of a very high authority investigative body and under oath, fearing the consequences if they found out she made it all up.

5 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

After some confusion in her testimony, Mrs. Roberts seemed to indicate that it was squad car # 207 that honked by the rooming house at 1026 N. Beckley.  As Joe Bauer noted in his initial post, this testimony should have set off alarm bells just about everywhere in Dallas.  Instead, Captain W.R. Westbrook wrote this brief excuse about car # 207 to Chief Curry:

Jimmy Valentine, who according to Westbrook was assigned to the car that day, should have been questioned.  As John Armstrong wrote on our website, “Valentine should have been interviewed by DPD internal affairs, the FBI, the Secret Service, and/or the Warren Commission and asked who borrowed his squad car that afternoon. Valentine should have provided a written statement or affidavit as to either the location of car #207 or the officer to whom he gave the keys to car #207 prior to 1:00 PM on 11/22/63. The opportunity to identify and connect the police officers in car #207 with HARVEY Oswald was now lost, and I believe was intentionally lost.”

By the same measure, Sgt. J. A. Putnam should have been grilled about Westbrook’s claim he was given the keys to car # 207 and didn’t return them until 3:30 pm that afternoon.  But, of course, Putnam was never questioned about that either.

John and I believe that it was Captain Westbrook himself in car # 207 honking the horn in front of the rooming house, along with Reserve Officer Kenneth Croy.   The case for this is made  here:

THE MURDER OF J.D. TIPPIT

Could this specific black hole incident regarding the missing chain of possession record of car 207 that afternoon be one of the reason's Chief Curry thought there was more to the JFK story in his late life recollection book?

So, Captain W.R. Westbrook is directly involved with this unaccounted for police car that Earlene Roberts identified as the one that pulled up to her rooming house and parked and honked twice?  Well, Well.

Steve, I saw that I had misstated the date of Earlene Robert's WC testimony.  I just edited my post to correct this.

Also, after reading the Johnson's WC testimonies, they both mentioned that the Dallas police came to their rooming house "after"  they had arrested Oswald at the Texas theater.

Ms. Johnson stated that the police got their 1026 North Beckley address after finding this on Oswald after arresting him.

That should mean that the two officers who had stopped in front of the Johnson rooming house earlier and honked their horn twice, just as Oswald was there in his room, should not have known that Oswald lived there.

Again, of all the thousands of residences in that area of Dallas, these two police officers Ms. Robert's describes ( by sheer coincidence? ) decide to park their police car and play with their horn right in front of and just 50 feet away from Oswald's room, and while he is actually in there for a brief minute or two?

Oh please.

And yes, it is curious how much Mrs. Johnson finds such derogatory things to say about Earlene Roberts, especially how she ( Roberts ) made up things and how exaggerating she was in over-talking to guests.

Why say these specific and subjective negative things about Mrs. Roberts except to try to discredit her and her credibility?  Why would Mrs. Johnson feel the need to do this and actually harm Ms Robert's integrity and reputation like that?

Mrs. Johnson's husband Mr. Johnson didn't mention anything so negative and personal about Earlene Roberts and her character as Mrs. Johnson did.

Oswald's landlady at his 1026 North Beckley Oak Cliff address on 11,22,1963 was Earlene Roberts.

She testified to the Warren Commission on April 8, 1964. Just 5 months after President Kennedy was killed.

I would like to ask some of our researcher members a few questions about Ms. Robert's testimony and the Warren Commission's reactions to it.

I do so because I would like some feedback regarding my take that the WC's reaction to Ms. Robert's testimony was so purposefully avoiding of seeking more of the full truth of her story that it reeked of cover-up.

I have read many of the WC witness testimonies.  I do so because there are often great contradictions in them as well as disturbingly illogical reactions or non-reactions to these contradictions by the WC.

One great example is the WC illogically deciding to believe emotional basket case and lying Jack Ruby over emotionally stable, respected, intelligent and honest newspaper reporter Seth Kantor, regarding Kantor stating he clearly remembered running into and talking to Jack Ruby in the Parkland hospital the afternoon JFK was brought there versus Ruby claiming he never went to Parkland that day.

Regards Earlene Robert's WC testimony (which I will paste the relevant part of here ) I am blown away by the lack of follow up questions by the WC which seems almost unbelievable considering what Ms Roberts was claiming and how important her recollections potentially were.

Are we to believe, once again, this mind boggling fact of two uniformed Dallas police officers stopping their car "right in front" of Oswald's rooming house and honking their horn " tit-tit" twice at the exact same super brief moment the hottest criminal suspect in their history is in his room there  ( 50 feet away! ) ... was just another incredible JFK event coincidence?

Was there any higher priority instructions for all available units in the Dallas Police vehicle force at that exact time that day besides "be on the lookout" in their frantic search for a suspect fitting Lee Harvey Oswald's physical description...as Tippit was racing around doing?

Of all the places two cruising DPD officers decide to pull over and stop their car ( besides a stop sign ) that afternoon and play with their horn in that large city...they chose to do so in a specific residential location which just happened to have been right in front of and a mere 50 feet from their suspect's room and the suspect himself?  

Earlene Roberts stated she used to work for some policemen without explaining what she did in this employ. And the WC doesn't even want to know about this part of her life?

Ms. Robert's stated that occasionally a police car she knew on sight would stop in front of her house like this one did. She stated she would talk to these police officers ( whom she knew by name ) during these previous stops.

She also said she knew well the car number of those previous police car stop encounters and the one that stopped in front of her residence on 11,22,1963 had a different number and was also different in that it wasn't a Dallas PD "accident squad car" which one assumes she was used to seeing. Maybe a DPD car without all the lights and side printing? A higher ranking officer's car?

Wouldn't the WC want to know more about Ms. Roberts previous talking to these other two DPD police officers whom she knew by name?  Whom she said she "worked for?"

To ask them if they did indeed know Mrs. Roberts and if they ever stopped to talk to her and what they would talk about? 

Was Mrs. Roberts some type of police informant, relative to perhaps reporting to them if she had some new shady characters renting her rooms?

If the commission felt Mrs. Roberts was fabricating this 11/22/1963 DPD police car stop story,  BECAUSE IT'S IMPLICATIONS WERE SO IMPORTANT,  why wouldn't they interview the DPD police officers whose names Mrs. Roberts said she knew to either validate her story and credibility or invalidate it. 

Did anyone ever search the Dallas PD records to see if a police car like the one Ms. Robert's described was indeed on patrol in her area that afternoon and if so, who were the two officers Ms. Robert's described seeing in this stopping and honking vehicle?

And if they identified these two officers, were they asked why they did this bizarre thing  just 50 feet away from the most hunted suspect in Dallas history?

These follow up questions and so many more seemed so important and logical in response to Ms. Robert's startling recollections yet, she was just left to state them without such?

 

See outside

 

Mr. BALL. Did a police car pass the house there and honked?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes.
Mr. BALL. When was that?
Mrs. ROBERTS. He came in the house.
Mr. BALL. When he came in the house ?
Mrs. ROBERTS. When he came in the house and went to his room, you know how the sidewalk runs?
Mr. BALL. Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTS. Right direct in front of that door-there was a police car stopped and honked. I had worked for some policemen and sometimes they come by and tell me something that maybe their wives would want me to know, and I thought it was them, and I just glanced out and saw the number, and I said, "Oh, that's not their car," for I knew their car.
Mr. BALL. You mean, it was not the car of the policemen you knew?
Mrs. ROBERTS. It wasn't the police car I knew, because their number was 170 and it wasn't 170 and I ignored it.
Mr. BALL. And who was in the car?
Mrs. ROBERTS. I don't know--I didn't pay any attention to it after I noticed it wasn't them-I didn't.
Mr. BALL. Where was it parked ?
Mrs. ROBERTS. It was parked in front of the house.
Mr. BALL. At 1026 North Beckley?
Mrs. ROBERTS. And then they just eased on--the way it is-it was the third house off of Zangs and they just went on around the corner that way.
Mr. BALL. Went around what corner?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Went around the corner off of Beckley on Zangs.
Mr. BALL. Going which way--toward town or away from town?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Toward town.
Dr. GOLDBERG. Which way was the car facing?
Mrs. ROBERTS. It was facing north.
Dr. GOLDBERG. Towards Zangs?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Towards Zangs--for I was the third house right off of Zangs on Beckley.
Mr. BALL. Did this police car stop directly in front of your house?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes--it stopped directly in front of my house and it just "tip-tip" and that's the way Officer Alexander and Charles Burnely would do when they stopped, and I went to the door and looked and saw it wasn't their number.
Mr. BALL. Where was Oswald when this happened?
Mrs. ROBERTS. In his room.
Mr. BALL. It was after he had come in his room?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Had that police car ever stopped there before ?
Mrs. ROBERTS. I don't know--I don't remember ever seeing it.
Mr. BALL. Have you ever seen it since?
Mrs. ROBERTS. No--I didn't pay that much attention--I just saw it wasn't the police car that I knew and had worked for so, I forgot about it. I seen it at the time, but I don't remember now what it was.
Mr. BALL. Did you report the number of the car to anyone?
Mrs. ROBERTS. I think I did---I'm not sure, because I--at that particular time I remembered it.
Mr. BALL. You remembered the number of the car ?
Mrs. ROBERTS. I think it was--106, it seems to me like it was 106, but I do know what theirs was--it was 170 and it wasn't their car.
Mr. BALL. It was not 170?
Mrs. ROBERTS. The people I worked for was 170.
Mr. BALL. Did you report that number to anyone, did you report this incident to anyone?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes, I told the FBI and the Secret Service both when they was out there.
Mr. BALL. And did you tell them the number of the car?
Mrs. ROBERTS. I'm not sure--I believe I did--I'm not sure. I think I did because there was so much happened then until my brains was in a whirl.
Mr. BALL. On the 29th of November, Special Agents Will Griffin and James Kennedy of the Federal Bureau of Investigation interviewed you and you told them that "after Oswald had entered his room about 1 p.m. on November 22, 1963, you looked out the front window and saw police car No. 207?
Mrs. ROBERTS. No. 107.
Mr. BALL. Is that the number?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes--I remembered it. I don't know where I got that 106---207. Anyway, I knew it wasn't 170.
Mr. BALL. And you say that there were two uniformed policemen in the car?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes, and it was in a black car. It wasn't an accident squad car at all.
Mr. BALL. Were there two uniformed policemen in the car?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Oh, yes.
Mr. BALL. And one of the officers sounded the born ?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Just kind of a "tit-tit"--twice.
Mr. BALL. And then drove on to Beckley toward Zangs Boulevard, is that right?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes. I thought there was a number, but I couldn't remember it but I did know the number of their car--I could tell that. I want you to understand that I have been put through the third degree and it's hard to remember.
Mr. BALL. Are there any other questions?
Dr. GOLDBERG. No, that's all.
Mr. BALL. Now, Mrs. Roberts, this deposition will be written up and you can read it if you want to and you can sign it. or you can waive the signature.
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, you know, I can't see too good how to read. I'm completely blind in my right eye.
Mr. BALL. Do you want to waive your signature? And then you won't have to come back down here.
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, okay.
Mr. BALL. All right, you waive it then ?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes. Do you want me to sign it now?
Mr. BALL. No; we couldn't, because this young lady has to write it up and it will be a couple of weeks before it will be ready.
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, will you want me to come back or how?
Mr. BALL. Well, you can waive your signature and you won't have to come back to do that--do you want to do that?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Okay, it will be all right.
Mr. BALL. All right. The Secret Service will take you home now.
Mrs. ROBERTS. All right.
Mr. BALL. Thank you for coming.
Mrs. ROBERTS. All right.

4 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

So Catholics only have one political care, the poor?

Social issues, war, freedom of religion don't count?

There are lots of good reasons why Catholics like me are Republican.

Sometime come to Vegas and we can chat about it over a drink.

"Sometime come to Vegas and we can chat about it."

I hope that isn't a coded message meaning "break my knuckles"  is it?

Ha!  Just kidding Cory.

But Vegas isn't a place I would ever feel totally safe visiting.

Here is another "deal" theory of mine regards Reagan in 1980.

And this would involve the Catholic Church and Pope John Paul.

I don't have strong research facts to bolster my theory. 

It is simply and honestly from my own personal observations of the U.S. presidential 1980 election and noticing what I sensed was a socio-voting anomaly.

It had to do with Catholics voting for a party they traditionally didn't vote for except in the 1972 presidential election when almost everyone in this country was brainwashed into believing that George McGovern was actually a closet crime and hippie free love loving commie. The nation was terrified that he would promote violent chaos in the streets instead of law and order.

Perversely, the truth turned out to be that their "Law And Order" candidate ( Nixon ) and his political team gang were the real criminals and all but Nixon had to serve time because of their criminal acts.  McGovern turned out to be the real law abiding and moral straight arrow.

There were so many Catholic families where I grew up that they had their own schools including high school.

Most of them had very large families with many children. 

They were everywhere. Many of our neighbors were Catholics like this.

We knew they all voted Democrat. Always.

The Democrats back then seemed to represent a liberal ( help the poor and working class more than the rich) reputation. The edict of Christ himself.

But, in 1980, I noticed every Catholic family I knew just instantly switched to voting for the Republicans and Reagan that year.

It was a consensus in our three local Catholic churches.

I was so struck by this instant reversal of party voting loyalty I began asking why these Catholics were doing this.

I would say, you always vote for the party of the poor and workers and unions. Why switch to the party representing the rich now?

I could never get a real straight or well thought out answer from those I ask this question of. A few did say it was because of abortion and gave no other reason.

But, I had a sense that the Cardinals and Bishops of the church were instructing their priests here in the U.S. to urge their church flocks to vote for the Republicans that year.

I believe their doing so helped Reagan and the Republicans win the election.

I believe a "deal" between the Vatican and the Republican party was struck in 1980 where the leadership of the Catholic church  agreed to compel their millions of American faithful to vote against the Democrats that year.

To this day, I will never understand a true believer in the Catholic church doctrine of helping the poor and working class could ever justify voting for the party of the rich. For a candidate who crushed many of the labor unions in his time in office.

In 1991 ( 28 years after 11,22,1963 ) there were still a lot of JFK conspiracy freaks running around.

At least if you figure the tens of millions of American adults ( and foreign ones too)  who were willing to pay out their hard earned movie theater ticket money to view Oliver Stone's film "JFK", even though most of the American MSM movie critics and other media commentators trashed the film ( harder and more viciously than any other film in their careers ) and who starting doing so almost a year before the film even premiered.

Those millions of JFK conspiracy freak ticket buyers ignored the MSM film critics,  or simply didn't believe them.

And if these JFK ticket buyers were conspiracy freaks "or dupes" before seeing Stone's film, they must have become absolute lunatics after, since polls of Americans after the film's theater run revealed a significant "spike" in the number of American's who didn't believe the official finding of the Warren Commission Report.

And the previous WC doubting number was high to begin with.

Stones "JFK" film made over $200 million dollars in ticket sales ( domestic and foreign combined ) back in 1991.

Adjusted for inflation that amount in 1991 equals $368 million in today's dollar value.

Stone's "JFK" was the 6th highest grossing American film of 1991. It was nominated for 8 Academy Awards and won two.

The only reason JFK conspiracy polls have dropped to smaller majority numbers in the last 20 years is because our main population is made up of so many younger generation Americans who naturally know very little about the assassination and the history and body of JFK assassination research.

This number drop doesn't reflect a new trust of the WC and their "lone nut" finding. Just a disinterest in the whole story due to later generational apathy.

Denny Zartman.

Just read your JFK event interest history post above.

I find it interesting and refreshingly sincere and rational and thoughtful.

Thanks for posting this.

Yes, the more you read of the research facts and main suspect connected testimonies, you can't help but develop more doubts about this being a simple, impulsive, lone nut who just got lucky act versus a more involved scenario.

Earlene Robert's WC testimony statements about a Dallas police car stopping and horn tapping twice in front of her rooming house just as Oswald was in his room for a minute or two is just one of hundreds of witness testimony statements that sound almost unbelievable in their beyond coincidence intrigue incongruity relative to the simple lone nut official finding.

You'd have to be purposely avoiding or hiding from the full truth not to see something more to Earlene Robert's police car horn honking right in front of her door story just as Oswald arrived and went to his room next to Robert's entrance room. The distance from the curb to Ms. Robert's front door was not far.

 Ms. Roberts could clearly see the car number through the window she walked to and was so familiar with this from prior police car stops she easily and confidently recalled the difference and even recognized the car as specifically different from an "accident squad car."  Pretty credible testimony it appears to me.

Robert's WC testimony below is mind blowing imo.

Mr. BALL. Did a police car pass the house there and honked?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes.
Mr. BALL. When was that?
Mrs. ROBERTS. He came in the house.
Mr. BALL. When he came in the house ?
Mrs. ROBERTS. When he came in the house and went to his room, you know how the sidewalk runs?
Mr. BALL. Yes.
Mrs. ROBERTS. Right direct in front of that door-there was a police car stopped and honked. I had worked for some policemen and sometimes they come by and tell me something that maybe their wives would want me to know, and I thought it was them, and I just glanced out and saw the number, and I said, "Oh, that's not their car," for I knew their car.
Mr. BALL. You mean, it was not the car of the policemen you knew?
Mrs. ROBERTS. It wasn't the police car I knew, because their number was 170 and it wasn't 170 and I ignored it.
Mr. BALL. And who was in the car?
Mrs. ROBERTS. I don't know--I didn't pay any attention to it after I noticed it wasn't them-I didn't.
Mr. BALL. Where was it parked ?
Mrs. ROBERTS. It was parked in front of the house.
Mr. BALL. At 1026 North Beckley?
Mrs. ROBERTS. And then they just eased on--the way it is-it was the third house off of Zangs and they just went on around the corner that way.
Mr. BALL. Went around what corner?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Went around the corner off of Beckley on Zangs.
Mr. BALL. Going which way--toward town or away from town?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Toward town.
Dr. GOLDBERG. Which way was the car facing?
Mrs. ROBERTS. It was facing north.
Dr. GOLDBERG. Towards Zangs?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Towards Zangs--for I was the third house right off of Zangs on Beckley.
Mr. BALL. Did this police car stop directly in front of your house?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes--it stopped directly in front of my house and it just "tip-tip" and that's the way Officer Alexander and Charles Burnely would do when they stopped, and I went to the door and looked and saw it wasn't their number.
Mr. BALL. Where was Oswald when this happened?
Mrs. ROBERTS. In his room.
Mr. BALL. It was after he had come in his room?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Had that police car ever stopped there before ?
Mrs. ROBERTS. I don't know--I don't remember ever seeing it.
Mr. BALL. Have you ever seen it since?
Mrs. ROBERTS. No--I didn't pay that much attention--I just saw it wasn't the police car that I knew and had worked for so, I forgot about it. I seen it at the time, but I don't remember now what it was.
Mr. BALL. Did you report the number of the car to anyone?
Mrs. ROBERTS. I think I did---I'm not sure, because I--at that particular time I remembered it.
Mr. BALL. You remembered the number of the car ?
Mrs. ROBERTS. I think it was--106, it seems to me like it was 106, but I do know what theirs was--it was 170 and it wasn't their car.
Mr. BALL. It was not 170?
Mrs. ROBERTS. The people I worked for was 170.
Mr. BALL. Did you report that number to anyone, did you report this incident to anyone?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes, I told the FBI and the Secret Service both when they was out there.
Mr. BALL. And did you tell them the number of the car?
Mrs. ROBERTS. I'm not sure--I believe I did--I'm not sure. I think I did because there was so much happened then until my brains was in a whirl.
Mr. BALL. On the 29th of November, Special Agents Will Griffin and James Kennedy of the Federal Bureau of Investigation interviewed you and you told them that "after Oswald had entered his room about 1 p.m. on November 22, 1963, you looked out the front window and saw police car No. 207?
Mrs. ROBERTS. No. 107.
Mr. BALL. Is that the number?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes--I remembered it. I don't know where I got that 106---207. Anyway, I knew it wasn't 170.
Mr. BALL. And you say that there were two uniformed policemen in the car?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes, and it was in a black car. It wasn't an accident squad car at all.
Mr. BALL. Were there two uniformed policemen in the car?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Oh, yes.
Mr. BALL. And one of the officers sounded the born ?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Just kind of a "tit-tit"--twice.
Mr. BALL. And then drove on to Beckley toward Zangs Boulevard, is that right?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes. I thought there was a number, but I couldn't remember it but I did know the number of their car--I could tell that. I want you to understand that I have been put through the third degree and it's hard to remember.
Mr. BALL. Are there any other questions?
Dr. GOLDBERG. No, that's all. 

2 hours ago, Robert Harper said:

A similar description could be given for literally millions of young people at the time. I applaud your introspection and your pursuit of your questions. I think your journey has also been experienced by...if not millions, at least, thousands.. of people who grew up accepting the word of official USA. It took 99 years for people to learn that the SS Lusitania was actually loaded with armaments and a fiction that it was merely a passenger vessel. It took less time, but a similar result, to find that the Gulf of Tonkin resolution (supported by a unanimous Senate and all but 2 Representatives) was based on a lie. It took much less time to learn that the invasion of Iraq was based on a lie or that the government could be involved in an end run around the law with the Iran-Contra shenanigans. If I am surprised by anything now, it is the lack of urgency one senses in the public for a confrontation over the 9/11 deception. Similar to the intent of the Warren Commission, it clouded the truth. As I mentioned in another thread, at least after 17 years with JFK, we had books, investigations by Garrison, the House Report and the Church report that helped establish an understanding of a deep - or secret - government at work. It is almost as if it is considered useless to try and understand. The work of Griffen and Wood and Marshall and  Bollyn have helped, but so little discussion, it is depressing.

True realities that most of our country's citizens ( for many reasons ) don't know about, think about or care about.

I just saw and read an article about an old English woman ( maybe over 100 years old? ) who was employed at a very young adult age in Britain's secret German code deciphering program during W.W.II.

She said she still knows secrets that she will take to her grave to honor the secrecy vow she took in her position back in the 1940's.

Secrets of great national and even world significance definitely can be ( and are ) kept as secrets successfully...sometimes forever.

Cory, no I can't.

However, even if this action on Lee's part was a suicide mission good bye, it doesn't mean he still wasn't part of a larger group of conspirators.

Cory, can you explain Lee Harvey Oswald's statement to the world's press late Friday evening in the Dallas PD  building ..."I didn't kill nobody." And " I am just a patsy." ?

Does that sound like someone who wanted to kill JFK for greatness recognition reasons? 

Oswald supposedly told Marina he would have been justified killing General Walker, comparing him to Hitler.

He wouldn't admit to killing Kennedy, but let's say he did. He certainly couldn't compare JFK to Hitler or any other Fascist dictator.

And the man Oswald hated ( General Walker ) hated JFK!

And Oswald didn't target JFK because of JFK's aggressive actions toward Cuba.

Oswald knew JFK held back on an all out assault in the Bay Of Pigs invasion of Cuba and was hated in this country by millions for doing so.

Oswald acting under orders from Cuba to kill JFK also didn't  make sense as Castro knew JFK was trying to improve certain relations with them when JFK was killed.

And Castro would be stuck with a much more extreme anti-Castro military/intelligence agency favoring LBJ.

Oswald told his interrogators that in regards to his possible hate of JFK due to his Cuba policies,  that America's stance against Cuba wouldn't change with LBJ.

There was never any personal, political or ideological anger or hatred ever expressed by Oswald toward JFK according to Oswald's closest confidant for years - Marina Oswald.

The left marriage ring could suggest Oswald knew he might not survive past that day.  It is a powerful emotional statement and action from one spouse, who obviously felt it important to leave in the other spouse's possession. a symbol of his love for her.  But, I don't see this action in and of itself as logically indicating Oswald's guilt as a lone nut assassin.

Oswald's intriguingly curious world press proclamation of being set up as a patsy is as strong an indication of his lone gunman innocence as much as the left ring may be an indication of his lone nut guilt imo.

8 pages out of 11 on Jim Garrison blacked out?

At this late date?

That's not a release...that's a censured peek.

I've mentioned my personal youthful story in this regards several times now and do so once again to explain when and why I first became suspicious of the official JFK assassination event finding.

Like most Americans however, I moved on and began life's journey.  I didn't obsess about the JFK assassination, however, when Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy were also struck down by assassin's bullets just 5 years later and their killings were again assigned to lone nut perps by our government, my common sense instincts forced me to begin looking at these similar populist ideology high political leader killings with serious suspicion. Jim Garrison's investigation also intrigued me.

And residing in the same small town as Mae Brussell you couldn't help but catch some of her JFK, MLK and RFK and much broader conspiracy broadcasts on KRML,  just by turning on your car radio. I listened to Brussell off and on but she would exhaust you with her non-stop, high energy, hours long reports.

I believed a fair amount of what Brussell was postulating however, but again I was always so busy making enough income to survive and focusing my time and mental energies to this endeavor, that I didn't get into any deeper examination of our trifecta political leader elimination conspiracy realm until the Oliver Stone film JFK in 1993.

Responding to W. Neiderhut's original post;  when one continually discovers over decades an ever growing body of "thousands" of hard and credibly vetted research facts and testimonies that suggest a JFK conspiracy with far more  logical weight than the almost childish minded simplified "lone gunman" who just got lucky finding , it is truly more rational to consider a conspiracy in this matter versus not.

Trying to find a lone gunman answer to the JFK murder case is becoming more difficult and illogical every extra year with new information continually coming forth that just adds to the mountain of facts suggesting a conspiracy.

Oswald did not just get a lucky window of opportunity and impulsively decide to make his barbaric, murderous social change mark on history.  He was much more thoughtful and disciplined than that imo.  His extra curricular political activities were organized and planned in advance. His radio and TV  appearance in N.O. showed a person who was quite intelligent and coherent and well spoken.  If Oswald did travel to Mexico City, this took coherent planning and disciplined management of what appears to be meager, bare bones funding.

And I also believe Lee Harvey Oswald loved his babies June and Rachel too much to leave them with a potentially horrific life ruining legacy such as he supposedly did.

7 hours ago, Daniel Meyer said:

A couple of details. I don't remember much of New Orleans public transit before the 1970s, but much similar to a decade earlier. It was better than currently in the city, especially in the older parts of town closer to the river. Not unusual for people to commute to work from say the Carrollton neighborhood (around where the map says "Oak Street" towards the center left) to the Central Business District/Canal Street on the border of the French Quarter, less than an hour on NOPSI (New Orleans Public Service Inc. -  the company that ran transit, electric, and gas in the city; the latter two partially subsidizing public transit).

Left out of the map is the Murrat house, on French Street in the Lakeview section. That was a middle to upper middle class "automobile suburb" at the time;  IIRC most use of public transit was "domestic help" (maids) coming in mornings and leaving evenings. The French Street address was just a block and a half off the Canal Boulevard line, making it plausibly accessible by public transport. But buses were rare off the morning and evening peak; I recall 90 min or more waits in that part of town for a bus when I visited that part of town before I had a car. It would also involve transfers; least difficult in '63 would be to take the old Canal Streetcar to the end of the line in Mid-City (at City Park Avenue) then transfer to the Canal Boulevard Bus. 

Getting to Ochsner not only involves transfer within the system; it is outside of the city  limits of New Orleans in Jefferson Parish, involving another transfer to the separate Jefferson Parish transit system. The map shows a route from St. Charles Avenue to River Road in Jefferson near Ochsner. That would be a good route by automobile, but I'm unaware of any public transit route doing that. From Magazine/Marengo area either two bus routes or one bus and one streetcar to get to the intersection of S. Claiborne and S. Carrollton, then another transfer to Jefferson Parish Jeff Highway bus 2 miles to Ochsner. 

FWIW.

Your recall of the NO transit system even close to that time frame is remarkable and full of relevant and informative details.  Thanks for sharing.