Cory Santos

Is it accurate that at the other Texas stops Jackie was presented white roses while in Dallas she was presented red? Or is it a false story? Thanks.

Interesting, I see the similarity to President Bush. Thanks for the information. It tends to support what I said above about President Bush NOT being there at that exact time.

I see what David is submitting. As to what David is saying, at this point I agree, I do not see the correlation to the figure in the previous photos. One looks younger, relaxed, the other older, less relaxed. Are there more clear photos to compare? I have always had a problem however with people saying it was President Bush when 1) he was not in Dallas in the afternoon of 11/22/63 per his own call to the FBI-think about it, why would you risk a fake report to the FBI saying you are somewhere else and lounge around outside the TSBD with photographers everywhere? Makes no sense. Show more pictures of this so called individual people claim is President Bush. I dont buy it. LOL, I recall once seeing someone claiming they identified a young "W" there also. Yes the conspiracy runs deep for some.

When you are prosecuting a defendant, you have to control the picture painted of him. Steve, you are correct. The W.C. had to instill subliminally in the mind of everyone reading that LHO was capable of such a horrific act. The Tippit shooting did two things. 1) it gave LHO the appearance of a killer but 2) was a problem because I do not think the shooting was meant to happen as it did. I find it so so strange in reading Deputy Baker's testimony of how he went into the DBD and saw LHO on the second floor. What a strange coincidence indeed and perhaps it was, but I find it very strange. Everyone is running to the Grassy Knoll and he goes into the DBD. So they have to show this pattern of LHO being a killer, because it puts in the jurors mind-that being the American public-that this is a person that could perform this act without any issue. Making him the Walker shooter does that along with Tippit. My question, if I was writing a book-which I am not- I would go look at all the Walker shooting documents very carefully, if it was 30 years ago I would talk to people. I think this question of how LHO became the Walker shooter is very important. I doubt that it is merely a strange coincidence. But then again . . . Mr. Caddy, did General Walker have any connection or knowledge of UFO's ?

Mervyn, what Jim says is what I was getting at. Where is the evidence Oswald was arrested or a suspect in the Walker shooting prior to the assassination? I have never seen any. If there is any, show it. Otherwise, it is all speculation. More importantly, as a defense attorney, it looks like LHO is being tied to it merely to prove he shot JFK. If he shot at one person, he can shoot at another.

Hi Mervyn, no that was not what I was writing about.

I was watching a video by Leroy Blevins Sr. He had what he felt was evidence of a shooter located on the County Records building and a shooter located on the Dal Tex building. He also stated that Zapruder film shows two distinct bullets hit the cement cover on the grass directly across from the grassy knoll. Has anyone watched his videos? Thoughts? I thought today I heard him suggest RFK was the surgeon general. I must have been tired when I heard that because that would be a pretty big mistake. Thanks for your opinions.

I think you ask the correct questions, but again, I have sat on various boards, it does not mean that I am in close connection with other members. It merely means that I have access to that other member. I am in various organizations, yet, all that means is I have access to other people. When I spoke at the Univ. of Nevada OLLI Institute on the JFK Assassination-no it was never put up on youtube-I mentioned that just because I participate in the Infragaard program it does not mean anything more than that. What you are really getting at is this. As an attorney, I utilize physical direct and circumstantial evidence first. In this case, most of it was destroyed, manipulated, or "lost". So, what one is left with is evidence of connections, strange coincidences - some which are not coincidences- and speculation. LHO said he was a patsy. That is a fact. Clay Shaw lied on the witness stand. That is a fact. So did David Ferrie to Jim Garrison as to him knowing LHO. Of course he did. But, my concern with Paul's analysis (the other one) of Dallas connections to a possible conspiracy is that he devotes so much on Walker and connections. But we do not have direct evidence in most cases of anything other than connections and/or strange coincidences. I asked him and to his credit he answered, where is the day to day evidence of what Walker was doing. He admitted it really does not exist. Those were questions that needed to be asked decades ago. So to answer your question Paul, I like that Paul-the other one-is digging the way he is, but, I do agree that he seems to be ignoring the other connections which you mention. However, if that is to maintain focus, then perhaps it cold be good. But, just digging through the testimony will not solve anything. Showing inconsistencies is helpful. But the proof needs to come in evidence -which I would even consider credible second hand testimony from family members as now it is so late. If there was a conspiracy, I believe that there is still evidence out there. The LHO Ferrie photo from Frontline proved that. The trick is finding that information. I have always thought the photo of Walker's house with the license plate on the car blacked out was relevant. I would recommend you Paul keep asking the questions you are asking. These were questions that should have been asked decades ago by one of the worst Supreme Court Justices, no the worst, that ever stained the judiciary and who was charged with finding truth.

lol

There is motive, speculation, but no evidence. I read the posts on Gen. Walker but no one has produced any evidence that he was involved. His interview with the German newspaper can be interpreted many ways. Unless someone can give me more information on how he knew LHO shot at him in April. . . prove he knew George DeMohrenschildt, prove he met with Guy Bannister, prove he knew David Ferrie. I am interested. But, even then, give evidence that he was involved with a conspiracy beforehand or, afterwards as part of the cover up. Facts, not speculation.

Thanks Paul. I was aware of the interview you provided. I was not aware of the meeting with Guy Bannister. I would like more information and proof of that. No, I was looking for a very detailed day by day of his movements, communications, etc. I thought you might have some information like that. Guilty people do guilty people things. I would therefore want to analyze his movements closely before and after. Not just merely that he called a paper. While relevant, especially because how did he know it was LHO who shot at him, but, I want to see where exactly he was. Close people to him, what did they say? Where exactly was he? Etc. Tell me, what if any were his connections to big oil, could you name the companies he was associated closely with, if any?

Question for Paul, you seem to have studied Gen. Walker, tell me, with documents/evidence, can you give me a day by day account for Gen. Walker several days before the assassination and several days after? What were his actions? Do you feel they were suspicious? How so?

Well in taking this question with some thought, the bad guys (why do you assume they were just guys?) would have had a problem. . .not just with letting him outside during the parade, but making sure he got to the Book Depository unless. . . there were other fall guys there that day. Were there back up plans? Clearly, if there was a conspiracy, LHO was doing his own thing. He left the book depository, left the bus for a taxi, failed to get picked up by the two officers at the boarding house, and then the whole Tippit event. If there was a conspiracy, he clearly was a rogue part of it as they did not have control of him. See your thought is if they knew LHO was the patsy, then they are stuck with the shot from behind, etc. If JFK makes it out by some chance, they cannot change enough of the evidence to fit the shot from behind. So, they would have needed other people to pin it on. But, consider this, if it was only him they chose, they would have had to make sure he arrived to work that day. Therefore, they needed to make sure they had control of him the day and night before and the subsequent morning of the assassination. So we would have to look at where he was, who was driving him to work, etc. But, your thought does disprove a conspiracy. Maybe LHO was loyal, did what he was told, but that morning, after leaving the 6th floor-went downstairs to the front steps before the assassination. Maybe prior to the shooting he knew something was not right and hoped to gain an alibi- sounds kind of like another story, i.e. Richard Case Nagell. Maybe, prayer man is not LHO. We know he was on the 2nd floor at least when Baker saw him. So you are trying to suggest that those that feel he is prayer man have made an illogical conclusion because it makes no sense if it was tight knit conspiracy. The problem is you are limiting the scope and consideration of the conspiracy. If there was a conspiracy in Dallas, it was certainly not hastily put together by a few friends. It was a well coordinated action which would have had back up plans. These plans would have allowed for more than one area of action, would have allowed for other fall guys. Remember, so many people seemed to want an alibi that day. Some people were out of the country or allegedly fishing with a plane waiting for example. So, if he was prayer man, still there could be a conspiracy, LHO could have gone rogue seeking the alibi so many others apparently had. If he was not prayer man, so what? It does not prove he was on the 6th floor shooting.

Mr. Caddy will you be attending and/or speaking?

Thanks Steve. Appreciate it. It is coming up if anyone is in So. California and interested in going. http://www.nationalboxinghalloffame.com/

Steve, LOL, so my dad Herb Santos, Sr. is being inducted into the National Boxing Hall of Fame in April in Los Angeles. The HOF has been putting up pictures of the inductees. One picture it put up had him at his desk. On his desk there is an owl winking. It is a card holder. On one website, a person commented in effect that this was a clear illuminati sign and it is no wonder he is being put in the HOF. It has since been deleted. EWWW more mystery. Some people see things as sinister or part of a conspiracy that are not. They are simply "strange coincidences". As for MSU, my wife thinks highly of the school. From what I understand (not from her but other people), some recruiting was done there by the CIA in the 50s and 60s. I dont know about now. . . or do I? Ha ha ha Thanks for the great post Steve.

My wife went to law school at Michigan State. Aww, always strange coincidences right? LOL.

Thank you, I might publish it online. I am checking to see if any legal magazines would be interested. Again, thank you for the support. If I publish it, I will let everyone know.

I think it needs to get to the U.S. Supreme Court, though I doubt it will. Many people do not realize this but Garrison's actions against Clay Shaw actually did get up to the U.S. Supreme Court. I wrote about it in my law school paper, "Separating Fact From Fiction: The Ethical Dimensions of Jim Garrisons prosecution of Clay Shaw for Conspiracy in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy." To think Morley's case has been ongoing for over 15 years. Scary a case can take that long. It needs to just be decided one way or the other so that it is done.

Well, legally speaking, if you can reproduce something 100% of the time, great. It is a fact. If you can produce it 1 out of 15 times, its possible. But, if you can reproduce it 1 out of 15 it is possible, but not probable. Courts like high probability with tests. So when I cross examine an expert and they state most people injured in rear end car accidents heal within several months. I always enjoy asking them to explain why my client cannot be in the percentage (no matter how small) that does not heal within several months. With the assassination, factor in other variables such as moving target, wind, trees with leaves, crowds, women with distracting red dress on, guy twirling an umbrella- to protest lol, guy in street near car with hand in the air, a large pipe on the side of the low window which requires awkward stance, etc. etc. and, well, its not really probable. The time to do the scientific tests is well over, the warren commission-like Warren's opinion- was faulty and failed to properly investigate. Though, certainly, as a fact finding commission, it should have never been in existence in the first place. If you want to discuss the problems with the good senator's single bullet theory, then one needs to look at one thing. That is, did they investigate all ballistic avenues? In other words, did they investigate the other options as to where and how the shots could have been fired. If they were ignored, as they were in my opinion, then, truly, the theory is very weak. If it was innocent, well it was negligent. If it was intentional, well, we know what it should be called then.

As a trial attorney, I find this story very interesting. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/03/19/jfk-files-15-year-lawsuit-over-mysterious-cia-agent-drags-final-files-await-release/435989002/

My two cents is I joined this forum for serious intellectual debate on this issue. I knew I would disagree with some people, as Paul and I have had on a few minor issues. I knew some more sophisticated and some less sophisticated researchers would be here and there would be debate as to their methods and ideas. However, I am sickened that trolls are allowed on here. It makes the forum less professional and distracts from a true debate of ideas. When someone starts each post with a ridiculous statement such as "with all due respect", it cheapens this site greatly. This is not intellectual dialogue but mere trolls talk. I have my own thoughts on the assassination which probably do not fit in well with most here, but, honest debate is a good thing. Allowing garbage trolls talk is not appropriate. I am also disgusted by posts by another person, wont name, who refuses to respond to thread questions but instead, dodges the questions and moves to another not related topic in the thread. He then makes comments like "we know what happened", etc. Sorry folks, I tend to agree with Paul on this one. Paul, if you want to go, perfectly understand. At some point, it becomes less fun when trolls allowed on the forum when one wants to have real discussion about a topic. Also, why is the word t r o l l not allowed? It keeps deleting it?

Ok, give me your best concise arguments either way. I have a hearing tomorrow but probably Thursday I will talk with him about this and link the arguments. Keep it short and simple please. I am not paying him to review this thread. Thanks, Cory

But its in contradiction to the photo showing the missing tooth. I will have one of my dental experts review the form and give me an opinion and I will share that with all of you.

I can settle this very quickly. With all these intelligent posts and debates on the subject, it is so easy to solve. Don't you see? Just ask JVB. Hey that rhymes. Certainly if she dated Oswald in a love affair, certainly she can settle the debate. I would imagine somewhere she mentioned this or can confirm this one way or another. Ok, tongue in cheek, actually, Sandy, I think that from a legal perspective, you have found something. Where it leads, that is another story, but you have found a hole in the evidence which has a bite- lol. Keep it up.