Paul Jolliffe

3 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

I’d sure like to know exactly what Lumpkin said to Curry about taking police detectives from Parkland back to Dealey Plaza.  Did he refer directly to the TSBD, or simply to the vicinity of the assassination?
 

According the Charles Batchelor's report to Chief Curry, on page 43 of the link below, Lumpkin referred specifically to the TSBD.

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338584/m1/43/?q=PARKLAND

3 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Makes sense to me.  But securing the radio dispatch recordings doesn’t seem all that incriminating, at least to me.  After all, the U.S. President had just been assassinated, the Governor of Texas had been wounded, and uniformed city cop murdered, all in the city Lumpkin was empowered to protect.  Impounding of evidence sounds like standard operating procedure.

Jim,

It seems awfully premature to me - after all, at that moment, how did Lumpkin know that no other suspects would be uncovered? Why impound the tapes (!!!) at 5 pm on Friday? I mean, at that time, had the DPD even ascertained "Oswald's" identity for certain, or was he still saying things like "you figure it out" to them?

2 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Paul,

Here’s what I’ve been able to find searching at Baylor’s John Armstrong collection (emphasis added).

According to an interview with Murray Jackson summarized by HSCA staff,  

“JACKSON tells us that the tapes were sequestered almost immediately after the shift ended, and JACKSON would not have had access to the original, to dub in any comments. JACKSON left after his shift and went to the home of TIPPIT.”

http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/compoundobject/collection/po-arm/id/10393/rec/1

According to a summary of an HSCA interview of Sergeant Gerald D. Henslee, supervisor of the dispatcher’s unit, 

“On 11-22-63 he had four officers and four civilians working for him on the day shift. The officers were: V. A.McDaniels, C. E. Hulse, Murray Jackson (Tippit's erstwhile partner) and Bob Huffstutler….”

The summary of Henslee’s interview goes on to state, 

“Later that afternoon he started to transcribe channel two (autograph disc) - about 5 PM. After that, Chief Lumpkin came in and told him to take all the tapes (and discs), place them in sealed envelopes and bring them to him. This was done shortly after 5 PM. Tapes (and discs) were sent to FBI for transcribing, but were returned later as channel one was too vague what with the interference and the unfamiliar names, etc.

“Chief Lumpkin again gave them to Henslee for complete transcribing. It was 3 to 4 days later that he completed the task and returned them to Lumpkin.

“Henslee next saw the original tapes sometime in the fall of 1968 when he received a call from Judy Bonner, ex-news media in Dallas area, turned author. She wanted him to transcribe the tapes for her efforts with the book she was working on. She delivered them to his apartment and he transcribed them – again, but this time for her. Doesn't know where tapes were between November, 1963 and Fall of 1968.

http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/compoundobject/collection/po-arm/id/9716/rec/2

Interesting that the DPD dispatcher supervisor said didn’t know where the “tapes” (actually Dictabelts) were from November 1963 to the Fall of 1968.

Steve Thomas seems to know the DPD archives inside and out.  He might know more about this.

Hmm.

So Deputy Chief George Lumpkin knew by shortly after 5 pm that he needed to have physical possession of the dispatch tapes/dictabelt recordings. This was before the FBI seized all of the relevant evidence late Friday night. Before Chief Curry was pressured into releasing the "evidence" to the FBI. 

As a matter of fact, at 5 pm, the lineups in which "Oswald" was identified (or not) by various witnesses had yet to take place!

All of the audio evidence was turned over to the FBI on Friday night, but was later returned as "too vague". Meanwhile, apparently no one from the DPD could have listened to the original tapes before they went to the FBI except for Lumpkin. No one from the DPD would know whether the audio evidence the FBI returned to the DPD was original, except for Lumpkin.

I'd say Deputy Chief George Lumpkin's connections to various suspects outside the DPD deserve some very careful scrutiny.

49 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

According to this document, Inspector J.H. Sawyer and other officers were already "in the process of detaining everyone who had any knowledge whatsoever of the shooting" at the TSBD before Lumpkin arrived. It seems to me that it may have been one of Sawyer's officers who stopped Oswald from leaving rather than Lumpkin's man, Lt. Erich Kaminsky.

If so, this means Oswald could have left earlier than the time we were discussing earlier. (12:49?)

 

Sandy,

My point was that somehow Lumpkin knew from where the shots originated by the time JFK had arrived at Parkland! His "knowledge" could not have been from first-hand experience - Lumpkin was the driver of the "pilot car" in the motorcade and was west of the Triple Underpass and Dealey Plaza when the shots rang out. During the motorcade's race to Parkland, the local authorities believed the shots came from the grassy knoll, as evidenced by both Chief Curry and Sheriff Decker's infamous orders to get men up on the triple overpass and into the railroad yard. Yet Lumpkin knew immediately that the key location was not the railyard, but the TSBD!

To me, this strongly implies that Lumpkin had foreknowledge of the shooting! 

At Parkland, Lumpkin "suggested" to Chief Curry that he, Lumpkin, go to the TSBD with the Homicide Detectives at that moment, and as we read from the document, Lumpkin then started making the decision about what to do with anyone who might have had knowledge of the shooting, sealing the building, etc. 

(I think it highly likely that "Oswald" had left the TSBD well before 12:49. Truly's (wholly false) claim that he "noticed" that "Oswald" was missing does not work if "Oswald" was still hanging around the TSBD at least four minutes after the 12:45 DPD broadcast description of the shooter.)

9 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Sandy,

The question, then, would be were transcripts made of the Dictabelt recordings before the FBI seized and replaced them, and the evidence seems to suggest there wasn’t time.  From John’s write-up in The Murder of J.D. Tippit:

DPD dispatcher Murray Jackson, who worked 20 years at the Dallas Police department, told the HSCA that the dictabelts/tapes were sequestered almost immediately after his shift ended on November 22, 1963. Police Chief Lumpkin had the dictabelts and discs placed in sealed envelopes and taken to his office. A few days later the Dallas Police gave the FBI their original dictabelts and discs that contained the original recordings of the dispatchers' radio transmissions from channel 1 and channel 2 on November 22, 1963.

Note also this indication of a TAPE SPLICE at 1:44 on the FBI transcript of the recordings.  What on earth is a tape splice doing on a Dictabelt recording?  Dictabelts are not tape and they cannot be spliced, although I'm not sure what Murray Jackson's reference to "tapes" was about above.  I'll try to remember to ask John about it.

 

John’s complete write-up on the Dictabelt alteration begins here:

https://harveyandlee.net/Tippit/Tippit.html#Dictabelt

Jim,

What time did Murray Jackson's shift end? (I assume it was some time Friday evening, right? Or did he work late after midnight? Or, was he on the day shift?)

I am asking because I want to figure out how quickly Deputy Chief George L. Lumpkin and the DPD knew that the Dictabelt/tapes (?) were going to be critical evidence in the case against "Oswald". If Lumpkin was responding to Friday night pressure from the FBI to secure those materials, then that implies that someone in the FBI knew on Friday that the audio recordings would be important to build the case against "Oswald" - even before he had been formally charged!

However, an early end to Jackson's shift may also imply that Lumpkin himself was from the start in on the plot to frame "Oswald."

Is it a coincidence that the president of the Texas School Book Depository, Mr. Jack Charles Cason, described himself as the former commander of American Legion Post 53 in Dallas (and as "a patriotic citizen who upholds our democratic principles") and the Deputy Chief George Lumpkin was himself a Provost for the American Legion Committee Chairmen at the 1964 national convention?

Is it a coincidence that just as the limo arrived at Parkland with the victims (before any possible determination could have been made), Lumpkin "suggested to Chief Curry that he take the Homicide Detectives back to Elm and Houston streets from where it was thought that the shots were fired at the President and the Governor from the Texas School Book Depository . . ." ?

http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg Subject Index Files/C Disk/Cason Jack Charles/Item 01.pdf

Steve, 

I am not so sure it is a typo for a few reasons:

1. Three of the time stamps you pointed out have a parenthesis around them, whereas the "1:10 pm" time stamp does not, indicating to me that the transcriber of this transcript was probably looking at an annotated copy of the dispatch tapes, one that someone had marked with parentheses around the (changed) times. This is a general pattern - look at several time stamps over several pages around the Tippit shooting. There is one exception to this pattern, but still, it is a pattern.

I know that's speculative, but  . . .

2. Look at the bottom of page 408. There in black and white is an obviously changed time stamp. It now reads "1:19", yet the whiteout and the original time it hides are still clearly visible: 1:10. 

It is indisputable that the current "1:19" at the bottom of page 408 is typed over an earlier time. 

3. Finally, why would ambulances 602 and/or 603 be en route to Baylor? J.D. Tippit was taken to Methodist Hospital in Oak Cliff, not the Baylor Medical Center which was much closer to Dealey Plaza. I think you were trying to imply that because 602 and 603 responded on the extant transcript very soon after the report of the Tippit shooting that their calls to the dispatcher were, in fact, to pick up Tippit. While that may be so, it does not explain why one of them, 603, notified the dispatcher that they had arrived at Baylor.

That 603 ambulance could not have been responding to the shooting of J.D. Tippit. No ambulance took Tippit to Baylor Medical Center. I agree with you that a Dudley Hughes ambulance responded to the Tippit shooting report very soon after the 1:07 shooting, and it was probably 602 from Dudley Hughes, literally right around the corner. And therefore, the "1:10 pm" time stamp was probably accurate.

In any event, you and I agree that the type written transcripts almost certainly reflect the changes made to obscure the fact that Tippit was shot earlier than 1:15. I agree with those who believe the time was probably around 1:07 or 1:08. (Way too early for "Oswald" to arrived at 10th and Patton on foot from 1026 N. Beckley.)

5 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

Sandy,

 

The thing that clinched it for me was the difference in Interrogation reports that Fritz had drawn up.

Look at the difference between the:

DPD Archives Box 1, Folder# 15, Item# 1, page 5

http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/box1.htm

and

DPD Archives Box 15, Item# 1, Item# 111, page 6

http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/box15.htm

 

Fritz, or someone, had manually inserted the info about the bus transfer, and that accounted for the increase in page numbers from page 5 to page 6. For some reason, they had to get Oswald on that bus. To discredit Roger Craig's account of the Nash Rambler perhaps?

 

Steve Thomas

 

Steve, 

I'll see your difference in Fritz interrogation reports and raise you one official, Warren Commission published transcript: I present to you CE 705. Page 408 on the printed transcript (page 48 when you scroll down here).

It reads "Disp. 10-4 603 and 602. 1:10 pm."

This is after the Tippit shooting!

And the WC was dumb enough to publish this transcript with the old time, "1:10 pm" still on it!

Somebody screwed up, the WC published it, and nobody caught it! But there it is to this day!

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pdf/WH17_CE_705.pdf

29 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Paul,

Did Lovelady say anywhere he talked to Gloria Calvery a few moments after the hit?  In his first day affidavit, Bill Shelley said he ran across Elm and talked to her before going back inside the building.  From this image, Shelley’s conversation with her must have happened very quickly, if it is true at all.

Thanks to Sandy for all this hard work putting this evidence together.

Jim,

Yes, Lovelady did indeed identify Gloria Calvery as the "girl who ran up to us and told us the president had been hit" in his taped interview with the HSCA. The relevant section on Youtube begins at around the 29 minute mark.

Sandy,

Your gif and analysis certainly go a long way towards proving that Lovelady was on the steps of the TSBD for a bit after the shots. And, of course, then he can't be walking with Bill Shelley westward down the Elm Street extension at the same time. It certainly appears that Gloria Calvery had her conversation with Lovelady on the steps of the TBSD, not out on the island.

In your gif, is Bill Shelley visible anywhere?

16 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

Hi Paul, would you please share a link to that document?

Michael,

I found it on the shaky site "JFK Murder Solved". 

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/bush3.htm

I don't vouch for anything written on that site, but they do have a useful collection of primary sources. I bet the Jimmy Carter Presidential Library and Museum has it, too, but you have to navigate through that site.

https://www.jimmycarterlibrary.gov/

I have attached below a view of that same railing,  but from the circular drive that connected that upper level to the street. President Reagan was walking one level down on T St. NW, but the drive connected to Columbia Rd. NW., one level up.

Notice that the kneeling/sitting man appears to be concealed from any observers to his immediate right, thanks to (bunched drapes?) This man is not there to support the President - he is not leaning over the railing, waving, smiling, cheering, etc. He is ducking and hiding.

His location by the balcony is not adjacent to a room. It is next to a doorway, invisible in this photo, but very apparent on Google Maps. His location could have facilitated an (escape?) via the interior of the ground floor of the hotel (but on a different level from Reagan!) or via a vehicle off to Columbia Dr. 

I am amazed that photo remains in the pubic domain!

https://www.google.com/maps/@38.9163228,-77.0454939,3a,15y,121.87h,86.51t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s2ksQSncXNySWnERJkpcDwQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

11 hours ago, Joseph McBride said:

Hinckley did not shoot Reagan. The shot that hit Reagan was fired

from above. It was on a downward trajectory and hit the side of the

car, flattened itself, and richocheted into his left underarm, lodging in his chest. Hinckley was

firing diversionary shots, like Sirhan. I remember finding it odd that

the government never issued a report on the shooting. Some details

did not emerge until months later, in a book on James Brady. Judy Woodruff, then a network

radio reporter, was among those at the scene of the gunfire who said a shot came

from above, but in her autobiography she changed her story to fit

the official story, which is why she gets the big bucks today. As Vonnegut

used to put it, "So it goes." In an official White House color photograph

taken during the shooting (which is available online), you can see a man

in the balcony at top right with his arm protruding in what looks like a firing position.

Joseph,

I believe this is the photo to which you are referring, correct?

Yes, the man kneeling/sitting below the railing on the balcony does appear suspicious. I never noticed him before . . .

8 hours ago, Joseph McBride said:

The 11/22/63 Belmont memo Doug Horne wrote about, and I wrote

about in INTO THE NIGHTMARE, is a "smoking gun" document

that disproves the Warren Report, since that bullet "lodged

behind the President'e ear" was never entered into evidence.

It is the shot that struck Kennedy in the right temple from the front and blew the brains out the back of his head. Various

witnesses (including William Newman, Emmett J. Hudson, George Hickey, Sam Kinney, and

Bobby W. Hargis) reported seeing Kennedy

being struck in the right side of his head. Hurchel Jacks

corroborated this after seeing Kennedy lying in

the limousine, and Assistant White House Press Secretary Malcolm Kilduff pointed to that

area in his filmed press conference. I found this memo in 1985 and

wrote an article about it then but couldn't get it published at the time.

The memo also helps prove David Lifton's body alteration theory,

but he missed it in his research for BEST EVIDENCE.

Joseph,

When I read your excellent book two years ago, I remember being struck by that document. It was one more example of just how screwy the medical evidence really was, and how difficult it remains to try to parse out the truth from any conclusions drawn at the autopsy. 

Anyway, here is one more eyewitness who described what he saw at very close range of the president's entry wound into his skull: Secret Service Agent Roy Kellerman. I have always believed that Kellerman was a decent guy who told the truth as he remembered it. His observations did not fit the basic narrative - he heard the last two shots come very close together ("a flurry") and he described the entry wound to the RIGHT of JFK's ear, just in the hairline. I bet he was right.

3 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Paul,

But then why was such an effort made to frame "Oswald" as a shooter?  All those appearances at the Sports Drome rifle range, The Irving Furniture Mart and Dial Ryder referral (for the scope that eventually wasn't needed), the 4-foot long package while hitch-hiking with Ralph Leon Yates, that brown paper package mailed to "Lee Oswald" with 12-cent overdue postage notice delivered to Ruth Paine.  These elements of the set-up, all prior to the assassination, sure sound like trying to make "Oswald" appear to be a shooter, not a ringleader.

Yes, I agree Jim. Their intent or hope was to blame "Oswald" as the shooter.

But, important as that was, it was NOT the most important consideration for the plotters, nor even the second most: the overriding, absolutely imperative, nothing-else-matters-if-this-fails objective was to kill JFK. JFK had to be dead before the limo left Dealey Plaza, and if that meant an artillery strike had to be called in on the limo, then so be it. For the plotters, a living JFK would head an investigation that would, beyond any doubt, find out who did it. And they would all hang.

The second most important consideration for the plotters was to get the sixth floor impersonators/shooters/team out of the TSBD. You and I agree that the passenger elevator escape theory is viable, if not proven beyond doubt. That team had to escape successfully. 

The third most important aspect was to blame a dead "Oswald". Only a dead "Oswald" could be patsified. Remember, even J. Edgar Hoover admitted in his phone call to LBJ on Saturday evening that "the evidence against this man is not very strong." Within 24 hours that changed. Had the FBI suddenly discovered more "evidence"? No, merely the patsy was now dead, and his widow could now be coerced into saying literally anything against him.

And, of course, she did. 

Yes, they all wanted to wrap it up with "Oswald" as the shooter, but the other three considerations were even more important to the conspirators.

On 5/18/2019 at 2:45 PM, James DiEugenio said:

Its not Bush in that picture.

Plus he had a solid alibi to prove it.

 

Jim,

You may be right, but it is mighty interesting that this same George W. Bush (43, not 41) was pressuring Billy Lord beginning in September of 1976 to tell all he remembered about his trip across the Atlantic back in 1956 with "Oswald". Lord was so worried about the intense coercion/threats/"terror tactics" that he wrote to President Carter!

This demonstrates that certain very powerful people were very interested in talking to/influencing/intimidating/silencing every single person on earth who ever talked to "Oswald" - and doing so just before the HSCA really got rolling.

John,

Are you still in touch with Jeff Belmont?

I'd like to know more about Alan H. Belmont and any anti-Nazi stories Jeff might have from the 1940's in NYC. Did Belmont ever cross paths in the 1940's with either Allen Dulles or John J. McCloy? How did Belmont feel about President Kennedy's policies, particularly his foreign policies? Did Belmont have an opinion about Kennedy's proposed plan to end the Cold War with the Soviet Union? 

On 11/22/63, was Belmont in touch with anyone from outside the FBI?  How about in the next several days? Does Jeff have any anecdotes at all about how his uncle recalled the JFK assassination? Did his uncle feel that a "no-conspiracy" solution was foisted upon him, or did he naturally believe that was the sole path to follow?

Has Jeff read (or can he get a copy of) his uncle's typescript "As I Recall It! Incidents in the life of a G-man"? 

5 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

Sandy,

 

I believe that it was Lt. Erich Kaminsky who stopped Oswald at the front door.

 

After the assassination, George Lumpkin returned to the TSBD and took command there.

DPD Archives Box 14, Folder# 4, Item# 10 page 22.

http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/box14.htm

 

According to the Dispatch Tapes, George Lumpkin had arrived at the TSBD by 12:49 PM

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/dpdtapes/

 

15 (Captain C.E. Talbert): “15 is at the scene. We... the building's the Old Purse Company on the east side of Houston. Somebody cut off the back side, will you? Make sure nobody leaves there.”

Dispatcher: “10-4, 15”

15: “15's in charge down here. Correction 5's (Deputy Chief Lumpkin) in charge.”

(It appears that Talbert had the wrong building in mind).

 

It was Kaminsky who Deputy Chief Lumpkin had positioned at the front door of the TSBD.

 

 

This matches exactly what Postal Inspector, Harry Holmes wrote in his Report of Oswald's interrogation on Sunday, November 24^th even down to the fact that it was Truly, "his boss", who identified the person being questioned, as being an employee.

See Warren Report, Appendix XI page 636

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=946#relPageId=660&tab=page

If Oswald was the shooter, why was he hanging around as late as 12:49?

 

Steve Thomas

 

Steve,

I am glad you pointed the role of Erich Kaminsky here. When I read Jesse Curry's book last summer he wrote exactly that. I realized that the "Oswald was stopped and questioned by a policeman before Truly identified him" story may have its genesis right there. (Either that, or it is possible that there were TWO "Oswald"/DPD encounters within a very few minutes of the shots - one near the front door shortly after the shots, and then a second one a few minutes later.)

If Roy Truly vouched for "Oswald" not in the 2nd floor lunchroom, but instead a few minutes later near the front door as "Oswald" was confronted by Kaminsky (and noted on Revill's list), then Truly's decision to send the DPD after "Oswald" a few minutes later is even more suspicious and conspiratorial. 

Greg Parker has suggested that the "605 Elsbeth" address noted on Revill's list could be a misread of "Oswald's" library card, particularly if the library card were read upside down (if "Oswald" was holding it in his hand as identification, say.) While that scenario is possible, it is hardly definitive. We don't know why the Elsbeth address appeared on the DPD list. I'd say the possibility that the address came from some other intelligence file is still open.

Sandy Larsen,

On a different note, I agree with you that the most important consideration for the conspirators on 11/22/63 was that the president was dead, not that "Oswald" be framed perfectly. I have long believed that "Oswald" was to be the patsy as the shooter if possible, but failing that, "Oswald" was to be blamed as the ringleader. This is where I disagree with Jim and John Armstrong. I have already demonstrated that there is clear evidence that Buell Wesley Frazier was impersonated before 11/22/63 (CE 3077) and was implicated after the shots with the  early press reports that the DPD "found" a .303 British Enfield - Frazier's exact weapon!

This is not to suggest that I think that Frazier was a conspirator - I don't. I think he was an innocent 19 year old kid on whom the authorities thought they could lean to support their "case" against "Oswald." Had not the FBI "linked" the Mannlicher-Carcano to "Oswald" late Friday night/early Saturday morning,  I believe there was an excellent chance Frazier would have been jailed on conspiracy charges.

On 5/17/2019 at 3:17 AM, Sandy Larsen said:

 

"The reason I believe the TSBD was a CIA front is because a plan was apparently devised and carried out to allow gunmen to enter the building, shoot, and leave. It seems to me that that would have been a difficult thing to do at a normal place of business. CIA cover businesses are different. They can be compartmented with individuals and groups of individuals not knowing what each other is up to. So if something "different" happens, it doesn't raise eyebrows.

 

I haven't heard of that Paul. But I'd like to read about it... if there is evidence backing it up."

 

 

Sandy,

Have you read CIA Financial Analyst James B. Wilcott's classifed statements/interview with the HSCA? 

I had not. But in them, he claimed that 

"Among the close circle of friends with which I discussed all this openly, there was no doubt that Ruby was paid by CI*\ to do away with Oswald, and Oswald was a patsy . Information from other rather tight ; social circles would occasionally come our way and we would seise upon It and try to fit it into our own version of the scenario. There was no doubt that CIA was in "as thick as thieves" with the Dallas Police. Several different individuals or firms in Dallas had been Involved ♦ in one way or another with acting as cut-outs for arms shipment to * Cuban exiles for the Invasion. This we concluded from, putting various 

pieces people of information together. I remember hearing about some who had somehow helped the right-win.; Minute Men in Texas to get arms, originally intended for the invasion."

https://archive.org/stream/HSCAUnpublishedAndClassifiedInterviewsAndTestimony/HSCA Interview of James B Wilcott%2C 22 March 1978_djvu.txt

William Weston's articles "411 Elm Street" and "The Spider's Web: The Texas School Book Depository and the Dallas Conspiracy" make the provocative speculation that the TSBD was an important storage site for the CIA and their gun-running activities.  I've also included a pretty good interview with Weston and Jim Fetzer. Take a close look at what Weston has to say about the Lone Star Book Depository's move to Harry Hines Blvd. and the alternate motorcade route. (1:40:00 ish on the video.)

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=16259#relPageId=16&tab=page

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=16259#relPageId=7

4 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Jim,

Here is a Darnell frame showing the supposed Shelley and supposed Lovelady walking toward the railroad tracks together:
 

Note that "Shelley" appears to be taller than "Lovelady" in Darnell. This alone is problematic for the identification because Lovelady was in reality taller than Shelley. I believe that their heights were 5' 9" for Lovelady and 5' 6" for Shelley. Now, Shelley once said that he was actually an inch or two taller in 1963, before he was involved in an accident. If you add the 2" figure to his 5' 6" that gives 5' 8" which is still shorter than Lovelady. Unfortunately I don't have this information documented (I just read it a couple days ago myself), so it would be better for you to find the source of this information. I wish I would have made notes.

But regardless of that, the Lovelady identification is still problematic because at the very same time we see those two walking toward the railroad tracks, we also see Lovelady in Darnell standing on the TSBD steps. Here he is:

 

Lovelady is the guy standing in front of Prayer Man, and at this time he is a couple steps down from the top landing. So, how do we know this is Lovelady? For one thing, Lovelady was standing in that general area the whole time, as can be seen in different films and Altgens 6. For another, we see that this guy is balding. In the above frame it looks like this guy might be completely bald, but you can see he is not in the following animated gif:

 

 

This gif shows Lovelady turning his head toward the west, at which point it is easy to see his hair.

Now, people who insist that Shelley and Lovelady are headed off to the railroad tracks in Darnell will naturally say that this man in not Lovelady. The problem with that claim is this: If that were the case, then Lovelady must have left the steps right after the Altgens 6 photo was taken and some other balding guy took Lovelady's place within about 30 seconds. That's very unlikely.

Oh, BTW, I originally said that the two guys walking to the railroad tracks were in the same frame of the same film showing Lovelady on the steps, the film being Darnell. (Or possibly Couch.) That's not quite true. I thought it was true because Darnell/Couch does indeed show the two guys walking to the railroad tracks at the very same time as we see Lovelady on the steps. What I didn't realize at the moment is that the film pans over from one scene to another. I was thinking (erroneously) that I couldn't see the two scenes in the very same frame merely because I had greatly enlarged the frame and cropped off all the surrounding. But no, it's because the camera panned over. But my mistake is irrelevant... the film still shows Lovelady in two places at the same time.

As for my claim that Lovelady (on the steps) is talking to Gloria Calvery, just scroll back up and look a Lovelady. You will see that he is facing a woman in black who is a couple steps below Lovelady. It's pretty clear that they are talking, especially given that we can see him stooping down in the film as if he is struggling to hear what she is saying.

Of course I need to prove to you that that is Gloria Calvery. I have done so in the past, but it's not well documented. I am in the process of documenting it and will post it soon.

 

Sandy,

That's a really good point about the appearance of a Loveladyesque figure right on the steps of the Darnell film and its similarity to the actual image of Lovelady in Altgens 6 photo. As you pointed out, since it is Lovelady in Altgens, it is either Lovelady on the steps in Darnell or some other very similar looking balding guy standing in the same spot, wearing a shirt just like Lovelady's, not 30 seconds later. The odds of that are so improbable that we can dismiss them. 

So, since Lovelady remained on the steps for at least 30 seconds after the shots, he could not have been the "Lovelady" seen in Darnell striding west on the Elm Street extension with (Bill Shelley?). 

I await your positive identification of Gloria Calvery in Darnell at the steps, talking to Lovelady. As I pointed out before, she was so well acquainted with Bill Shelley that he was the best man at her wedding in July of 1963. (I don't know if Lovelady attended, or not.)

Incidentally, if Andrej is correct, then to Frazier's left in the Darnell frame we can see both Bill Shelley and the very top of Sarah Stanton's gray hairdo, immediately behind Shelley. 

(So who were the two men who bore some resemblance to Shelley and Lovelady, and, as seen in Darnell, were walking toward the rail yard and does it really matter?)

Jim,

If Shelley did give "Oswald" his instructions on what to do after the shots, then it strikes me that Shelley would be the first person named, once "Oswald" started naming names. And Shelley, of course, would have received his instructions from Truly, so he would have been next on the totem pole. And higher up yet would have been TSBD President, Jack C. Cason. Cason (former commander of American Foreign Legion Post 53) , as we may know, hosted a party in the spring of 1961 (post Bay of Pigs) during which Mrs. Cason was quoted as saying that "someone ought to shoot the president"

Here's a fascinating connection between the FBI and the American Legion:

During WWII, FDR's Attorney General Robert Jackson "sidetracked a proposal by American Legion officials to monitor suspicious activity in defense plants and their communities and to report their findings to military intelligence: instead Jackson authorized the American Legion Contact program, whereby FBI agents recruited and directed Legionnaires in their monitoring activities. By the end of the war, 40,000 Legionnaires had served as FBI informers. (The FBI continued many of these contacts after 1945. Intensified following the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950, this program was terminated only in 1966.)

https://books.google.com/books?id=VnQduXa4JdoC&pg=PA20&lpg=PA20&dq=american+legion+FBI+contact+program&source=bl&ots=SDbZzr9RlM&sig=ACfU3U1weYDjAKCYCW_vj1KgFt6VvPS

So Jack Cason, a self-described "patriotic citizen who upholds our democratic principles", was the head of an American Foreign Legion Post during the time when the FBI encouraged the AFL to report disloyal Americans. And Bill Shelley testified to having worked in a defense plant during WWII, and he (allegedly) later claimed to an interviewer that he had intelligence connections (CIA, supposedly.)

Bill Shelley and Jack Cason, two guys who for decades had specialized in detecting subversives. 

And yet, right under their noses, the reddest of the red - ol' "Oswald" himself - worked right there in the TSBD, yet they had no idea!

Golly gee, what irony . . .  😄

I wonder if the Glaze letters/Shelley story about almost being arrested on the afternoon of 11/22/63 might actually have a little truth to it? Could "Oswald" have actually let slip something about his contact at the TSBD (without coming right out and saying he was CIA), and could the DPD have reacted by bringing Shelley in for an interrogation? We don't know exactly what "Oswald" did say, but I think we all agree that the DPD's excuse for not producing a verbatim record of what he did say is B.S. And if the Glaze letters detail about Shelley's release coming after calls were placed to the DPD was true, then that possibly would explain the disappearance of the verbatim "Oswald" interrogations.

If Shelley was "Oswald's" contact at the TSBD (again, "if") then almost certainly it was Shelley in the background of those strange leaflet photos from New Orleans in August. 

Hmm.

"Oswald" to Shelley to Truly to  Cason to  ? ? ?

Could be.

http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg Subject Index Files/C Disk/Cason Jack Charles/Item 01.pdf

Quote

 

Sandy and John,

Your summations point out the difficulty of determining exactly where and when Shelley and Lovelady did whatever it was they did after the shots.

I don't have any final answers, and I am suspicious of anyone who argues vehemently one way or another. Either version might be true: they may have walked toward the rail tracks and stayed for a very few minutes, or they may not have. 

Even if they did lie later, I don't see that as proof that they went along with anything more than the post-shooting frame-up of "Oswald" - if "Oswald" was Prayerman (note I said "if"), then they had to know that he was on the steps beside/behind them at the time of the shots.  The same had to be true for Frazier who was, after all, just a 19 year old kid!

So, were Shelley, Lovelady and Frazier all coerced/threatened/"advised"/persuaded to refrain from giving "Oswald" an alibi? To keep their mouths shut?

Well, we know for certain Frazier was aggressively interrogated and damn near charged with complicity. Will Fritz was desperate to get Frazier to admit that he knew that "Oswald" had carried in the rifle to the TSBD that morning. But Frazier would not do it, and so when Fritz got word from the FBI either later Friday night or early Saturday morning that the FBI could "link" the rifle to "Oswald", then Frazier was no longer needed, and he was released.

We also know that Shelley later (apparently) claimed to have been nearly arrested himself on Friday afternoon/evening. And since Lovelady had a prior conviction record for receiving and concealing stolen firearms from an Army base/depot, then Lovelady would have been very vulnerable to extralegal "pressure".

If (IF) Shelley and Lovelady did return immediately to the TSBD, were they then seen by Marrion Baker and later, Robert MacNeil and/or Pierce Allman?

Maybe, but so what? At this point, I can't even say for certain that the power was cut to the TSBD, let alone that they had anything to do with it. The power may have been cut briefly, but the ambiguity of Geneva Hines' statement leaves open the possibility that no power went off at any time. Plus, the fact the two freight elevators were "hung up" means nothing since they both could be "hung up" when the power was on!

(This is NOT to say that John Armstrong's hypothesized "Passenger Elevator Escape Theory" is impossible - far from it. Until and unless someone clearly identifies the man who exited the passenger elevator as Inspector Sawyer got on, I say John's theory is plausible.)

But in the end, why are we chasing Shelley and Lovelady (who appear, at worst, to be guys who were "persuaded" to keep their mouths shut about "Oswald's" whereabouts), when Roy Samson Truly seems to be guilty as hell? Truly had to have foreknowledge of the plan to pin it on "Oswald" - he was the one who started the chase in the first place! Therefore, Roy Truly was in on the conspiracy to frame "Oswald" and on some level, he had to have been in on the conspiracy to murder JFK!

Sandy, what evidence do you have that Truly was CIA? I am not saying he wasn't, but I haven't seen any evidence for it. 

Also, Sandy, what do you make of the allegations that the TSBD was used as a clandestine drop point for rifles to be shipped to the anti-Castro forces in preparation for another raid on Cuba?

Thanks for the link to that fascinating thread, Jim.

I read the original article (including the crossed-out portion) and several of the responses, including Duke Lane, William Weston, Jack White etc. 

Shelley, Lovelady and "Oswald" are certainly possibilities for the three calm men MacNeil encountered, but I am not willing to say for certain. Personally, I can't convict Shelley or Lovelady of anything at this point based on the evidence we have available to us. Even if we could demonstrate that they were on the first floor a few minutes after the shooting, that wouldn't seem to invalidate their general narrative about going toward the parking lot and watching the DPD search for some short period of time before returning. 

As far as I know, Lovelady never said or did anything to incriminate "Oswald". Further, we have no evidence that Shelley ever incriminated "Oswald".

Whether or not the "calm men" seen by MacNeil were Shelley and/or Lovelady and/or "Oswald" is trivial - the number one conspirator in the TSBD was Roy Samson Truly! He was the one who sent the DPD after "Oswald" at a time when there was absolutely no reason to do so!

Truly never testified that Shelley or Lovelady pointed out "Oswald's" absence to Truly - instead he testified to the opposite: that it was he, Roy Truly, who somehow singled out "Oswald's" absence! As has been noted many times, when Roy Truly himself was asked the crucial question as to why he singled out "Oswald's" absence for action requiring DPD attention, he responded "Mr. TRULY. That is the only one that I could be certain right then was missing." 

How Roy? You never took a roll-call! You had just seen (supposedly) "Oswald" in the lunchroom but a few minutes earlier, and you yourself had cleared him! Why did you report him "missing" not ten minutes later???

11 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Thanks again, Sandy. You've helped me understand that the guy in the clip I posted was not "Oswald."  But...

Do you think Shelley and Lovelady conspired to frame "Oswald?" How about Frazier?

Jim,

It's hard to say about Shelley and Lovelady at this point. If the hints in the Glaze letters (about Shelley claiming some kind of association/role with the CIA) could ever be authenticated, then yes, Shelley becomes a very real suspect. But for now, it would seem that Roy Truly, not Bill Shelley, was the most suspicious character to set the DPD after "Oswald" for no apparent reason. 

Lovelady freely admitted that he didn't care for "Oswald", and I don't doubt he could have been manipulated (thanks to his prior arrest record) by higher-ups at the TSBD to help incriminate "Oswald"after the fact, but we don't have any evidence from before the assassination that he framed "Oswald" for the crime. In other words, I know of no evidence that he was a witting conspirator (even on a low level) before the assassination. 

As for afterwards, well:

Jim, I must tell you: I am not sure just how much weight to give to the first day affidavits from Shelley and Lovelady to determine their exact whereabouts in the seconds after the shots. We know that Shelley said they went across the Elm Street extension to the "island" and there encountered Gloria Jean Calvery. Lovelady, of course, mentioned no such thing in his first day affidavit. 

I have cautioned before, though, that neither man appeared to be a particularly precise writer or thinker. Both men appeared to be rudimentary writers, at best. Therefore, any (implicit) claims that their affidavits were exhaustively complete accounts of their movement strikes me as very unlikely. It seems entirely plausible to me that they did not write down a thoroughly detailed summary of their exact movements on 11/22/63, simply because they had never before written such a summary of anything ever! 

A pretty good case can be made on photographic evidence that Shelley and Lovelady did indeed go toward the railroad tracks. The photo evidence is not definitive, but it is not bad. It does resemble Shelley and Lovelady. 

Their later statements that they did indeed head toward the tracks for a few minutes before re-entering the TSBD are pretty consistent. 

Vicky Adams has always denied seeing them near the foot of the stairs when she descended. 

They denied seeing her there at that time.

Vicky Adams WC transcript is suspect, allegedly. (Why in the world was it marked "Top Secret"?)

But she did (apparently) initial it in 1964 with the lines about her seeing Shelley and Lovelady, so in the end, we just don't know whether she saw them, or not. 

On the other hand, there may (or may not) have been "two (unidentified) white men" hanging around the back of the ground floor of the TSBD when Baker and Truly went by en route to the freight elevators (whenever that was, exactly), and those two men might or might not have been Shelley and Lovelady. 

Frazier strikes me as an innocent 19 year old kid who was damn near arrested for abetting "Oswald". He didn't frame "Oswald", but CE 3077 makes it pretty clear someone else was impersonating Frazier (and "Oswald") at the Sports Drome Rifle Range a couple of weeks before the assassination. 

Further evidence that the conspirators were willing to frame Frazier came in the form of the early news reports that the "rifle" found in the TSBD matched the type actually owned by Frazier himself. Unlike "Oswald", Frazier really did have possession of a rifle! (See Stovall Exhibit C, page 601 of Warren Commission Volume XXI)

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0313a.htm

I am convinced that intense pressure was placed on Frazier on Friday night to shore up the "case" against "Oswald". I am sure a deal was offered: if Frazier would implicate "Oswald' and say the "Oswald" brought a rifle to the TSBD, then the DPD would make the case against Frazier go away. Frazier's confiscated .303 rifle was used as leverage against him - he was just a few "discovered" shells away from being named a co-conspirator.

The DPD only let him go at 3:00 am on Saturday morning.

Why?

Because they had received word by then from the FBI that the FBI could "link" the rifle allegedly found in the TSBD with "Oswald", and therefore Frazier was no longer needed.

https://www.richmond.com/news/special-report/jfk/people/buell-wesley-frazier-a-commute-with-oswald-then-a-harsh/article_a9be7f2e-fb7f-5357-91c9-605df00641f7.html

Incidentally, did people here know that Bill Shelley was the best man at Gloria Calvery's wedding in July of 1963?

https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/149407954/gloria-jean-calvery#view-photo=125082765

2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

If DeTorres had written an honest book he would have needed to hire 24 hour security details, even when he went to the bathroom.

IMO, this guy came close to knowing where the bodies were buried.  At lest at the operative level.

 

 

Yeah, especially if he really was "Leopoldo" at Sylvia Odio's doorstep in September of 1963. Or if Gaeton Fonzi (or Joan Mellen) was right and this guy was "Carlos" taking pictures of the JFKA in Dealey Plaza (and later keeping those pictures in some safety deposit box.)

15 hours ago, David Andrews said:

In what sense was the CIA judicially held responsible for the break-in?

I believe McCord planned to be arrested.  But did Hunt ever really expect to be arrested?  His later behavior and the outcome of the case for Hunt suggest he was abandoned not only by Nixon, but by Helms, whom he royally angered by calling attention to the White House's ingratitude.

Helms' posting Iran was just a cover assignment for more CIA work in an opening arena where government change was anticipated.  In a past thread, we saw how CIA kept track of a Helms temporary return to the US, by air, labeling him by his director's code name (Knight, I think) in the report.  Helms would have had a status not dissimilar to Allen Dulles's after leaving CIA.  (Angleton, too, was retained for some time as a contractee advisor after his disgrace.  You can't run an old-boy network without the old boys.)

"In what sense was the CIA judicially held responsible for the break-in?"

It wasn't held responsible for the break-in by any court of law. And David I believe you and I agree that the CIA's role was not to perpetrate the break-in, but instead to sabotage it. I think it was to prevent the Nixon team from encroaching on/ learning about/ stumbling into an ongoing CIA black op involving the prostitutes at the Colombia Plaza Apartments and their high-level clientele. But whatever the true reason, I think we agree that the CIA loyalists had no intention of letting the break-in succeed. 

My point was that Nixon believed that , because of Hunt's involvement, the CIA could be coerced into telling the FBI to back off the break-investigation, even if they themselves had not planned the break-in! (Unbeknownst to Nixon, they really had planned to make a botch of it. But RMN did not know that on 06/23/72.)

And so,  after some blustering and protesting by Helms and Walters, they did, in fact, do just that. The CIA did indeed tell the FBI to back off.

Why?

Because Helms (supposedly) feared that the FBI investigation MIGHT run into something  . . . in Mexico? 

Nah. I think Helms knew that a real FBI investigation that even tangentially looked at E. Howard Hunt just might uncover some really deadly agency secrets.

In the words of Richard Helms himself: "The White House constantly had information that others don't have -- that it would be a prudent thing for me to find out if there was some possibility that some CIA operation was being -- was going to be affected . . . we had nothing to do with the Watergate burglary, the fact of the matter was that if an investigation continued to go on, it might run into something we were doing in Mexico. I mean, this possibility always has to exist. Nobody knows everything about everything . . . General Walters was to go and see Acting Director Gray  with this charge . . . I said, "when you go to see Acting Director Gray, I think you should confine yourself to reminding him that the agency and the FBI have a delimitation agreement . . ."

My favorite part of Helms testimony came when Helms pretended to be confused by Haldeman's reference to the "Bay of Pigs" and then assured that Congress that while "I don't know what the reference was alleged to be, but in any event I assured him that I had no interest in the Bay of Pigs that many years later, that everything in connection with that had been dealt with or liquidated, as far as I was aware, and I didn't care they (the FBI) ran into connection with that . . ."

"Everything had been dealt with or liquidated" . . . yup, I bet that was true anyway.

Pages 13 and 14 are relevant here:

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP91-00901R000500170002-6.pdf