Jump to content
The Education Forum

Ralph Leon Yates


Recommended Posts

Yates did not wait weeks to take his story to the FBI although he did wait until he could go along with his lawyer; I can't give a specific date from memory as to when the FBI actually interviewed Yates but his friend Dempsey Jones was interviewed by the FBI on Nov. 27 so that suggests Yates was into the FBI office no later than say the Tuesday following the assassination. Jones confirmed that Yates had related the encounter to him prior to the assassination. Yates also passed a polygraph on his remarks. Wherever else the story goes, it seems pretty clear that Yates did have some sort of encounter with an individual who made remarks about the President's upcoming visit, about a potential assassination attempt ...perhaps most interesting is that Dempsey confirmed that Yates had told him before the shooting that the young man he had picked up said he had window shades in the package. and that the young man was dropped off at the corner of Houston and Elm. That's a interesting dose of coincidence...

-- Larry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 years later...
  • Replies 44
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On ‎12‎/‎26‎/‎2013 at 4:42 AM, Larry Hancock said:

perhaps most interesting is that Dempsey confirmed that Yates had told him before the shooting that the young man he had picked up said he had window shades in the package. and that the young man was dropped off at the corner of Houston and Elm. That's a interesting dose of coincidence...

-- Larry

When Yates told his story to the police, could he have learned about Oswald's testimony concerning the curtain rods? Did the newspapers report anything? If yes Yates and Dempsey could've made up the story... if no, they appear highly credible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately we never seem to have the level of detailed timing we would like.  Yates told the FBI (and passed a polygraph on his remarks) that Yates had talked to him about the young man and the encounter before the assassination.  He also talked about the package and the young man speaking about the president being shot.  However it was only after the assassination, although well before either man talked to the FBI, that Yates told Dempsey about the young man saying that the package had contain curtain coverings, or something to do with curtains.

So..the package was described to Yates in advance - it seems that Dempsey might have wondered if it was a rifle...but the curtain remarks came later.  I have no idea how soon curtain rods were discussed in the press but I suspect it would have been days later since that could only have come from the statements from Frazier and his sister....and shown up when Frazier was first interviewed by the press.

Given the polygraphs I don't see any reason to question Dempsey on the matter and he clearly was told something by Yates in advance of the assassination....nor any reason to think the hitch hiker incident did not happen.  Perhaps the most significant element is actually that Dempsey said that Yates told him he dropped the young man off at the intersection of Houston and Elm...and he said that before the assassination.  That's way too much coincidence for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Yates encounter was just part of the elaborate pantomime in which an Oswald lookalike (LEE) impersonated LHO in the days and weeks prior to the assassination.  Other events in this series included LEE’s multiple appearances at the Sports Drome Rifle Range, the Downtown Lincoln Mercury dealership, the Irving Furniture Mart, and the Southland Hotel.

On November 20, shortly before the Yates encounter, multiple witnesses told the FBI they saw “Oswald” at the Dobbs House restaurant, about a mile north of the Beckley St. entrance to the Thornton Expressway, where Yates would soon give “Oswald” a ride.  At Dobbs House, “Oswald” acted in a publicly rude and obnoxious manner.  According to waitress Mary Dowling, J.D. Tippit, was also seated in the restaurant at the time.  She had known Tippit for many years.  The point of this charade was probably to bring LEE Oswald to J.D. Tippit’s awareness, so that he would recognize him for their fateful meeting two days later.

During both the Dobbs House appearance and the Yates episode, HARVEY Oswald was filling orders at the Book Depository.  

Documentation (mostly FBI reports) about the Dobbs House episode can be found here, including information from multiple sources:

http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/compoundobject/collection/po-arm/id/13343/rec/31

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

Unfortunately we never seem to have the level of detailed timing we would like.  Yates told the FBI (and passed a polygraph on his remarks) that Yates had talked to him about the young man and the encounter before the assassination.  He also talked about the package and the young man speaking about the president being shot.  However it was only after the assassination, although well before either man talked to the FBI, that Yates told Dempsey about the young man saying that the package had contain curtain coverings, or something to do with curtains.

So..the package was described to Yates in advance - it seems that Dempsey might have wondered if it was a rifle...but the curtain remarks came later.  I have no idea how soon curtain rods were discussed in the press but I suspect it would have been days later since that could only have come from the statements from Frazier and his sister....and shown up when Frazier was first interviewed by the press.

Given the polygraphs I don't see any reason to question Dempsey on the matter and he clearly was told something by Yates in advance of the assassination....nor any reason to think the hitch hiker incident did not happen.  Perhaps the most significant element is actually that Dempsey said that Yates told him he dropped the young man off at the intersection of Houston and Elm...and he said that before the assassination.  That's way too much coincidence for me.

I searched an online archive for articles about the curtain rods story in Texas newspapers. This is the result I got:

https://newspaperarchive.com/tags/oswald/?psi=94&pci=7&ndt=by&py=1963&pey=1963&pep=curtain-rods&ob=1/

So Yates could not have learned it from the newpaper. That adds weight to his credibility in my opinion.

Update: The term "package" turned up results:

https://newspaperarchive.com/tags/oswald/?psi=94&pci=7&ndt=by&py=1963&pey=1963&pep=package&ob=1/

Quote

Del Rio News HeraldWednesday, November 27, 1963, Del Rio, Texas, United States Of America

Oswald carry a package to Work that day which he said was window blinds and fellow workers say that he re main...Oswald had shown up on the job Friday carrying a long package wrapped in brown paper

 

Edited by Mathias Baumann
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...

Ralph Leon Yates. Thanks to Malcolm Blunt.

Most interesting: daddy had issues, he himself was admitted, his wife is doubtful......the whole thing is a fugezi.

Edited by Bart Kamp
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 9 months later...

In his January 9, 1964 statement and appearance, Yates may be trying to walk back the story by amplifying past mental problems.  Or, the whole business from the start was planned to create false mystery through that walk-back sequel, and give us all something to talk about, forevermore.

Edited by David Andrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...

If Mr. Yates was making the thing up, then he majorly fluked out in putting 'Oswald' in an area consistent with 'Oswald's' multiply-witnessed presence a little prior at the Dobbs Snack Bar.

Actually I suspect it really was Mr. Oswald in both cases---------------and his little performance for Yates' benefit was part of his self-incrimination ahead of the planned false-flag event on the Friday.

Mr. Yates was pumped with brain-scrambling pharmaceuticals afterwards as a result of the 'investigation's' need to neutralize his story. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alan Ford said:

Actually I suspect it really was Mr. Oswald in both cases---------------and his little performance for Yates' benefit was part of his self-incrimination ahead of the planned false-flag event on the Friday.

Can you describe any believable scenario in which someone of sound mind who was pro-jfk would agree to falsely self-incriminate to appear to be an attempted killer of jfk? I can’t. 

I could conceivably imagine an ideologically committed anti-jfk person and good team player might falsely self-incriminate as decoy to help real assassin confederates in a real assassination, or attempt, escape. But not someone pro-jfk. 

Edited by Greg Doudna
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

Can you describe any believable scenario in which someone of sound mind who was pro-jfk would agree to falsely self-incriminate to appear to be an attempted killer of jfk?

Someone working on behalf of the JFK administration.

I am not suggesting that Mr. Oswald was self-incriminating as a shooter, but as someone involved in an upcoming 'pro-Castro' 'missed shots' incident (actually a false-flag stunt ahead of C-Day). He would have had zero idea that an actual assassination was in the works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alan Ford said:

Someone working on behalf of the JFK administration.

I am not suggesting that Mr. Oswald was self-incriminating as a shooter, but as someone involved in an upcoming 'pro-Castro' 'missed shots' incident (actually a false-flag stunt ahead of C-Day). He would have had zero idea that an actual assassination was in the works.

If you don’t mind pressing you on this, with reference to the Yates’ hitchhiker, if that was Oswald (as you suggested) that means he has created a random witness which could positively ID him talking about assassination of JFK and maybe carrying a rifle going to his workplace where his rifle and shot was fired etc. He would be in national news as involved in attempting to kill JFK, proof of premeditation and not framed etc.

How do you get someone to agree to go down in history looking like that? Enough money? Or what? 

Is there any mechanism in the scenario when his name would be publicly cleared? Would that be before or after invasion of Cuba and maybe nuclear war done because of it? If before, defeats the point of it, but if after, that is a major scandal too, so logically never. Would anyone rational go along with agreeing to that? How would he explain it to Marina and his kids? Would it occur to him with that kind of stakes maybe he might be helped not to be a living witness too long with that knowledge capable of blabbing? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

If you don’t mind pressing you on this, with reference to the Yates’ hitchhiker, if that was Oswald (as you suggested) that means he has created a random witness which could positively ID him talking about assassination of JFK and maybe carrying a rifle going to his workplace where his rifle and shot was fired etc. He would be in national news as involved in attempting to kill JFK, proof of premeditation and not framed etc.

How do you get someone to agree to go down in history looking like that? Enough money? Or what? 

Is there any mechanism in the scenario when his name would be publicly cleared? Would that be before or after invasion of Cuba and maybe nuclear war done because of it? If before, defeats the point of it, but if after, that is a major scandal too, so logically never. Would anyone rational go along with agreeing to that? How would he explain it to Marina and his kids? Would it occur to him with that kind of stakes maybe he might be helped not to be a living witness too long with that knowledge capable of blabbing? 

I don't mind in the least your pressing me on this, Mr. Doudna-----------it's why we're here!

Mr. Oswald was perfect for the role. A man who had worked very hard to build up a 'pro-Castro' profile. He was (by his lights) a patriot. Anti-Communist to the core. He detested Pres. Castro as much as the Kennedy brothers did.

So he willingly signs up for involvement in a plan to generate anti-Castro outrage by a non-lethal shots-fired incident in Dealey Plaza. He knows that there will be evidence pointing to his involvement (though NOT as a shooter). That's the whole point.

In all likelihood the planned official story was to be that he was flown out of Dallas from Red Bird Airport, bound for Cuba. As for his actual planned destination, we can only speculate.

His primary motivation? Ideology. It makes people do things that no calculus of narrow self-interest can account for.

If he indeed left his wedding ring with his wife that morning, then he was taking his leave from her and the children.

But it all went wrong. The non-lethal false-flag plan (driven no doubt by Attorney General Robert Kennedy, who hated Pres. Castro and loved clandestine operations) was hijacked by elements who wanted Pres. Kennedy dead. This was their golden opportunity, and they took it.

And so the 'guiltocent' Mr. Oswald was hung out to dry as-------------absurdly-------------the lone-wolf sixth-floor shooter. With full public support from the Kennedy inner circle, up to and including Mr. Robert Kennedy.

In fact, as everyone knew, Mr. Oswald had been on the front steps at the time of the assassination. Because that had been the agreed plan: Mr. Oswald was tasked with performing a political 'signature' stunt out front just after the shots had rung out. Had things gone as planned, the whole world would have heard about it.

Those who would argue that there is no significance in the demonstrable fact that Officer Marrion L. Baker is shown in the Darnell film running towards this bizarre little scene by the mailboxes are taking gaslighting to a new level..................

cJyvvy3.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...