Jump to content
The Education Forum

Hosty's Reports


Recommended Posts

In another thread Jim Root wrote:

An area of my research that I felt that he was not well informed upon was FBI Agent James P. Hosty's third note (the one that identified exactly where Lee Harvey Oswald was working some 18 days before the assassination and prior to the final motorcade route being decided upon. As you may recall I have posted several times my reasons for feeling that this note is of particular significance for two reasons:

1. Hosty's third note would prove that persons at the highest levels of intelligence had access to information which allowed them to know exactly where Oswald was working prior to the final motorcade route designation was made (Newman's work, Oswald and the CIA, shows that Richard Helms did in fact receive Hosty's previous two notes and we have no reason to believe that he would not have received the third)

2. The fact that this Hosty note has never appeared on ANY CIA documents list suggests that it was destroyed or eliminated for some reason. The obvious reason would be that the tracking of that particular document would lead directly to all that had knowledge of where Oswald was working and may in fact point directly to the conspirator/s involved.

While there are many other aspects of this case that I would love to rehash once again with Mr. McKnight a discussion on the significance of this particular note (Hosty's third which is mentioned in the testimony of Hosty) would be my first topic of discussion.

I too would like to know more about this third note.

Is there really no record of it?

Jim, Can you site the reference where Hosty mentions this?

Thanks,

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 40
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

In another thread Jim Root wrote:

An area of my research that I felt that he was not well informed upon was FBI Agent James P. Hosty's third note (the one that identified exactly where Lee Harvey Oswald was working some 18 days before the assassination and prior to the final motorcade route being decided upon. As you may recall I have posted several times my reasons for feeling that this note is of particular significance for two reasons:

1. Hosty's third note would prove that persons at the highest levels of intelligence had access to information which allowed them to know exactly where Oswald was working prior to the final motorcade route designation was made (Newman's work, Oswald and the CIA, shows that Richard Helms did in fact receive Hosty's previous two notes and we have no reason to believe that he would not have received the third)

2. The fact that this Hosty note has never appeared on ANY CIA documents list suggests that it was destroyed or eliminated for some reason. The obvious reason would be that the tracking of that particular document would lead directly to all that had knowledge of where Oswald was working and may in fact point directly to the conspirator/s involved.

While there are many other aspects of this case that I would love to rehash once again with Mr. McKnight a discussion on the significance of this particular note (Hosty's third which is mentioned in the testimony of Hosty) would be my first topic of discussion.

I too would like to know more about this third note.

Is there really no record of it?

Jim, Can you site the reference where Hosty mentions this?

Thanks,

BK

This is not exactly what you are looking for, but it is very pertinent to the subject matter.....

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...mp;relPageId=36

The document is 193 pages, I have not had the opportunity to read it, but will be......

If you read it in some detail you will notice according to Hosty that is, that Shanklin asked him to destroy more than one item and Hosty did not do this, which is to his credit, I believe......

Although I will catch hell for saying this, Hosty is not an ideal candidate for a Kennedy hater, if you read

Assignment Oswald, he was in his own words, an Irish-Catholic Democrat, and also genuinely liked Kennedy if you think about it, the point can be made that he makes observations in his book that are not exactly refutation of a homegrown conspiracy..such as...mentioning that Revill detested Kennedy, he cites arguments with Revill about Kennedy prior to the assassination and that Revill did not even want to take part in security for the motorcade, also he observed that the Secret Service Security for the motorcade was very lax.....which, all goes back to Oswald as a security threat to Kennedy, he also mentions that the extreme right wing was THE area in which specific attention was focused on in the immediate aftermath of the assassination; if Oswald was a serious threat then there is truly no reason why he would not have been on the FBI and Secret Service index of serious threats to the President residing in Dallas, but if he was an unofficial informant who was relied upon by the FBI it would make perfect sense for him not to be......I suppose I am preaching to the choir........

Also, I am not saying that Hosty was not a reluctant participant in a cover-up though.......

Also this page has a clue,

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...mp;relPageId=17

As you can see Hosty is citing the pre-assassination memoranda he had compiled, notice at the top of the document, it is penciled in "Hoover list of 64, not consistent with this chronology......"

Does not bode well for locating the memo.....

If this information is correct it appears the memo in question would have been dated sometime in July, 1963

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...mp;relPageId=17

Edited by Robert Howard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In another thread Jim Root wrote:

An area of my research that I felt that he was not well informed upon was FBI Agent James P. Hosty's third note (the one that identified exactly where Lee Harvey Oswald was working some 18 days before the assassination and prior to the final motorcade route being decided upon. As you may recall I have posted several times my reasons for feeling that this note is of particular significance for two reasons:

1. Hosty's third note would prove that persons at the highest levels of intelligence had access to information which allowed them to know exactly where Oswald was working prior to the final motorcade route designation was made (Newman's work, Oswald and the CIA, shows that Richard Helms did in fact receive Hosty's previous two notes and we have no reason to believe that he would not have received the third)

2. The fact that this Hosty note has never appeared on ANY CIA documents list suggests that it was destroyed or eliminated for some reason. The obvious reason would be that the tracking of that particular document would lead directly to all that had knowledge of where Oswald was working and may in fact point directly to the conspirator/s involved.

While there are many other aspects of this case that I would love to rehash once again with Mr. McKnight a discussion on the significance of this particular note (Hosty's third which is mentioned in the testimony of Hosty) would be my first topic of discussion.

I too would like to know more about this third note.

Is there really no record of it?

Jim, Can you site the reference where Hosty mentions this?

Thanks,

BK

This is not exactly what you are looking for, but it is very pertinent to the subject matter.....

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...mp;relPageId=36

The document is 193 pages, I have not had the opportunity to read it, but will be......

If you read it in some detail you will notice according to Hosty that is, that Shanklin asked him to destroy more than one item and Hosty did not do this, which is to his credit, I believe......

Although I will catch hell for saying this, Hosty is not an ideal candidate for a Kennedy hater, if you read

Assignment Oswald, he was in his own words, an Irish-Catholic Democrat, and also genuinely liked Kennedy if you think about it, the point can be made that he makes observations in his book that are not exactly refutation of a homegrown conspiracy..such as...mentioning that Revill detested Kennedy, he cites arguments with Revill about Kennedy prior to the assassination and that Revill did not even want to take part in security for the motorcade, also he observed that the Secret Service Security for the motorcade was very lax.....which, all goes back to Oswald as a security threat to Kennedy, he also mentions that the extreme right wing was THE area in which specific attention was focused on in the immediate aftermath of the assassination; if Oswald was a serious threat then there is truly no reason why he would not have been on the FBI and Secret Service index of serious threats to the President residing in Dallas, but if he was an unofficial informant who was relied upon by the FBI it would make perfect sense for him not to be......I suppose I am preaching to the choir........

Also, I am not saying that Hosty was not a reluctant participant in a cover-up though.......

Also this page has a clue,

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...mp;relPageId=17

As you can see Hosty is citing the pre-assassination memoranda he had compiled, notice at the top of the document, it is penciled in "Hoover list of 64, not consistent with this chronology......"

Does not bode well for locating the memo.....

If this information is correct it appears the memo in question would have been dated sometime in July, 1963

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...mp;relPageId=17

Also someone with the last name Drinan was a participant in the Hosty depo, if the Robert Drinan cited in the link below, is the same person that might be interesting.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachus...f_fbi_scrutiny/

Edited by Robert Howard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In another thread Jim Root wrote:

An area of my research that I felt that he was not well informed upon was FBI Agent James P. Hosty's third note (the one that identified exactly where Lee Harvey Oswald was working some 18 days before the assassination and prior to the final motorcade route being decided upon. As you may recall I have posted several times my reasons for feeling that this note is of particular significance for two reasons:

1. Hosty's third note would prove that persons at the highest levels of intelligence had access to information which allowed them to know exactly where Oswald was working prior to the final motorcade route designation was made (Newman's work, Oswald and the CIA, shows that Richard Helms did in fact receive Hosty's previous two notes and we have no reason to believe that he would not have received the third)

2. The fact that this Hosty note has never appeared on ANY CIA documents list suggests that it was destroyed or eliminated for some reason. The obvious reason would be that the tracking of that particular document would lead directly to all that had knowledge of where Oswald was working and may in fact point directly to the conspirator/s involved.

While there are many other aspects of this case that I would love to rehash once again with Mr. McKnight a discussion on the significance of this particular note (Hosty's third which is mentioned in the testimony of Hosty) would be my first topic of discussion.

I too would like to know more about this third note.

Is there really no record of it?

Jim, Can you site the reference where Hosty mentions this?

Thanks,

BK

William

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/hosty.htm

Testimony Of James Patrick Hosty, Jr.

Some of the interesting aspects when discussing Hosty's third note:

"Mr. STERN. It is true, isn't it, that some of this information had already been----

Mr. HOSTY. Transmitted in letter form to New Orleans; right.

Mr. DULLES. Prior to the assassination?

Mr. HOSTY. Prior to the assassination; yes, sir.

Representative FORD. That part on the second page?

Mr. HOSTY. Right; this second paragraph starting, "On November 1, 1963, Mrs. Ruth Paine"

Representative FORD. What did you do, dictate that to a stenographer?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Representative FORD. And she typed it and it was sent officially?

Mr. HOSTY. On the 4th of November, right, airmail letter to New Orleans.

Mr. STERN. Would that be sent to your headquarters in Washington?

Mr. HOSTY. Also. Excuse me, the original goes to headquarters in Washington, a copy goes to New Orleans. It is addressed to the headquarters.

Mr. STERN. But the only information sent was the information in that paragraph beginning "On November 1, 1963."

Mr. McCLOY. But you had your original notes with you?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. McCLOY. And still intact?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. McCLOY. At the time you put this----

Mr. HOSTY. Because I knew I was going to get this into a report. The next report was written, and I would put it in a report form and destroy the notes.

Mr. DULLES. Do we have a copy of that letter of November 4?

Mr. HOSTY. I don't know.

Mr. DULLES. That you sent to headquarters and to New Orleans?

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. STERN. You tell us you have reviewed these two pages?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes.

Mr. STERN. Is there anything you would like to add?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. Anything you would like to correct?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir.

Mr. STERN. This accurately states the interviews that you covered. May this be admitted in the record?

The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted, No. 830."

In this segment you see that Dulles jumps in and wants to know if if the Commission has a copy of this third note. The Commission then "goes off the record" changes the subject and no Exhibit Number or request for a copy of this important note is made!

Once again we find:

"Mr. HOSTY. Let me see. Part of it would have, this paragraph on page 11, this November 1, Mrs. Ruth Paine was interviewed. This appeared in the communication I sent out to the New Orleans office advising them where he (Oswald)was employed.

Mr. DULLES. When was that sent?

Mr. HOSTY. The 4th of November, sir. The rest of it was in note form. I hadn't reduced it to writing yet."

And:

"Mr. STERN. Now, tell us in detail of your interview with Mrs. Paine starting from the time you rang the doorbell.

Mr. HOSTY. All right. As I say, when I entered the house I immediately identified myself. I showed her my credentials, identified myself as a special agent of the FBI, and requested to talk to her. She invited me into the house.

Mr. STERN. Did she seemed surprised at your visit?

Mr. HOSTY. No, she didn't. She was quite friendly and invited me in, said this is the first time she had ever met an FBI agent. Very cordial.

As I say, it is my recollection I sat here on the couch and she sat across the room from me.

I then told her the purpose of my visit, that I was interested in locating the whereabouts of Lee Oswald.

She readily admitted that Mrs. Marina Oswald and Lee Oswald's two children were staying with her. She said that Lee Oswald was living somewhere in Dallas. She didn't know where. She said it was in the Oak Cliff area but she didn't have his address.

I asked her if she knew where he worked. After a moment's hesitation, she told me that he worked at the Texas School Book Depository near the downtown area of Dallas. She didn't have the exact address, and it is my recollection that we went to the phone book and looked it up, found it to be 411 Elm Street.

Mr. STERN. You looked it up while you were there? Mr. HOSTY. Yes; that is my recollection that we looked it up in her telephone book to show it at 411 Elm Street, Dallas, Tex.

She told me at this time that she did not know where he was living, but she thought she could find out and she would let me know. "

Was Washington always made aware of the infromation:

"Mr. DULLES. Just one question. Are cases of this kind administratively transferred by agreement between two offices, or does that have to go up to Washington?

Mr. HOSTY. Washington always gets a copy of these communications. They know what we are doing. Actually the original is sent to Washington, and a carbon is sent to the other field office.

Mr. DULLES. But you can transfer it directly from one office to another?

Mr. HOSTY. Right.

Mr. DULLES. And just notify Washington as to the Possibility of its being transferred?

Mr. HOSTY. Right; because he is now residing and employed in our division. There is no more needs to be done.

Mr. DULLES. I am clear. Thank you very much."

Hope this helps

Jim Root

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Robert and Jim.

Could this be it?

There doesn't seem to be a date, but it mentions relevant stuff.

CE - 1809

PDF] <H3 class=r>Warren Commission, Volume XXIII: CE 1809 - FBI report of ... ?</H3>File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML

4,. 1963, Dallas Confidential Informant. T-1 advised that in March, 1963 ROBERT L . OSWALD of 7313 .... On November 1, 1963, Mrs . RUTH PAINE, 2515 West Fifth ... HOSTY, JR . and GARB' S . WILSON that she had not been able to obtain ...

www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/pdf/WH23_CE_1809.pdf

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/w...H23_CE_1809.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Robert and Jim.

Could this be it?

There doesn't seem to be a date, but it mentions relevant stuff.

CE - 1809

PDF] <H3 class=r>Warren Commission, Volume XXIII: CE 1809 - FBI report of ... ?</H3>File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML

4,. 1963, Dallas Confidential Informant. T-1 advised that in March, 1963 ROBERT L . OSWALD of 7313 .... On November 1, 1963, Mrs . RUTH PAINE, 2515 West Fifth ... HOSTY, JR . and GARB' S . WILSON that she had not been able to obtain ...

www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/pdf/WH23_CE_1809.pdf

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/w...H23_CE_1809.pdf

William

Nice try. Clearly not the one since it references November 5, 1963 and the third note in question was sent on November 4, 1963.

Don't you find it strange that both Dulles and McCloy, both trained attorneys, trained in spycraft and trained in political intrique, would miss an opportunity to access a message that provided the exact location of where Oswald was working (a building which would become the final building passed along the motorcade route before backtracking to the Trade Mart lucheon) and would show exactly who had had access to that same message.

I will suggest right here, once again, this IS the coverup!!!!!

Jim Root

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully
http://books.google.com/books?id=d32jyAysv...sion+5#PPA65,M1

Assignment, Oswald

by James P. Hosty

Page 65

....Another interesting development, I thought. The cases I had on Lee and Marina Oswald

had been counter-espionage cases, not criminal cases. Division 5 was the security division,

which was headed by Assistant Director Bill Sullivan, a studious, academic type and a favorite

of Hoover's. I wondered, to myself, did this mean anything? .....

http://www.newsmakingnews.com/torbitt.htm

...II. J. Edgar Hoover, Ferenc Nagy, Clay Shaw, L.M. Bloomfield, and Permindex.

The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation was in charge of NASA's Security Division and the Defense Industrial Security Command in his position as head of counter-espionage activities in the United States. His agents investigated every employee of the space agency as well as the employees of the pertinent contractors doing business with NASA and also prospective employees of every arms and munitions manufacturer.

The Defense Intelligence Agency is headed by Lt. General Joseph F. Carroll, a former assistant Director of the FBI. Carroll worked closely with Sullivan, Hoover and L.M. Bloomfield in directing activities of the munition-makers' police agency, the Defense Industrial Security Command. Walter Sheridan, whose activities are covered later, was the direct liaison man between Carroll and Robert F. Kennedy during the pertinent period. The address for DISC is 3990 East Broad Street, Columbus, Ohio. The Field office for the Command was located at the old Redstone Arsenal in Huntsville and Muscle Shoals, Alabama.

Von Braun had been decorated more than any other Nazi during World War II. Hoover had worked directly with Von Braun in connection with NASA's security since his arrival in the United States in December 1945.

Lyndon Johnson, as Vice-President, was Chairman of NASA, and he, Von Braun, Bobby Baker, [and] Fred Black had worked diligently to obtain the nine billion dollar Apollo contract for North American Aviation in 1961. NASA awarded this contract to North American despite the fact that it went against the recommendation of its own source evaluation board.1 Each of the NASA security personnel who were assigned duties in connection with the assassination were employees or contractees for Division Five of the FBI and many were connected with the other four groups. It must be born in mind that this was a relatively small group within all of these agencies. It was not official, and it was not an American operation, but was simply the independent action taken by these men, some of whom happened to hold official positions....

The most common thread I've found in the Torbitt details is that the Ernest BYfield family, Sr. & Jr., is as "tied up" in the JFK plot as any other target of interest.....from their connection to Patrick Hoy-Irv Kupcinet-Henry Crown, to the minor detail of Ernest Sr.'s last young widow marrying next an executive of a firm named in Torbitt, "Schenley". Byfield Jr. was OSS S-1, his mother rented her estate to the JFK family from 11/60 to 03/63. His wife was a white Russian noblewoman with a sister married to a Mr. Eversun, first cousin and fellow executive officer in Franciso sugar....B. Rionda Braga was the father of Ames Braga, the groom who received the hand-off of his bride to be from GHW Bush in 1973:

http://www.nytimes.com/1986/07/25/obituari...onda-braga.html

I looked at the Byfields more closely only because of the odd quirk of fate that, in searching the name after discovering that Byfield's mother had rented her Glen Ora estate to JFK, after I discovered that Byfield Sr. had been the career mentor of Patrick Hoy, the result of my name search was finding what I think is the odd, but probably unrelated fact that when he was 88 years old, Robert S. McNamara married Byfield Jr.'s widow and second wife, Diana Masiere.

Turner, in the "Fish is Red", tells us that B. Rionda Braga was telegraphing fore-knowledge of the Bay of Pigs invasion as imminent, to the Wall Street community, after JFK's election. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=163522

I suggest a debate thread, if there is not one already, on what Torbitt had right, in hindsight, and what he was mistaken, or intentionally misleading, if a case for that can be made....about. By the way....can anyone cite, an early mention, aside from the mention in Torbitt, where Louis Mortimer Bloomfield's name comes up in any investigation of JFK/Dallas? If you don't dismiss as a coincidence that the Bloomfield's widow has successfully blocked the release of his papers, since December, 2007, let us agree to put some energy into much further research into the validity of all of the Torbitt documents!

Edited by Tom Scully
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Robert and Jim.

Could this be it?

There doesn't seem to be a date, but it mentions relevant stuff.

CE - 1809

PDF] <H3 class=r>Warren Commission, Volume XXIII: CE 1809 - FBI report of ... ?</H3>File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML

4,. 1963, Dallas Confidential Informant. T-1 advised that in March, 1963 ROBERT L . OSWALD of 7313 .... On November 1, 1963, Mrs . RUTH PAINE, 2515 West Fifth ... HOSTY, JR . and GARB' S . WILSON that she had not been able to obtain ...

www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/pdf/WH23_CE_1809.pdf

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/w...H23_CE_1809.pdf

William

Nice try. Clearly not the one since it references November 5, 1963 and the third note in question was sent on November 4, 1963.

Don't you find it strange that both Dulles and McCloy, both trained attorneys, trained in spycraft and trained in political intrique, would miss an opportunity to access a message that provided the exact location of where Oswald was working (a building which would become the final building passed along the motorcade route before backtracking to the Trade Mart lucheon) and would show exactly who had had access to that same message.

I will suggest right here, once again, this IS the coverup!!!!!

Jim Root

If you look at the assassination as a war between competing intelligence agencies, Dulles and McCloy are pretty much on the same team, while Hosty is a loyal Kennedy/FBI man, though he didn't realize they were on different teams.

Hosty is given the Oswald assignment in March, but Oswald disapears in April, and by the time Hosty catches up with Oswald he's already left New Orleans, on September 24, 1963.

Then there's the October 25th and October 31 FBI reports out of New Orleans Re: Oswald and FPCC, which are also sent to the State Dept. and presumably the FBI and Secret Service.

Then on the day of the assassination, Hosty refuses to tell SS Agent in Charge Sorrells about something of a Top Secret nature that Hosty says Sorrells can obtain from FBI HQ in DC.

And Dallas Intelligence Unit detective Revell crosses paths with Hosty and writes up an affidavit saying that Hosty told him that he knew about Oswald, that Oswald was a Commie and capable of killing the President, thus bolstering his carear and tanking Hosty's.

When Hosty finally catches up with Oswald, he talks with Ruth Paine and then Marina at Irving, and when Oswald finds out, he leaves a threatening note for Hosty at the FBI office in Dallas, which Hosty is ordered to destroy after the murder of Oswald.

The one thing that Hosty and Mrs. Paine reiterate is the fact that the Oswald they knew as not capable of killing either the President or officer Tippit.

It appears that there are official documents that have not been introduced into the record or have been distroyed.

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Robert and Jim.

Could this be it?

There doesn't seem to be a date, but it mentions relevant stuff.

CE - 1809

PDF] <H3 class=r>Warren Commission, Volume XXIII: CE 1809 - FBI report of ... ?</H3>File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML

4,. 1963, Dallas Confidential Informant. T-1 advised that in March, 1963 ROBERT L . OSWALD of 7313 .... On November 1, 1963, Mrs . RUTH PAINE, 2515 West Fifth ... HOSTY, JR . and GARB' S . WILSON that she had not been able to obtain ...

www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/pdf/WH23_CE_1809.pdf

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/w...H23_CE_1809.pdf

William

Nice try. Clearly not the one since it references November 5, 1963 and the third note in question was sent on November 4, 1963.

Don't you find it strange that both Dulles and McCloy, both trained attorneys, trained in spycraft and trained in political intrique, would miss an opportunity to access a message that provided the exact location of where Oswald was working (a building which would become the final building passed along the motorcade route before backtracking to the Trade Mart lucheon) and would show exactly who had had access to that same message.

I will suggest right here, once again, this IS the coverup!!!!!

Jim Root

If you look at the assassination as a war between competing intelligence agencies, Dulles and McCloy are pretty much on the same team, while Hosty is a loyal Kennedy/FBI man, though he didn't realize they were on different teams.

Hosty is given the Oswald assignment in March, but Oswald disapears in April, and by the time Hosty catches up with Oswald he's already left New Orleans, on September 24, 1963.

Then there's the October 25th and October 31 FBI reports out of New Orleans Re: Oswald and FPCC, which are also sent to the State Dept. and presumably the FBI and Secret Service.

Then on the day of the assassination, Hosty refuses to tell SS Agent in Charge Sorrells about something of a Top Secret nature that Hosty says Sorrells can obtain from FBI HQ in DC.

And Dallas Intelligence Unit detective Revell crosses paths with Hosty and writes up an affidavit saying that Hosty told him that he knew about Oswald, that Oswald was a Commie and capable of killing the President, thus bolstering his carear and tanking Hosty's.

When Hosty finally catches up with Oswald, he talks with Ruth Paine and then Marina at Irving, and when Oswald finds out, he leaves a threatening note for Hosty at the FBI office in Dallas, which Hosty is ordered to destroy after the murder of Oswald.

The one thing that Hosty and Mrs. Paine reiterate is the fact that the Oswald they knew as not capable of killing either the President or officer Tippit.

It appears that there are official documents that have not been introduced into the record or have been distroyed.

BK

I agree with your summarization of the key points, believe me the only thing I would add, is that in Assignment Oswald, Hosty is very clear on the fact that the "threatening note" was a manufactured device by his superior's. Although he does not come out and say it implicitly......But I will be the first to admit he is [in the book a member of the Oswald did it school, no doubt]

and any honest researcher, would be forced to concede that there are passages that appear very truthful as well as passages that would make Angelton, Win Scott or any other promoter of "the Cuban's did it" proud. So it is a challenging read, I take material written in book by key persons, with massive grains of salt, But in the passage regarding the note he states....

Assignment Oswald page 21 ......it was Oswald who had left me an angry, unsigned note just ten days before. I had the note in my file drawer: It said, in effect: "If you want to talk to me, you should talk to me to my face. Stop harassing my wife, and stop trying to ask her about me. You have no right to harass her."

When I recieved this note from Nancy Lee Fenner, a former chief stenographer newly demoted to receptionist, I read it and, quite honestly, thought little about it. At the time I was juggling 30 to 40 cases, mostly on right-wing subversives, and had no way of knowing who might have written the note. I suspected it had come from from a particularly radical right-winger I had been investigating, simply because I had recently interviewed his wife. At any rate, in law enforcement such notes are common. Ocassionally I received abusive phone calls and notes from the targets of my investigations. All law enforcement officers do. It's what I called "getting guff." After reading the note, I tossed it in my file drawer at the office and not given it another thought. That is, not until November 22 at approximately 3:18 P.M........

One last word, it might make readers of this post who may be familiar with the JFK assassination, but not the 20th century history of intelligence, do a little thinking......Way back in the years 1940-1947 there was another FBI agent who felt the wrath of J. Edgar Hoover. Not only did he do incredibly groundbreaking work in Division Five of the FBI, his work led to the arrest of over 30 Abwehr agents during WWII, and is attributed as being the person who was handling Elizabeth Bentley after Louis Budenz and Igor Gouzenko defected from the KGB, although the information confirming this is via Bayard Stockton, I am a firm believer that Stockton is telling the truth. Afterwards there was a incident involving alcohol with this agent and he was demoted back to his home state. He then left the FBI as a result of Hoover's disciplinarian tactics, and subsequently joined the CIA......His name William "Bill" Harvey.

See pages 15-20 Flawed Patriot - Bayard Stockton........

Edited by Robert Howard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. HOSTY: I asked her if she knew where he worked. After a moment's hesitation, she told me that he worked at the Texas School Book Depository near the downtown area of Dallas. She didn't have the exact address, and it is my recollection that we went to the phone book and looked it up, found it to be 411 Elm Street.

Mr. STERN. You looked it up while you were there?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes; that is my recollection that we looked it up in her telephone book to show it at 411 Elm Street, Dallas, Tex.

--------------------

Mr. JENNER. Did you give him the telephone number and the address of the Texas School Book Depository on the occasion when you talked to him, this is Texas School Book Depository on the occasion when you talked to him, this is the 14th?

Mrs. PAINE. The address, I don’t think so. I probably gave the phone number. I don’t recall that I gave him an address.

Mr. JENNER. Directing your attention to your address book, you have an entry in your address book of the Texas School Depository, do you not? Would you turn to that page?

Mrs. PAINE. Yes ; I have it here.

Mr. JENNER. Is there an entry of address of the Texas School Depository on that page?

Mrs. PAINE. Yes; which I believe I made after he gained employment there.

Mr. JENNER. Rather than at the time that you advised him of this possibility?

Mrs. PAINE. Indeed.

Mr. JENNER. Have you made an entry of the telephone number of the Texas

School Book Depository on that date?

Mrs. PAINE. Yes; I have and of the address.

Mr. JENNER. And that is the telephone number and the address of the Texas School Depository Building where---

------------------------------------

Mr. JENNER. I heard you mention the Texas School Depository warehouse. Did you think the warehouse was at 411 Elm?

Mrs. PAINE. No. I had seen a sign on a building as I went along one of the limited access highways that leads into Dallas, saying “Texas School Book Depository Warehouse” and there was the only building that had registered on my consciousness as being Texas School Book Depository. I was not aware, hadn’t taken in the idea of there being two buildings and

that there was one on Elm, though, I copied the address from the telephone book, and could well have made that notation in my mind but I didn’t. The first I realized that there was a building on Elm was when I heard on the television on the morning of the 22d of November that a shot had been Fired from such a building.

Mr. JENNER. For the purpose of this record then I would like to emphasize you were under the impression then, were you, that Lee Harvey Oswald was employed?

Mrs. PAINE. At the warehouse.

Mr. JENNER. Other than at 411, a place at 411 Elm?

Mrs. PAINE. I thought he worked at the warehouse. I had in fact, pointed out the building to my children going into Dallas later after he had gained employment.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever discuss with Lee Harvey Oswald where he actually was employed, that is the location of the building?

Mrs. PAINE. No: I didn’t.

Mr. JENNER. Did he ever mention it?

Mrs. PAINE. No.

Mr. JENNER There never was any discussion between you and, say, young Mr. Frazier or Mrs. Randle or anyone in the neighborhood as to where the place of employment is located?

Mrs. PAINE. No. It may be significant here to say, my letter to which I have

already referred-

--------------------------------

Clearly, Jenner had concerns over who knew what and when about the location of the TSBD.

In essence, RP seems to be saying after Oswald obtained his job, she wrote the address down after looking it up in the phone book, but then forgot that she had done so - and was still under the impression that he worked at the other warehouse on the day of the assassination. But if so, why was she so concerned about Oswald possibly being involved when she heard that the sniper had been in the Elm St building?

But back-tracking to the Hosty-RP discussion... due to her lack of recall on the address, and forgetting that she had already looked it up in the phone book, she and Hosty (for her part, again) referred to the directory - assuming we can take both testimonies on face value...

---------------------------------

Is it possible for some one to check the directory that was current at that time?

We know from Nat Pinkston's interview with Roy Trulyon 11/23/63 that the TSBD only moved into the Elm St address during that Summer. It hardly seems possible then that it could have been listed in time...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. HOSTY: I asked her if she knew where he worked. After a moment's hesitation, she told me that he worked at the Texas School Book Depository near the downtown area of Dallas. She didn't have the exact address, and it is my recollection that we went to the phone book and looked it up, found it to be 411 Elm Street.

Mr. STERN. You looked it up while you were there?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes; that is my recollection that we looked it up in her telephone book to show it at 411 Elm Street, Dallas, Tex.

--------------------

Mr. JENNER. Did you give him the telephone number and the address of the Texas School Book Depository on the occasion when you talked to him, this is Texas School Book Depository on the occasion when you talked to him, this is the 14th?

Mrs. PAINE. The address, I don’t think so. I probably gave the phone number. I don’t recall that I gave him an address.

Mr. JENNER. Directing your attention to your address book, you have an entry in your address book of the Texas School Depository, do you not? Would you turn to that page?

Mrs. PAINE. Yes ; I have it here.

Mr. JENNER. Is there an entry of address of the Texas School Depository on that page?

Mrs. PAINE. Yes; which I believe I made after he gained employment there.

Mr. JENNER. Rather than at the time that you advised him of this possibility?

Mrs. PAINE. Indeed.

Mr. JENNER. Have you made an entry of the telephone number of the Texas

School Book Depository on that date?

Mrs. PAINE. Yes; I have and of the address.

Mr. JENNER. And that is the telephone number and the address of the Texas School Depository Building where---

------------------------------------

Mr. JENNER. I heard you mention the Texas School Depository warehouse. Did you think the warehouse was at 411 Elm?

Mrs. PAINE. No. I had seen a sign on a building as I went along one of the limited access highways that leads into Dallas, saying “Texas School Book Depository Warehouse” and there was the only building that had registered on my consciousness as being Texas School Book Depository. I was not aware, hadn’t taken in the idea of there being two buildings and

that there was one on Elm, though, I copied the address from the telephone book, and could well have made that notation in my mind but I didn’t. The first I realized that there was a building on Elm was when I heard on the television on the morning of the 22d of November that a shot had been Fired from such a building.

Mr. JENNER. For the purpose of this record then I would like to emphasize you were under the impression then, were you, that Lee Harvey Oswald was employed?

Mrs. PAINE. At the warehouse.

Mr. JENNER. Other than at 411, a place at 411 Elm?

Mrs. PAINE. I thought he worked at the warehouse. I had in fact, pointed out the building to my children going into Dallas later after he had gained employment.

Mr. JENNER. Did you ever discuss with Lee Harvey Oswald where he actually was employed, that is the location of the building?

Mrs. PAINE. No: I didn’t.

Mr. JENNER. Did he ever mention it?

Mrs. PAINE. No.

Mr. JENNER There never was any discussion between you and, say, young Mr. Frazier or Mrs. Randle or anyone in the neighborhood as to where the place of employment is located?

Mrs. PAINE. No. It may be significant here to say, my letter to which I have

already referred-

--------------------------------

Clearly, Jenner had concerns over who knew what and when about the location of the TSBD.

In essence, RP seems to be saying after Oswald obtained his job, she wrote the address down after looking it up in the phone book, but then forgot that she had done so - and was still under the impression that he worked at the other warehouse on the day of the assassination. But if so, why was she so concerned about Oswald possibly being involved when she heard that the sniper had been in the Elm St building?

But back-tracking to the Hosty-RP discussion... due to her lack of recall on the address, and forgetting that she had already looked it up in the phone book, she and Hosty (for her part, again) referred to the directory - assuming we can take both testimonies on face value...

---------------------------------

Is it possible for some one to check the directory that was current at that time?

We know from Nat Pinkston's interview with Roy Trulyon 11/23/63 that the TSBD only moved into the Elm St address during that Summer. It hardly seems possible then that it could have been listed in time...

Greg

The answer to your question is in the Hosty testimony:

"Mr. HOSTY. On Monday morning, I made a pretext telephone call to the Texas School Book Depository, I called up and asked for the personnel department, asked if a Lee Oswald was employed there. They said yes, he was. I said what address does he show? They said 2515 West Fifth Street, Irving, Tex., which I knew not to be his correct address.

I then sent a communication, airmail communication to the New Orleans office advising them--and to the headquarters of the FBI advising them--and then instructing the New Orleans office to make the Dallas office the office of origin. We were now assuming control, because he had now been verified in our division."

Hosty did verify where Oswald was working by calling the TSBD and speaking with the "personnel department."

Hosty then sent this information on to Washington and it is this note that is missing!

This is not rocket science! Prior to the final determination of the designation of the motorcade route person/s in Washington were privy to exactly where Lee Harvey Oswald was working. The Warren Commissioners were aware of this information and questioned Hosty about it extensively making it very clear that this third note was sent and that Oswald's place of employment was known. Those same Commissioners then FAILED to make this Hosty note a Commission Exhibit although they did make (CE430) the floor plan of the house where RP lived and where Hosty parked when he gathered this information a Commission exhibit. This is either an example of gross negligence on the part of the Commissioners or an intentional attempt to make sure that the Hosty note number three would never be examined and it would never be known who had viewed this information.

While many people go to great lengths to speculate on how Oswald got his job at the TSBD and who (of those who may have had a hand, seen or unseen in Oswald's successful job search) therefore was involved in the conspiracy (opening doors to a myriad of potential conspirators) we have here an example of how the information about Oswald's work location was obtained and forwarded to person/s in the highest echelons of the intelligence community and how that information was not only not followed up on but was actually kept out of the official record, as far as the assignment of a Commission Exhibit Number and the production of the document for the record. We also know that to this day the CIA has never admitted that a copy of this Hosty note was received although we have proof positive that Hosty's previous two notes were received into the office of Richard Helms at the CIA.

If you accept the possibility of Oswald being a shooter or being nothing more than a Patsy a requirement of any conspiracy theory IS pre knowledge of where Oswald was working.

We have proof positive that this information was available to potential conspirators within th egovernment and we have proof positive that the (or certain) Warren Commissioners FAILED to insure that this infomation was properly followed up on, evaluated or preserved within the record!

I submit that while most conspiracy buffs want to prove that Oswald was not a shooter in order to prove conspiracy that perhaps something as simple as this item within the record could go along way toward doing the same thing without much controversy......because what occured in this instance is proveable beyond a doubt!

Jim Root

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate your reply, Jim. You may be on to something. However, it does not address my concerns.

How is it that RP looked up the address on Elm St in Oct if the TSBD had only been there since the Summer?

How is it she quickly forgot she had written down the Elm St address?

How is it that in her forgetting about the Elm St address, and thus thinking Oswald worked at the other warehouse, she nevertheless told police she was expecting them when they arrived? Did she think Oswald could hit JFK in Dealey from the other warehouse? :lol:

Hosty may have verified Oswald's employment by ringing the TSBD but that does not explain how they got the Elm St address from the phone book in the first place - or why RP was unable to recall that she had already written the Elm St address down from the phone book some weeks earlier.

In my opinion, if the Elm St address is not listed in the then current phone book, then RP and Hosty have some explaining to do.

Edited by Greg Parker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate your reply, Jim. You may be on to something. However, it does not address my concerns.

How is it that RP looked up the address on Elm St in Oct if the TSBD had only been there since the Summer?

How is it she quickly forgot she had written down the Elm St address?

How is it that in her forgetting about the Elm St address, and thus thinking Oswald worked at the other warehouse, she nevertheless told police she was expecting them when they arrived? Did she think Oswald could hit JFK in Dealey from the other warehouse? :lol:

Hosty may have verified Oswald's employment by ringing the TSBD but that does not explain how they got the Elm St address from the phone book in the first place - or why RP was unable to recall that she had already written the Elm St address down from the phone book some weeks earlier.

In my opinion, if the Elm St address is not listed in the then current phone book, then RP and Hosty have some explaining to do.

Greg

Thank you for your reply.

"Two roads in the woods diverge"

Each person will take their research where their path leads them. It seems for you that "RP and Hosty have some explaning to do." For me it seems that the Warren Commision has "some explaining to do." After all, we find that the Hosty testimony destroys several premisses of the final Warren Commission Report. For example Hosty goes into an articulate and detailed rundown of Oswald's political beliefs while the Warren Commission suggests that Oswald is politically confused. Hosty knows exactly on what date Oswald leaves New Orleans, the Warren Commission suggests the day to be one day later. Hosty provides information that can lead us to conclude that information about where Oswald was working made it to the Office Of Richard Helms in the CIA (the same as we know, in fact, that Hosty's other two notes made it to that office) but to this day nobody seems to be able to locate that note or p[ut any signifigance onto that particular note.

Feel free to suggest that the phone number of the Elm St. TSBD may or may not have been in the phone book and what role that would play in this scenario and where that could then lead.

For myself and my research it is important to find in the records and material that we have, that the "Big Fish" would need to have access to information that would locate exactly where Oswald was working prior to the final decissions about the motorcade route------- an essential element in proving conspiracy. The Hosty testimony provides that information with the additional caveat that we can also see where McCloy was either not smart enough (which I doubt) to create an Exhibit Number and have produced this Hosty document or we have a clear indication of McCloy actually assuring that that document would, as is the case, never see the light of day!

To my simple mind this is much more important than how an FBI Agent was able to find a telephone number that it seems that he clearly did find!

Jim Root

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully
Mr. HOSTY: I asked her if she knew where he worked. After a moment's hesitation, she told me that he worked at the Texas School Book Depository near the downtown area of Dallas. She didn't have the exact address, and it is my recollection that we went to the phone book and looked it up, found it to be 411 Elm Street.

Mr. STERN. You looked it up while you were there?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes; that is my recollection that we looked it up in her telephone book to show it at 411 Elm Street, Dallas, Tex.

-------------------- .....

...... ---------------------------------

Is it possible for some one to check the directory that was current at that time?

We know from Nat Pinkston's interview with Roy Trulyon 11/23/63 that the TSBD only moved into the Elm St address during that Summer. It hardly seems possible then that it could have been listed in time...

The "tlnyurl" link in the post quoted below no longer resolves, but this link does, and it displays the 1962 date of TSBD occupancy at 411 Elm....

http://web.archive.org/web/20080129171204/...tory_of_411.htm

....The Texas School Book Depository Company leased space in the building starting in 1962, having moved there from the Dal-Tex Building across Houston Street. The private firm stocked and distributed public school text books for the northern half of Texas. Space on the first four floors was leased to book publishers for their regional offices. Floors five through seven held stock for them and others, while shipping was handled on the first floor....

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=53597

Tim Gratz's ill-tempered rants are a confirmation of the accuracy of my thesis.

Below is a reaction from Gary Mack>

Bill, I skimmed through your article and was quite disappointed. Too many

problems to go into now, but a few are: TSBD moved into 411 Elm early in 1962,

not 1963. NO films or photos were confiscated (unless you believe Gordon Arnold

or Beverly Oliver) and all original pictures, with the exception of the Nix

film, survive to this day. What are the journalism credentials of Elzie Glaze?

Here's a link to the Museum's history of 411 Elm: http://tinyurl.com/7f9jl Gary

Mack gmack@jfk.org

Here is my reply,

Hello Gary,

I'm sorry you did not like the article.

What do you think about the part where Roy Truly said the TSBD moved in during

the summer of 1963? See reference note 36. Do you have any sources to the

contrary?

For the reference regarding the suppression of footage of the limousine completing the turn

see reference note 25.

For more on Glaze's credentials see The Glaze Letters which I posted on the

Education Forum on January 3, 2006.

Thanks for your input.

Bill

Edited by Tom Scully
Link to comment
Share on other sites

G

reg

Thank you for your reply.

"Two roads in the woods diverge"

Each person will take their research where their path leads them. It seems for you that "RP and Hosty have some explaning to do." For me it seems that the Warren Commision has "some explaining to do." After all, we find that the Hosty testimony destroys several premisses of the final Warren Commission Report. For example Hosty goes into an articulate and detailed rundown of Oswald's political beliefs while the Warren Commission suggests that Oswald is politically confused. Hosty knows exactly on what date Oswald leaves New Orleans, the Warren Commission suggests the day to be one day later. Hosty provides information that can lead us to conclude that information about where Oswald was working made it to the Office Of Richard Helms in the CIA (the same as we know, in fact, that Hosty's other two notes made it to that office) but to this day nobody seems to be able to locate that note or p[ut any signifigance onto that particular note.

Feel free to suggest that the phone number of the Elm St. TSBD may or may not have been in the phone book and what role that would play in this scenario and where that could then lead.

For myself and my research it is important to find in the records and material that we have, that the "Big Fish" would need to have access to information that would locate exactly where Oswald was working prior to the final decissions about the motorcade route------- an essential element in proving conspiracy. The Hosty testimony provides that information with the additional caveat that we can also see where McCloy was either not smart enough (which I doubt) to create an Exhibit Number and have produced this Hosty document or we have a clear indication of McCloy actually assuring that that document would, as is the case, never see the light of day!

To my simple mind this is much more important than how an FBI Agent was able to find a telephone number that it seems that he clearly did find!

Jim Root

Jim,

No doubt the phone number was listed since it had been a long established business. It is the address that is of concern. And as seen in the questioning of RP, it was of no small concern to Jenner.

The decision on the parade route was a foregone conclusion since the Host committee was never going to allow the luncheon to be anywhere but the Trade Mart. Look at the connections to the Host committee and see where that leads. Or not.

Tom,

there are a few different time-frames I've seen for the TSBD move to Elm. Only one came from a person who worked for the company - Roy Truly. He said Summer of '63.

The white and yellow pages which I believe came out in May, 63, would help settle the issue. If the TSBD is not listed at Elm, then RP and Hosty were "mistaken" about obtaining the address from the directory.

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...