The complete Lee Bowers "Rush to Judgment" transcripts

[Ken Rheberg]

In his 1964 testimony before the Warren Commission, Union Terminal railroad tower employee and key JFK assassination witness Lee Bowers implied that he had seen someone on the high ground above Elm Street between his tower and the triple underpass at the time the shots were fired. A picket fence was never mentioned by Bowers or attorney Joseph Ball.

Bowers was later interviewed in 1966 for the Mark Lane/Emile de Antonio documentary film "Rush to Judgment". In clips selected from this interview and used for the film, nothing was said by Bowers that contradicted what he had told the Warren Commission.

Then a few years ago, after reviewing the complete transcripts of Bowers' "Rush to Judgment" interview, computer animator Dale Myers concluded on his "Secrets of a Homicide" web site that Bowers said there was no one behind the fence at the time of the shots. Myers also made unique claims about other aspects of Bowers' story.

Unfortunately, while Myers had access to a copy of the transcripts, those inclined to disagree with him did not. And no direction was given by Myers as to where they could be located apart from page numbers and film rolls. Nor was any direction given by a Myers version supporter who also had access to the transcripts as he argued Myers' conclusions elsewhere online. In fact the supporter ultimately declined outright to reveal his source for the transcripts when asked. All this put those who disagreed with Myers at an unfair disadvantage.

However, that disadvantage has come to an end. The transcripts have actually been available to anyone who wants them. All thirteen pages can be found in and obtained from the archives of the Wisconsin Historical Society. I now have my copy. And I believe this discussion needs to be reopened.

**If you wish to obtain your own copy, please contact Harry Miller, Reference Archivist, at askarchives@wisconsinhistory.org. Refer to the Lee Bowers transcripts in Box 55, Folder 2 of the Emile de Antonio papers.**

Ken

(Note: This is being posted on both the Lancer and Education forums.)

Edited November 16, 2009 by Ken Rheberg

[Chris Halbower]

Wouldn't it be instructive to have a .pdf of these transcripts uploaded to the internet?

[David Andrews]

Wouldn't it be instructive to have a .pdf of these transcripts uploaded to the internet?

That may violate the archives' terms of gift from the donor, the archives' copyright, etc.

[Dean Hagerman]

That sounds great

Could you give us a quick rundown of what is in the transcipts Ken?

I heard it had a better desciption of the two men standing behind the fence

Thanks for the info

Edited November 12, 2009 by Dean Hagerman

[Ken Rheberg]

Wouldn't it be instructive to have a .pdf of these transcripts uploaded to the internet?

To Chris and others who may be thinking along the same line:

Please see the site below posted by Kathy Beckett on the Lancer Forum.

http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/copyright.asp

Ken

[Ken Rheberg]

That sounds great

Could you give us a quick rundown of what is in the transcipts Ken?

I heard it had a better desciption of the two men standing behind the fence

Thanks for the info

Thanks, Dean. I'm going to hold off a bit until others have a chance to get their copies. It shouldn't be too long.

Ken

[Dean Hagerman]

That sounds great

Could you give us a quick rundown of what is in the transcipts Ken?

I heard it had a better desciption of the two men standing behind the fence

Thanks for the info

Thanks, Dean. I'm going to hold off a bit until others have a chance to get their copies. It shouldn't be too long.

Ken

No problem I will be looking for it

I think im going to watch my copy of "Rush To Judgement" tonight to catch up on what Bowers and others said

No matter how many times I watch it I cant get over the fact that Nix says his film was altered when he got it back from the Govt.

[David Andrews]

A lengthy summary and paraphrase of the Bowers material might pass legal standards. Inviting the right scholar to do the work would keep the most important topics foremost.

The archives might give one-time publication permission. The internet location might dissuade them, but the Education Forum name might be a note in our favor. (I know a bit about archival practices.)

Edited November 13, 2009 by David Andrews

[Ken Rheberg]

Here's the substance of a conversation I had 11/13/09 with the Wisconsin Historical Society Reference Archivist regarding use of their archived materials by researchers:

The Society provides archived documents to individuals for their own personal study and research. The Society also informs these individuals of their responsibilities as they pertain to copyright.

Posting documents on the internet is a form of publishing. Posting small portions of said documents is generally acceptable under what is known as "fair use". Posting entire documents, or major portions of them, could lead to a violation of the copyright. This is normally resolved by obtaining an authorization to publish from the holder of the copyright.

In this case, the copyright for the interview of the late Lee Bowers could be held by his heirs, however I'm not sure if he was ever married or had any children. If he did, the rights could have been signed over to Emile de Antonio. These rights would then be held by de Antonio's estate as he has passed away as well. It's hard to say where the copyright lies at this point.

The Society recommends against posting the entire document or major portions of it without the proper authorization. If this isn't obtained, an objection and then legal action could arise from the holder of the copyright. The Society's recommendation is my position as well.

I was also told that the Society has now been contacted by other researchers asking for copies of the Bowers transcripts. This is good news.

So the plan is as follows. Sometime this coming week, while waiting for your transcripts to be received, I'll post my analysis of Bowers' Warren Commission testimony. That will be followed by my analysis of the complete Bowers' transcripts the following week, including whether or not I feel they conform to his testimony. I'll be as objective as I can possibly be, giving credit where credit is due, or the lack thereof, and hopefully come up with an acceptable theory about what Lee Bowers saw that day.

Ken

(Posted on both the Lancer and Education forums.)

Edited November 16, 2009 by Ken Rheberg

[Dean Hagerman]

Sounds good

I ran into the same thing with regards to posting scanned pages from Harold Weisbergs "Photgraphic Whitewash"

I talked to the lady in charge of the library that all of Harolds work and files had been donated

[Pat Speer]

Here's the substance of a conversation I had 11/13/09 with the Wisconsin Historical Society Reference Archivist regarding use of their archived materials by researchers:

The Society provides archived documents to individuals for their own personal study and research. The Society also informs these individuals of their responsibilities as they pertain to copyright.

Posting documents on the internet is a form of publishing. Posting small portions of said documents is generally acceptable under what is known as "fair use". Posting entire documents, or major portions of them, could lead to a violation of the copyright. This is normally resolved by obtaining an authorization to publish from the holder of the copyright.

In this case, the copyright for the interview of the late Lee Bowers could be held by his heirs, however I'm not sure if he was ever married or had any children. If he did, the rights could have been signed over to Emile de Antonio. These rights would then be held by de Antonio's estate as he has passed away as well. It's hard to say where the copyright lies at this point.

The Society recommends against posting the entire document or major portions of it without the proper authorization. If this isn't obtained, an objection and then legal action could arise from the holder of the copyright. The Society's recommendation is my position as well.

I was also told that the Society has now been contacted by other researchers asking for copies of the Bowers transcripts. This is good news.

So the plan is as follows. Sometime this coming week, while waiting for your transcripts to be received, I'll post my analysis of Bowers' Warren Commission testimony. That will be followed by my analysis of the complete Bowers' transcripts the following week, including whether or not I feel they conform to his testimony. I'll be as objective as I can possibly be, giving credit where credit is due, or the lack thereof, and hopefully come up with an acceptable theory about what Lee Bowers saw that day.

Ken

(Posted on both the Lancer and Education forums.)

Ken, publishing the transcript for re-sale or profit is one thing--but I am 99.99% certain you can re-type and re-use what is on the transcript for education purposes under the principle of fair use. People can own a work of fiction, but people can't own a public quote. In Part 3 of my video series, we re-enact an interview of Dr. Humes performed by Dan Rather, where Humes lies through his teeth. We wanted to use the actual interview, to show people Hey! This is real! This good doctor was given a script by the Justice Department and went on national TV and LIED to one of the largest TV audiences of that era. But CBS wanted to charge us a thousand dollars to put a 30 second segment on Youtube, or some such thing. So we just re-shot it, using a comedian friend of the director. CBS owns the footage of what was said, but they do not own what was said, once it's been broadcast. So..the question is has this footage ever been shown publicly?

[Ken Rheberg]

Here's the substance of a conversation I had 11/13/09 with the Wisconsin Historical Society Reference Archivist regarding use of their archived materials by researchers:

The Society provides archived documents to individuals for their own personal study and research. The Society also informs these individuals of their responsibilities as they pertain to copyright.

Posting documents on the internet is a form of publishing. Posting small portions of said documents is generally acceptable under what is known as "fair use". Posting entire documents, or major portions of them, could lead to a violation of the copyright. This is normally resolved by obtaining an authorization to publish from the holder of the copyright.

In this case, the copyright for the interview of the late Lee Bowers could be held by his heirs, however I'm not sure if he was ever married or had any children. If he did, the rights could have been signed over to Emile de Antonio. These rights would then be held by de Antonio's estate as he has passed away as well. It's hard to say where the copyright lies at this point.

The Society recommends against posting the entire document or major portions of it without the proper authorization. If this isn't obtained, an objection and then legal action could arise from the holder of the copyright. The Society's recommendation is my position as well.

I was also told that the Society has now been contacted by other researchers asking for copies of the Bowers transcripts. This is good news.

So the plan is as follows. Sometime this coming week, while waiting for your transcripts to be received, I'll post my analysis of Bowers' Warren Commission testimony. That will be followed by my analysis of the complete Bowers' transcripts the following week, including whether or not I feel they conform to his testimony. I'll be as objective as I can possibly be, giving credit where credit is due, or the lack thereof, and hopefully come up with an acceptable theory about what Lee Bowers saw that day.

Ken

(Posted on both the Lancer and Education forums.)

Ken, publishing the transcript for re-sale or profit is one thing--but I am 99.99% certain you can re-type and re-use what is on the transcript for education purposes under the principle of fair use. People can own a work of fiction, but people can't own a public quote. In Part 3 of my video series, we re-enact an interview of Dr. Humes performed by Dan Rather, where Humes lies through his teeth. We wanted to use the actual interview, to show people Hey! This is real! This good doctor was given a script by the Justice Department and went on national TV and LIED to one of the largest TV audiences of that era. But CBS wanted to charge us a thousand dollars to put a 30 second segment on Youtube, or some such thing. So we just re-shot it, using a comedian friend of the director. CBS owns the footage of what was said, but they do not own what was said, once it's been broadcast. So..the question is has this footage ever been shown publicly?

Thanks for your input, Pat. I'll be going over the transcripts page by page, re-typing when necessary along the way for educational purposes under the priciple of fair use. This kind of usage was appropriate according to the Wisconsin Historical Society. Scanning and posting of the entire transcripts was not. To answer your question about the footage, the entire interview of Lee Bowers has never, to my knowledge, been shown publicly. Just select portions of the interview as seen in the film "Rush to Judgment".

Ken

[William Kelly]

Here's the substance of a conversation I had 11/13/09 with the Wisconsin Historical Society Reference Archivist regarding use of their archived materials by researchers:

The Society provides archived documents to individuals for their own personal study and research. The Society also informs these individuals of their responsibilities as they pertain to copyright.

Posting documents on the internet is a form of publishing. Posting small portions of said documents is generally acceptable under what is known as "fair use". Posting entire documents, or major portions of them, could lead to a violation of the copyright. This is normally resolved by obtaining an authorization to publish from the holder of the copyright.

In this case, the copyright for the interview of the late Lee Bowers could be held by his heirs, however I'm not sure if he was ever married or had any children. If he did, the rights could have been signed over to Emile de Antonio. These rights would then be held by de Antonio's estate as he has passed away as well. It's hard to say where the copyright lies at this point.

The Society recommends against posting the entire document or major portions of it without the proper authorization. If this isn't obtained, an objection and then legal action could arise from the holder of the copyright. The Society's recommendation is my position as well.

I was also told that the Society has now been contacted by other researchers asking for copies of the Bowers transcripts. This is good news.

So the plan is as follows. Sometime this coming week, while waiting for your transcripts to be received, I'll post my analysis of Bowers' Warren Commission testimony. That will be followed by my analysis of the complete Bowers' transcripts the following week, including whether or not I feel they conform to his testimony. I'll be as objective as I can possibly be, giving credit where credit is due, or the lack thereof, and hopefully come up with an acceptable theory about what Lee Bowers saw that day.

Ken

(Posted on both the Lancer and Education forums.)

Ken, publishing the transcript for re-sale or profit is one thing--but I am 99.99% certain you can re-type and re-use what is on the transcript for education purposes under the principle of fair use. People can own a work of fiction, but people can't own a public quote. In Part 3 of my video series, we re-enact an interview of Dr. Humes performed by Dan Rather, where Humes lies through his teeth. We wanted to use the actual interview, to show people Hey! This is real! This good doctor was given a script by the Justice Department and went on national TV and LIED to one of the largest TV audiences of that era. But CBS wanted to charge us a thousand dollars to put a 30 second segment on Youtube, or some such thing. So we just re-shot it, using a comedian friend of the director. CBS owns the footage of what was said, but they do not own what was said, once it's been broadcast. So..the question is has this footage ever been shown publicly?

Thanks for your input, Pat. I'll be going over the transcripts page by page, re-typing when necessary along the way for educational purposes under the priciple of fair use. This kind of usage was appropriate according to the Wisconsin Historical Society. Scanning and posting of the entire transcripts was not. To answer your question about the footage, the entire interview of Lee Bowers has never, to my knowledge, been shown publicly. Just select portions of the interview as seen in the film "Rush to Judgment".

Ken

Why wouldn't the publication of the entire transcript be permitted under fair use for educational purposes?

I would think that any real research or educational purpose would necessarily need the entire transcript.

In addition, didn't Mark Lane make this interview?

He's a lawyer. Doesn't HE own the rights to it?

And why isn't this part of the JFK Ass Records at the NARA?

And why does a local historical society think it can claim copyright over a transcript of an interview that Mark Lane did?

And if I am sent the entire transcript of the interview I will post it on my blog

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/

and hope and pray that somebody sues me for copyright infringement because then I would get what I have been trying to do for the past decade, and that's get new sworn testimony under oath, and develop new evidence that would mandate a special federal grand jury investigation.

But alas, nobody will sue me, so send me the transcript and I'll post it in full and hope and pray somebody will sue me and then we can subpoena new documents and require the sworn testimony of those who won't answer our questions without being required to by law.

Bill Kelly

[Dean Hagerman]

Right on Bill!

I love your drive and attitude