Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

Just a small observation here.

In Mercer's statement (Julia Ann Mercer-1) dated 1/16/68, she said her statement to the FBI was altered.  No surprise there.  Additional evidence of an altered statement is shown within the statement.  The FBI has her saying that the truck was parked on the right side of Elm Street, but later has her saying the man who took the rifle out of the back of the pickup "...then proceeded to walk across the street and up the grassy hill..."

Someone got it wrong...


Link to post
Share on other sites

Citing Dallas PD Patrolman Joe Murphy's recounting of the stalled truck and who came and went from it as credible is laughably absurd knowing he had left the area (for what , a 1/2 hours time? ) to take one of these men back to get another truck. 

Julia Ann Mercer obviously saw what she saw regards the truck and it's occupants when Murphy was on this drop off errand because she mentions seeing only two men, not three.

Speaking of Julia Ann Mercer seeking attention regards her story, have any of you ever been confronted by armed policemen in uniform and out-of-the -blue told to come with them for any reason?

And my common high anxiety time sense guess is that they did this without polite apologies and reassuring smiles.

I never have, but I am sure it would be a very alarming and even scary experience during any normal time let alone right during a truly high tension shocking time of the assassination as this was.

You would logically assume that if Julia Ann Mercer made up her story or her "SS not so secret" comments to other coffee shop patrons for attention, she was probably cursing herself for doing so within earshot of these two officers.

And you and I would not keep reciting this story of the stalled truck and gun case removal under even more stressful face to face questioning if it was all exaggerated in the first place. We'd probably admit it was all an embarrassing attention seeking mistake.

Yet, even under these stressful circumstances, Mercer stuck with her story throughout her questioning.

She stated her original story consistently that day and the next day and both times before Ruby shot Oswald.

And were these officers in the coffee shop having coffee and doughnuts themselves?  If they were, then JFK must not have been shot at that point, otherwise they would have been called back out to the frantic "attention all units" scene all over Dallas.

Since when does a worker in a stalled truck get something several feet long out of the back of the truck to try to restart a dead engine?  And what's up with walking with this longer item up the grassy knoll farther and farther way from his stalled truck and not returning right away?

Did this younger worker just decide to do something more productive and interesting with his wait time like metal detecting on the top of the knoll rather than sit there with a paunchy old guy who looked like Jack Ruby?

And Mercer's claim of alteration of her signature and deposition statements isn't far fetched when you consider the Dallas FBI destroying important file evidence regards Oswald and agent Hosty keeping this fact from the Warren Commission with the outrageous explanation of "they didn't ask me."

How could the Warren Commission ask about something they had no knowledge of?

Whose doing the lying or truth withholding here?

If Hosty had told the WC about the Oswald file destruction, it would have turned the investigation upside down and all around.

Could you imagine the questions the Warren Commission would then have to ask the FBI regards Oswald and what they knew about him and their motives in destroying such evidence?


My point here is that the of credibility factor of Mercer was higher than the FBI's in this matter imo, especially after we finally knew how much was held back from the WC by them.


Edited by Joe Bauer
Link to post
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...