Bernice Moore Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 We should also point out that the tentative memorandum of January 23 substantially differs from the original outline of our work in this area which had as its subject, "Lee Harvey Oswald as the Assassin of President Kennedy," and which examined the evidence from that standpoint. At no time have we assumed that Lee Harvey Oswald was the assassin of President Kennedy. Rather, our entire study has been based on an independent examination of all the evidence in an effort to determine who was the assassin of President Kennedy.[27] :blink: :blink: http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/PG/PGchp2.html#Belin130 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 I'm well aware that Baker's first report places the encounter on the fourth floor, but I also think, based on everything I can learn about him and his filmed interviews, that he appears to be a good cop that wouldn't lie to fit a cover story, and what I am using as evidence is the evidence used by the WC to frame Oswald - and all three - Baker, Truly and Oswald agree that the encounter occured in the lunchroom which is on the second floor by the coke machine. Bill, Fritz testified that Oswald said he was in the second floor lunchroom when the encounter took place and that he further said he was in the first floor having lunch when the assassination took place. To believe this, you have Oswald on the first floor having lunch – not hearing or suspecting anything amiss, then going up to the second floor post-assassination for a coke just barely ahead of Baker & Truly. You also have Fritz testifying that Truly had told him that the encounter had occurred "near the back stairway". Since no floor was mentioned, this, to my mind, has to be a reference by default to the first floor. I further believe that this was part of what was said by Truly to Fritz when Truly was reporting Oswald missing. The eavesdropping Biffle fills in what Fritz leaves out – "in a storage room on the first floor". A small storage is indeed located "near the back stairway". Fritz' testimony regarding Oswald's alibi is untrustworthy whether because he was deliberately changing Oswald's alibi to something that could be challenged, or he was simply confused by his own very sloppy hand written notes. But those notes, if punctuated and with missing words inserted, actually can back up Oswald saying he was on the first floor after buying a coke on the second floor when the encounter happened. My only disagreements with Lee on this are that I think your position is an easier "sell" to both the legal system and to the general public, so from a purely pragmatic point of view, I'd go along with this being presented. The end result is the same anyway, and history books can make the correction later. The other point of disagreement is that I do not believe Baker was the one who cleared Oswald to leave the building. Oswald had two separate cop encounters (the first was with Baker; the second was with ?) Baker had two separate encounters of his own (the first with Oswald; the second with the person described by the 6th floor witnesses – someone older, heavier and dressed differently to Oswald) The second person encountered by Baker was not out of breath for a very good reason. He'd only had to come down two floors. Now if you look at the youtube of Baker, he says that he saw Oswald "walking away" from him but he saw him through the window in the door. If Oswald had gone through that door, he wouldn't have seen him at all because the door would have been partially open and Oswald would have made the left and not have been visible through the window, and if Oswald had gone through that door, Truly would have surely seen him and didn't. Now you don't want to believe Baker, Truly or Oswald then there's nothing to believe. I don't believe Oswald said what Fritz claimed he said, and there is good evidence to support that notion. Truly and Baker are a different kettle of fish. Baker's apparent honesty does not trump the facts. To me, it works the way; the facts trump his apparent honesty. Like Lee, I think Baker told the truth initially, but then was coerced into changing his story – or maybe just allowed himself to be convinced that it happened the way Truly said. Despite changing his story, Baker deserves to be regarded as a hero for his actions during the crisis. I believe Baker and I believe the encounter took place, and I believe the door was closed and Baker saw Oswald in the vestibule through the window moving from right to left into the lunchroom and Baker followed him there. Everybody has thresholds of belief, and what will change their minds, That you remain unconvinced by arguments against a second floor encounter is – probably more than anything else – a clear indication as to how hard the "sale" is. If it can't be sold to some one of your stature and knowledge, I wouldn't even bother trying with a GJ. On the other hand, your version would play well to the legal fraternity because it employs more than just witness statements – it employs science. And in the end, your version – as much as I disagree with it – is closer to the truth than the official version, in that it shows the impossibility of that official version. In short, as I've indicated before, you have my support on going with your "destroy the myth" model, complete with graphics. but to me this is the key that exonerates Oswald from being the Sixth Floor Sniper, and the quest to find someone else who did that shooting, someone who also had a reason for being in the building at the time, someone who either stayed behind and calmly moved boxes around (as seen by Ms. Mooneyham and confirmed by the Dillard/Powell photos), or somebody who was an acomplace to the shooter who did leave immediately, but still wasn't Oswald. In order to understand the reasoning behind all this you must read the first thread and the chapter in the book that I reference - Michael Roffman's Presumed Guilty, who first recognized this point. Greg, Your points are all well taken and considered, and thanks for acknowledging that my arguments, using their witnesses and evidence, is the best approach to use to "sell" the legal system and general public. I should also point out that these ideas are not my own, but were first advanced many years ago, now decades, by Howard Roffman, when he was a student at the University of Pennsylvania, and is posted on the internet by Dave Ratcliff at : http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/PG/PG.html#TOC and is really a very basic Dealey Plaza 101 text that should be manditory reading before discussing anything else about the assassination. And many thanks for all you do, and with your assistance and the help of others, we not only destroy the myth, but figure out how it really went down, though justice may never be served. Bill Kelly http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/ http://jfkcountercoup.wordpress.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 (edited) <BR>Thanks Jim.... and thanks to Michael for the link<BR><BR>I know I experienced an "ah-ha" moment when reading these memos, just wish there was a way to do a "TRUTH" campaign ala the anti-smoking people and let the "masses" read this. Hoover and the FBI had it solved that evening, regardless of the evidence. Pretty neat.<BR><BR>Greg... That Baker incident has always been so very bizarre to me... How do we get from the Baker Affidavit to Truly's and Baker's testimony? and are you saying that Fritz just threw that into his notes? I can't find it right now but wasn't there an entire batch of reports written by everyone in the interrogation room describing what was said... I know Holmes wrote one... did they corroborate that Oswald told the lunchroom story?<BR><BR>Not sure where I got this but it makes our point<BR><BR><BR>From the angle of the photo we should be looking directly into the lunchroom thru the window... we are obviously not.<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>Thanks for that David, <BR><BR>Can you try to find out where you got it? <BR><BR>It details what I am trying to say very clearly, as does the other illustrations by Martin hinrichs in the original thread, that should be consulted on this subject. <BR><BR>I don't want to dominate this thread with what I think is the most significant evidence, and would like to hear more of what swayed other people, one way or the other. <BR><BR>But I think it is a good exercise to try to replicate what the official story says happened and see where the disconnections are, as they often lead somewhere....<BR><BR>Bill Kelly <BR><BR>See Martin Hinrich's illustration on page 8 of this thread (Thanks' Martin) <BR><A href="http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15429&st=0">http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15429&st=0</A><BR><BR>Howard Roffman: <A class=bbc_url title="External link" href="http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/PG/PG.html#TOC" rel="nofollow external">http://www.ratical.o.../PG/PG.html#TOC</A><BR><BR><A class=bbc_url title="External link" href="http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow external">http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/</A><BR><BR><A class=bbc_url title="External link" href="http://jfkcountercoup.wordpress.com/" rel="nofollow external">http://jfkcountercoup.wordpress.com/</A> Edited December 10, 2010 by William Kelly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 <BR>Thanks Jim.... and thanks to Michael for the link<BR><BR>I know I experienced an "ah-ha" moment when reading these memos, just wish there was a way to do a "TRUTH" campaign ala the anti-smoking people and let the "masses" read this. Hoover and the FBI had it solved that evening, regardless of the evidence. Pretty neat.<BR><BR>Greg... That Baker incident has always been so very bizarre to me... How do we get from the Baker Affidavit to Truly's and Baker's testimony? and are you saying that Fritz just threw that into his notes? I can't find it right now but wasn't there an entire batch of reports written by everyone in the interrogation room describing what was said... I know Holmes wrote one... did they corroborate that Oswald told the lunchroom story?<BR><BR>Not sure where I got this but it makes our point<BR><BR><BR>From the angle of the photo we should be looking directly into the lunchroom thru the window... we are obviously not.<BR><BR><BR><BR><BR><BR>Thanks for that David, <BR><BR>Can you try to find out where you got it? <BR><BR>It details what I am trying to say very clearly, as does the other illustrations by Martin hinrichs in the original thread, that should be consulted on this subject. <BR><BR>I don't want to dominate this thread with what I think is the most significant evidence, and would like to hear more of what swayed other people, one way or the other. <BR><BR>But I think it is a good exercise to try to replicate what the official story says happened and see where the disconnections are, as they often lead somewhere....<BR><BR>Bill Kelly <BR><BR>See Martin Hinrich's illustration on page 8 of this thread (Thanks' Martin) <BR><A href="http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15429&st=0">http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15429&st=0</A><BR><BR>Howard Roffman: <A class=bbc_url title="External link" href="http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/PG/PG.html#TOC" rel="nofollow external">http://www.ratical.o.../PG/PG.html#TOC</A><BR><BR><A class=bbc_url title="External link" href="http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow external">http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/</A><BR><BR><A class=bbc_url title="External link" href="http://jfkcountercoup.wordpress.com/" rel="nofollow external">http://jfkcountercoup.wordpress.com/</A> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd W. Vaughan Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 For me the strongest piece of evidence that Oswald is innocent of being the Sixth Floor Sniper is the alleged encouter in the Second Floor lunchroom between Officer Marion Baker, Roy Truly and Oswald within a minute and a half after the last shot. http://educationforu...opic=15429&st=0 While the official story has Oswald hiding the rifle and descending the stairs and Baker seeing Oswald enter through the lunchroom's south door window, a more detailed analysis, as the Secret Service did when they tried to Re-enact the assassination, shows that Baker saw Oswald through a closed door. As Baker relates, he saw Oswald through the door window moving from the right to the left in the vestibule entering the lunchroom. Since the door had an automatic closing device, and if the door was open or ajar even a few inches, the rectangular window naturally gets smaller as seen from the position where Baker was by the stairs. If Oswald had gone through that door, the door would probably have still been open a little bit, and Oswald couldn't have been seen by Baker through the window. In addition, if Oswald had gone through that door, Roy Truly, who was ahead of Baker on the way up the stairs, most certainly would have seen Oswald and an open door, but he didn't. In addition, if Oswald had gone down those stairs from the Sixth floor to the Second floor, he would have had to encouter Jack Dougherty on the fifth floor by the stairs, and the two secretaries who descended from the fourth floor to the first floor, but they didn't encounter anyone. There is another south side door to the vestibule of the Second floor lunchroom, that leads to the same location, and it is this south door that Oswald had used to enter the vestibule so that he could be seen walking past the west door window, as Baker saw him. Since Baker and Truly encountered Oswald in the lunchroom less than a minute and a half after the last shot, Oswald couldn't have fired that shot, deposited the rifle and made it down the stairs past Dougherty, the two secretaries and Truly without any of them seeing him, and for Baker to see him in the vestibule through that west door window, he had to have entered it from the south door, coming from the offices, the rest room or the first floor steps, the same way he left a few minutes later. The Secret Service stoped their reenactment at that point, with the last photo of the reenactment photo sequence being the photos of the door as seen from Baker's position. They recognized the significance of this as well since they called Truly back for a second round of questioning but only asked him one question - did that door have an automatic closing device? Yes it did. And the door was closed when Baker saw Oswald walking in from the south door, not the west door, so he didn't come down those stairs and wasn't the Sixth Floor Sniper. Further support for this is provided by Ms. Mooneyham, the court clerk from across the street who saw a man in the Sixth Floor window four to five minutes after the last shot - and that person, who was apparently moving boxes around, was certainly not Oswald, and if he wasn't the sniper, had to have seen him and was most certainly an accomplice. I don't know who the Sixth Floor Sniper was, but if you believe Baker, Truly and Oswald and the circumstances they say they met, then it wasn't Oswald. I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, but it better be good. Well that's my two cents. BK http://jfkcountercou...-copa-2010.html Bill, This doesn't account for Baker's original first-day affidavit nor the statement that O.V. Campbell made to the press regarding seeing Oswald in a utility cupboard on the first floor shortly after Baker and Truly had entered the building. There was another reason for the change in Baker's affidavit that took the encounter from the 3rd or 4th floor down to the 2nd. I just don't know what it is. Baker states that the man he ran into was walking away from the stairs (no mention of doors, cokes and lunchrooms) was in his thirties and wearing a light brown jacket. Backed up by the witnesses outside the TSBD who saw a man in the window. If the Jack Revill TSBD list was made in the TSBD by speaking to employees and William Shelley then there is evidence that Oswald possibly gave the officers his name and address before leaving and was vouched for by somebody. Truly claims he vouched for Oswald to Baker but perhaps the vouching didn't take place on the 2nd floor. What if the vouching took place on the first floor around 12:45pm and it resulted in Oswald being let loose? Truly moving the encounter to the lunchroom served a purpose. As did Baker reinforcing it by changing his recollections. What was it? Lee I'm well aware that Baker's first report places the encounter on the fourth floor, but I also think, based on everything I can learn about him and his filmed interviews, that he appears to be a good cop that wouldn't lie to fit a cover story, and what I am using as evidence is the evidence used by the WC to frame Oswald - and all three - Baker, Truly and Oswald agree that the encounter occured in the lunchroom which is on the second floor by the coke machine. Now if you look at the youtube of Baker, he says that he saw Oswald "walking away" from him but he saw him through the window in the door. If Oswald had gone through that door, he wouldn't have seen him at all because the door would have been partially open and Oswald would have made the left and not have been visible through the window, and if Oswald had gone through that door, Truly would have surely seen him and didn't. Now you don't want to believe Baker, Truly or Oswald then there's nothing to believe. I believe Baker and I believe the encounter took place, and I believe the door was closed and Baker saw Oswald in the vestibule through the window moving from right to left into the lunchroom and Baker followed him there. Everybody has thresholds of belief, and what will change their minds, but to me this is the key that exonerates Oswald from being the Sixth Floor Sniper, and the quest to find someone else who did that shooting, someone who also had a reason for being in the building at the time, someone who either stayed behind and calmly moved boxes around (as seen by Ms. Mooneyham and confirmed by the Dillard/Powell photos), or somebody who was an acomplace to the shooter who did leave immediately, but still wasn't Oswald. In order to understand the reasoning behind all this you must read the first thread and the chapter in the book that I reference - Michael Roffman's Presumed Guilty, who first recognized this point. Howard Roffman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Lane Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 Another compelling piece of evidence is the 5th floor landing after the shooting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Robert Morrow Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 (edited) Early on investigator/author Joachim Joesten took the view that the biggest piece of evidence that proves there was an elite conspiracy to murder John Kennedy was THERE WAS NO INVESTIGATION INTO THE DEATH OF JOHN KENNEDY! http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=6089 I agree. You would think the usurper traitor murderer President Johnson and his close friend and neighbor of 19 years J. Edgar Hoover would be turning over EVERY STONE to find the supposed phantom Castro hit team, or the phantom Russian hit team, or the phantom mob only hit team, or the phantom team of nuts ... in order to stop ANOTHER potential threat to US leadership. After all, LBJ and US law enforcement knew very early on, thanks to eye and ear witnesses and the indicting Zapruder film with its back head snap that THERE WAS A SHOOTER ON THE GRASSY KNOLL WHO, NOT JUST SHOT AT, BUT MURDERED JOHN KENNEDY. Zero effort to find that guy ... because Lyndon Johnson, the CIA/military and shadow government murdered John Kennedy. Duh. That is why there was no "investigation" into a "conspiracy" because the murderers of John Kennedy were THE ONES IN GOVERNMENT! Instead Lyndon Johnson calls Dallas police detective Will Fritz PERSONALLY on Saturday afternoon 11/23/63 and tells him to STOP investigating and that you got your man (Oswald). Then Johnson calls Dr. Charles Crenshaw at noon on 11/24/63 while Oswald is near death "This is President Lyndon B. Johnson. Dr. Crenshaw, how is the accused assassin? ...Dr. Crenshaw, I want a death-bed confession from the accused asssassin. There's a man in the operating room who will take the statement. I will expect full cooperation in this matter." Well, that is pretty stunning. LBJ is 1) personally involved 2) not even asking a very relevant and simple question, which is "Who supposedly sent you to kill JFK" if in fact patsy Oswald were the real assassin. Then by Wednesday November 27th, less than one week after the 1963 Coup d'Etat, Hoover of the FBI is sending a memo out to FBI agents nationwide telling them to STOP investigating ANY other angle except the Lee Harvey Oswald angle to the JFK assassination. By Friday November 29th, although he and Hoover did NOT want to do so, Johnson was forced by immense suspicions of him, to appoint the Warren Commission. And the fix was officially in ... although the fix had really been in by the afternoon of 11/22/63. Friday, November 29th, was the SAME DAY that an expose by LIFE Magazine was going to be printed and mailed out (dated the Dec. 6th issue) and it was set to blow the political career of Lyndon Baines Johnson out of the water ONCE AND FOR ALL. LIFE had been fed damaging material on Lyndon Johnson by Atty General Robert Kennedy. Edited December 10, 2010 by Robert Morrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 (edited) For me the strongest piece of evidence that Oswald is innocent of being the Sixth Floor Sniper is the alleged encouter in the Second Floor lunchroom between Officer Marion Baker, Roy Truly and Oswald within a minute and a half after the last shot. http://educationforu...opic=15429&st=0 While the official story has Oswald hiding the rifle and descending the stairs and Baker seeing Oswald enter through the lunchroom's south door window, a more detailed analysis, as the Secret Service did when they tried to Re-enact the assassination, shows that Baker saw Oswald through a closed door. As Baker relates, he saw Oswald through the door window moving from the right to the left in the vestibule entering the lunchroom. Since the door had an automatic closing device, and if the door was open or ajar even a few inches, the rectangular window naturally gets smaller as seen from the position where Baker was by the stairs. If Oswald had gone through that door, the door would probably have still been open a little bit, and Oswald couldn't have been seen by Baker through the window. In addition, if Oswald had gone through that door, Roy Truly, who was ahead of Baker on the way up the stairs, most certainly would have seen Oswald and an open door, but he didn't. In addition, if Oswald had gone down those stairs from the Sixth floor to the Second floor, he would have had to encouter Jack Dougherty on the fifth floor by the stairs, and the two secretaries who descended from the fourth floor to the first floor, but they didn't encounter anyone. There is another south side door to the vestibule of the Second floor lunchroom, that leads to the same location, and it is this south door that Oswald had used to enter the vestibule so that he could be seen walking past the west door window, as Baker saw him. Since Baker and Truly encountered Oswald in the lunchroom less than a minute and a half after the last shot, Oswald couldn't have fired that shot, deposited the rifle and made it down the stairs past Dougherty, the two secretaries and Truly without any of them seeing him, and for Baker to see him in the vestibule through that west door window, he had to have entered it from the south door, coming from the offices, the rest room or the first floor steps, the same way he left a few minutes later. The Secret Service stoped their reenactment at that point, with the last photo of the reenactment photo sequence being the photos of the door as seen from Baker's position. They recognized the significance of this as well since they called Truly back for a second round of questioning but only asked him one question - did that door have an automatic closing device? Yes it did. And the door was closed when Baker saw Oswald walking in from the south door, not the west door, so he didn't come down those stairs and wasn't the Sixth Floor Sniper. Further support for this is provided by Ms. Mooneyham, the court clerk from across the street who saw a man in the Sixth Floor window four to five minutes after the last shot - and that person, who was apparently moving boxes around, was certainly not Oswald, and if he wasn't the sniper, had to have seen him and was most certainly an accomplice. I don't know who the Sixth Floor Sniper was, but if you believe Baker, Truly and Oswald and the circumstances they say they met, then it wasn't Oswald. I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, but it better be good. Well that's my two cents. BK http://jfkcountercou...-copa-2010.html Bill, This doesn't account for Baker's original first-day affidavit nor the statement that O.V. Campbell made to the press regarding seeing Oswald in a utility cupboard on the first floor shortly after Baker and Truly had entered the building. There was another reason for the change in Baker's affidavit that took the encounter from the 3rd or 4th floor down to the 2nd. I just don't know what it is. Baker states that the man he ran into was walking away from the stairs (no mention of doors, cokes and lunchrooms) was in his thirties and wearing a light brown jacket. Backed up by the witnesses outside the TSBD who saw a man in the window. If the Jack Revill TSBD list was made in the TSBD by speaking to employees and William Shelley then there is evidence that Oswald possibly gave the officers his name and address before leaving and was vouched for by somebody. Truly claims he vouched for Oswald to Baker but perhaps the vouching didn't take place on the 2nd floor. What if the vouching took place on the first floor around 12:45pm and it resulted in Oswald being let loose? Truly moving the encounter to the lunchroom served a purpose. As did Baker reinforcing it by changing his recollections. What was it? Lee I'm well aware that Baker's first report places the encounter on the fourth floor, but I also think, based on everything I can learn about him and his filmed interviews, that he appears to be a good cop that wouldn't lie to fit a cover story, and what I am using as evidence is the evidence used by the WC to frame Oswald - and all three - Baker, Truly and Oswald agree that the encounter occured in the lunchroom which is on the second floor by the coke machine. Now if you look at the youtube of Baker, he says that he saw Oswald "walking away" from him but he saw him through the window in the door. If Oswald had gone through that door, he wouldn't have seen him at all because the door would have been partially open and Oswald would have made the left and not have been visible through the window, and if Oswald had gone through that door, Truly would have surely seen him and didn't. Now you don't want to believe Baker, Truly or Oswald then there's nothing to believe. I believe Baker and I believe the encounter took place, and I believe the door was closed and Baker saw Oswald in the vestibule through the window moving from right to left into the lunchroom and Baker followed him there. Everybody has thresholds of belief, and what will change their minds, but to me this is the key that exonerates Oswald from being the Sixth Floor Sniper, and the quest to find someone else who did that shooting, someone who also had a reason for being in the building at the time, someone who either stayed behind and calmly moved boxes around (as seen by Ms. Mooneyham and confirmed by the Dillard/Powell photos), or somebody who was an acomplace to the shooter who did leave immediately, but still wasn't Oswald. In order to understand the reasoning behind all this you must read the first thread and the chapter in the book that I reference - Michael Roffman's Presumed Guilty, who first recognized this point. Howard Roffman. Thank you Todd. But you're taking Duke's job. How do you get around Roffman's work? Gary Mack says that Oswald just went down the steps quickly and just missed Dougherty and the two secretaries, like the Keystone Cops. Howard Roffman went on to become the personal secretary to a major motion picture director and to publish a photo book of gay couples. BK Edited December 10, 2010 by William Kelly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd W. Vaughan Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 For me the strongest piece of evidence that Oswald is innocent of being the Sixth Floor Sniper is the alleged encouter in the Second Floor lunchroom between Officer Marion Baker, Roy Truly and Oswald within a minute and a half after the last shot. http://educationforu...opic=15429&st=0 While the official story has Oswald hiding the rifle and descending the stairs and Baker seeing Oswald enter through the lunchroom's south door window, a more detailed analysis, as the Secret Service did when they tried to Re-enact the assassination, shows that Baker saw Oswald through a closed door. As Baker relates, he saw Oswald through the door window moving from the right to the left in the vestibule entering the lunchroom. Since the door had an automatic closing device, and if the door was open or ajar even a few inches, the rectangular window naturally gets smaller as seen from the position where Baker was by the stairs. If Oswald had gone through that door, the door would probably have still been open a little bit, and Oswald couldn't have been seen by Baker through the window. In addition, if Oswald had gone through that door, Roy Truly, who was ahead of Baker on the way up the stairs, most certainly would have seen Oswald and an open door, but he didn't. In addition, if Oswald had gone down those stairs from the Sixth floor to the Second floor, he would have had to encouter Jack Dougherty on the fifth floor by the stairs, and the two secretaries who descended from the fourth floor to the first floor, but they didn't encounter anyone. There is another south side door to the vestibule of the Second floor lunchroom, that leads to the same location, and it is this south door that Oswald had used to enter the vestibule so that he could be seen walking past the west door window, as Baker saw him. Since Baker and Truly encountered Oswald in the lunchroom less than a minute and a half after the last shot, Oswald couldn't have fired that shot, deposited the rifle and made it down the stairs past Dougherty, the two secretaries and Truly without any of them seeing him, and for Baker to see him in the vestibule through that west door window, he had to have entered it from the south door, coming from the offices, the rest room or the first floor steps, the same way he left a few minutes later. The Secret Service stoped their reenactment at that point, with the last photo of the reenactment photo sequence being the photos of the door as seen from Baker's position. They recognized the significance of this as well since they called Truly back for a second round of questioning but only asked him one question - did that door have an automatic closing device? Yes it did. And the door was closed when Baker saw Oswald walking in from the south door, not the west door, so he didn't come down those stairs and wasn't the Sixth Floor Sniper. Further support for this is provided by Ms. Mooneyham, the court clerk from across the street who saw a man in the Sixth Floor window four to five minutes after the last shot - and that person, who was apparently moving boxes around, was certainly not Oswald, and if he wasn't the sniper, had to have seen him and was most certainly an accomplice. I don't know who the Sixth Floor Sniper was, but if you believe Baker, Truly and Oswald and the circumstances they say they met, then it wasn't Oswald. I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, but it better be good. Well that's my two cents. BK http://jfkcountercou...-copa-2010.html Bill, This doesn't account for Baker's original first-day affidavit nor the statement that O.V. Campbell made to the press regarding seeing Oswald in a utility cupboard on the first floor shortly after Baker and Truly had entered the building. There was another reason for the change in Baker's affidavit that took the encounter from the 3rd or 4th floor down to the 2nd. I just don't know what it is. Baker states that the man he ran into was walking away from the stairs (no mention of doors, cokes and lunchrooms) was in his thirties and wearing a light brown jacket. Backed up by the witnesses outside the TSBD who saw a man in the window. If the Jack Revill TSBD list was made in the TSBD by speaking to employees and William Shelley then there is evidence that Oswald possibly gave the officers his name and address before leaving and was vouched for by somebody. Truly claims he vouched for Oswald to Baker but perhaps the vouching didn't take place on the 2nd floor. What if the vouching took place on the first floor around 12:45pm and it resulted in Oswald being let loose? Truly moving the encounter to the lunchroom served a purpose. As did Baker reinforcing it by changing his recollections. What was it? Lee I'm well aware that Baker's first report places the encounter on the fourth floor, but I also think, based on everything I can learn about him and his filmed interviews, that he appears to be a good cop that wouldn't lie to fit a cover story, and what I am using as evidence is the evidence used by the WC to frame Oswald - and all three - Baker, Truly and Oswald agree that the encounter occured in the lunchroom which is on the second floor by the coke machine. Now if you look at the youtube of Baker, he says that he saw Oswald "walking away" from him but he saw him through the window in the door. If Oswald had gone through that door, he wouldn't have seen him at all because the door would have been partially open and Oswald would have made the left and not have been visible through the window, and if Oswald had gone through that door, Truly would have surely seen him and didn't. Now you don't want to believe Baker, Truly or Oswald then there's nothing to believe. I believe Baker and I believe the encounter took place, and I believe the door was closed and Baker saw Oswald in the vestibule through the window moving from right to left into the lunchroom and Baker followed him there. Everybody has thresholds of belief, and what will change their minds, but to me this is the key that exonerates Oswald from being the Sixth Floor Sniper, and the quest to find someone else who did that shooting, someone who also had a reason for being in the building at the time, someone who either stayed behind and calmly moved boxes around (as seen by Ms. Mooneyham and confirmed by the Dillard/Powell photos), or somebody who was an acomplace to the shooter who did leave immediately, but still wasn't Oswald. In order to understand the reasoning behind all this you must read the first thread and the chapter in the book that I reference - Michael Roffman's Presumed Guilty, who first recognized this point. Howard Roffman. Thank you Todd. But you're taking Duke's job. How do you get around Roffman's work? Gary Mack says that Oswald just went down the steps quickly and just missed Dougherty and the two secretaries, like the Keystone Cops. Howard Roffman went on to become the personal secretary to a major motion picture director and to publish a photo book of gay couples. BK Bill. One thing is that Roffman made a mistake in his analysis of the Couch film. He says that Baker is not visible running to the TSBD when in fact he is. The result of his error was putting Baker into the TSBD too quickly. Dougherty's testimony is a mess. I suspect he was headed to or on the elevator going down when LHO passed the 5th floor landing. The two secretaries went down after LHO. Todd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 The two secretaries went down after LHO. Todd That can't be right because Oswald was never on the sixth floor. Seriously does anyone really buy the idea that a man could rapidly fire 3 shots into the most powerful man in the world in 5-8 seconds, hide his weapon, squeeze through stacks of boxes, and run down four flights of stairs all within 90 seconds only to appear as cool as a cucumber when confronted by a Policeman with his pistol in hand? Because that's absurd. A minute and a half after you've killed the President and you're not bothered when confronted by the police? Come on pull the other one, its got bells on. I imagine that if Baker ran into one of the actual shooters they too may be very cool right after the deed... so if Oswald can be proven to be a cold blooded killer exhibiting no emotion or remorse for action in his past, then maybe. If you could somehow actually get the rifle into his possession If you could actually prove he made the bag, brought it home, disassembled the rifle leaving no prints, put the rifle into the bag leaving no evidence of such, bring the bag with gun inside (all 32" plus loose metal parts), believe that frazier sees a 3 foot, industrial material made bag as Oswald walks to his car instead of the barely 2 foot "grocery type bag" he testified to, made the sniper's nest, assembled the rifle - again leaving no prints as well as no marks on the inside of this bag, load a partially filled clip that also was never seen or photographed in the TSBD, carefully fold and place the bag completely flat in the corner exactly where he was supposed to be standing, completely disregard the testimony of many who place armed men on the 5th, 6th and 7th floors between 12:15 and 12:25 completely disregard the witnesses that see Oswald elsewhere as late as 12:25 completely disregard that Oswald's actions between 11:55 and 12:25 do not support his being on the 6th floor at any time or planning to be there in time for the announced arrival of the motorcade completely disregard the conflicting testimony as to where and what kind of rifles, bullets, clips, bags etc... are found (3rd, 4th and 5th floors) completely disregard the number of people coming and going from the front and especially the back of the TSBD between 12:30 and 12:50 especially Det Sawyer, and Officers Haygood and Harkness (the source of their info that no one has entered or left was a negro man at one of the back doors.... (at 12:35 Haygood encounters this man... at 12:37 Harkness goes to the back and encounters what he is told are Secret Service agents - not! - and at 12:55 or so, 20-25 mins later, Sorrells goes around back and instead of asking the officers he supposedly sees back there he asked a negro man standing on the loading platform if anyone has come or gone... he does not ID this person) completely disregard photos of bullet tracks, bullet scars and even an unidentified man picking up a bullet and walking off from areas suggesting shots originating from other than the TSBD completely disregard the movement of the boxes between Dillard and Powell when Oswald would have to be going down the back steps completely disregard the obviously suspect medical evidence which so many actual witnesses are on complete disagreement completely disregard the multi-billion $$$ and war escalating motives of the Mil Ind Congressional Complex completely disregard the multi-billion $$$ motives of the Fed Reserve owners, the TX oilmen, and the CIA in opium rich SE Asia completely disregard the historical reality that was LBJ, JEH, Helms, Angleton, Phillips, Hunt, etc.... and the Cold War Now that you're in the right mindset.... you can see how Oswald would have been considered the only viable suspect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Lane Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 ... Friday, November 29th, was the SAME DAY that an expose by LIFE Magazine was going to be printed and mailed out (dated the Dec. 6th issue) and it was set to blow the political career of Lyndon Baines Johnson out of the water ONCE AND FOR ALL. LIFE had been fed damaging material on Lyndon Johnson by Atty General Robert Kennedy. Even presuming all of the rest to be 100% accurate and valid, I'm a little confused why appointing the Warren Commission prevented LIFE from printing this exposé of Johnson, or thinking better of it. I don't "get it" how the two things have anything to do with each other. I can understand the thinking behind the idea that LBJ was going to be exposed and averted it by his assumption of the presidency (after all, this was back in the days of politesse, before Watergate and the hounding and constant investigations of the president), but if LIFE was planning on printing it anyway despite that, what about the appointment of the Commission superceded it? Even if it was "bigger news," how come it didn't get printed the following week? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted December 10, 2010 Share Posted December 10, 2010 (edited) For me the strongest piece of evidence that Oswald is innocent of being the Sixth Floor Sniper is the alleged encouter in the Second Floor lunchroom between Officer Marion Baker, Roy Truly and Oswald within a minute and a half after the last shot. http://educationforu...opic=15429&st=0 While the official story has Oswald hiding the rifle and descending the stairs and Baker seeing Oswald enter through the lunchroom's south door window, a more detailed analysis, as the Secret Service did when they tried to Re-enact the assassination, shows that Baker saw Oswald through a closed door. As Baker relates, he saw Oswald through the door window moving from the right to the left in the vestibule entering the lunchroom. Since the door had an automatic closing device, and if the door was open or ajar even a few inches, the rectangular window naturally gets smaller as seen from the position where Baker was by the stairs. If Oswald had gone through that door, the door would probably have still been open a little bit, and Oswald couldn't have been seen by Baker through the window. In addition, if Oswald had gone through that door, Roy Truly, who was ahead of Baker on the way up the stairs, most certainly would have seen Oswald and an open door, but he didn't. In addition, if Oswald had gone down those stairs from the Sixth floor to the Second floor, he would have had to encouter Jack Dougherty on the fifth floor by the stairs, and the two secretaries who descended from the fourth floor to the first floor, but they didn't encounter anyone. There is another south side door to the vestibule of the Second floor lunchroom, that leads to the same location, and it is this south door that Oswald had used to enter the vestibule so that he could be seen walking past the west door window, as Baker saw him. Since Baker and Truly encountered Oswald in the lunchroom less than a minute and a half after the last shot, Oswald couldn't have fired that shot, deposited the rifle and made it down the stairs past Dougherty, the two secretaries and Truly without any of them seeing him, and for Baker to see him in the vestibule through that west door window, he had to have entered it from the south door, coming from the offices, the rest room or the first floor steps, the same way he left a few minutes later. The Secret Service stoped their reenactment at that point, with the last photo of the reenactment photo sequence being the photos of the door as seen from Baker's position. They recognized the significance of this as well since they called Truly back for a second round of questioning but only asked him one question - did that door have an automatic closing device? Yes it did. And the door was closed when Baker saw Oswald walking in from the south door, not the west door, so he didn't come down those stairs and wasn't the Sixth Floor Sniper. Further support for this is provided by Ms. Mooneyham, the court clerk from across the street who saw a man in the Sixth Floor window four to five minutes after the last shot - and that person, who was apparently moving boxes around, was certainly not Oswald, and if he wasn't the sniper, had to have seen him and was most certainly an accomplice. I don't know who the Sixth Floor Sniper was, but if you believe Baker, Truly and Oswald and the circumstances they say they met, then it wasn't Oswald. I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, but it better be good. Well that's my two cents. BK http://jfkcountercou...-copa-2010.html Bill, This doesn't account for Baker's original first-day affidavit nor the statement that O.V. Campbell made to the press regarding seeing Oswald in a utility cupboard on the first floor shortly after Baker and Truly had entered the building. There was another reason for the change in Baker's affidavit that took the encounter from the 3rd or 4th floor down to the 2nd. I just don't know what it is. Baker states that the man he ran into was walking away from the stairs (no mention of doors, cokes and lunchrooms) was in his thirties and wearing a light brown jacket. Backed up by the witnesses outside the TSBD who saw a man in the window. If the Jack Revill TSBD list was made in the TSBD by speaking to employees and William Shelley then there is evidence that Oswald possibly gave the officers his name and address before leaving and was vouched for by somebody. Truly claims he vouched for Oswald to Baker but perhaps the vouching didn't take place on the 2nd floor. What if the vouching took place on the first floor around 12:45pm and it resulted in Oswald being let loose? Truly moving the encounter to the lunchroom served a purpose. As did Baker reinforcing it by changing his recollections. What was it? Lee I'm well aware that Baker's first report places the encounter on the fourth floor, but I also think, based on everything I can learn about him and his filmed interviews, that he appears to be a good cop that wouldn't lie to fit a cover story, and what I am using as evidence is the evidence used by the WC to frame Oswald - and all three - Baker, Truly and Oswald agree that the encounter occured in the lunchroom which is on the second floor by the coke machine. Now if you look at the youtube of Baker, he says that he saw Oswald "walking away" from him but he saw him through the window in the door. If Oswald had gone through that door, he wouldn't have seen him at all because the door would have been partially open and Oswald would have made the left and not have been visible through the window, and if Oswald had gone through that door, Truly would have surely seen him and didn't. Now you don't want to believe Baker, Truly or Oswald then there's nothing to believe. I believe Baker and I believe the encounter took place, and I believe the door was closed and Baker saw Oswald in the vestibule through the window moving from right to left into the lunchroom and Baker followed him there. Everybody has thresholds of belief, and what will change their minds, but to me this is the key that exonerates Oswald from being the Sixth Floor Sniper, and the quest to find someone else who did that shooting, someone who also had a reason for being in the building at the time, someone who either stayed behind and calmly moved boxes around (as seen by Ms. Mooneyham and confirmed by the Dillard/Powell photos), or somebody who was an acomplace to the shooter who did leave immediately, but still wasn't Oswald. In order to understand the reasoning behind all this you must read the first thread and the chapter in the book that I reference - Michael Roffman's Presumed Guilty, who first recognized this point. Howard Roffman. Thank you Todd. But you're taking Duke's job. How do you get around Roffman's work? Gary Mack says that Oswald just went down the steps quickly and just missed Dougherty and the two secretaries, like the Keystone Cops. Howard Roffman went on to become the personal secretary to a major motion picture director and to publish a photo book of gay couples. BK Bill. One thing is that Roffman made a mistake in his analysis of the Couch film. He says that Baker is not visible running to the TSBD when in fact he is. The result of his error was putting Baker into the TSBD too quickly. Dougherty's testimony is a mess. I suspect he was headed to or on the elevator going down when LHO passed the 5th floor landing. The two secretaries went down after LHO. Todd So how did Oswald go through that door and not be seen by Truly, ahead of Baker. And if Baker saw Oswald through the window, then the door must have been closed. And if Oswald was with Baker and Truly in the lunchroom, who did Ms. Mooneyham see in the Sixth Floor sniper's nest a minute later? How do you get past those three facts? BK Edited December 10, 2010 by William Kelly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Lane Posted December 11, 2010 Share Posted December 11, 2010 Thank you Todd. But you're taking Duke's job. How do you get around Roffman's work? Gary Mack says that Oswald just went down the steps quickly and just missed Dougherty and the two secretaries, like the Keystone Cops. Howard Roffman went on to become the personal secretary to a major motion picture director and to publish a photo book of gay couples. BK Bill.One thing is that Roffman made a mistake in his analysis of the Couch film. He says that Baker is not visible running to the TSBD when in fact he is. The result of his error was putting Baker into the TSBD too quickly. Dougherty's testimony is a mess. I suspect he was headed to or on the elevator going down when LHO passed the 5th floor landing. The two secretaries went down after LHO. Todd Blah, blah, blah. I'm not sure what my "job" is, but the one I'm going to take on is moving this conversation "offline" into another thread so David Williams' original request - "one piece per person please" - is honored and what he's looking for isn't hijacked by the sixteen different discussions going on. So, if y'all wanna follow me, the discussion continues in the thread "Key Evidence of Conspiracy? Escape from the 6th Floor & The Lunchroom Encounter." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duke Lane Posted December 11, 2010 Share Posted December 11, 2010 Bump. David, control of your thread is now returned to you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Williams Posted December 12, 2010 Author Share Posted December 12, 2010 Thanks Duke and everyone else. Some good points given by everyone. I am working on two different aspects of the assassination, Robert Oswald and possible military inteligence photographers, (including Powell and possibilly one other). It is very useful to know what people think is the best evidence in this very complex case and i thank you all for answering my question. Yes Lee im very well thank you, we will have to get together and have a chat, maybe over a bevvy mate. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now