Clearing up some areas

[Greg Parker]

BLACK RIVER CROSSING FROM MEXICO TO BROWNSVILLE ?? Mr. Parker,Is there a map for this area ? thanks sg

Can't help you, Steve. It was Robert who posted that. A quick google came up with Arizona for "Black River Crossing" so I don't think that's it.

[Duke Lane]

Greg, you're not following my point. Or maybe I'm not explaining it well.

The story was about a "porter," which because of Meagher's reference to Givens as a "porter," you thought was the same as an "order-filler," which Piper clearly was not. Thus, in your interpretation, the story was about an "order-filler" who took Oswald up and then went to the first floor to watch the parade. Despite the fact that Piper was not an order-filler, you seem to have "made" him one because, as you say, he was the "only one" who "watched the parade" from the first floor.

The point is that you thought an order-filler was a "porter," and drew initial conclusions based not on its definition as a "janitor," but on the assumption that the article referred to an order-filler such as Givens. Your erroneous understanding should have led you to eliminate Piper from consideration since he was not an order-filler.

Pat pointed out a more "generic" use of the term "porter," essentially applied to any black man performing unskilled, menial, and often non-physical labor, such as operating elevators, parking cars and sweeping floors. The reporter might have used the term simply because he didn't know what his subject actually did, and made the assumption - easy enough in Dallas in 1963 - that whomever he spoke with fit that bill.

If Meagher could've erroneously called Givens a "porter," why couldn't a reporter have done so as well?

So along come people asking, perhaps erroneously, about a "porter," which various people respond to, saying that they know of no such person. And then Truly, who uses the term just like Eddie Piper did, uses a synonym to describe his only "janitor," you take this to be confirmation that the "porter" referred to in the first story is in fact the "janitor" that Truly was talking about.

Thus, if Truly's "janitor" did a particular thing (or not) described in an article about a "porter" (or not), then the original story "must" have been about Piper, the only "janitor" in the building who once described himself as a "porter," which in your mind was an "order-filler" a la Meagher's description of Givens.

If Meagher, who was intimately familiar with the case, could identify Givens as a "porter," what about a reporter doing the same thing is so impossible so shortly after the crime, when nobody was intimately familiar with it?

Perhaps it's that our constant and belabored scrutiny of everything everyone said and did causes us to dissect and parse everything more closely than it needs be. Where it's reported that the "porter" went "down to the first floor to watch the parade," we presume that if he didn't also specify that "he went outside" that he therefore couldn't have and didn't.

Consider this exchange that could've taken place with Charles Givens:

Q: So then what did you do then?

A: Went back downstairs to the first floor.

Q: Did you watch the parade?

A: Yeah.

It is accurate insofar as the questions asked and answers given; it is obviously incomplete, but would the reporter, not having asked questions that he might not have thought entirely pertinent or germane at the time, be correct in saying that Givens "went down to the first floor to watch the parade?" My bet is that any editor would say he was.

The trouble is that some of us expect reporters to have cross-examined witnesses and gotten every detail, and to have printed each and ever fact courtroom-accurately and in complete context, and if Givens in the exchange above didn't mention having gone to the parking lot and Main Street, then he couldn't have done that.

Consider that the reporter got it wrong, inaccurate and incomplete at best, and remember that the reporting is not verbatim of a statement given under oath with all the right questions asked. It is at least as likely if not more so that this story is about Charles Givens as about the only actual porter TSBD had, Eddie Piper.

You say "The confusion between Piper and Givens was deliberately created to hide one very salient fact: Piper was a close-up eye-witness," but the real "confusion" seems to be about what a "porter" is and does, and whether the reporter was talking to someone whom Oswald asked to "send the elevator back up for him," or someone who "went to the ground floor to watch the parade," who in your mind can only be "the only person to claim he watched the motorcade from the first floor," Eddie Piper.

Troy West claimed not to have known that the President had been shot. He was "alone at the time" and "walking toward the front of the building" when he was told of the shooting by someone he couldn't recall. Could Troy West, by lack of specificity, not have been elsewhere, where he shouldn't have been?

TFIC, consider that he made coffee every day when he came in at 8:00 and and "always" at 12:00 he made another pot, which he did on November 22 as well. Oddly, he stated in his testimony:

Well, I had just, after I made coffee, I just had started to eat my lunch because I was a little hungry---I didn't eat anything that morning before I went to work---and I had started to eat my lunch. But before I got through, well, all of this was, I mean, the police and things was coming in, and I was just spellbound. I just didn't know what was the matter. So I didn't get through eating. I had to eat about half my lunch, and that is all. (6H361)

You don't think it's a little odd that a man can "make coffee" at 12:00 and only got "about half" of his lunch eaten in the half-hour before the cops came swarming in? Yet you say he "couldn't" have been the "elderly Negro" on six because he didn't say that he'd watched the parade from the first floor? Well, Jeez Louise, talk about "alibis" that are "wafer thin:" Troy West didn't even offer one!

And, while sitting "spellbound" eating his lunch, whatever became of his "walking toward the front of the building" as he'd told the FBI in March?

You want to say that Eddie Piper "fit the description" of the "elderly Negro" seen by Arnold Rowland, yet you offer no proof that he wore a shirt similar to that described by Rowland beyond that "beige is on the red scale" so Piper can become yet someone else seen running outside later. "On the red scale" or not, do you know anyone who's ever mistaken a red shirt for beige or vice-versa? One who's not color-blind, that is?

You cite no corroboration of this "description" of any sort by Amos Euins, who also saw a black man in the upper window. One might reasonably presume that it was the same black man. Nor do you relate Rowland's sighting to what Bonnie Ray Williams was wearing, or consider - for that matter - that Rowland didn't remember it quite the color it actually was: remember, he had no particular reason to pay close attention to it since he didn't think there was anything "pecuilar" about someone being there, that they were "Secret Service."

And yes, I've read your articles. Bugliosi and Posner and Myers couldn't convince me that Oswald did it, and you haven't convinced me Piper even might have had anything to do with it.

As for Bonnie Ray Williams, I've tackled that question in depth elsewhere, but succinctly, his being on the sixth floor near to the shooting is based on the statements of Norman, Jarman and Truly that had the two black men going upstairs after the motorcade was on Main Street and BRW joining them at the window after they'd walked from the front of the building, ridden upstairs and walked across the floor only a short while before JFK arrived. I didn't rely at all upon what time any of them thought or guessed it was. BRW was "clearly" there.

It's all well and good to hypothesize that supposed "Secret Service" men or other outsiders co-opted Piper into performing a simple task for them - operating an elevator and getting them five stories up - but doing so flies in the face of anything plausible. We would have to imagine some chaotic enterprise whereby plotters had meticulously assembled a plethora of evidence against a patsy that nobody has pierced fully nearly 50 years later being so inept that they didn't know the layout of the building they'd be shooting POTUS from or how to operate the complicated machinery to get them to their lair.

Instead of getting in quickly without - hopefully - being seen, they instead conscript someone and not only reveal themselves to him, but also allow him to hang around with them while they make whatever preparations were necessary prior to the motorcade's arrival ... and then, inexplicably, they let him go back downstairs, hoping all the while (I'm sure) that he doesn't say anything to anyone or worse, raise an alarm before they can execute their plan.

Ultimately, that might not differ essentially from the scenario I've hypothesized with regard to the "three blind mice" on the fifth floor, except that in my scenario the shooter(s) didn't invite the men into witnessing their plan, but rather played with a hand they were unexpectedly dealt. Nor did they allow them to just "walk away" before or after their purposes were plain. Nor, for that matter, is mine dependent upon a flimsy description made months later with no corroboration that the "suspect" employee was anywhere near where I claim him to be.

More to the point, I don't suggest that anyone else - several other people - altered or adapted their statements to "cover for" any of these men, which necessitates giving them a reason to want to change their stories to obfuscate yours. How could - and why would - anybody make such wholesale changes without knowing what really happened and what was at stake if anyone found out?

One would think that Piper - if he'd been anywhere near "the action" - would've taken his secret to his grave and never taken the chance of anyone else being affected by what had happened to him by breathing even a hint about it. This alone undermines the whole hypothesis.

(EDIT: What gives up your position is what you wrote on the "reopen" site: "To de-construct the newspaper account, we must first ask who claimed to watch the motorcade alone on the first floor? The answer to that is Eddie Piper." You start from a particular vantage point - conclusion, if you prefer - and proceed from there. Is that really the first question that needs to be asked? Only if you want to arrive at a certain place.)

Edited August 23, 2011 by Duke Lane

[Duke Lane]

... I could well imagine Piper at his age, being bent over with the physical exertion. It now seems likely he ran straight past the wrapping table and out that side loading dock.

Oh, puh-LEEZE, Greg!

Eddie Piper was 55. You're 53. Are YOU anywhere close to describing yourself that way?!? Are YOU "elderly?"

I didn't think so.

[Duke Lane]

Greg, I wonder if you see the contradiction in these two statements you've made regarding "proof" of Piper's movements?

Victoria Adams, who within a minute of the last shot ringing out, ran from a window on the south side of the fourth floor down the rear stairs to the first floor, saw no one there but Shelley and Lovelady.

(ReopenKennedyCase

website

, "

Was Eddie Piper on the Sixth Floor?

")

and

He [Piper] also claimed that during the fusillade, he ran over to the packing table where a clock was located to see what time it was. In his first two statements, he said the time had been 12:25 - which just happened to be the AMENDED time the motorcade was supposed to pass. It was however, delayed a further 5 minutes. Was this clock just 5 minutes slow, or was Piper devising his alibi for what he thought was the time of the hit? I believe it was the latter, as

Bill Shelley testified Piper was running to the wrapping table at the time he (Shelley) came back inside. This was well past the time of the last shot

. (

Post #1

to this thread; emphasis added)

If the first is true, the second is false, and vice-versa.

Edited August 23, 2011 by Duke Lane

[Duke Lane]

Regarding Troy West, the "Reopen" article:

One way to test [Piper's] alibi is to look for corroboration. When we do that, we find: He did not see anyone else who had remained inside on the first floor - even though, according to his testimony, he moved from his spot at the window to the same location as West. Likewise, West did not see anyone else.

That statement is true, insofar as it goes. West's testimony on this subject reads in part as follows:

Mr. BELIN

. At any time while you were making coffee or eating your lunch, did you see anyone else on the first floor?

Mr. WEST

. No, sir; I didn't see.

Mr. BELIN

. Who was the first person you saw on the first floor after you--- while you were eating your lunch? Someone came in the building?

Mr. WEST

. Yes; before I got through. The officers and things were coming in the front door.

According to this portion of the testimony, Troy West saw nobody on the first floor until "the officers and things" came in the door. How reliable is that testimony? Let's see what else he had to say:

Mr. BELIN

. Who was the first person or persons that you saw coming through there while you were eating your lunch?

Mr. WEST

. Well, that was police.

Mr. BELIN

. A police officer?

Mr. WEST

. Yes, sir.

Mr. BELIN

. Anyone else?

Mr. WEST

. I guess it was a bunch of them, I guess, FBI men, and just a crowd of them coming in there.

Mr. BELIN

. Did you see Roy Truly coming in at all that time? Do you know Mr. Truly?

Mr. WEST

. Yes, sir; that is the boss, the superintendent.

Mr. BELIN

. Did you ever see him, do you remember, while you were eating your lunch, come in the building?

Mr. WEST

. Yes, sir; I think he came in with the police.

Mr. BELIN

. Was he one of the first people in, or did other people come ahead of him, if you remember?

Mr. WEST

. Really, I just don't know

.

Mr. BELIN

. That is okay if you don't remember. That is all I want you to say if you don't remember.

Did you hear anyone yelling to let the elevator loose or anything like eat?

Mr. WEST

. I can't remember.

Mr. BELIN

. Were you working when you were eating your lunch? Were you facing the elevator or not when you were eating your lunch? Were you facing any of the elevators back there?

Mr. WEST

. No, sir; I was always--I mean I would always be with my back kind of, you know, towards the elevators and facing the front side over on the side.

Mr. BELIN

. The Elm Street side?

Mr. WEST

. Toward Elm Street side.

Mr. BELIN

. So you don't know whether anyone was using the elevators?

Mr. WEST

. No, sir; I don't.

Mr. BELIN

. Do you know whether anyone was going up and down the stairs?

Mr. WEST

. No, sir; I don't.

Mr. BELIN

. Do you know anything else about what happened on November 22, that might be helpful or relevant here?

Mr. WEST

. No, sir; I don't really.

So here we have Troy West, mail wrapper extraordinaire who never left his wrapping desk all day long except to get water for coffee at 8:00 and 12:00 and, one presumes, to attend to the normal functions of the life of an habitual coffee drinker, who takes more than 30 minutes to eat his lunch while facing toward the front of the building. He becomes "spellbound" when police come in - "a bunch of them ... just a crowd of them coming in there," among whom, he thought, was the man responsible for West's weekly pay, Roy Truly. West couldn't remember, however, if Truly was "one of the first people in," or if "other people come ahead of him:" "really, I just don't know," he said.

He didn't know if anyone went to the elevators. He didn't hear Truly yell upstairs to "let loose the elevator," or if anyone was actually using the elevators, or going up or down the stairs, or "anything else that might be helpful or relevent." Zip, zero, and zilch.

And based on this testimony, we are to deduce that Eddie Piper wasn't where he said he was because Troy West didn't say he saw "anybody," much less single Piper out from among the crowd that he barely recalled his boss being in.

Despite being "spellbound" and presumably watching the activities of the "officers" - a "bunch" of them, "just a crowd" of them - who came in the building, Troy West saw nothing or nobody, heard nothing or nobody, noticed nothing or nobody except a "bunch" or "crowd" of cops who weren't there.

And that testimony is used to indict Eddie Piper's story?!?

Also worth noting, from the "Reopen" article:

Piper was seen moving towards West's mail desk by Bill Shelley at a time later than that which Piper had indicated - meaning he (Piper) could have been anywhere in the building beforehand.

... possibly the most damaging testimony to [Piper's] alibi came from Bill Shelley. Leaving aside his ludicrous timeline for WC consumption, he was back in the building as per his initial statement not long after Truly and Baker entered. His testimony on seeing Piper at that point is enlightening:

Mr. BALL

. When you came into the shipping room did you see anybody?

Mr. SHELLEY

. I saw Eddie Piper.

Mr. BALL

. What was he doing?

Mr. SHELLEY

. He was coming back from where he was watching the motorcade in the southwest corner of the shipping room.

Mr. BALL

. Of the first floor of the building?

Mr. SHELLEY

. Yes.

So there it is. Piper did not watch the motorcade from a first floor window and move to West's mail desk at the sound of the second shot. He was seen "coming back" from that presumed viewing position

after

the last shot, and indeed,

after

the entry of Truly and Baker – leaving open the possibility he had not been at a first floor window at all. He could have been "coming back" from virtually any place in the building.

As we've seen above, there is some conflict not only in testimony, but in this article as well, about when Shelley (actually entered the building after the shooting. In one case, we have him being one of two people (the other being Billy Lovelady) seen already on the first floor by Sandra Stiles when she arrived on the first floor "within a minute of the last shot ringing out," while in another he didn't come back inside until "well past the time of the last shot." Here, we have him coming inside "not long after Truly and Baker entered" the building.

These are at least two and possibly three different times that Shelley entered the building. When it was "well past the time of the last shot," that time was used to show how Piper could have been anywhere and coming from anywhere; when Sandra Stiles didn't see him "within a minute of the last shot ringing out," it was used to show that Piper wasn't anywhere near where he said he was. Then, when Shelley's statement includes seeing Piper "not long after Truly and Baker entered" the building, with Piper "coming back from where he was watching the motorcade in the southwest corner of the shipping room," it "leaves open the possibility that he had not been at a first floor window at all," but "could have been 'coming back' from virtually any place in the building."

The emphasis throughout is on the supposed inaccuracy of Piper's statement, without noting or apparently paying any attention to the inaccuracies and inconsistencies regarding Shelley's actions and timeline, or the inconsistencies and conflicts in these citations.

What is important -- indeed, the only thing that needs to be resolved -- is how these inaccuracies and inconsistencies and conflicts can indict what Eddie Piper had to say. There is no question about whether any of them are incorrect, whether simply the result of bad recollections over a four- to five-month period, failure to accurately recall their exact movements, or if any of them may have simply been imagined or misstated by those making the observations.

Shelley, within seconds after the shooting, saw Piper going from the front to the rear of the building, "from ... the southwest corner of the shipping room." There is no question about how Shelley knew where Piper was presumably coming from, or if he'd mis-stated "southwest" when he might have meant "southeast," or anything.

And while, according to Shelley, Piper was going from south(west) to north on the first floor, there is no consideration that there were few places Piper could have been "coming from" from the southern (or particularly the southwestern) end of the first floor since there were no stairs, doors or elevators in that area, we learn that in (some version of) reality, Piper "could have been 'coming back' from virtually any place in the building" without limitation to any of those "virtually any" places that could have deposited him in the south(west) end of the building in order to be "coming from" there.

The fact is that, prior to coming in the door, Shelley could not have seen where Piper was, but could only have formed an impression of where he was coming "from," so his statement isn't fully probative, but is certainly indicative: Piper was at least moving from near where he said he was, toward where he said he went. And he had "under a minute" to get to his supposed starting point ... and there's no indication that anyone saw him doing that either.

[Greg Parker]

edit

Edited October 25, 2012 by Greg Parker

[Greg Parker]

edit

Edited October 25, 2012 by Greg Parker

[Greg Parker]

edit

Edited October 25, 2012 by Greg Parker

[J. Raymond Carroll]

possibly the most damaging testimony to [Piper's] alibi came from Bill Shelley. Leaving aside his ludicrous timeline for WC consumption, he was back in the building as per his initial statement not long after Truly and Baker entered. His testimony on seeing Piper at that point is enlightening:

Duke: Iv you have easy access to a link to Shelley's initial statement, I would be most obliged iv you could post it. (I am using v as my keyboard has lost the use ov the letter I use vor the beginning ov all my vour-letter curses.)

[Todd W. Vaughan]

"and now we know of a witness to a Black man running away across the knoll whose actions were so at odds with all others, it caused SA Landis to remember him and include the sighting in his report. "

Do you have any more on this from anyone/where else?

So here we have Troy West, mail wrapper extraordinaire who never left his wrapping desk all day long except to get water for coffee at 8:00 and 12:00 and, one presumes, to attend to the normal functions of the life of an habitual coffee drinker, who takes more than 30 minutes to eat his lunch while facing toward the front of the building. He becomes "spellbound" when police come in - "a bunch of them ... just a crowd of them coming in there," among whom, he thought, was the man responsible for West's weekly pay, Roy Truly. West couldn't remember, however, if Truly was "one of the first people in," or if "other people come ahead of him:" "really, I just don't know," he said.

He didn't know if anyone went to the elevators. He didn't hear Truly yell upstairs to "let loose the elevator," or if anyone was actually using the elevators, or going up or down the stairs, or "anything else that might be helpful or relevent." Zip, zero, and zilch.

And based on this testimony, we are to deduce that Eddie Piper wasn't where he said he was because Troy West didn't say he saw "anybody," much less single Piper out from among the crowd that he barely recalled his boss being in.

Despite being "spellbound" and presumably watching the activities of the "officers" - a "bunch" of them, "just a crowd" of them - who came in the building, Troy West saw nothing or nobody, heard nothing or nobody, noticed nothing or nobody except a "bunch" or "crowd" of cops who weren't there.

And that testimony is used to indict Eddie Piper's story?!?

Truly told the FBI he never saw anyone when he entered.

West stated he never saw anyone.

West also explained why he didn't know if anyone went to the elevators.He had his back to them.

Piper claimed on Nov 23 that the shots sounded like they came from inside the building.

West was unaware of any shots.

Piper's testimony on seeing Truly and Tonto was so bad he had be recalled.

As for Truly calling up for the elevators... at least one early account has them going straight to the stairs.

As for what can be deduced from Wests testimony regarding Piper... it is just one piece of evidence.

There is his entirely suspect attempt to timestamp.

There is Truly not seeing him, while Shelley does soon after - though too late for Piper's account to be true.

There is Piper's statement that he saw the motorcade coming, contradicted by later statements that he couldn't see anything for the crowd - which wasn't true either - it would have been impossible to see anything from that window.

There is Rowland's description of a man up on 6 who matches Piper's description.

There is the Waldo story which fits with Rowland's testimony and has the witnesses running out of the building in terror - and now we know of a witness to a Black man running away across the knoll whose actions were so at odds with all others, it caused SA Landis to remember him and include the sighting in his report.

[David Lifton]

"and now we know of a witness to a Black man running away across the knoll whose actions were so at odds with all others, it caused SA Landis to remember him and include the sighting in his report. "

Do you have any more on this from anyone/where else?

Todd,

As you probably are aware, the "black man running away across the knoll" is very likely Marvin Chism, running west, with a child in his arms. There's a well known photograph showing that, but I don't recall the name of it. (FYI: I interviewed Chism in November, 1971). Both he and his wife should have been deposed by the WC--and the picture of him running across the knoll would have been admitted as evidence at that time. (The same goes for the Newmans, Mary Moorman, Brehm, etc. The failure to call these important witnesses was inexcusable).

DSL

[Greg Parker]

edit

Edited October 25, 2012 by Greg Parker

[Greg Parker]

edit

Edited October 25, 2012 by Greg Parker

[Chris Davidson]

Greg,

Landis' complete statement for this point in time.

"My immediate thought was that the President could not possibly be alive after being hit like he was. I still was not certain from which direction the second shot came, but my reaction at this time was that the shot came from somewhere towards the front, right-hand side of the road.

I did not notice anyone on the overpass, and I scanned the area to the right of and below the overpass where the terrain sloped towards the road on which we were traveling. The only person I recall seeing clearly was a Negro male in light green slacks and a beige colored shirt running from my left to right, up the slope, across a grassy section, along a sidewalk, towards some steps and what appeared to be a low stone wall. He was bent over while running and I started to point towards him, but I didn't notice anything in his hands and by this time we were going under the overpass at a very high rate of speed. I was looking back and saw a motorcycle policeman stopping along the curb approximately adjacent to where I saw the Negro running."

I'm pretty sure the only person Landis could be describing is: http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r25/123steamn/Moorman-2.gif

according to the extant films that are available.

chris

[David Lifton]

Greg,

Landis' complete statement for this point in time.

"My immediate thought was that the President could not possibly be alive after being hit like he was. I still was not certain from which direction the second shot came, but my reaction at this time was that the shot came from somewhere towards the front, right-hand side of the road.

I did not notice anyone on the overpass, and I scanned the area to the right of and below the overpass where the terrain sloped towards the road on which we were traveling. The only person I recall seeing clearly was a Negro male in light green slacks and a beige colored shirt running from my left to right, up the slope, across a grassy section, along a sidewalk, towards some steps and what appeared to be a low stone wall. He was bent over while running and I started to point towards him, but I didn't notice anything in his hands and by this time we were going under the overpass at a very high rate of speed. I was looking back and saw a motorcycle policeman stopping along the curb approximately adjacent to where I saw the Negro running."

I'm pretty sure the only person Landis could be describing is: http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r25/123steamn/Moorman-2.gif

according to the extant films that are available.

chris

Chris. . . I think you are correct.

If we go by the extant films, and carefully consider the matter of timing, what you're proposing makes sense.

Its always been pretty amazing to me that so many critical witnesses were not located and interviewed.

Remember what Hudson said (in his testimony). . that one of the men standing with him on the stairs said, "Lay down, Mister, Somebody is shooting the president...He says 'Lay down,lay down,' and he kept on repeating, 'Lay down'. . . so I just laid down, over on the ground. . . " (7 WCH 560) So its either that man whose the subject of your GIF (obviously not anyone from the TSBD), or the other fellow standing behind Hudson. But I agree, that is more likely the person that Landis saw.

DSL

Edited August 25, 2011 by David Lifton