Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

I was satisfied, at the time, and after that call, that John Hurt was an alcoholic and that this lead was worthless.

If time and funds permitted (and they don't) I would be glad to go to the boxes of audiotapes that I have stored, locate this tape, and have it digitized, so that everyone could listen to it.

DSL

11/16/12; 10:35 AM

Los Angeles, California

Don't waste your time or money, David. The SUPPOSED Raleigh call is just another piece of fiction.

As I recall, this all stems from a lady who claims that she retrieved a note from the garbage,

copied it in her own handwriting, and then threw away the original,

even though the original (if there was one) would be a historic document.

If I am remembering correctly, this lady stuck to her story

only until she was asked to affirm it under penalty of perjury.

As for Victor Marchetti, I don't think it would be prudent to consider him a reliable source.

To all:

Its hard for me to believe that someone is writing a newspaper article about this Hurt call and was unaware that I had spoken to this person over 40 years ago, had a reasonably lengthy telephone call with him, and had a recording of the call.

I made no secret of it (at the time).

Its too bad there were no PC's then, because any notes I made would have been scanned and easy to recover. As it is, my records of this incident are in a storage box--but I stand by my statement that the call established (at least to my satisfaction) that this particular lead went nowhere.

As far as I can see, this is nothing more than the 2012 "recycling" of a worthless lead, the research equivalent of a "bridge to nowhere."

One other thing: I notice that the news story (that started this thread) was written by one Randolph Benson. FWIW: My records indicate that Randolph Benson telephoned me in 2008. At the time (assuming he brought this up) I am sure that I told him about my call to Hurt decades ago. In that same call he also indicated that he had the BEST EVIDENCE VIDEO (which was released in 1989, and then again in 1991)--and which sold about 50,000 copies. He also said he knew all about my work (concerning the falsification of the JFK autopsy protocol) which was first published in 1981. If so, then he probably also knew that I was one of the original researchers profiled in the June, 1967 New Yorker, in an 8700 word article by Calvin Trillin entitled "The Buffs." The article provided portraits of Josiah Thompson, Sylvia Meagher, Vincent Salandria, Ray Marcus, and me. Possibly, Benson also knew that I was the co-author of "The Case For Three Assassins" a 30,000 word cover story published in the January , 1967 issue of RAMPARTS MAGAZINE. This article was a comprehensive and detailed essay--divided into two parts--that was organized as follows. Part 1 laid out in great detail the problems with the single bullet theory (clothing holes, trajectory, condition of the "magic bullet" etc.) Part 2 laid out the whole business of the JFK backward head-snap as seen on the Zapruder film, along with a discussion of the physics, written by UCLA physics professor James Riddle, plus a detailed listing of over 60 "grassy knoll" witnesses, with excerpts from their affidavits or WC testimony. If you were "new to the case," this is exactly the sort of comprehensive overview one would need to get "up to speed" on the case. But apparently, none of this made made any impression on Randolph Benson. Nor was he apparently impressed with the fact that I had a rather colorful 15 minute showdown with former CIA Director Allen Dulles at UCLA in December, 1965, which is described in detail in Chapter 2 of BEST EVIDENCE. I say it didn't make "any impression" because, looking at the link to his forthcoming film, I apparently didn't make the cut to be included as one of the "original" people he calls "the searchers."

Another thing that apparently didn't make an impression is that, for at least three semesters, I attended the UCLA law class taught by former WC Attorney Wesley Liebeler, who had served on the Warren Commission; and, further, in the fall of 1966, when I discovered the passage in the FBI Report of the autopsy that said that it was "apparent" that there had been "surgery of the head area, namely, in the top of the skull," Liebeler then thought the discovery was important enough to write a 13 page memorandum --focused on that--which went to every member of the Warren Commission, all former staff members, the Kennedy family, the White House, and the Justice Department. (Oh well, I guess I didn't make the grade. Apparently, I wasn't "searching" hard enough [LOL] )

All of this is really odd. Benson is writing a lengthy newspaper article about a lead revolving around someone I spoke to --and dismissed as someone as completely without credibility--some 40 years ago, but Benson apparently doesn't even know (or pretends not to know) that I had that conversation; furthermore, he ignores all the work I did in the period 1965-1967 that, ultimately, culminated with the publication of BEST EVIDENCE in January, 1981.

Oh well . . it takes all types. . c'est la vie.

DSL

11/18/12; 5:35 PM PST

Re-edited, 11/21/12, 1:30 PM PST

Los Angeles, California

Edited by David Lifton
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tom Scully

I showed Louise Swinney, a Xerox copy of the slip containing information on a phone call placed by Lee Harvey Oswald to John Hurt, Raleigh, N.C. on November 23, 1963 and bearing her signature. She stated that it was defintely[ sic. ] not her signature. She was upset that someone had signed her name. She stated that she never handled a call from Oswald to John Hurt. She stated that she only handled a call from Oswald to Lawyer Apt [ sic. ] and another one that she cannot remember, but it was not to John Hurt. Mrs. Swinney insisted on giving me samples of her handwriting and told me that she would have no reason to lie. She stated that only someone working in the switchboard room could have made that out and Alveeeta Treon [ sic. ] was the only other person working that night. Signature: Harold A. Rose

http://www.groverpro...winney-OCR.html

Did Alveeta Treon originally claim the slip was the original?

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=16450&st=825&gopid=262893entry262893

Link to post
Share on other sites

I showed Louise Swinney, a Xerox copy of the slip containing information on a phone call placed by Lee Harvey Oswald to John Hurt, Raleigh, N.C. on November 23, 1963 and bearing her signature. She stated that it was defintely[ sic. ] not her signature. She was upset that someone had signed her name. She stated that she never handled a call from Oswald to John Hurt. She stated that she only handled a call from Oswald to Lawyer Apt [ sic. ] and another one that she cannot remember, but it was not to John Hurt. Mrs. Swinney insisted on giving me samples of her handwriting and told me that she would have no reason to lie. She stated that only someone working in the switchboard room could have made that out and Alveeeta Treon [ sic. ] was the only other person working that night. Signature: Harold A. Rose

http://www.groverpro...winney-OCR.html

Did Alveeta Treon originally claim the slip was the original?

It sure looks that way.

That might explain her need to retain a lawyer;

Forgery is a crime.

Based on Harold Rose's HSCA interview with Louise Swinney

there can be no doubt that Treon either invented the entire incident herself

or was persuaded to tout the phoney story by someone

who was bent on making mischief.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tom Scully

Did Alveeta Treon originally claim the slip was the original?

It sure looks that way.

That might explain her need to retain a lawyer;

Forgery is a crime.

Based on Harold Rose's HSCA interview with Louise Swinney

there can be no doubt that Treon either invented the entire incident herself

or was persuaded to tout the phoney story by someone

who was bent on making mischief.

Your resorting to posting about a crime of forgery indicates you are divorced from the documented details. Did Sharon Kovac tell lies, Ray?

....As she listened, Mrs. Treon wrote the information on a telephone call slip used by the Dallas City Hall operators. She said she signed Mrs. Swinney's name to the slip since Mrs. Swinney had actually handled the call; she then kept the slip as a souvenir. Mrs. Treon's daughter Sharon was present at the time in the switchboard room and had earlier asked her mother to get a souvenir of Oswald's call. The daughter, Sharon Kovac, also worked in the City Hall and had the habit of visiting her mother at the switchboard to sit and talk

.

Did Mrs. Treon state that Mrs. Swinney had signed the "souvenir" slip? Were Surrell Brady and Grover Proctor in agreement with your conclusion? Did Mrs. Swinney's examination of the signature on the slip produced by Treon and Kovacs have any relevance?

The facts support that the answers to all these questions is no.

Edited by Tom Scully
Link to post
Share on other sites

Did Mrs. Treon state that Mrs. Swinney had signed the "souvenir" slip? Were Surrell Brady and Grover Proctor in agreement with your conclusion? Did Mrs. Swinney's examination of the signature on the slip produced by Treon and Kovacs have any relevance?

The facts support that the answers to all these questions is no.

It would be instructive to see what she said before the Rose report, after Treon said she made the slip as a souvenir but what had she said before? The addition of a fake signature indicates an intent to create a forgery. This coupled with Mrs. Swinney's denial of Treon's story undermine the latter's credibility.

Edited by Len Colby
Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be instructive to see what she said before the Rose report

It SEEMS that, as of August 1977, HSCA investigators believed that the phoney call slip

was an "official" document, which I take to mean that they believed the call slip was an authentic document

signed by Swinney.

http://www.groverpro...04-Kostman.html

In defense of Ms Treon, it is not clear from the info on Grover Proctor's site that she deliberately

led the HSCA to believe that the call slip was genuine.

However, it does appear that Treon's story changed over time:

According to a 1970 memo by Paul Hoch:

Treon witnessed Mrs. Swinney handle a call purportedly by Oswald. She claims she took Mrs. Swinney's scrap of paper from the trash and recorded it on what is now known as the Hurt slip.

http://www.groverpro...jfk-hoch70.html

Paul Hoch was apparently relying on the original draft affidavit,.At the time of the CORRECTED

BUT UNSIGNED AFFIDAVIT Treon was backing away from he trash can story:

[ A few moments later, Mrs. Swinney tore the page off her notation pad and threw it in the waste paper basket. ] I did not say this. I do not know what Mrs. Swinney did with her L.D. ticket I think the time of the Oswald call would be about 10:45 p.m. and Mrs. Swinney left at around 11:00 p.m. or just after.

[ When she walked out of the room, I got up from my position, walked to the waste paper basket and took the piece of paper out. It was just an unofficial piece of paper from a pad with [ approximately 10 words illegible here; new sentence begun ] long distance call, an operator will scribble out details and only if the call is completed will she transfer this to an official ticket.

I immediately noted all the details made by Mrs. Swinney and made out a long distance call ticket. I threw this scrap of paper back into the waste paper basket. At the time I didn't even think about keeping it. All I wanted was a souvenir. ] I did not say all this. I was asked if I knew what Mrs. Swinney did with her ticket. I said I had no idea, that tickets on L.D. calls not completed were not normally kept but I did not know what she did with it. I heard Oswald place the call -- give his name etc. as I was [ last line of Mrs. Treon's note cropped off National Archives copy ]

http://www.groverpro...-affidavit.html

and, as of November 1978, Treon had thrown the trash can story completely in the trash can and replaced it with this:

Mrs. Treon said that it has concerned her from conversations with Committee investigaor Harold Rose that we might not have completely correct information.

She sais the sequence at the switchboard was that when Oswald came on, both she and Louise Swinney got on the line to take the call. She said, however, it was clear that Mrs. Swinney intended to handle it, as though she had instructions, so Mrs. Treon let her handle it, but Mrs. Treon stayed on the line.

She said she was therefore able to hear everything Oswald said and she is sure he asked for the name John Hurt and gave the two numbers. She sais that as she listened she wrote the information down on a regular telephone call slip. However, since Mrs. Swinney actually handled the call, Mrs. Treon signed her name to the slip she intended to keep as a souvenir.

http://www.groverpro...-Treon-OCR.html

Mrs. Swinney's denial of Treon's story undermine the latter's credibility.

That is putting it mildly,

to put it mildly!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Mark Knight for the kind words. Yes I have worked on this "John Hurt" subject for many years. I was informed of the ABC News film with Bill Lord by Gary Mack while at the 6th Floor Museum. I have written several pieces in the past on the Raliegh Call so I will not spend a great deal of time or effort repeating or retrieving that information.

For myself I believe that the call was made to a cut out and was not intended to go to any person named John Hurt. I do believe the name John Hurt, was the message and that it signed Oswald's death warrent when he himself made the call. If true very few people would have known the ramifications that would be carried by that name being used by Lee Harvey Oswald. That this story did not make it into the WC Report is, in my opinion, telling. But.....

I first became aware of a person named John Hurt, who was involved in US Intelligence, while researching Maj. Gen. Edwin Walker. The reference was obscure but Walker and Hurt were assigned to the same place at the same time in the 1930's. John B. Hurt was an original member of William Friedman's team of cryptologist. This TEAM became the NSA after World War II. Hurt's work after WWII has remained classified to this day. Of the seven original members of Friedman's team, Hurt is the only one whose work remains classified. During WWII Hurt's work went directly to John J. McCloy and led to McCloy's discussion with President Truman about the droping of the first atomic bomb and that the US could negotiate a peace without droping the bomb. Prior to WWII Hurt worked with Frank Rowlet (also one of the oringinal members of Friedman't team) and during WWII he worked with Meridith Gardner. These two men, Gardner and Rowlet, would be involved in the Venona Project. It was a Hurt translated intercept that led to Operation Stella Polaris (the start of the Venona Project). They also would be the two men who investigated Oswald's intelligence connections for the Warren Commission. Stella Polaris involves many of the major players in the Kennedy assassination saga....including Richard Helms.

If for no other reasons than the few listed above, and there are so many more, I find it strange that the name John Hurt would become a part of the Kennedy Assassination story.

Jim Root

Edited by Jim Root
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...