Oswald Leaving TSBD?

[Robin Unger]

HSCA

James Richard Worrell, what's his story. ?

 

 

 

[Andrej Stancak]

2 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Right, Bill.  There's no motivation for so many TSBD to lie to protect LHO, by agreeing unanimously that LHO was nowhere to be seen near the TSBD front steps or first floor.

The only reason to accuse them all of lying seems to be to protect Captain Will Fritz (and his pals) who testified that LHO claimed that he was out front with Bill Shelley.

The more likely scenario is that Captain Will Fritz lied in order to fully portray LHO as a big fat l-i-a-r.  Yet in doing this, Fritz also gave ammunition to those who maintain not only the innocence of LHO in the JFK shooting (which I also maintain), but also that LHO was an honest and innocent choir boy (which I deny).

It is impossible that LHO was outside the TSBD standing next to Bill Shelley and Roy Truly, but they didn't see him.  Impossible.

Although it's not impossible that LHO himself lied about it, it is more likely that Captain Will Fritz was inventing a story to anger Bill Shelley, to get Bill Shelley to attack LHO more forcefully.  I say this because the rest of the testimony by Captain Will Fritz is carefully packaged, submitted after weeks of delay, and perfectly matches the testimony given by Dallas FBI agents James Hosty, James Bookhout, Dallas SS agent Forrest Sorrels, as well as Dallas Postmaster Harry Holmes -- who also added a full detail of LHO's Mexico City trip for good measure.  It was calculated.

LHO was nowhere to be seen near the TSBD front steps or first floor.  LHO was not Prayer Man.  The search for LHO in photographs and film of the front steps of the TSBD is unlikely to bear fruit.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul:

would the following points change your opinions? 1. Prayer Man was a Caucasian, white male. 2. He was dressed as a worker, with shirt sleeves rolled up to just below the elbow joints. 3. Prayer Man came from inside the building just before Wiegman started filming. 4. Prayer Man had a specific stance often displayed by Lee Harvey Oswald. 5. Prayer Man was a man sized 5'9'' which is the body height of Lee Harvey Oswald. 6. Prayer Man was standing in the doorway only for 45-120 s during a period filled with the most dramatic events whilst people at Dealey Plaza were gazing towards Triple Underpass or Grassy Knoll; thus, Prayer Man came in and went away unnoticed by all the people standing on steps below him. 7. Lee Harvey Oswald was not identified by any witness to be at some other location during the period overlapping with Wiegman's and Darnell's films.

There is simply no one else than Lee Harvey Oswald who would match all these points. It cannot be just "anybody". If you take a standpoint that Prayer Man was someone else than Oswald, it is your turn to suggest who he was. You can start with Revill's list of Depository employees, and tick off females, Afro-American males, those who abstained from work on the day, and those whose locations are verifiable and different to Prayer Man's location. Who will remain? 

Witnesses who had to see and would be able to identify Prayer Man were not called to testify for the Warren Commission (Mrs. Sanders, Mrs. Stanton), or were vulnerable (Frazier, Lovelady, Molina), or maybe even participated in framing Oswald (Shelley). Those who might for some reason remember Prayer Man as a salient person in the doorway and could later associate Prayer Man with Oswald, these people would soon question their own memories once they had listened to TV news ("the case is cinched" etc.), and would not come forwards. Witnesses reporting events and facts deviating from the official version were ignored, threatened, harassed, or their testimonies were falsified. 

We do not know all information about Prayer Man yet which would be necessary to make a qualified and authoritative decision about whether Prayer Man was Oswald or someone else. While a number of forum members continue to work on the points listed above and refrain from posting unless they know the answers, you already know that Prayer Man could not be Oswald.

Please do not expect further comments from me, I stand on my decision to withdraw from posting on Prayer Man issues unless my research is finished. You can either start your own research on Prayer Man and also withdraw from posting until you have novel data, or you can continue posting your conclusions which are only based on your subjective beliefs about what was possible and what was not. It will be interesting to know what path you choose.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Andrej Stancak said:

Paul:

would the following points change your opinions? 1. Prayer Man was a Caucasian, white male. 2. He was dressed as a worker, with shirt sleeves rolled up to just below the elbow joints. 3. Prayer Man came from inside the building just before Wiegman started filming. 4. Prayer Man had a specific stance often displayed by Lee Harvey Oswald. 5. Prayer Man was a man sized 5'9'' which is the body height of Lee Harvey Oswald. 6. Prayer Man was standing in the doorway only for 45-120 s during a period filled with the most dramatic events whilst people at Dealey Plaza were gazing towards Triple Underpass or Grassy Knoll; thus, Prayer Man came in and went away unnoticed by all the people standing on steps below him. 7. Lee Harvey Oswald was not identified by any witness to be at some other location during the period overlapping with Wiegman's and Darnell's films.

There is simply no one else than Lee Harvey Oswald who would match all these points. It cannot be just "anybody". If you take a standpoint that Prayer Man was someone else than Oswald, it is your turn to suggest who he was. You can start with Revill's list of Depository employees, and tick off females, Afro-American males, those who abstained from work on the day, and those whose locations are verifiable and different to Prayer Man's location. Who will remain? 

Witnesses who had to see and would be able to identify Prayer Man were not called to testify for the Warren Commission (Mrs. Sanders, Mrs. Stanton), or were vulnerable (Frazier, Lovelady, Molina), or maybe even participated in framing Oswald (Shelley). Those who might for some reason remember Prayer Man as a salient person in the doorway and could later associate Prayer Man with Oswald, these people would soon question their own memories once they had listened to TV news ("the case is cinched" etc.), and would not come forwards. Witnesses reporting events and facts deviating from the official version were ignored, threatened, harassed, or their testimonies were falsified. 

We do not know all information about Prayer Man yet which would be necessary to make a qualified and authoritative decision about whether Prayer Man was Oswald or someone else. While a number of forum members continue to work on the points listed above and refrain from posting unless they know the answers, you already know that Prayer Man could not be Oswald.

Please do not expect further comments from me, I stand on my decision to withdraw from posting on Prayer Man issues unless my research is finished. You can either start your own research on Prayer Man and also withdraw from posting until you have novel data, or you can continue posting your conclusions which are only based on your subjective beliefs about what was possible and what was not. It will be interesting to know what path you choose.

Item 2. needs to be corrected, his sleeves are rolled down.

 

 

Edited January 11, 2017 by Bart Kamp

[Bill Miller]

27 minutes ago, Bart Kamp said:

Item 2. needs to be corrected, his sleeves are rolled down.

 

 

So the image is so bad that you couldn't tell for certain until now that his shirt sleeves were rolled down - Interesting!

2 - That the guy is dressed as a worker .... are you as certain about this as you originally were about the length of his shirt sleeves? Seems like I recall there being a witness who described Lee as wearing dark or black pants at work that day.

3 - How do we not know but what Prayer Man wasn't down at street level and moved up the steps before Wiegman started filming?

4 - And don't you think that Prayer Man's stance is a bit subjective when his image is so unclear that he was originally thought to have his shirt sleeves rolled up.

5 - How was Prayer Man's height was ruled out as being 5'7" or 5'11" when no one even knows for certain what his posture is.

6 - No one seeing Prayer Man before - during - or after the shooting is hardly evidence that he entered the building at all.

7 - Lee Oswald was not identified being on the steps at any time either.

 

Much of what you are saying appears to be based on supposition in my view.

 

 

Edited January 11, 2017 by Bill Miller

[Guest]

The image is good enough to determine his sleeves are rolled down. And that was the sole reason for my reply.

2/So he is an office worker in that attire? All debated to death 3.5 years ago in this very same thread.

3/That would have shown in the Hughes film i/e, which shows Lovelady moved up more between the H film and A6 which makes perfect sense as he was following the limo going down Elm.

4/His stance is of someone who is disengaged for starters (is that because he knows what is about to happen????) Everyone else is busy watching/following the motorcade, yet he has a drink and just stands there, without moving an inch while the motorcade goes out of view, if only he had stuck his head out like Lovelady, now wouldn't that would have been some picture, twins!!!! The headlines.......

This actual picture by Vinny from ROKC was posted over a year ago at the Webs forum and re-posted at the current one (the thread is on page 3 I think) and it was the first visual confirmation of the sleeves being rolled down, the actual B&W versions did not really provide that visual proof as clear as this particular pic did.

5/Pretty much agree with you. It is hard to determine his height and his actual position, whether he stands one step down or is on the landing. My take is he is one step down.And I base that on the fact of photos that show the bottle and a lunch sack one step down.

6/Sure that is a possibility But the fact that he gets no mention at all by anyone is odd, nor does anyone position themselves there! No one mentions Molina or Jones either.......... A Hispanic and a negro, what white person in Dallas in 1963 would openly associate themselves like that in front of the public and above all their colleagues? Things were a tad more conservative in those days.

7/The subterfuge of evidence (interrogations, 2nd floor fakery, many witnesses lying, witholding the films) points to him being there

Any way. I am going to take a break from posting here. Too busy with work for the next month or so.

Best,

B

[Paul Trejo]

Andrej,

Although I stand by my belief that Oswald could never have stood by Bill Shelley without Bill seeing him, I will suspend judgment on your fine points.

That is, if the timing is right, and no TSBD witnesses are filmed nearby, etc. then it might be possible.

The key for me is that the TSBD employee witnesses are to be respected.  In my reading, not one lied.

I have seen your work, Andrej, and I have been impressed.  I look forward to seeing more.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited January 12, 2017 by Paul Trejo
clarity

[Bill Miller]

22 hours ago, Bart Kamp said:

The image is good enough to determine his sleeves are rolled down. And that was the sole reason for my reply.

2/So he is an office worker in that attire? All debated to death 3.5 years ago in this very same thread.

3/That would have shown in the Hughes film i/e, which shows Lovelady moved up more between the H film and A6 which makes perfect sense as he was following the limo going down Elm.

4/His stance is of someone who is disengaged for starters (is that because he knows what is about to happen????) Everyone else is busy watching/following the motorcade, yet he has a drink and just stands there, without moving an inch while the motorcade goes out of view, if only he had stuck his head out like Lovelady, now wouldn't that would have been some picture, twins!!!! The headlines.......

This actual picture by Vinny from ROKC was posted over a year ago at the Webs forum and re-posted at the current one (the thread is on page 3 I think) and it was the first visual confirmation of the sleeves being rolled down, the actual B&W versions did not really provide that visual proof as clear as this particular pic did.

5/Pretty much agree with you. It is hard to determine his height and his actual position, whether he stands one step down or is on the landing. My take is he is one step down.And I base that on the fact of photos that show the bottle and a lunch sack one step down.

6/Sure that is a possibility But the fact that he gets no mention at all by anyone is odd, nor does anyone position themselves there! No one mentions Molina or Jones either.......... A Hispanic and a negro, what white person in Dallas in 1963 would openly associate themselves like that in front of the public and above all their colleagues? Things were a tad more conservative in those days.

7/The subterfuge of evidence (interrogations, 2nd floor fakery, many witnesses lying, witholding the films) points to him being there

Any way. I am going to take a break from posting here. Too busy with work for the next month or so.

Best,

B

That current image appears to show what you have said about the sleeves, but my point was that the image was not good enough that so many people had also thought the sleeves were rolled up and that the light color of the arms even in shade demonstrated this.

Quote

2/So he is an office worker in that attire? All debated to death 3.5 years ago in this very same thread.

Your response is not an answer. The entire JFK assassination has been debated to death for 53 years, thus the amount of time something has been debated is not a verification of one position over another. You could have addressed the point that a witness had said that Oswald was wearing dark colored trousers on the day of the assassination which does not fit with the uniform tone of Prayer Man's clothing, but you did not even if to say that witness lied which has been a common excuse for anything that doesn't fit your theory.

Quote

3/That would have shown in the Hughes film i/e, which shows Lovelady moved up more between the H film and A6 which makes perfect sense as he was following the limo going down Elm.

With all dues respect - the Hughes film does not allow anyone to ID the people by sight who were standing on the stairs or at its base. And the time span between Hughes last look at the limo to the moment Altgens took his #6 photo is enough time for anyone to have ascended the stairs, as well as walked out from inside the doorway.

Quote

4/His stance is of someone who is disengaged for starters (is that because he knows what is about to happen????) Everyone else is busy watching/following the motorcade, yet he has a drink and just stands there, without moving an inch while the motorcade goes out of view

"Disengaged" is purely speculative.  Just like his having a drink in his hands. I am sure that if you have studied the witness statements that you found that some were unaware of shots being fired. Some called the first shot as sounding like a firecracker had been thrown - others said a car backfire. Many claimed the noises came from west of the  building towards the RR yard.

Here is an image of others seeming disengaged .... see if you can spot them.

Quote

5/Pretty much agree with you. It is hard to determine his height and his actual position, whether he stands one step down or is on the landing. My take is he is one step down.And I base that on the fact of photos that show the bottle and a lunch sack one step down.

Regardless of what step the man is on - you have no way of knowing that the man is 5" 9" tall.

Quote

6/Sure that is a possibility But the fact that he gets no mention at all by anyone is odd, nor does anyone position themselves there!

The WC didn't interview everyone and not everyone gave a statement to the DPD ... would that not be a fair statement.  And if you were one of the many people moving up the stairs and had walked within feet of this person ... why if not Oswald would they make a point of telling anyone? The question was always about if they saw Oswald and if so, where was he and when was the last time it took place in relation to the shooting.

Quote

7/The subterfuge of evidence (interrogations, 2nd floor fakery, many witnesses lying, witholding the films) points to him being there

Not everyone agrees with your assessment.

Edited January 12, 2017 by Bill Miller

[Paul Trejo]

19 hours ago, Bill Miller said:

 ...Not everyone agrees with your assessment.

I'm with Bill Miller on this point -- if anybody argues for Prayer Man being Lee Harvey Oswald on the allegation that TSBD witnesses were lying -- then I reject that argument.

First, the TSBD witnesses were all honest -- even if they made honest mistakes in their TIMING.  I cannot find one who was lying, and I've scoured their WC testimony.   Also, DPD officer Marrion Baker was honest -- I find nothing at all to doubt in his WC testimony.

Find some material evidence, I say, or just give up on Prayer Man.

That said -- given the advocate's arguments by Andrej -- I have serious doubts about Prayer Man, as follows:

(1) What is the precise TIMING of this film?  That is surely known by people.

(2) That is, when exactly did Baker-and-Truly run into the TSBD front steps, relative to this film clip?

(3) Are advocates claiming that while Baker-and-Truly were arguing about the elevator being broken, that LHO calmly walked from this position back to the 2nd floor Coke machine and bought a Coke in time to be harassed by Officer Baker?

(4) If so -- then I can see some plausibility there.

(5) If not -- if advocates are claiming that Baker-and-Truly deliberately lied about their 2nd floor encounter of LHO, then I flatly reject the claim. 

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited January 12, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Michael Clark]

1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said:

I'm with Bill Miller on this point -- if anybody argues for Prayer Man being Lee Harvey Oswald on the allegation that TSBD witnesses were lying -- then I reject that argument.

First, the TSBD witnesses were all honest -- even if they made honest mistakes in their TIMING.  I cannot find one who was lying, and I've scoured their WC testimony.   Also, DPD officer Marrion Baker was honest -- I find nothing at all to doubt in his WC testimony

(5) If not -- if advocates are claiming that Baker-and-Truly deliberately lied about their 2nd floor encounter of LHO, then I flatly reject the claim. 

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul, I respect your assertions as to the honesty of the witnesses. You are adamant and consistent about that. But I would like to ask if you think that threats, intimidation and misrepresentation come into play?

For me, one reason for the murder of Tippit and Oswald was to immediately inject fear into the population. The strange deaths that surrounded people and thrived in that era would have added to the fear. There are stories of goons in suits saying "you didn't see anything" and "that didn't happen". I'll cite the the story of Jerry Coley of the Dallas Morning News, who's story can be heard here, as an example:

I'm not sure if you agree but to many the WCR is in essence a lie, patched together with the statements of many good honest people. There was much that was, apparently, omitted from testimony and the police notes and reports are lacking much information.

I am just surprised that your statements rejecting theories and claims that assume that a great deal of prevarication is going on are applied with such a wide brush.

 

Cheers,

Mike

Edited January 12, 2017 by Michael Clark

[Paul Trejo]

21 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

Paul, I respect your assertions as to the honesty of the witnesses. You are adamant and consistent about that. But I would like to ask if you think that threats, intimidation and misrepresentation come into play?

For me, one reason for the murder of Tippit and Oswald was to immediately inject fear into the population. The strange deaths that surrounded people and thrived in that era would have added to the fear. There are stories of goons in suits saying "you didn't see anything" and "that didn't happen". I'll cite the the story of Jerry Coley of the Dallas Morning News...as an example...

I'm not sure if you agree but to many the WCR is in essence a lie, patched together with the statements of many good honest people. There was much that was, apparently, omitted from testimony and the police notes and reports are lacking much information.

I am just surprised that your statements rejecting theories and claims that assume that a great deal of prevarication is going on are applied with such a wide brush.

Cheers,

Mike

Mike,

It's an important question.  I respect the claims of Penn Jones Jr., who counted dozens of deaths in the JFK cover-up.  

I would point out two issues: (1) the majority of those deaths occurred around DALLAS, and had to do with DALLAS people talking about DALLAS suspects; and (2) one of the most important of them was Dallas Sheriff Deputy Roger Craig. 

I say that Captain Will Fritz (along with Postmaster Harry Holmes) was actively lying to the WC, so it is interesting that Fritz openly accused Roger Craig of lying to the WC.   Also, Roger Craig survived multiple threats and murder attempts (until his "suicide").

I therefore strive to defend Roger Craig's WC testimony as far as possible.  Now, Roger Craig said he saw LHO running toward and inside of a Green Rambler only minutes after the JFK shooting.  WHERE DID LHO RUN FROM?   Roger Craig says he ran from the "Hill on the Grassy Knoll".

IMHO, that suggests that LHO left the TSBD from one of the rear exits.  This was AFTER the Truly-Baker confrontation.  (So, by this estimate, if people agree that Prayer Man was photographed BEFORE the Truly-Baker confrontation, then I have no problem with this.)

I believe that most of the TSBD witnesses were fearless of the DPD police, and were above all threats.  (That is probably why so many of them were killed.)

TSBD employees, Roy Truly, Billy Lovelady and William Shelley, for example, all promoted a Grassy Knoll shooter to the WC.  They did this courageously, even knowing that the dangers were high.  FEARLESS.  That's what I call them.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited January 13, 2017 by Paul Trejo
clarity

[Bill Miller]

3 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

For me, one reason for the murder of Tippit and Oswald was to immediately inject fear into the population. The strange deaths that surrounded people and thrived in that era would have added to the fear. There are stories of goons in suits saying "you didn't see anything" and "that didn't happen". I'll cite the the story of Jerry Coley of the Dallas Morning News, who's story can be heard here, as an example:

Yet there were so many witnesses who either didn't know what was happening to other witnesses or they didn't care for they stood by the shots coming from the area of the RR yard and/or the knoll.

 

[Paul Trejo]

On 1/12/2017 at 7:40 PM, Bill Miller said:

Yet there were so many witnesses who either didn't know what was happening to other witnesses or they didn't care for they stood by the shots coming from the area of the RR yard and/or the knoll.

 

Yes, Bill, ironic, isn't it?  Be skeptical of the Dallas witnesses and the Dallas authorities, but when the Dallas authorities tell us what LHO said behind closed doors -- take that as truth.

All the answers that WIll Fritz asked, all that the FBI asked, all that the Secret Service asked, all that the Dallas Police asked, all that the witness line-ups decided -- all put together -- were never written down during those three days and two nights.

They were written down weeks later, after the Dallas authorities had the chance to share notes, and to share ideas, and to erase words here and there.

Lee Harvey Oswald was interrogated Friday afternoon, evening and late night.   LHO was interrogated on Saturday morning and afternoon and night.  LHO spent his last hours Sunday morning in another interrogation.  Yet not one word was recorded or taken by shorthand, or even by longhand -- or if words were written down, they were concealed.  All the WC witnesses who were in the interrogation room admitted their notes came from weeks later.

Will Fritz, James Hosty, James Bookhout, Forrest Sorrels and Harry Holmes supplied their best memories of the LHO interrogations after several months -- and lots of changes to compare them with each other and "refresh each others memories."

It is no surprise that the combined results for 3 days of interrogation can be read by an average court reporter in about 30 minutes -- including all reports by all principals: Fritz; Sorrels, Hosty, Bookhout and Holmes.  Also, they agree with each other so exactly; it should be obvious that they had plenty of time to rehearse their stories.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited January 15, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Bill Miller]

Paul,

I have always found it troubling that a tape recorder wasn't obtained so to have an audio record of the suspect's responses. I understand that it may not have been customary or standard procedure at that time, but certainly they must have realized that in the murder of a U.S. President that they would not want to leave any doubt as to what the suspect may or may not have said. After all I believe it was referenced that they wanted to be sure that Oswald's rights were being protected and yet they left themselves with little more than hearsay to rely on concerning his questioning and Lee's responses had there been a trial. I mean - what if Lee had confessed - who in their right mind would not want it recorded for future reference. One might say that they had written out what he had said and had him sign it, but then there would still be an argument that could be made that Lee was forced to sign a confession. Yet an audio recording could better establish if the witness sounded stressed or was being coerced in any of his responses. I just find it mind-boggling that no one spoke up and recommended that his interrogation be recorded on tape .... it wouldn't have taken minutes to have had someone purchase and tape recorder if nothing else.

Edited January 17, 2017 by Bill Miller

[Alistair Briggs]

28 minutes ago, Bill Miller said:

Paul,

I have always found it troubling that a tape recorder wasn't obtained so to have an audio record of the suspect's responses. I understand that it may not have been customary or standard procedure at that time, but certainly they must have realized that in the murder of a U.S. President that they would not want to leave any doubt as to what the suspect may or may not have said. After all I believe it was referenced that they wanted to be sure that Oswald's rights were being protected and yet they left themselves with little more than hearsay to rely on concerning his questioning and Lee's responses had there been a trial. I mean - what if Lee had confessed - who in their right mind would not want it recorded for future reference. One might say that they had written out what he had said and had him sign it, but then there would still be an argument that could be made that Lee was forced to sign a confession. Yet an audio recording could better establish if the witness sounded stressed or was being coerced in any of his responses. I just find it mind-boggling that no one spoke up and recommended that his interrogation be recorded on tape .... it wouldn't have taken minutes to have had someone purchase and tape recorder if nothing else.

In essence I agree with all the pertinent things that Bill has said there (although personally I would change 'troubling' to 'an annoyance' )

I do have a couple of questions on the subject though;

What were Oswald's rights?

Had the use of a tape recorder ever been used prior to that?

Regards

[Paul Trejo]

5 hours ago, Alistair Briggs said:

In essence I agree with all the pertinent things that Bill has said there (although personally I would change 'troubling' to 'an annoyance' )

I do have a couple of questions on the subject though;

What were Oswald's rights?

Had the use of a tape recorder ever been used prior to that?

Regards

Alistair and Bill,

Will Fritz said that the DPD Homicide Bureau never had a tape-recorder in its offices at any time through 1963.  It was not considered necessary, and the budget for the department was slim.

It was not considered necessary -- that's the  main point.  Getting a confession out of a suspect was most often a strategy of psychology.  For example, the Paraffin test for gunshot residue on cheek and hands was widely known by Police to be a 50/50 test, with as many false positives as false negatives -- and yet it was considered valuable for psychological purposes, as the suspect was told, "The Paraffin test is going to get the truth here, so you might as well confess," and very often the suspect would confess.

So, very likely, the tape recorder was considered another psychological ploy -- would the suspect be more or less inclined to talk freely if there was a tape recorder in the room?   Very likely the decision was made that the suspect would clam up with a tape recorder in the room, so it was considered an unnecessary expense.

Will Fritz says that he didn't take notes during the interrogations of Lee Harvey Oswald during the many interviews he conducted from 11/22/1963 to 11/24/1963, because he could never really get started.  He was interrupted continually by more people than had ever been outside his office in his life.  He would ask Oswald a question, and get a preliminary answer, and ask another question, and somebody would knock on the door -- "Excuse me, but..." 

This went on for hours, he said.  How could he make any progress in that environment? 

By actual protocol, the City Jail had a duty to send the accused to the County Jail, given enough suspicion.  Some desk officers expected Oswald to go to the County Jail late Friday night.  Others expected Oswald at the County Jail early Saturday.  Others expected him Saturday afternoon.  Many were certain Oswald would be at the County Jail late Saturday night -- because this was already far too late, according to regulations.

For me, the most suspicious activity was that Jack Ruby was brought close to Lee Harvey Oswald two times during that weekend -- once very late Friday night, in the massive press conference, which lasted about 5 minutes.  DPD Chief Jesse Curry managed to arrange that.   IMHO, Jesse Curry also helped to arrange for Jack Ruby to be in the DPD basement when Oswald was finally being moved to the Dallas County Jail.

If that's correct, then what we really see with the 2.5 days delay in moving Oswald to the County Jail is the coordination of Jesse Curry with Will Fritz to manage events so that Oswald would be shot somewhere inside the City Jail.  

If that's the case, then keeping notes would have been distracting.  There were no notes.  There was no actual interrogation.  There was small talk, and delays, and Lee Oswald was never assigned a lawyer during that time.

THIS MEANS THAT THE OSWALD INTERROGATION NOTES THAT WERE PRESENTED IN WC TESTIMONY WERE FAKE: pieced together from bits of other people's testimony.

Now -- I do believe that Oswald asked to speak with New York attorney John Abt -- whom he didn't know personally, as John Abt didn't know Oswald.  I believe this firmly because Ruth Paine also testified that Oswald called her personally to insist that she keep trying to call John Abt until she got him.  Ruth thought that Oswald was being unrealistic and bossy -- what good would some stranger attorney do for him anyhow?  Abt and Oswald never met in their lives.  Ruth Paine tried a couple times, and then gave up.   So, her story convinces me of its truth.

Lawyers from the ACLU and Dallas Bar visited Oswald to ensure he had representation, and were all convinced that he refused to speak with any local attorney, because he only wanted to be represented by John Abt.  Yet John Abt was on vacation in the countryside that weekend -- away from all telephones.   IMHO, Oswald was part of a larger conspiracy involving the Radical Right in Dallas -- and they most likely, IMHO, gave instructions to Oswald to insist on John Abt -- this was to be their CODE WORD.

Lee Harvey Oswald never mentioned John Abt at any time before 11/22/1963 to the best of my knowledge, Marina's knowledge, Ruth Paine's knowledge, or Robert Oswald's knowledge.  The two men never talked or corresponded.  Why Abt?  John Abt's name did appear in the pages of The Worker Newspaper, as a reliable lawyer for left-wing causes.  For the Radical Right, this would have been a CODE WORD.

So -- we really have no idea what Lee Harvey Oswald told the Dallas Police during interrogation in the final three days of his life.   We know a little about what he told his mother, his wife, his brother and Ruth Paine.  There are rumors about what he told other inmates.  But as for the crucial hours of interrogation with Will Fritz, James Hosty, James Bookhout, Forrest Sorrels and Harry Holmes -- we must rely on their notes which were composed WEEKS LATER, and which match each other in every detail.  This is unacceptable to me.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited January 17, 2017 by Paul Trejo