William Kelly Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 I thought it would be worthwhile to start a thread on the topic of Oswald's interrogation, especially since many of the arguments have come down to what Oswald said there and what was learned by the interrogating officers. Of all the accounts of the interrogation, I have found, surprisingly enough, the best version thus far published is Vince Bugliosi's in Reclaiming History, I think it is early in the book in the chapter Four Days in November, which was also published as a separate book. The Bug must have gotten the essence of the interrogations from the notes taken by Capt. Fritz and the federal agents who sat in on the interrogations, but he puts things in quotes and makes a good narrative, describing people's moods, etc. First off, and I've never counted them, how many interrogation sessions were there? At least two on Friday, probably three or four on Saturday and one or two on Sunday, but we have to break it down exactly and determine who was present at each session. This thread is devoted to the topic of the interrogations, and I please ask you to stay on topic. Thanks, BK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Did Sean Murphy not essentially prove that Fritz copied his notes from the notes of one of the FBI agents? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted September 28, 2013 Author Share Posted September 28, 2013 (edited) Did Sean Murphy not essentially prove that Fritz copied his notes from the notes of one of the FBI agents? Yes, Sean made a very strong case for that - Bookhout - but I think Hosty also took notes and if I'm not mistaken, when asked a question by Fritz, Oswald once replied that he already answered that question and told Fritz to check his notes as he wrote it down - so Fritz, in Oswald's opinion, took notes himself and didn't just copy them. It would be appropriate for Sean to repost those notes here so we can discuss them further. In the meantime, I will go back over what Bugliosi has to say as I recall he devoted quite a bit of detail to Oswald's interrogations. What I want to know specifically is how many interrogation sessions were there and who was sitting in on them? Edited September 28, 2013 by William Kelly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 Did Sean Murphy not essentially prove that Fritz copied his notes from the notes of one of the FBI agents? Yes, Sean made a very strong case for that - Bookhout - but I think Hosty also took notes and if I'm not mistaken, when asked a question by Fritz, Oswald once replied that he already answered that question and told Fritz to check his notes as he wrote it down - so Fritz, in Oswald's opinion, took notes himself and didn't just copy them. It would be appropriate for Sean to repost those notes here so we can discuss them further. In the meantime, I will go back over what Bugliosi has to say as I recall he devoted quite a bit of detail to Oswald's interrogations. What I want to know specifically is how many interrogation sessions were there and who was sitting in on them? And we know that Oswald actually told Fritz to check his notes because......? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 (edited) The best to go to read about all the various interrogations of Oswald is the Warren Report itself --- Appendix #11 (XI), entitled "Reports Relating To The Interrogation Of Lee Harvey Oswald At The Dallas Police Department". Here's a link (starting on WR, page 598): http://history-matters.com Edited September 28, 2013 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 (edited) A related excerpt regarding Oswald's interrogation on Sunday, Nov. 24 (from Vince Bugliosi's book): "During Sunday's interrogation Oswald slipped up and placed himself on the sixth floor [of the TSBD] at the time of the assassination. .... In his Sunday-morning interrogation he said that at lunchtime, one of the "Negro" employees invited him to eat lunch with him and he declined. .... He said before he could finish whatever he was doing, the commotion surrounding the assassination took place and when he "WENT DOWNSTAIRS," a policeman questioned him as to his identification, and his boss stated that he was one of their employees. .... WHERE WAS OSWALD AT THE TIME THE NEGRO EMPLOYEE INVITED HIM TO LUNCH, AND BEFORE HE DESCENDED TO THE SECOND-FLOOR LUNCHROOM? [Answer:] The sixth floor." [All emphasis Bugliosi's.] -- VB; Page 957 of "Reclaiming History" Sources for the above Bugliosi excerpt are Page 636 of the Warren Report and Harry Holmes' WC testimony (at 7 H 302). http://ReclaimingHistory.blogspot.com jfk-archives.blogspot.com / Oswald's Ever-Changing Alibi Edited September 28, 2013 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted September 28, 2013 Author Share Posted September 28, 2013 (edited) Did Sean Murphy not essentially prove that Fritz copied his notes from the notes of one of the FBI agents? Yes, Sean made a very strong case for that - Bookhout - but I think Hosty also took notes and if I'm not mistaken, when asked a question by Fritz, Oswald once replied that he already answered that question and told Fritz to check his notes as he wrote it down - so Fritz, in Oswald's opinion, took notes himself and didn't just copy them. It would be appropriate for Sean to repost those notes here so we can discuss them further. In the meantime, I will go back over what Bugliosi has to say as I recall he devoted quite a bit of detail to Oswald's interrogations. What I want to know specifically is how many interrogation sessions were there and who was sitting in on them? And we know that Oswald actually told Fritz to check his notes because......? Because .... Postal Inspector Holmes, present at the scene, and the last person to question Oswald, tells us in his memo on the last interrogation, a very interesting document. I will post it as soon as I can get my computer to let me post links again, but its different from the link provided by DVP to Holmes testimony. And thanks for those links Dave, and as for the Bug saying Oswald "slipped up" by saying he would go down to have lunch, I would think that the Bug would wish harder, as the statements attributed to Oswald under interrogation are being filtered to us through the cops in the room and then through the Bug, who puts his own spin on them. Bugliosi's version of events is only interesting because he tries to bring it to life and put you there in the room with them, which is a kind of fictional narrative that makes for easy reading but not the reference necessary for criminal or historical documentation. Edited September 28, 2013 by William Kelly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 As far as I am concerned, everything we know about the interrogation of Oswald, be it from Harry Holmes, Fritz, the FBI or Vincent Bugliosi, is second hand information. Why would anyone be inclined to believe one source over another? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 (edited) I tend to agree with both William Kelly and Robert Prudhomme in their last couple of posts. The "slipped up" comment by Vincent Bugliosi might not necessarily have to mean that Harry Holmes is 100% correct in reconstructing Lee Oswald's exact and verbatim remarks. I can easily envision a situation where Holmes could have gotten confused about some of Oswald's comments, with one possibility being that when Oswald at one point said he "went downstairs", he might have been referring to going "downstairs" from the SECOND FLOOR in order to go outside the building. So, yes, I agree that a grain of salt should be placed next to Holmes' reports about Oswald's statements (and Fritz' reports too). However, it's also quite possible that Holmes' version is absolutely correct. But without a tape recording of exactly what Oswald said (and its context), we can never know for sure. Edited September 28, 2013 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Murphy Posted September 28, 2013 Share Posted September 28, 2013 I tend to agree with both William Kelly and Robert Prudhomme in their last couple of posts. The "slipped up" comment by Vincent Bugliosi might not necessarily have to mean that Harry Holmes is 100% correct in reconstructing Lee Oswald's exact and verbatim remarks. I can easily envision a situation where Holmes could have gotten confused about some of Oswald's comments, with one possibility being that when Oswald at one point said he "went downstairs", he might have been referring to going "downstairs" from the SECOND FLOOR in order to go outside the building. So, yes, I agree that a grain of salt should be placed next to Holmes' reports about Oswald's statements (and Fritz' reports too). However, it's also quite possible that Holmes' version is absolutely correct. But without a tape recording of exactly what Oswald said (and its context), we can never know for sure. (Grin) Somebody's just taking out a little insurance against somebody else bringing up what Harry Holmes had to say about where exactly Oswald said the encounter with the police officer actually took place... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Davies Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 When one knows everything , calls others names, and presupposes that his role as a KFC salesman makes him more qualified than a senior litigation lawyer to evaluate evidence, then one does not need insurance. Reminds me of a Lewis Carroll tale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 Curiouser and curiouser.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Kelly Posted September 29, 2013 Author Share Posted September 29, 2013 (edited) As far as I am concerned, everything we know about the interrogation of Oswald, be it from Harry Holmes, Fritz, the FBI or Vincent Bugliosi, is second hand information. Why would anyone be inclined to believe one source over another? Well, we're just going to have to believe somebody Robert. Since we weren't there we have to believe somebody who was. As I mention here: http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-perception-part.html We have to believe most of what witnesses tell us happened, despite the attempts by some - ie. Reitzes - who ties to discount all witness testimony because the Parkland witnesses don't fit into his perception of how things went down. And when it comes to the interrogation, you don't have much choice as to who to believe and who not to believe, the witnesses are all cops - local and federal agents, and we have to use their version of events though we can choose to believe them or not. I believe DPD officer Marion Baker when he said that while filing out his 11/22/63 statement at DPD HQ he overheard Capt. Fritz say "Did you kill the President?" and Oswald responding, "That's ridiculous!" That had to be at the very first interrogation session early Friday afternoon. Are there any notes from anyone else present that reflect Fritz asking that question and Oswald's response? Confirming evidence is important to help us decide who and what to believe. Edited September 29, 2013 by William Kelly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Blank Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 (edited) i like john armstrong's account of the interrogation sessions; i think his work in general is beyond groundbreaking Edited September 29, 2013 by Martin Blank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Davies Posted September 29, 2013 Share Posted September 29, 2013 Bill Kelly's approach is very reasonable. 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