Was it Lansdale?

[Guest Mark Valenti]

Prouty was wrong about so many things, I can't support the ID he made.

Tomorrow I'll issue a photographic challenge and see if anyone can tell who's who.

Well, Mark, I thought I clarified this point -- but I'll try again.

If you work with somebody for several years, then it is EASY for you to recognize them from the back.

The same applies to members of your family -- you can EASILY recognize them from the back.

However, when it comes to strangers, and a few photographs, then NOBODY can recognize somebody from the back.

So, to just try some photograph experiments misses the point.

Lieutenant Fletcher Prouty could successfully recognize General Edward Lansdale from the back because he was FAMILIAR with the man.

That cinches it for me. No amount of experimentation with photographs will convert me.

I can recognize everybody in my family from the back -- or a photograph (or short film) of them from the back. Same with the people I work with. I feel certain the same is true for most readers out there.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Paul, there have been countless examples of people making incorrect IDs of FACES, much less the back of their head. I'd bet someone a thousand dollars it's not Lansdale.

[Ron Ecker]

See the man on the far left. Could this the same man that Prouty identified as Lansdale, now walking the other way?

[Paul Trejo]

See the man on the far left. Could this the same man that Prouty identified as Lansdale, now walking the other way?

Well, it's much harder with that photo, Ron, because it doesn't show the left hand.

Remember that Lieutenant Prouty wasn't the ONLY ONE who said it was Lansdale, because General Victor Krulak also said:

"The haircut, the stoop, the twisted left hand, the large class ring. It's Lansdale."

This is what we expect from somebody who is FAMILIAR with the subject. The twisted left hand wearing the large class ring -- that's interesting.

Now -- I will grant that in the photo you posted, Ron, that the person's height, haircut and stoop are similar -- yet without seeing that "twisted left hand; the large class ring", I myself would not place a bet.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited April 15, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Guest Mark Valenti]

By the way, with all of this talk of Lansdale's alleged 'twisted left hand," how is it possible for him to do this? With that damaged hand and all.

[Paul Trejo]

By the way, with all of this talk of Lansdale's alleged 'twisted left hand," how is it possible for him to do this? With that damaged hand and all.

No, Mark -- Lansdale's left hand was not "damaged." That's your word.

What General Krulak said was that Lansdale's left hand was "twisted" -- which can mean many things in common parlance. It was the *way* in which Lansdale would carry his hand when there was nothing in it.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited April 15, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Brian Schmidt]

In all fairness, Prouty did know Lansdale for over a decade prior to the first time he ID'ed him in the photo. They worked together on and off during this period--mostly off--but sometimes worked on a project quite closely for a short time. He exaggerated the extent of their contact, sure. He made other claims that were a stretch, such as him not mentioning Lansdale at all to Krulack before K's ID which makes people question his credibility. But Krulack really did ID Lansdale too. They are probably better judges than any of us, who have never met him and have only seen a dozen photos of him. I think it looks a lot like Lansdale, but others here don't. Barring some more nefarious motive for identifying the person as Lansdale--i.e. they didn't like Lansdale, which is true and certainly muddies the waters--I think you have to take it at face value as an ID coming from as close to an expert on the subject as you're going to get. Now, can a person who knows someone very well make an ID of someone's back definitively? Has anyone ever gone to a mall with family members, split up to shop and been behind someone who they thought was a family member only to discover they weren't when the person turned around? I know I have.

We could argue forever about the credibility of Prouty. I think it makes more sense to debate Lansdale's character and connections and then try to come to some consensus as to whether he would have to capacity to assassinate JFK.

[Paul Trejo]

Paul, not to be a pest, but you mention working with somebody for years. I've posted sources on this thread which should allow anyone to determine how long and how closely Prouty worked with Lansdale.

I don't think it adds up "years" of constant contact....have you taken a close look at how long they really were together, where their duties overlapped and how much personal contact they would have had?

I don't think it was as much as you may assume. The men did work inside the same group for a time and certainly knew each other, but the question is were they close as office mates over years or really as close as the family members you describe?

Well, Larry, let's ask Fletcher Prouty himself for the answer to that question. Here's what Prouty wrote to Jim Garrison on 6 March 1990:

"I sat in the same office with Lansdale, (OSO of OSD) for years. I listened to him in Manila and read his flurry of notes from 1952 to 1964."

Clear enough?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

[Guest Mark Valenti]

By the way, with all of this talk of Lansdale's alleged 'twisted left hand," how is it possible for him to do this? With that damaged hand and all.

No, Mark -- Lansdale's left hand was not "damaged." That's your word.

What General Krulak said was that Lansdale's left hand was "twisted" -- which can mean many things in common parlance. It was the *way* in which Lansdale would carry his hand when there was nothing in it.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Then really what does that mean, "twisted left hand" if it doesn't mean damaged? Most of the time when someone refers to a person's limbs or other body parts as "twisted" they mean damaged or congenitally deformed.

I think you are trying hard to mitigate the severity of the word because you want it to be Lansdale.

[Guest Mark Valenti]

Paul, not to be a pest, but you mention working with somebody for years. I've posted sources on this thread which should allow anyone to determine how long and how closely Prouty worked with Lansdale.

I don't think it adds up "years" of constant contact....have you taken a close look at how long they really were together, where their duties overlapped and how much personal contact they would have had?

I don't think it was as much as you may assume. The men did work inside the same group for a time and certainly knew each other, but the question is were they close as office mates over years or really as close as the family members you describe?

Well, Larry, let's ask Fletcher Prouty himself for the answer to that question. Here's what Prouty wrote to Jim Garrison on 6 March 1990:

"I sat in the same office with Lansdale, (OSO of OSD) for years. I listened to him in Manila and read his flurry of notes from 1952 to 1964."

Clear enough?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Lansdale sent Prouty on an errand to buy a gift for Diem. Kind of like a gofer.

Lansdale on Prouty: "I continue to be surprised to find Fletcher Prouty quoted as an authority. He was my "cross to bear" before Dan Ellsberg came along."

[Paul Trejo]

Maybe take a second and reread Chambers' from above. Homicide Division, Forgery Dept, 3rd floor DPD by Fritz' office

Capt JONES...the entire sequence with your three tramps occurs at the DPD where Oswald was...

Decker is a Sheriff...different place, different people.

Can you show me where WISE talks about Jones and the rest... COUNTY JAIL is Sheriff...

thanks

Well, David, thanks for sharing those documents -- they sound theatrical to me -- just my opinion.

Furthermore, Fletcher Prouty would tend to agree with your point about the three tramps -- that they were not who we tend to think they were -- because they were really hired actors.

Here's what Prouty told Jim Garrison about Ed Lansdale on 6 March 1990:

"...Now you can see why I have always said that identification of the 'Tramps' was unnecessary, i.e. they are actors. The first time I saw that picture, I saw the man I knew, and I realized why he was there. He caused the political world to spin on its axis."

Granted, this was only Prouty's opinion, yet as an informed opinion it's interesting on many levels.

Remember that Prouty analyzed the policemen in the photo, too, and realized that they were not real policemen, based on their uniforms, their weapons and their unprofessional posture.

It really makes me wonder -- what was Lansdale doing there?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited April 15, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Brian Schmidt]

See the man on the far left. Could this the same man that Prouty identified as Lansdale, now walking the other way?

I think it could be, Ron. I remember looking at old posts and Jack White said it wasn't the same person--not sure why he was so convinced though. I think the person Duncan MacRae posted on #85 could be the Lansdale figure too.

[Paul Trejo]

Lansdale sent Prouty on an errand to buy a gift for Diem. Kind of like a gofer.

Lansdale on Prouty: "I continue to be surprised to find Fletcher Prouty quoted as an authority. He was my "cross to bear" before Dan Ellsberg came along."

Well, Mark, I have no doubt that what you say is true here. There was no way in which Lieutenant Prouty was the equal of General Lansdale -- on multiple levels.

Nevertheless, we aren't asking Prouty to be his equal -- or to be perfect, or even a great man. We are only looking for an identification.

Also, whatever Prouty's political opinions were -- that has no interest to me at all. All I care about is an identification.

Prouty might not have been a great man, but he was an intelligent man -- and he served Lansdale with loyalty according to his military rank. So, Prouty was also an honorable man.

I find zero reason to believe that Prouty would just bad-talk Lansdale out of some personal vendetta.

Instead -- I find every reason to believe that Prouty got this one right -- and General Krulak agreed with him.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited April 15, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

Then really what does that mean, "twisted left hand" if it doesn't mean damaged? Most of the time when someone refers to a person's limbs or other body parts as "twisted" they mean damaged or congenitally deformed.

I think you are trying hard to mitigate the severity of the word because you want it to be Lansdale.

No, Mark -- look at the photograph of the man walking away from the three tramps again. Notice that his left hand is "bent" in some characteristic way -- like a personal style. It's not uncommon.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited April 15, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Ron Ecker]

I think it's obvious that no conclusion can ever be reached on this. It's a surreal thing like so much else surrounding this murder, as if some gremlins or demons were at work for the fun of it. Well, some gremlins anyway. We know there were demons in Dallas that day.

We've got three tramps about whom there can be no certainty either. They just happened to resemble a number of possible villains in the case (Hunt, Harrelson, Sturgis, Frenchy or some guy whose name I can't remember), and might be none of them. Another guy who looks like Hunt crosses Elm Street. Rip Robertson's long lost twin brother is at the corner of Houston and Main. And a guy who Prouty was sure was Lansdale walks by the tramps. Why would Lansdale be there? Was it just to see the president go by? Then why did he choose Dealey Plaza? Why didn't he stand in front of the Adolphus Hotel (where he may have been staying), be at Love Field, or anywhere in town along the parade route? Or was it possibly to prevent the assassination? Well, a good way to prevent the assassinaion would be to tell JFK "they 're going to assassinate you!"

Here is my conclusion: It may be Lansdale walking past the tramps. And if it is, he was up to no good. That is all.

[Brian Schmidt]

I think it's obvious that no conclusion can ever be reached on this. It's a surreal thing like so much else surrounding this murder, as if some gremlins or demons were at work for the fun of it. Well, some gremlins anyway. We know there were demons in Dallas that day.

We've got three tramps about whom there can be no certainty either. They just happened to resemble a number of possible villains in the case (Hunt, Harrelson, Sturgis, Frenchy or some guy whose name I can't remember), and might be none of them. Another guy who looks like Hunt crosses Elm Street. Rip Robertson's long lost twin brother is at the corner of Houston and Main. And a guy who Prouty was sure was Lansdale walks by the tramps. Why would Lansdale be there? Was it just to see the president go by? Then why did he choose Dealey Plaza? Why didn't he stand in front of the Adolphus Hotel (where he may have been staying), be at Love Field, or anywhere in town along the parade route? Or was it possibly to prevent the assassination? Well, a good way to prevent the assassinaion would be to tell JFK "they 're going to assassinate you!"

Here is my conclusion: It may be Lansdale walking past the tramps. And if it is, he was up to no good. That is all.

Exactly.