Bernie Laverick Posted February 5, 2016 Share Posted February 5, 2016 I don’t want to seem argumentative, I actually thought John’s article was really illuminating and adds something of value to the process. What spoils it for me is the constant need to anchor such research into an existing belief. For instance, it is painted as a “mystery” how the FBI came by the Irving Gun Shop in the first place but common sense tells us otherwise. Take the tag ‘found’ at Irving Gun Shop with the name Oswald on it. It is seemingly a “mystery” as to how the FBI came by this information yet the sequence of events shows exactly how it came about. Mr GREENER was the owner and his assistant, RYDER, is the one who wrote the tag and carried out the repairs. He subsequently denied seeing Oswald and confirmed that the gun in question wasn’t the assassination weapon. Mr. LIEBELER. Do you have any reason to believe that any reporter talked to Ryder prior to the time the FBI came to your shop? Mr. GREENER. One told me he did. Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember that reporter's name? Mr. GREENER. No; he was with the Times Herald. Mr. LIEBELER. Dallas Times Herald? Mr. GREENER. I couldn't swear. Mr. LIEBELER. He told you he talked to Ryder? Mr. GREENER. Ryder told me he hadn't. Mr. LIEBELER. Ryder told you the reporter had not talked to him? Mr. GREENER. Had not talked to him. Mr. LIEBELER. Did the reporter tell you when he had talked to Ryder? Mr. GREENER. He told me that he talked to him earlier in the morning… So we have proof that the employee is lying to his boss. And it wasn’t the FBI, but the Dallas Herald who first made the contact…apparently. Mr. LIEBELER. I am trying to find out at what time this story first broke, whether the FBI had been here at the shop to ask any questions before the story came out in the newspapers? Mr. GREENER. As I recall, no. None of the law enforcing agencies had been by previous to that. Mr. LIEBELER. Your impression is that he came here because they saw the story in the paper? Mr. GREENER. That is my idea. Either that, or they were informed by the news reporters. Mr. LIEBELER. Now did this reporter from the Dallas paper, whose name you don't remember, tell you that Ryder had called him? Mr. GREENER. No; he told me that he called him, called Ryder. Mr. LIEBELER. Did he tell you how he got the idea to call Ryder? Mr. GREENER. No; he didn't. Mr. LIEBELER. And you didn't ask him? Mr. GREENER. No. Mr. LIEBELER. Did you discuss this question with Ryder? Mr. GREENER. Yes; I did. And he said he had not talked to a newspaper reporter about it. Mr. LIEBELER. At all? Mr. GREENER. Right. Why is Ryder lying to his boss about not talking to the media? What is he trying to hide from him? If the Dallas Herald reporter is really telling the truth and not just defending his sources, who else could possibly know about this tag? Certainly not the FBI, they came along later… Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember the exact details under which you found the tag in the shop? Mr. RYDER. Well, we talked about this thing on Saturday morning and like I said before, like you saw the workbench up there today, that it is cluttered up, and on Saturday evening I was cleaning it off and found the tag laying back on the workbench. Mr. LIEBELER. The Saturday following the assassination? Mr. RYDER. Yes. Mr. LIEBELER. You found the tag there yourself? Mr. RYDER. Yes. Mr. LIEBELER. Had the FBI been out here prior to that time? Mr. RYDER. No. Mr. LIEBELER. They had not? Mr. RYDER. No, sir. Mr. LIEBELER. When did the FBI first come out? Mr. RYDER. On Monday. Mr. LIEBELER. On Monday? Mr. RYDER. Yes; that was on Monday, of the funeral of the late President. Mr. LIEBELER. That would have been November 25, 1963, when the FBI came out on Monday and you gave them the tag or showed them this tag; is that right? Mr. RYDER. He told us to hold onto it, and then they later came by and got the tag. Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever talk to the newspaper reporter about this? Mr. RYDER. There were several out here after the FBI had been out, and we told them the same thing that we told the FBI. Mr. LIEBELER. But you didn't talk to any newspaper reporter before the FBI came out here? Mr. RYDER. No. But according to the owner, Mr Greener this was the scenario. Sounds like our boy Ryder is a bit of a romancer. Mr. LIEBELER. Who found the tag; do you remember? Mr. GREENER. No; I don't know. If I remember correctly, and I could be wrong, because like I said, you are going into things that hadn't entered my mind since November 22, along in there, and it seems to me that he had contacted Ryder and they had come down here. Mr. LIEBELER. The FBI? Mr. GREENER Yes, and they found the tag on the workbench somewhere. Mr. LIEBELER. Your impression now is that the FBI man was here when the tag was found? Mr. GREENER. That is my impression; yes. Somehow someone from the Dallas Herald received a tip off about a gun repair shop who had a tag with the name Oswald written on it. So others knew about this tag before the FBI; firstly the source of the information and secondly the Dallas Herald. Only when the story broke did the FBI get involved, naturally. Had the FBI known about this first why would the Dallas Herald even be involved in the story? So we have three, and only three, scenarios for that tag to have been there in that shop. The real Oswald went there and asked for repairs to yet another gun he owned. Another Oswald went there for repairs to another gun. Or, Ryder wrote the tag after the event and either he or his partner contacted the media with an anonymous tip off. Here is a fascinating exchange between the Dallas Herald reporter, Hunter Schmidt, and Ryder who Schmidt claimed had provided the information that was eventually published. http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/ryderschmidt.htm Make your own mind up who is telling the truth. Ernie, First let me say that I read some of the testimony and skimmed some of it. So I may be mistaken somehow in my response here. But I think not. It seems like you (and Mr. Greener) are mistaken in some way. You both say the Dallas Herald got involved with the Irving Gun Shop before the FBI did. But I think it happened the other way around. You said: Only when the story broke did the FBI get involved, naturally. Had the FBI known about this first why would the Dallas Herald even be involved in the story? Mr. Greener (the shop owner) agrees with you: Mr. LIEBELER. I am trying to find out at what time this story first broke, whether the FBI had been here at the shop to ask any questions before the story came out in the newspapers? Mr. GREENER. As I recall, no. None of the law enforcing agencies had been by previous to that. Mr. LIEBELER. Your impression is that he [FBI agent] came here because they saw the story in the paper? Mr. GREENER. That is my idea. Either that, or they were informed by the news reporters. But I read in other testimony that the FBI got involved on Monday the 25th, whereas the Dallas Herald didn't get involved until Wednesday the 28th. The following Ryder (the workman) testimony establishes the date for the FBI visit: Mr. LIEBELER. When did the FBI first come out? Mr. RYDER. On Monday. Mr. LIEBELER. On Monday? Mr. RYDER. Yes; that was on Monday, of the funeral of the late President. Mr. LIEBELER. That would have been November 25, 1963, when the FBI came out on Monday and you gave them the tag or showed them this tag; is that right? Now, as you read the following Greener testimony, keep in mind that the Oswald tag had been found by Monday the 25th: Mr. LIEBELER. Your impression now is that the FBI man was here when the tag was found [on Monday 25th or earlier]? Mr. GREENER. That is my impression; yes. So Mr.Greener changes his mind and no longer agrees with you. Now he agrees with his employee, Ryder. The FBI was there early. Now let's turn to the testimony of Schmidt, the newspaper reporter. His testimony establishes the date for the Dallas Times Herald visit: Mr. LIEBELER. As I have indicated to Mr. Ryder, Mr. Schmidt testified yesterday that on the morning of November 28, 1963, you came to work in your office at the Dallas Times Herald and received information of some sort that possibly Lee Oswald had had some work done on a rifle, on his rifle or a rifle, in some sports shops or gunshop in the outlying areas of Dallas. Would you tell us briefly what happened after that, Mr. Schmidt? Mr. SCHMIDT. After I got the tip, I traced it down and thought it was Garland first and I looked it up in the phonebook--the city directory--and the usual sources that we go through--I looked-through and this Ryder was the only one that I could find, or apparently he was the one that said what I was looking for. Mr. LIEBELER. Where did you get Ryder's name in the first place; do you know? Mr. SCHMIDT. Well, it was from a tip around the police station. Now, I don't remember. I have been trying to remember where who specifically it came from, but it was one of the many we were getting at that tim. Incidentally, the highlighted text near the end tells us who found out about the gun shop's Oswald tag. Someone around the police station knew about it. Perhaps a DPD employee?? So you see, the FBI really did go to the gun shop first. BTW, regarding the accusation that Ryder lied about conversing with newspaper man Schmidt, I have three comments: Ryder claimed he wouldn't talk to Schmidt. He even took the phone off the hook. Schimdt claimed that he did talk to Ryder, and that an associate listened in on the whole conversation. I only skimmed the article. But from what I saw, I couldn't tell who was lying. Why would somebody listen in on the conversation? I couldn't tell from the testimony, but if this associate heard BOTH sides of the conversation, to me this stinks. Maybe to provide later corroboration for a conversation that didn't really happen? I wish I had time to delve into this. Sandy, it's not a real big deal but my name is Bernie not Ernie, the clue is in the name at the top of the post you replied to. You say you haven't really read the whole transcript (as well as the name of the person you are replying to) but already everyone excluding Ryder seems suspicious to you. I know why of course. This story isn't a story unless there is a possible doppelganger attached to it. On this particular example though it is water-thin gruel. Look I aren't criticising the article for the sake of it, I've said, I thought it threw up some real good information. My irritation is this constant attempt to create the illusion that there was a second Oswald who can account for EVERY anomaly in the records or from witness testimony. Only Ryder knew about this tag, but the implication is that the FBI also knew about it too. Given that the Oswald in question didn't look like LHO and the gun in question wasn't LHO's why would the FBI need to know this information beforehand anyway. What are you implying? I thought we had established that it couldn't have been a doppelganger because Ryder didn't identify him. And surely if it had been 'Lee' setting up 'Harvey' (because that is what all this is about!) Ryder would have seen the likeness like dozens of others. We have also proved that Ryder did lie to Greener about talking to the press. He said he hadn't spoken to anyone "AT ALL" whereas Schmidt, who asked to take a lie detector test to prove his credibility, went into great detail on how the conversation went. If this isn't true then the info he is using must have come straight from the FBI. Don't you think it a bit odd that they would give the info to a journalist, wait until he rings Ryder and gets the story published and only then do the FBI decide to go and see Ryder? That didn't happen! As to the guy listening in on the conversation, it doesn't say, but I took it that he was just in the room listening to Schmidt's part of the dialogue. That would be perfectly normal (we even used to do that in our sales office if there was a particularly 'difficult' conversation to be had with a client.) According to the testimony Sandy, the FBI were informed by the media, it was an anonymous tip made to a couple of media outlets who then contacted the FBI. It started with a phone call from someone who knew for definite that tag was there. If the FBI did know this why didn't they act on it instead of calling the Dallas Herald? At that stage the FBI knew nothing. The only person who knew of this tag was Ryder. It seems logical then to assume that he is the source of the information. Can anyone add to the three possible scenarios as to how this tag business could have come about. 1 - It was the historic LHO who wanted work doing on different riffle to the one subsequently found in TSBD . 2 - It was someone else called Oswald about a different riffle to the one subsequently found in TSBD 3 - Ryder wrote the tag after the event and either he or his partner anonymously tipped off the media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now