Jump to content
The Education Forum

Brennan's lineup


Steve Thomas
 Share

Recommended Posts

Ian Grigg's book No Case to Answer is an intriguing nugget.  I am glad it exists and thanks to JFK Lancer it does.  Comparatively speaking, I really don't have that many JFK assassination books, but I have kept that one.  His essays on the Hotel Torni, the assembly of the MC rifle,Harry Holmes, the mythological bag on the sixth floor, the Elrod case, and the so called Brennan ID lineup are worth  the cost. On top of that, he writes in a concise and pointed manner.  Almost no meandering about.

 Ian was a former British police inspector, so he had a special interest in the actions of the Dallas Police, since he had worked as a part of a law enforcement force for over twenty years.  He got access to the Dallas Police files and actually went there and interviewed people.  His book is solidly documented and I have used it as a reference work in both Reclaiming Parkland and the second edition of Destiny Betrayed. 

According to Ian's essay, there were four line ups. Three on Friday and one on Saturday.  In all four line ups there were four suspects on stage.  (For purposes of brevity, and to stay on point, I will not discuss his criticisms of the methodology of how the DPD organized these line ups, especially when compared with UK, but they are telling.)

4:35 PM Friday:  This was done for Helen Markham

6:30 PM Friday: Callaway, Guinyard, McWatters 

7:55 PM Friday: VIrginia and Barbara Davis

2:15 PM Saturday: Whaley and Scoggins

Now, the problem here is that the WR says that Brennan attended a line up. But as David shows above, he was not listed as a proper witness to the Davis line up. He was added to the bottom of the page and escorted apparently by Sorrells. Further, Ian could find no corroboration for his being at this line up except in Brennan's own testimony, his book, and in the rather odd words of Sorrells.

According to Brennan, he was picked up by SS agent Patterson at his home that evening. Yet, when asked how many people were in the line up he saw, he said about 6 or 7. (Wrong, there were four.)  When asked if any of them were black, he said he did not recall.  (This is Texas in 1963.)  Barbara Davis did not recall Brennan there.  In fact, no other witness ever mentions Brennan being at a line up.

But its even worse than that.  Here is Fritz on Brennan and the line up: "I don't think I was present, but I will tell you what, I helped Mr. Sorrells find the time that that man--we didn't show that he was shown at all on our records, but Mr. Sorrells called me and said he did show him and he wanted me to give him the time of the show up.  I asked him to find out from his officers who were with Mr. Brennan the names of the people that we had there, and he gave me those two Davis sisters, and he said, when he told me that, of course I could tell what show up it was and then I gave him the time."

As you can see above there is a discrepancy between what Sorrells says and what is noted on the report--which I think is the only piece of documentary evidence that says Brennan was there.  But in light of the Fritz testimony above, where he says "we didn't show that he was shown at all on our records" and the fact Brennan did not recall how many suspects there were or even if any of them were black, gives us real pause about whether or not he was there.  Or as Ian writes, the other possibility is that they went to long lengths to  conceal his non-identification.  (But alas this is all a tempest in a teapot, Payette and DVP would say there is no real problem with this evidentiary record.)

 

 

 

 

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

 Further, Ian could find no corroboration for his being at this line up except in Brennan's own testimony, his book, and in the rather odd words of Sorrells.

On that subject I just came across something that may be just me over-reading in to something, but I don't know, I might be missing something, or just over thinking it, but...

All four of the line-ups fundamentally were set up for witnesses in relation to the murder of Tippit. Whether or not all of them, or any of them, had already made the connection that Oswald could have been both the murderer of Tippit and the murderer of Kennedy, the raison d'etre for them to be at the line-ups was in reference to the murder of Tippit only. None of those witnesses were there as witnesses of the murder of Kennedy... Brennan was the only witness of the murder of Kennedy, and he seems to have been shoe-horned in to view one of the line-ups.

In the WC testimony of C.W. Brown, in regards to the line-up for the Davis sisters...

Mr. BELIN. Anything else in connection with that identification?
Mr. BROWN. That is the only two that I was active insofar as the showups and identification of Lee Harvey Oswald by any of the witnesses on either Officer Tippit or-the President's assassination.

If all the other witnesses were there as witnesses to the murder of Officer Tippit and the only witness brought to a line up in regards to the President's assassination was Brennan, could Brown be (somewhat back-handedly) be corroborating Brennan being there?

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

 Further, Ian could find no corroboration for his being at this line up except in Brennan's own testimony, his book, and in the rather odd words of Sorrells.

 In fact, no other witness ever mentions Brennan being at a line up.

 

Jim,

 

I think Sorrels had it right when he testified,  " He (Fritz) said, "I wish he would have been here a little sooner, we just got through with a lineup. But we will get another fixed up."

 

If you go to the Index for the DPD Archives, there must be 50 references to the lineups. I've gone through all of them, and the only place Brennan shows up is in this one Box 6 file. I think the DPD did arrange for another lineup, just for Brennan. Based on the Reports filed by the people who were present at the Davis lineup, and the WC testimony of Will Fritz, there were no DPD people present. What I'd like to know is who else was there besides Sorrels. Winston Lawson sort of backhandedly refers to it, but the WC only asked him if there was anything unusual about it in the way the other "suspects" looked. They didn't ask him specifically what Brennan was asked and what he answered.

 

Based on his WC testimony, Lawson could very well have been present at this Brennan lineup. He said that Brennan didn't have much to offer in the way of evidentiary value and that Brennan's name didn't mean anything to him.

Mr. STERN. Do you know who that was, the witness?
Mr. LAWSON. I do not know; no, sir.
Mr. STERN. Could it have been someone named Brennan?
Mr. LAWSON. The name doesn't mean anything to me.

In his Report of what he did on November 22nd, Lawson said that he returned to DPD Headquarters and reported to Sorrels and "remained there under his direction". CE 772, page 633 https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1134#relPageId=659&tab=page

Nothing about attending Brennan's lineup.
 

 

Yes, Brennan testified that he thought it was Patterson that picked him and brought him down to DPD Headquarters. Patterson was interviewed by the Church Committee, and said that he had not filed a formal Report on Oswald's interview, but the Committee jumped from Oswald's interview to a discussion about Hosty, and then Patterson's interview with Marina. So I can't tell from this document if he was present for the Brennan lineup or not.

(I'm sorry, I forgot to include the citation for this, but if you do a search in the MF Foundation, you'll find it.)

 

CE 1024 is a collection of SS Agents' Reports. Patterson is not among them. In his cover letter to CE 1024, Rowley writes to Rankin that Sorrels' and Lawson's Reports were not included as they were already part of the Commission's records.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1135#relPageId=736&tab=page

 

Steve Thomas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alistair Briggs said:

the only witness brought to a line up in regards to the President's assassination was Brennan, could Brown be (somewhat back-handedly) be corroborating Brennan being there?

Thoughts?

Alistair,

 

You're absolutely right. All of the lineups had to do with Tippitt witnesses.

As Chief Jesse Curry said, "We never were able to put Oswald in that window with a gun in his hand".

Brown was testifying only to the lineups he was at. I don't think any DPD personnel were present at Brennan's, Brown included.

 

Steve Thomas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/11/2017 at 10:51 AM, David Josephs said:

So Item #3 says that they "witnessed this line-up" - not necessarily a line-up for Brennan's sake.

Brown and Dhority were at the 6:30, not the 7:55 it seems.  The "officers with witness" were with Barbara, not Brennan.  As I read it Steve, it appears the Barbara line-up was crashed by Sorrels and Brennen.  

The other DPD men were simply not involved and since he "Failed to ID" why would they make more of that in a report  or testimony?

With regards to the use of "WE",  it seems he uses "we" as the preferred pronoun regardless.  "We" in the case you name refers to he and Brennan.. FWIW

DJ

Mr. SORRELS - I did not talk to Oswald again, and I was around there. When I contacted Washington, I was informed that Inspector Kelley was being directed to be there, and he would be there later on that evening, that they had caught him out on the road, and he would come there to help out.
I also got information to Captain Fritz that I had this witness, Brennan, that I had talked to, and that I would like very much for him to get a chance to see Oswald in a lineup. And Captain Fritz said that would be fine.
So I instructed Special Agent Patterson, I believe it was, after I had located Brennan---had quite a difficult time to locate him, because he wasn't at home. And they finally prevailed upon his wife to try to help me locate him, and she, as I recall it, said that she would see if she could locate him by phone. I called her, I believe, the second time and finally got a phone number and called him and told him we would like for him to come down and arrange for him to meet one of our agents to pick him up at the place there. And when they came down there with him, I got ahold of Captain Fritz and told him that the witness was there, Mr. Brennan.
He said, "I wish he would have been here a little sooner, we just got through with a lineup. But we will get another fixed up."
So I took Mr. Brennan, and we went to the assembly room, which is also where they have the lineup, and Mr. Brennan, upon arrival at the police station, said, "I don't know if I can do you any good or not, because I have seen the man that they have under arrest on television," and he said. "I just don't know whether I can identify him positively or not" because he said that the man on television was a bit disheveled and his shirt was open or something like that, and he said "The man I saw was not in that condition."
So when we got to the assembly room, Mr. Brennan said he would like to get quite a ways back, because he would like to get as close to the distance away from where he saw this man at the time that the shooting took place as he could.
And I said, "Well, we will get you clear on to the back and then we can move up forward."
They did bring Oswald in in a lineup.
He looked very carefully, and then we rooted him up closer and so forth, and he said, "I cannot positively say."
I said, "Well, is there anyone there that looks like him?"
He said, "Well, that second man from the left," who was Oswald--"he looks like him."
Then he repeated that the man he saw was not disheveled.

1794-002.gif 

 

As the last post on a page, it was lost in the shuffle...

You echoed my thoughts about the DPD not being there for Brennan...  and from all accounts, Brennan is the only witness claiming to have seen the shooter other than Euins whose story had to be discounted immediately.  

I did this little gif focusing on Brennan...  he doesn't appear to be looking up at any time...  and he kinda shoots himself in the foot with this testimony, no?

 

 

 

 

Edited by David Josephs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-36.html

DVP vs. DiEUGENIO (PART 36):

Jim DiEugenio has now added one more person to his already huge list
of liars and cover-up artists associated with President Kennedy's
assassination. And that person is witness Howard L. Brennan.

Brennan could conceivably have already been on DiEugenio's "liars"
list prior to May of 2010. I'm not sure if he was or not. But as of
5/27/10, we can now be certain that DiEugenio thinks that the late
Howard Brennan was positively a xxxx, because DiEugenio has said he
now believes that Brennan never viewed a police lineup AT ALL on
November 22, 1963:

"I don't think Brennan was at any lineup. I think that was all
manufactured after the fact. I think Brennan is a completely created
witness." -- Jim DiEugenio; 5/27/10

http://www.box.net/shared/axiednnqla

Nice, huh? DiEugenio has decided that Howard Leslie Brennan was a
rotten xxxx too. (Jim recently also added civilian witnesses Buell
Wesley Frazier and Linnie Mae Randle to his list of liars as well.)

For the record, Brennan said this to the Warren Commission:

"They told me they were going to conduct a lineup and wanted me
to view it, which I did." -- Howard L. Brennan; Via his 1964 Warren
Commission testimony [at 3 H 147].

Plus, Brennan also said the following things in his Sheriff's Department
affidavit that he filled out on the DAY OF THE ASSASSINATION (I
wonder if DiEugenio thinks this is a fake document too?):

"In the east end of the building and the second row of windows
from the top I saw a man in this window. I had seen him before the
President's car arrived. .... He was a white man in his early 30's,
slender, nice looking, slender and would weigh about 165 to 175
pounds. .... I then saw this man I have described in the window and he
was taking aim with a high powered rifle. I could see all of the
barrel of the gun. I do not know if it had a scope on it or not. I was
looking at the man in this window at the time of the last explosion.
Then this man let the gun down to his side and stepped down out of
sight. He did not seem to be in any hurry. I could see this man from
about his belt up. There was nothing unusual about him at all in
appearance. I believe that I could identify this man if I ever saw him
again." -- Howard L. Brennan; 11/22/63 Affidavit

So, Brennan--on the day of the assassination!--told the Dallas County
Sheriff's Department (via his affidavit) that "I could identify this man
if I ever saw him again".

And so, even though these key words are contained within Brennan's
November 22nd affidavit -- "I could identify this man if I ever saw
him again" -- Jim DiEugenio thinks that the police NEVER TOOK THIS
MAN NAMED HOWARD BRENNAN TO VIEW A LINEUP.

In addition, there is Commission Exhibit 2006, which contains an FBI
report of an interview that the FBI had with Brennan on January 7, 1964.
Here are some highlights from that FBI interview (which took place two
months before Brennan's Warren Commission session):

"Mr. BRENNAN added that after his first interview at the Sheriff's Office,
on November 22, 1963, he left and went home at about 2 P.M. While
he was at home, and before he returned to view a lineup, which included
the possible assassin of President KENNEDY, he observed LEE HARVEY
OSWALD'S picture on television. Mr. BRENNAN said that this, of course,
did not help him retain the original impression of the man in the window
with the rifle; however, upon seeing LEE HARVEY OSWALD in the police
lineup, he felt that OSWALD most resembled the man whom he had seen
in the window."

And in addition to now labelling Howard Brennan as a xxxx regarding
the lineup, DiEugenio is also forced (by necessity) to place the label
of "xxxx" around the neck of Secret Service agent Forrest V. Sorrels
as well. And that's because Sorrels made the following statements to
the Warren Commission concerning Howard Brennan viewing a lineup on
the night of November 22, 1963 [at 7 H 354]:

"I also got information to Captain Fritz that I had this witness, Brennan,
that I had talked to, and that I would like very much for him to get a
chance to see Oswald in a lineup. And Captain Fritz said that would be
fine. So I instructed Special Agent Patterson, I believe it was, after I
had located Brennan--had quite a difficult time to locate him, because
he wasn’t at home. And they finally prevailed upon his wife to try to
help me locate him, and she, as I recall it, said that she would see if
she could locate him by phone. I called her, I believe, the second time
and finally got a phone number and called him and told him we would
like for him to come down and arrange for him to meet one of our agents
to pick him up at the place there. And when they came down there with
him, I got ahold of Captain Fritz and told him that the witness was
there, Mr. Brennan. He said, “I wish he would have been here a little
sooner, we just got through with a lineup. But we will get another fixed
up.”

[...]

"So when we got to the assembly room, Mr. Brennan said he would like
to get quite a ways back, because he would like to get as close to the
distance away from where he saw this man at the time that the shooting
took place as he could. And I said, “Well, we will get you clear on to the
back and then we can move up forward.” They did bring Oswald in in a
lineup. He [Brennan] looked very carefully, and then we moved him up
closer and so forth, and he said, “I cannot positively say.” I said, “Well,
is there anyone there that looks like him?” He said, “Well, that second
man from the left,” who was Oswald--“he looks like him.”" -- Forrest V. Sorrels

-------------------

In short, James DiEugenio doesn't care how many innocent people he has
to smear in order to promote his nonsensical theories. The more liars, the
merrier, it would seem.

David Von Pein
May 2010

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

Brown was testifying only to the lineups he was at. I don't think any DPD personnel were present at Brennan's, Brown included.
 

Brown's testimony implies (imo) that he was present in the same room at the same time as Brennan was there, albeit that Brown was not there for the purpose of having Brennan there as a witness... Brown (and Dhority) were at the line up with the Davis sisters... whilst in the room, Brennan was brought in by Sorrels and A.N.Other... one line up - two separate purposes...because of the two different purposes (Davis sisters = Tippit murder, Brennan = Kennedy murder) there was no need for Sorrels to tell Brown and Dhority the name of the person he had brought in and why he was there... but Brown would no doubt have heard some of what Brennan said and thus, without knowing his name, Brown works out that in the room there is another witness who is there about the President's assassination; hence looking at what he said in his WC testimony;

Mr. BELIN. Anything else in connection with that identification?
Mr. BROWN. That is the only two that I was active insofar as the showups and identification of Lee Harvey Oswald by any of the witnesses on either Officer Tippit or-the President's assassination.

Brown is saying that his only involvement at that line-up was directly in regards to the two Davis sisters and he had no part whatsoever to do with the witness that was also there in regards to the President's assassination. What he is saying there is that he was there with the Davis sisters at the same time that a witness to the President's assassination was also there but that he didn't have any involvement with it...

So Brown (a DPD personnel) admits that he was there in the room at the same time, but not involved with, the witness brought in that was there about the President's assassination (the only person that could be is Brennan)...

In other words, from Brown's WC testimony it can be drawn that,

DPD personnel were present at the same line up Brennan was, just not with him!

Note also in the WC testimony of Brown he says, on the subject of that line-up only, that he and Dhority took the Davis sisters "to the lineup room where again Oswald and three more men were being shown to other witnesses"

Then there is the WC testimony of Dhority too, on being asked about that line up only...

Mr. BALL. I know--but how was it conducted--did somebody ask questions?
Mr. DHORITY. Well, as I recall, somebody was holding the showup and there was other people there at the same time looking at them.
Mr. BALL. Did somebody ask questions of the men in the showup?
Mr. DHORITY. I think they did.
Mr. BALL. Did you?
Mr. DHORITY. No, sir.

So both Dhority and Brown testify that there were other people looking at the same line up they were at with the Davis sisters, and Brown states that the other people looking at the line up were there in regards to the President's assassination.

So in regards to,

11 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

... no corroboration for his being at this line up except in Brennan's own testimony, his book, and in the rather odd words of Sorrells.

Well, with all I have mentioned above, (to me at least) that adds up to corroboration for Brennan being there, albeit with the caveat that Brown and Dhority didn't know his name.

Regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alistair Briggs said:

Brown's testimony implies (imo) that he was present in the same room at the same time as Brennan was there,

Alistair,

 

Why do neither Brown nor Dhority make mention of this in their after-action reports?

See DPD Archives. Box 3, Folder# 5, Item# 2  and

Box 3, Folder# 6, Item# 2

http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/box3.htm

 

Steve Thomas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve

I would presume for reasons of brevity,

Box 3, Folder# 5, Item# 2 Report On Officer’s Duties, by C. N. Dhority. Report on officer's duties in regards to the murder of Officer J. D. Tippit, (Original)

Box 3, Folder# 6, Item# 2 Report On Officer’s Duties, by C. W. Brown. Report on officer's duties in regards to the murder of Officer J. D. Tippit, (Original)

They were asked to file a brief report on their duties in regards to the murder of Officer Tippit only so that is what they did, anything above and beyond that remit would be superflous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Instead of denying an obvious fact—Howard L. Brennan viewing Lee Harvey Oswald in a police lineup at Dallas City Hall on 11/22/63—conspiracy believers should probably be focusing more of their attention on this potential lie that appeared in LIFE Magazine in October 1964, which concerns whether or not Mr. Brennan really viewed Oswald in two different lineups at the Dallas Police Department shortly after President Kennedy's assassination:

Oct-2-1964-LIFE-Magazine-Excerpt-Page-50

 

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/22169-gerald-ford-and-howard-brennan

 

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Alistair Briggs said:

Rather than it (Brennan at 2 line-ups) being either the truth or a lie, could it not just be a mistake?

Well, yes, I guess that's possible. But I don't know if a "mistake" is likely, since the LIFE article (apparently written by Gerald Ford himself) clearly says that there was a "second lineup" attended by Brennan at the DPD.

In 2015, I offered up a possible explanation for it as an alternative to Mr. Ford coming across as a teller of tales [you can't use the L-word here and have it show up in posts, for some silly reason], but that explanation isn't even too satisfying to an LNer like myself....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/08/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-994.html#Gerald-Ford-Quote-In-LIFE-Magazine-October-2-1964

 

Quote

Is the whole article available to view online?

Yes. I provided the link to it at my webpage. But here it is directly:

https://books.google.com/books?id=UUgEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA1&pg=PA40#v=onepage&q&f=true

And I just took note of another place in the LIFE article (below) where it says that "Brennan later identified Oswald in a police lineup", which, of course, is a totally misleading statement:

https://books.google.com/books?id=UUgEAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA1&pg=PA41#v=onepage&q&f=true

 

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

Well, yes, I guess that's possible. But I don't know if a "mistake" is likely, since the LIFE article (apparently written by Gerald Ford himself) clearly says that there was a "second lineup" attended by Brennan at the DPD.

Both newspapers and magazines typically use a style guide for their publication to ensure a consistent format. The rule therein could be about use of words, use of abbreviations, use of cliches/idioms, length of sentences, length of paragraphs etc.

In terms of say writing a 'news' story or an 'interview piece', any reporter working for a newspaper or magazine will be trained in the style guide and will try at the time of writing up their copy to adhere to the style guide. After that it is likely they will then submit it to a 'sub-editor' or 'editor' whose job is to make sure it does adhere to the publications style guide before it is accepted for publication.

When it comes to a piece written by someone outside the trade - it would still, before publication, be 'edited' to fit in with the publications style guide.

Now, it can say that it was written by Gerald Ford, but as you say David, it is 'apparently' written by Gerald Ford... Whether it was copy fully written by Ford directly after a request from Life, or whether Life submitted questions to Ford for answer and send back, or whether Life sent a reporter to interview Ford and to write the copy as a 'first person account' (Ford's), perhaps there was an interview and it was quite informal and the copy had to be formalised, well, whatever the case may be... the likliehood is that before it was published it would be edited to fit in with the style guide of Life.

Another thing a newspaper or magazine has to do with any copy (but moreso with 'interview' pieces) is edit it to fit! In most times the actual copy would be too large a piece to fit in the available space and has to be edited down to fit - this can be done by cutting out bits that may be superflous or it can be done by rewording certain parts to reduce the space it takes up. Also, sometimes the copy isn't enough and an editor may have to reword it to put more words in to it. Such editing tends not to be done at all with direct quotes (for obvious reasons) but is done often with indirect quotes...

What is important to keep in mind is that the finally published piece will have been edited!

The likliehood is that Ford spoke to a reporter who wrote up the copy (either from a recording or shorthand notes) on his behalf and then it was submitted to an editor who got it ready for publication.

If Ford for example said something like "Brennan at a line up didn't identify Oswald because of fear, even though he knew he could, he later did identify him depite his fear." The reporter or editor could have, whilst getting the piece ready for publication, may have re-written it and tried to clarify it and made the error that that the 'identify' having been used twice meant that there were two times when Brennan was given the opportunity to 'identify' Oswald and inferred that there was thus 2 line ups.

As to why, if that was the case, Ford didn't seek to ask for a correction on that point after publication - the likliehood is that either (a) he never noticed the mistake or (b) he didn't think it was that important a mistake.

Regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

That is really nice work David.

You are right, it does not look like he is staring upwards.

Is that synced with the shot sequence?

 

Another points, if Sorrels was there, why did he have to ask Fritz what time the line up was?

 

 

These are all the available frames with Brennan on them...This takes up thru z207, a point after which LIFE believed a shot was fired...

Seems he should have been looking up by then... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...