The Discharge Of Lee Harvey Oswald And Other Related Issues

[Alistair Briggs]

5 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Dallas Deputy Roger Craig is a brilliant case in point.  There are many aspects to his JFK story.  Where would you like to begin?

This part (taken from his transcript of When They Kill A President);

Quote

Back to November 22, 1963. As I have earlier stated, the time was approximately 12:40 p.m. when I ran into Buddy Walthers. The traffic was very heavy as Patrolman Baker (assigned to Elm and Houston Streets) had left his post, allowing the traffic to travel west on Elm Street. As we were scanning the curb I heard a shrill whistle coming from the north side of Elm Street. I turned and saw a white male in his twenties running down the grassy knoll from the direction of the Texas School Book Depository Building. A light green Rambler station wagon was coming slowly west on Elm Street. The driver of the station wagon was a husky looking Latin, with dark wavy hair, wearing a tan wind breaker type jacket. He was looking up at the man running toward him. He pulled over to the north curb and picked up the man coming down the hill. I tried to cross Elm Street to stop them and find out who they were. The traffic was too heavy and I was unable to reach them. They drove away going west on Elm Street.

Is there any other witnesses who made mention of a 'shrill whislte'?

But the main question I have to ask is how did Roger Craig get across the road? He had been on the grassy knoll talking to witnesses then he crossed the road to look at where a shell might have hit the curb and then heard the shrill whistle etc etc but by that time the traffic was too heavy to get back across the street. Within what, seconds, the traffic had become so heavy (and presumably quickly moving enough) for him not to get back across the road he had just crossed)... or am I missing something...

thoughts?

Regards

 

[Paul Trejo]

44 minutes ago, Alistair Briggs said:

This part (taken from his transcript of When They Kill A President);

Is there any other witnesses who made mention of a 'shrill whislte'?

But the main question I have to ask is how did Roger Craig get across the road? He had been on the grassy knoll talking to witnesses then he crossed the road to look at where a shell might have hit the curb and then heard the shrill whistle etc etc but by that time the traffic was too heavy to get back across the street. Within what, seconds, the traffic had become so heavy (and presumably quickly moving enough) for him not to get back across the road he had just crossed)... or am I missing something...

thoughts?

Regards

Alistair,

That's a great place to start for many reasons.  One reason is that this same account is already given in fuller form in Roger Craig's WC testimony.  It is in this format that Roger Craig will explain how he got to the opposite side of the Grassy Knoll.  We pick up where Craig is at the Grassy Knoll only minutes after the JFK shots:

Mr. BELIN - Then, what did you do?
Mr. CRAIG - Well, I looked around for a little bit, you know, just observing the people and things...And then it was either Lemmy Lewis or Buddy Walthers...one of our other criminal investigators, said that one of the bullets had ricocheted off the south curb of Elm Street. So, Officer Lewis and I walked down the hill and crossed Elm Street to look for the place where the bullet might have hit.
Mr. BELIN - Did he say why he believed one of the bullets ricocheted off the south curb of Elm?
Mr. CRAIG - No; he just said that someone said that one of them had. So we checked it.
Mr. BELIN - So, you searched the south curb of Elm?
Mr. CRAIG - Right.
Mr. BELIN - Did you find anything there to indicate the ricocheted bullet?
Mr. CRAIG - No; we didn't find anything at that time. Now, as we were searching, we had just got over across the street, when I heard someone whistle...
Mr. BELIN - All right. Your heard someone whistle?
Mr. CRAIG - Yes. So I turned and saw a man start to run down the hill on the north side of Elm Street, running down toward Elm Street.
Mr. BELIN - And, about where was he with relation to the School Book Depository Building?
Mr. CRAIG - Directly across that little side street that runs in front of it, He was on the south side of it.
Mr. BELIN - And he was on the south side of what would be an extension of Elm Street, if Elm Street didn't curve down into the underpass?
Mr. CRAIG - Right; right,
Mr. BELIN - And where was he with relation to the west side of the School Book Depository Building?
Mr. CRAIG - ...Actually, directly in line with the southwest corner,
Mr. BELIN - He was directly in line with the southwest corner of the building?
Mr. CRAIG - Yes,
Mr. BELIN - And he was on the south curve of that street that runs right in front of the building there?
Mr. CRAIG - Yes,
Mr. BELIN - And he started to run toward Elm Street as it curves under the underpass?
Mr. CRAIG - Yes ; directly down the grassy portion of the park,
Mr. BELIN - All right. And then what did you see happen?
Mr. CRAIG - I saw a light-colored station wagon, driving real slow, coming west on Elm Street from Houston.  Actually, it was nearly in line with him. And the driver was leaning to his right looking up the hill at the man running down.
Mr. BELIN - Uh-huh.
Mr. CRAIG - And the station wagon stopped almost directly across from me.  And the man continued down the hill and got in the station wagon. And I attempted to cross the street. I wanted to talk to both of them. But the traffic was so heavy I couldn't get across the street.  They were gone before I could.
Mr. BELIN - Where did the station wagon head?
Mr. CRAIG - West on Elm Street.
Mr. BELIN - Under the triple underpass?
Mr. CRAIG - Yes.
Mr. BELIN - Could you describe the man that you saw running down toward the station wagon?
Mr. CRAIG - Oh, he was a white male in his twenties, five nine, five eight, something like that; about 140 to 150; had kind of medium brown sandy hair--you know, it was like it'd been blown--you know, he'd been in the wind or something--it was all wild-looking; had on--uh--blue trousers--
Mr. BELIN - What shade of blue? Dark blue, medium or light?
Mr. CRAIG - No; medium, probably; I'd say medium. And, a light tan shirt, as I remember it.
Mr. BELIN - Anything else about him?
Mr. CRAIG - No; nothing except that he looked like he was in an awful hurry.
Mr. BELIN - What about the man who was driving the car?
Mr. CRAIG - Now, he struck me, at first, as being a colored male. He was very dark complected, had real dark short hair, and was wearing a thin, white-looking jacket.  It looked like the short windbreaker type, you know, because it was real thin and had the collar that came out over the shoulder...just a short jacket.
Mr. BELIN - You say that he first struck you that way. Do you now think that he was a Negro?
Mr. CRAIG - Well -- I didn't get a real good look at him. But my first glance at him...he struck me as a Negro.
Mr. BELIN - Is that what your opinion is today?
Mr. CRAIG - Well, I couldn't say, because I didn't get a good enough look.
Mr. BELIN - What kind and what color station wagon was it?
Mr. CRAIG - It was light colored...it looked white to me.
Mr. BELIN - What model or make was it?
Mr. CRAIG - I thought it was a Nash.
Mr. BELIN - Why would you think it was a Nash?
Mr. CRAIG - Because it had a built-in luggage rack on 'the top. And...at the time, this was the only type car I could fit with that type luggage rack...

So, Alistair, I think that puts everybody on the same page.  Buddy Walthers told Roger Craig that there was a ricochet mark across the road, so he went to look.  Then he heard a shrill whistle.  I would note here that there must have been tremendous noise and commotion near the Grassy Knoll at that time.  The film of that time and place show hundreds of people gathering there.  I estimate it was somewhat after 5 minutes of the JFK shots.

So, a whistle at that time would hardly be noticed by most people -- but perhaps noticed by a Dallas Deputy on the alert.  Also, a whistle heard by somebody standing at one point of the Grassy Knoll might sound shrill, but to somebody at another point might sound dull or barely noticeable.

Also -- the time frames were hard for all the Dealey Plaza and TSBD witnesses to remember.  Bill Shelley, Billy Lovelady and Vicki Adams' gave widely different time frames, and yet they saw each other on the 1st floor TSBD, and this helps us to estimate the TIMING.  The same with Roger Craig -- I find his TIMING is also very loose, but we have further evidence.

Buddy Walthers says that he was at Houston and Main when the shots occurred, and his intuition told him the shots came from behind the picket fence of the Grassy Knoll, so he ran there as fast as he could.  He estimates about 15 seconds to get there (as in a 75 yard dash).  He jumped over the picket fence and looked around bravely -- and only saw DPD officers and Dallas Deputies there, moseying around.  Nothing to see.

So he walked to the Grassy Knoll, and then James Tague walked up and said he was hit by something.  His cheek was bleeding, and so Buddy Walthers walked over to the triple underpass to look for bullet fragments.  He saw a ricochet mark in the pavement, he said.  Then he walked back to the Grassy Knoll.  How long did this take?  At what point did Walthers tell Roger Craig to cross the street?  He does not mention Roger Craig. .

Most importantly -- Roger Craig added in this WC testimony that some hours later he went to the DPD headquarters, up to Captain Fritz' office, talked to Captain Fritz, and then Craig saw LHO inside Fritz' office and confronted him about the Nash Rambler -- AND OSWALD ADMITTED IT WAS A STATION WAGON.

Yet in Captain Fritz' testimony, he denies flatly that (1) Roger Craig told him about a Nash; (2) that Roger Craig was anywhere on this floor; and (3) that Roger Craig ever spoke to Oswald.

Roger Craig was branded a big fibber forever after. 

Yet many years later, photographs appeared that proved that Roger Craig was just outside Captain Fritz's office during the interrogation of Oswald.

Here's where it gets very interesting for me.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited April 4, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[James DiEugenio]

Alistair:

Did you not click at those two links i provided?

You don't write books about covert operations and special forces unless they approve of you.

Therefore, its easy to see the reasoning is circular.  The CIA is plugged into both at a high level.

 

[Alistair Briggs]

16 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

So, a whistle at that time would hardly be noticed by most people -- but perhaps noticed by a Dallas Deputy on the alert.  Also, a whistle heard by somebody standing at one point of the Grassy Knoll might sound shrill, but to somebody at another point might sound dull or barely noticeable.

As true as that may be, surely the real question becomes what was the whistle in the first place? Was it just a coincidental 'noise' that happened to catch Craig's ear? Or is the inference that the whistle was the person he saw 'hailing' their lift (like someone might hail a taxi)?

As a slight aside, if Roger Craig was on such 'alert' that he could hear a 'shrill' whistle that no one else made mention of, can it not also be argued that he would have been on just as much of an 'alert' to note the 'registration plate' of the vehicle? He does mention in his WC testimony that the 'angle' was wrong to read it - fair enough I suppose...

In this photo, the one identified as being Roger Craig, could it be that he is about to cross the road? To me it looks like he is looking up the street to see a gap in the traffic to cross. In terms of time it would fit with what he said...

... anyway,

I don't doubt that Roger Craig saw someone run down and get in to a vehicle, but whether it was Oswald... I doubt very much.

 It does lead in to the 'encounter' Roger Craig had with Oswald... here is a passage from Roger Craig's manuscript...

Quote

I arrived at Capt. Fritz office shortly after 4:30 p.m. I was met by Agent Bookhout from the F.B.I., who took my name and place of employment. The door to Capt. Fritz‘ personal office was open and the blinds on the windows were closed, so that one had to look through the doorway in order to see into the room. I looked through the open door at the request of Capt. Fritz and identified the man who I saw running down the grassy knoll and enter the Rambler station wagon—and it WAS Lee Harvey Oswald.

Fritz and I entered his private office together. He told Oswald, “This man (pointing to me) saw you leave.” At which time the suspect replied, “I told you people I did.” Fritz, apparently trying to console Oswald, said, “Take it easy, son—we‘re just trying to find out what happened.” Fritz then said, “What about the car?” Oswald replied, leaning forward on Fritz‘ desk, “That station wagon belongs to Mrs. Paine—don‘t try to drag her into this.” Sitting back in his chair, Oswald said very disgustedly and very low, “Everybody will know who I am now.”

Does all of that tie in with what he said in his WC testimony though? There are a couple of differences - one is that he puts the time at more like 5:30pm, another is that he makes mention of actually already being in the room with Oswald when Fritz asks him if this was the man he saw, and also he mentions another person sitting in the room too...

... you mention;

1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said:

Yet in Captain Fritz' testimony, he denies flatly that (1) Roger Craig told him about a Nash; (2) that Roger Craig was anywhere on this floor; and (3) that Roger Craig ever spoke to Oswald.

Well Fritz (who was quite busy that day) did remember Roger Craig being 'outside' his office, and indeed does remember talking to him for a minute, but he is quite adamant that Roger Craig did not talk to him in the presence of Oswald, and that's quite an important part...

Quote

Mr. BALL. Roger Craig stated that about 15 minutes after the shooting he saw a man, a white man, leave the Texas State Book Depository Building, run across a lawn, and get into a white Rambler driven by a colored man.
Mr. FRITZ. I don't think that is true.
Mr. BALL. I am stating this. You remember the witness now?
Mr. FRITZ. I remember the witness; yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Did that man ever come into your office and talk to you in the presence of Oswald?
Mr. FRITZ. In the presence of Oswald?
Mr. BALL. Yes.
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I am sure he did not. I believe that man did come to my office in that little hallway, you know outside my office, and I believe I stepped outside the door and talked to him for a minute and I let someone else take an affidavit from him. We should have that affidavit from him if it would help.
Mr. BALL. Now this man states that, has stated, that he came to your office and Oswald was in your office, and you asked him to look at Oswald and tell you whether or not this was the man he saw, and he says that in your presence he identified Oswald as the man that he had seen run across this lawn and get into the white Rambler sedan. Do you remember that?
Mr. FRITZ. I think it was taken, I think it was one of my officers, and I think if he saw him he looked through that glass and saw him from the outside because I am sure of one thing that I didn't bring him in the office with Oswald.
Mr. BALL. You are sure you didn't?
Mr. FRITZ. I am sure of that. I feel positive of that. I would remember that I am sure.

The interesting thing is that what Fritz says there in his WC testimony actually does tie in with what Craig said: "The door to Capt. Fritz‘ personal office was open and the blinds on the windows were closed, so that one had to look through the doorway in order to see into the room. I looked through the open door at the request of Capt. Fritz and identified the man who I saw running down the grassy knoll and enter the Rambler station wagon—and it WAS Lee Harvey Oswald." and it also ties in with Roger Craig's Sheriff Report on the 23rd of November!

Is it possible that Roger Craig, for whatever reason, embellished the actual being in the room with Oswald and the conversation therein?

Regards

[Paul Trejo]

On 4/4/2017 at 3:40 PM, Alistair Briggs said:

As true as that may be, surely the real question becomes what was the whistle in the first place? Was it just a coincidental 'noise' that happened to catch Craig's ear? Or is the inference that the whistle was the person he saw 'hailing' their lift (like someone might hail a taxi)?

As a slight aside, if Roger Craig was on such 'alert' that he could hear a 'shrill' whistle that no one else made mention of, can it not also be argued that he would have been on just as much of an 'alert' to note the 'registration plate' of the vehicle? He does mention in his WC testimony that the 'angle' was wrong to read it - fair enough I suppose...

In this photo, the one identified as being Roger Craig, could it be that he is about to cross the road? To me it looks like he is looking up the street to see a gap in the traffic to cross. In terms of time it would fit with what he said...

... anyway,

I don't doubt that Roger Craig saw someone run down and get in to a vehicle, but whether it was Oswald... I doubt very much.

 It does lead in to the 'encounter' Roger Craig had with Oswald... here is a passage from Roger Craig's manuscript...

Does all of that tie in with what he said in his WC testimony though? There are a couple of differences - one is that he puts the time at more like 5:30pm, another is that he makes mention of actually already being in the room with Oswald when Fritz asks him if this was the man he saw, and also he mentions another person sitting in the room too...

... you mention;

Well Fritz (who was quite busy that day) did remember Roger Craig being 'outside' his office, and indeed does remember talking to him for a minute, but he is quite adamant that Roger Craig did not talk to him in the presence of Oswald, and that's quite an important part...

The interesting thing is that what Fritz says there in his WC testimony actually does tie in with what Craig said: "The door to Capt. Fritz‘ personal office was open and the blinds on the windows were closed, so that one had to look through the doorway in order to see into the room. I looked through the open door at the request of Capt. Fritz and identified the man who I saw running down the grassy knoll and enter the Rambler station wagon—and it WAS Lee Harvey Oswald." and it also ties in with Roger Craig's Sheriff Report on the 23rd of November!

Is it possible that Roger Craig, for whatever reason, embellished the actual being in the room with Oswald and the conversation therein?

Regards

Alistair,

By the numbers:

1.  As for the whistle -- my intuition tells me that many heard it, and nobody registered it as important in the context of the melee at Dealey Plaza in the first 15 minutes after the JFK murder before their very eyes.

2.  I don't think it was the "Oswald" figure who whistled -- in my reading it was probably the driver who whistled (which lessens the number of people who heard it) -- because Craig describes the "Oswald" figure as somewhat frantic.  Shrill whistles are made by people in charge. 

3.   Although I think Roger Craig was alert enough to register a license plate -- I also think that he wasn't close enough, and that people were in his line of sight.

4.  Although that  photo is indeed Roger Craig -- that was not the moment that he was talking about.

5.  You "doubt very much" whether the "Oswald" figure was really Oswald -- and that is your right.  But I think that Roger Craig was an astute Deputy -- and I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt until he contradicts himself. 

6.  Roger Craig's manuscript and his WC testimony match in the main points.  People often have trouble pinpointing the exact number of minutes that it took to do this or that in a crisis.  I don't hold WC witnesses to minutes in their guesswork.

7.  Roger Craig says he was in the room with Oswald, in a conversation between himself, Oswald and Captain Fritz.  Fritz denies it flatly.  One of them is lying.  History has said that Roger Craig was lying.  I say that Captain Fritz was lying.

8.  You ask, Alistair, if it is possible that Roger Craig "embellished the actual being in the room with Oswald and the conversation therein."

8.1.  Of course it's possible -- and history says it is most likely, because Captain Fritz -- who is somehow never questioned -- said Roger Craig *did* "embellish" the story, which is to say, bluntly, that Roger Craig lied.

8.2.  My argument is that Roger Craig told the truth -- and that his truth opens up many other truths that lead to the correct solution to the JFK murder.

8.3.  Just for a small example: that Oswald drove a car to his rooming house in Oak Cliff -- and certainly not any bus or taxi.

8.4.  That Oswald was part of a larger conspiracy organization to assassinate Fidel Castro -- and that was why he foolishly handed over his rifle that morning.

8.5.  So -- the Bus Driver's WC testimony was a case of mistaken identity.

8.6.  So -- the Taxi Driver's WC testimony was a case of mistaken identity.

8.7.  So -- Buell Wesley Frazier told the TRUTH.

8.8.  So -- Captain Fritz was part of the JFK Kill Team, and hoped to convince America that the Communists killed JFK.

8.9.  When US Secretary of State Dean Rusk and US Assistant Attorney General Nick Katzenbach put pressure on Texas Attorney General Waggoner Carr and Dallas DA Henry Wade that the "Communist" strategy was dead on arrival -- all the Dallas officials suddenly turned to the official "Lone Nut" theory of LHO.

8.10.  Therefore, in a late move, Captain Fritz pushed for the "Lone Nut" theory has hard as he could -- and that meant steamrolling over Roger Craig.

8.11.  That's what happened, IMHO.  And the rest of what Roger Craig said in later life is equally important, IMHO.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Alistair Briggs]

3 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

4.  Although that  photo is indeed Roger Craig -- that was not the moment that he was talking about.

You are correct that it wasn't the time he was talking about... it was (just) before it... and that is in agreement with the time that he put on hearing the whistle... Roger Craig said that he was on that side of the road and then crossed it to look at where a bullet may have hit the grass, and it was just after crossing the road that he heard the 'shrill whistle' -  that photo, as can be seen by the 'Hertz' sign was taken at 12:40, so even if he crossed the road seconds after this photo then that would tie in with his time line (which gives credence to his story)...

3 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

1.  As for the whistle -- my intuition tells me that many heard it, and nobody registered it as important in the context of the melee at Dealey Plaza in the first 15 minutes after the JFK murder before their very eyes.

2.  I don't think it was the "Oswald" figure who whistled -- in my reading it was probably the driver who whistled (which lessens the number of people who heard it) -- because Craig describes the "Oswald" figure as somewhat frantic.  Shrill whistles are made by people in charge.

I don't doubt that he heard something that caught his attention...

Considering the position of the car, and considering the position of other people who were on that side of the street, and considering that Roger Craig was on the other side of the street, and considering from what side the 'Oswald' figure is said to have ran from, if the whistle did indeed come from the driver (presumably as some kind of 'signal') then... well... it leads to a lot more questions...

4 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

5.  You "doubt very much" whether the "Oswald" figure was really Oswald -- and that is your right.  But I think that Roger Craig was an astute Deputy -- and I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt until he contradicts himself.

On the assumption it was Oswald...

... whether or not Oswald was being 'set-up' as the 'assassin', the incident Roger Craig mentions is, in his opinion, to all intents and purposes, Oswald's 'escape' and it must have been something that was put in to practice beforehand, that is to say that 'Oswald' must have known to expect to be picked up by car - if that was the case then he must also have been told at what time and where - does it make sense that the time would be 10 minutes later, does it make sense that the place would be pretty much exactly where the crime happened, and, indeed, does it make sense that a shrill whistle would be used as a signal in such a place... to me it doesn't make sense as an 'escape' for Oswald either way...

I don't doubt that Roger Craig was an astute Deputy, and I don't doubt him seeing someone run down and get in to a car... it's just I can't see it being Oswald that he saw...

... was Oswald wearing blue trousers?

4 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

3.   Although I think Roger Craig was alert enough to register a license plate -- I also think that he wasn't close enough, and that people were in his line of sight.

People wouldn't have been in his line of sight - he was on the other side of the street from the car, the only thing that would be in his line of sight would be the 'heavy' traffic... on that point, I find that a bit strange also because he had just crossed the road easily enough and then seconds (as per what he says) later the traffic is so 'heavy' that he can't bolt across the road quick enough to 'speak' to the people in the car, and too heavy also for him to be able to read the plate... for such an 'astute' Deputy would reading the plate not be a priority... as for being not close enough... he wasn't that far away! Maybe it was just the angle, maybe the traffic was too heavy for him to get a look at it, no biggy really...

4 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

6.  Roger Craig's manuscript and his WC testimony match in the main points.  People often have trouble pinpointing the exact number of minutes that it took to do this or that in a crisis.  I don't hold WC witnesses to minutes in their guesswork.

We agree on the problem of timing that people have.

With regards to Roger Craig's manuscript and his WC testimony, yes they match in the main points, in the main...

there is one thing I noticed in his Clay Shaw trial testimony that jumped out to me that speaks of a certain 'embellishment' of what he knows... in both his Sherrif report and his WC testimony he mentions a 'luggage rack' and yet by the time of his Clay Shaw trial testimony he calls it a 'chrome luggage rack'! May not sound like a big difference, and really it's not, it's just something that stood out to me... another thing that stood out as a difference is that in his WC testimony he says Oswald leaned forward yet in his Clay Shaw trial testimony he says Oswald leaned back...

I will get back to some of the other points you have raised Paul.

Regards

 

[James DiEugenio]

Alistair:

Are you aware of the pics that show an Oswald double walking in that area near the incline after the assassination?

Also, many years ago, while I was running Probe Magazine, Anna Marie Kuhns Walko put together a compendium of documents for us.

In there was a picture of what looked like this Oswald double behind the picket fence, from his head up. I should have kept it, but in those days I as going through scores of documents each day.

That convinced me that Craig was telling the truth.

 

[Alistair Briggs]

7 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Are you aware of the pics that show an Oswald double walking in that area near the incline after the assassination?

Also, many years ago, while I was running Probe Magazine, Anna Marie Kuhns Walko put together a compendium of documents for us.

In there was a picture of what looked like this Oswald double behind the picket fence, from his head up. I should have kept it, but in those days I as going through scores of documents each day.

I'm sure I have come across such photos but can't find them now...

Anyway,

6 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

That convinced me that Craig was telling the truth.

In terms of what he saw on that day I too think he was telling the truth...

as mentioned in Jim Marrs Crossfire:

Quote

In recent years there seems to be growing corroboration for Craig's story. First, a photograph taken in Dealey Plaze minutes after the assassination shows Craig in the exact locations as he described. There are even two photos of a Nash Rambler station wagon moving west on elm.
In later years, researchers discovered Warren Commission Document 5, independent corroboration of Craig's story that was not published in the Commission's twenty-six volumes. In this document, an FBI report dated the day after the assassination, Marvin C. Robinson reported he had just past Houston Street driving west on Elm Street in heavy traffic when he saw a light-colored Nash station wagon stop in front of the Texas School Book Depository and a white man walk down the grassy incline and get into the vehicle, which drove west.

and, as you know, as mentioned in JFK and the Unspeakable, his story is also corroborated (to varying degrees) by Richard Randolph Carr, Helen Forrest, James Pennington and Roy Carr. Taking all that in to account then I think it does become clear that when Roger Craig said he saw someone run away from the TSBD and get in to a car he was indeed telling the truth...

... was it Oswald though (some people might think it was the Oswald, or maybe just an Oswald), as far as I'm concerned though it could just as easily be some random person. The question I ask myself is 'does it make sense' and I can't think of any reasonable reason for 'Oswald' to be making such an 'escape' at that time - if anyone can offer up an explanation at all that would be appreciated.

Regards

[Michael Clark]

4 minutes ago, Alistair Briggs said:

I'm sure I have come across such photos but can't find them now...

Anyway,

In terms of what he saw on that day I too think he was telling the truth...

as mentioned in Jim Marrs Crossfire:

and, as you know, as mentioned in JFK and the Unspeakable, his story is also corroborated (to varying degrees) by Richard Randolph Carr, Helen Forrest, James Pennington and Roy Carr. Taking all that in to account then I think it does become clear that when Roger Craig said he saw someone run away from the TSBD and get in to a car he was indeed telling the truth...

... was it Oswald though (some people might think it was the Oswald, or maybe just an Oswald), as far as I'm concerned though it could just as easily be some random person. The question I ask myself is 'does it make sense' and I can't think of any reasonable reason for 'Oswald' to be making such an 'escape' at that time - if anyone can offer up an explanation at all that would be appreciated.

Regards

I am convinced that Craig wished that he was in Antarctica with Fletcher Prouty that week. I don't see him falsely interjecting himself in anything at all.

Cheers,

Michael

[Ray Mitcham]

1 minute ago, Michael Clark said:

I am convinced that Craig wished that he was in Antarctica with Fletcher Prouty that week. I don't see him falsely interjecting himself in anything at all.

Cheers,

Michael

Michael, this was posted several years ago on this forum, by Malcolm Ward

Re Tidy Laundromat.

I believe the Penningtons saw Oswald at the Tidy Lady Laundromat

in the 12:50's before one o'clock. Most people will only accept a one

Oswald involvment and will forced to choose between the modes of potential

transporation. It fits well with me with two Oswalds, in all the modes of

transportation, with one setting the other one up...then, and the days and

weeks prior which are so well documented.

Source:

http://groups.google...a0abee?lnk=raot

The Tidy Lady Laundromat was located on Davis Street as well.

Source:

http://www.jfkassass...p?topic=5830.24

The light-colored Rambler station wagon that was seen with someone who was practically a double for Lee Harvey Oswald passed under the triple-underpass at 12:40 P.M.

A few blocks beyond that overpass is the Commerce Street Viaduct, leading directly into Oak Cliff. It is practically certain that after the Rambler with an unknown driver and a “Oswald impostor” left the Depository it crossed the viaduct, and after turning left on Sylvan Street drove 12 blocks further going south on Davis St. Three blocks away was the Tidy Lady Launderette. The drive from the Texas School Book Depository, would have taken 7 or 8 minutes. It is at the launderette where the car stopped. It would have been within a minute or so of 12:47 P.M.

The Tidy Lady (1227 Davis) was at the corner of Davis St and North Clinton St. There were only two people in the laundromat, at that time John Wesley and Oda Pennington. The car with the two fugitives parked on the east side of North Clinton St., by the side door of the laundromat. The young man who exited the car passed the laundromat and then turned around and entered, making a beeline towards the payphone. A brief pause and the Pennington’s heard the caller speaking in Spanish, in the FBI report, the Pennington’s felt that the man acted as if he was in trouble, under the circumstances, the Pennington’s were no doubt, accurate in their were perception. What happened to the driver is not certain but he may have left the scene as soon as he parked the car, which is what the Oswald impostor did as soon as he finished his call. He was last seen walking South on North Clinton St.

The car had been abandoned. When the couple were shown a photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald, they said he “appeared” to be the same person.

Just as compelling is how close the laudromat was to Jefferson Street, the location of the Texas Theater, and on the other side of Jefferson St. in the distance was the apartment of Jack Ruby. The Tidy Lady Lauderette on Clinton Street was only five blocks south away from Jefferson Street.

paraphrased from pages 831-832 Harvey and Lee - John Armstrong

So if you are trying to ascertain if another person was "in play" on Jefferson Street besides Lee Oswald, this scenario definitely seems pertinent. End of account. Yes....End of story? Definitely not.

There was also a Clarence Otis Pennington in W. Virginia who was interviewed by the FBI, at this point it is not known whether the individual Oda Pennington was related to Clarence Pennington. However there is a very sophisticated genealogy website and Family organization named Pennington Research Association, that almost without question makes mention of an C.O. Pennigton and “his wife Ida!”......If you surmised that the Pennington’s are interesting you would be right....

Source:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=3128&st=150

 

 

[Michael Clark]

6 minutes ago, Ray Mitcham said:

Michael, this was posted several years ago on this forum, by Malcolm Ward

Re Tidy Laundromat.

I believe the Penningtons saw Oswald at the Tidy Lady Laundromat

in the 12:50's before one o'clock. Most people will only accept a one

Oswald involvment and will forced to choose between the modes of potential

transporation. It fits well with me with two Oswalds, in all the modes of

transportation, with one setting the other one up...then, and the days and

weeks prior which are so well documented.

Source:

http://groups.google...a0abee?lnk=raot

The Tidy Lady Laundromat was located on Davis Street as well.

Source:

http://www.jfkassass...p?topic=5830.24

The light-colored Rambler station wagon that was seen with someone who was practically a double for Lee Harvey Oswald passed under the triple-underpass at 12:40 P.M.

A few blocks beyond that overpass is the Commerce Street Viaduct, leading directly into Oak Cliff. It is practically certain that after the Rambler with an unknown driver and a “Oswald impostor” left the Depository it crossed the viaduct, and after turning left on Sylvan Street drove 12 blocks further going south on Davis St. Three blocks away was the Tidy Lady Launderette. The drive from the Texas School Book Depository, would have taken 7 or 8 minutes. It is at the launderette where the car stopped. It would have been within a minute or so of 12:47 P.M.

The Tidy Lady (1227 Davis) was at the corner of Davis St and North Clinton St. There were only two people in the laundromat, at that time John Wesley and Oda Pennington. The car with the two fugitives parked on the east side of North Clinton St., by the side door of the laundromat. The young man who exited the car passed the laundromat and then turned around and entered, making a beeline towards the payphone. A brief pause and the Pennington’s heard the caller speaking in Spanish, in the FBI report, the Pennington’s felt that the man acted as if he was in trouble, under the circumstances, the Pennington’s were no doubt, accurate in their were perception. What happened to the driver is not certain but he may have left the scene as soon as he parked the car, which is what the Oswald impostor did as soon as he finished his call. He was last seen walking South on North Clinton St.

The car had been abandoned. When the couple were shown a photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald, they said he “appeared” to be the same person.

Just as compelling is how close the laudromat was to Jefferson Street, the location of the Texas Theater, and on the other side of Jefferson St. in the distance was the apartment of Jack Ruby. The Tidy Lady Lauderette on Clinton Street was only five blocks south away from Jefferson Street.

paraphrased from pages 831-832 Harvey and Lee - John Armstrong

So if you are trying to ascertain if another person was "in play" on Jefferson Street besides Lee Oswald, this scenario definitely seems pertinent. End of account. Yes....End of story? Definitely not.

There was also a Clarence Otis Pennington in W. Virginia who was interviewed by the FBI, at this point it is not known whether the individual Oda Pennington was related to Clarence Pennington. However there is a very sophisticated genealogy website and Family organization named Pennington Research Association, that almost without question makes mention of an C.O. Pennigton and “his wife Ida!”......If you surmised that the Pennington’s are interesting you would be right....

Source:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=3128&st=150

 

 

Thanks Ray, interesting read. 

[Paul Trejo]

On ‎4‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 9:59 AM, Alistair Briggs said:

...Anyway,

In terms of what he saw on that day I too think he was telling the truth...

as mentioned in Jim Marrs Crossfire:

and, as you know, as mentioned in JFK and the Unspeakable, his story is also corroborated (to varying degrees) by Richard Randolph Carr, Helen Forrest, James Pennington and Roy Carr. Taking all that in to account then I think it does become clear that when Roger Craig said he saw someone run away from the TSBD and get in to a car he was indeed telling the truth...

... was it Oswald though (some people might think it was the Oswald, or maybe just an Oswald), as far as I'm concerned though it could just as easily be some random person. The question I ask myself is 'does it make sense' and I can't think of any reasonable reason for 'Oswald' to be making such an 'escape' at that time - if anyone can offer up an explanation at all that would be appreciated.

Regards

Alistair,

Granting all that you say -- there are major implications if Roger Craig's story turns out to be correct.

You admit that the first part of his story is probably correct -- his seeing somebody enter into a Nash Rambler outside the TSBD after the JFK shooting ...

...but in the next breath you effectively call Roger Craig a big fibber -- because the second part of his story claims that Oswald in Captain Fritz's office was the same man.

And to eliminate any doubt whatsoever, Roger Craig testified that he and Captain Fritz had engaged Oswald in a conversation about that station wagon -- and Oswald responded specifically about the "station wagon."

So -- if years of subsequent evidence show that Roger Craig was telling the truth about the first part of his story -- what will it take for you to accept the second part of his story?

I grant that the ice is thin on this topic today. 

The main obstacle, of course, is that when we say that Roger Craig told the truth, we are automatically saying that Captain Fritz was a big fibber, because Fritz said that Roger Craig's story was flat out false.

We can't have it both ways.

Yet my CT today claims that Captain Fritz was one of the JFK Kill Team -- along with several other Dallas officials -- and that Captain Fritz' WC testimony is chock full of fabrications from start to finish.

That is the key implication -- and there are many more.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited April 7, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Alistair Briggs]

2 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Granting all that you say -- there are major implications if Roger Craig's story turns out to be correct.

You admit that the first part of his story is probably correct -- his seeing somebody enter into a Nash Rambler outside the TSBD after the JFK shooting ...

...but in the next breath you effectively call Roger Craig a big fibber -- because the second part of his story claims that Oswald in Captain Fritz's office was the same man.

Being wrong about something does not a 'big fibber' make... if Roger Craig thought the person he saw in Fritz's office was the same person he saw get in to a car earlier then he is being honest, albeit he could be mistaken...

... it's actually very common for people to be wrong about things that they are sure they are correct about. Granted most of the times it may be on either frivolous things or just things that are relatively unimportant - for example, have you ever heard anyone quote any of these famous movie quotes;

"If you build it, they will come" (Fields of Dreams)
"Luke, I am your father" (Empire Strikes Back)
"Play it again Sam" (Cassablanca)
"You want the truth? You can't handle the truth?" (A Few Good Men)
"Do you feel lucky, punk?" (Dirty Harry)

Each of those are wrong - they are all misquotes - someone who repeats one of those does so erroneously but they aren't 'fibbing' about it (unless they know it's wrong )

Anyway, at the end of the day, the person that Roger Craig saw in Fritz's office was either the same person he saw get in to the car or it wasn't the same person - either way I don't think he was being a 'big fibber', I just think he was wrong...

2 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

And to eliminate any doubt whatsoever, Roger Craig testified that he and Captain Fritz had engaged Oswald in a conversation about that station wagon -- and Oswald responded specifically about the "station wagon."

This is where it may get slightly more complicated. lol

It's possible that Roger Craig is putting himself in to such a conversation through a 'false memory'... perhaps he overheard a conversation and latterly his memory played tricks and he became convinced he was in the room as an active participant...

2 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

The main obstacle, of course, is that when we say that Roger Craig told the truth, we are automatically saying that Captain Fritz was a big fibber, because Fritz said that Roger Craig's story was flat out false.

We can't have it both ways.

We kind of can have it both ways, inasmuch as it's possible that both Fritz and Craig are telling the truth (as they recall it) - the question is which one is wrong (I don't think either were being 'big fibbers') and from all I have read I would say that it is Craig that is wrong...

... not sure if you were aware of this, but I found it very interesting that two of the most esteemed 'conspiracy theorists' - Mary Ferrell and Harold Weisberg - both 'dismissed' Roger Craig.

You asked,

3 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

So -- if years of subsequent evidence show that Roger Craig was telling the truth about the first part of his story -- what will it take for you to accept the second part of his story?

Looking at it from a different angle, the question is, was it actually Oswald that he saw get in to the car and if so what is the explanation. To me it makes no sense whatsoever as an 'escape' for Oswald. The time and the location just don't make sense to me...

Regards

 

 

[Paul Trejo]

Alis

3 hours ago, Alistair Briggs said:

... not sure if you were aware of this, but I found it very interesting that two of the most esteemed 'conspiracy theorists' - Mary Ferrell and Harold Weisberg - both 'dismissed' Roger Craig.

You asked,

Looking at it from a different angle, the question is, was it actually Oswald that he saw get in to the car and if so what is the explanation. To me it makes no sense whatsoever as an 'escape' for Oswald. The time and the location just don't make sense to me...

Regards

Alistair,

To this very day -- the vast majority of CTers dismiss Roger Craig.  You are among the most gentle by saying that his direct conversation with Lee Harvey Oswald and Captain Fritz in the office of Captain Fritz was a "false memory."

Very gentle indeed.

Now, you say that the "escape" of Oswald by car right on Elm Street makes no sense to you.

Yet you overlook certain facts, IMHO, such as the following: 

1.  Insofar as this was less than 10 minutes after the JFK murder, then absolutely nobody but nobody was looking for Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO). 

2.  So, if LHO ran from a rear exit to a car on Elm Street, then it was in no way an "escape."   Nobody was looking for him.

3.  In fact, only 2 minutes after the JFK murder, Officer Marrion Baker held a gun to LHO's chest and demanded his identity.   Then he let LHO go.

4.  Taking a car ride to his rooming house explains why the bus ride and the taxi ride witnesses of LHO were such obvious cases of mistaken identity.

5.  LHO taking a car ride anywhere was strictly against the "Lone Nut" scenario.  It had to be stomped out of existence.

6.  For the same reason, the FBI had to stomp out the actual Mexican Immigration records from late September and early October 1963 show that LHO entered and exited Mexico as a passenger in a car.

7.  Instead, the FBI pretended to believe the WC testimony of the Mexico bus riders who claimed to see LHO on the bus -- but contradicted themselves and each other.

8.  Nevertheless -- they fit the "Lone Nut" scenario, so their WC testimony was accepted and promoted. 

9.  By dismissing Roger Craig's honest WC testimony -- as the vast majority of CTers do -- we accidentally agree with the "Lone Nut" fiction of the FBI.

That's what I respectfully believe you're overlooking, Alistair.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Alistair Briggs]

3 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

To this very day -- the vast majority of CTers dismiss Roger Craig.  You are among the most gentle by saying that his direct conversation with Lee Harvey Oswald and Captain Fritz in the office of Captain Fritz was a "false memory."

Very gentle indeed.

The way memory works is intriguing. It's more about 'connecting the dots' than having 'total recall', plus conflation of memories can happen quite easily...

3 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Now, you say that the "escape" of Oswald by car right on Elm Street makes no sense to you.

On the assumption that it was LHO, regardless of whatever his 'role' in the assassination was or wasn't, yes, I posit that it makes no sense as an 'escape'... even if it wasn't LHO but still had relevancy to the assassination I would still say it makes no sense as an 'escape'... for reasons of location and timing... 

At the end of this response I will offer up an innocent explanation of what Roger Craig saw.

3 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Yet you overlook certain facts, IMHO, such as the following:

I can assure you that I haven't 'overlooked' any of the points you raised.

I won't respond to every single point for purposes of brevity (although may come back to them later) but will respond to a couple of things just now...

3 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

1.  Insofar as this was less than 10 minutes after the JFK murder...

I think we can fairly say that it was certainly more than 10 minutes after the JFK murder because of the following photo...

... it ties in very well with what Roger Craig said his 'timeline' was. He said that it was approx. 10-12 minutes after the shots that he 'handed over' the Rowlands, he then said he 'looked around a bit' then crossed the road, looked at the 'curb' and then heard the 'shrill' whistle, he put that as happening at 14-15 minutes after the shots... regardless of how much he was off with his actual timing, the photo shows him before crossing the road and thus some time before hearing the whistle and the photo shows the time as being 10 minutes after the shots. Thus, with a high degree of certainity we can say that his hearing of the 'shrill' whistle was certainly more than 10 minutes after the shots...

... that nobody at this time was looking for LHO is irrelevant...

Wait, wait, wait...

As you know, Frazier (somewhat recently) has made the claim that he saw Oswald walk up Houston Street (beside the TSBD) and then cross over to the other side of Houston and then crosses Elm street. Frazier posits that Oswald must have come from the rear of the building but that isn't necessarily the case, it would only appear that way to Frazier if, for example, Oswald left via the front turned left and then turned left at the corner of Houston and walked up that road looking for a bus (?) and then for some reason decided to 'double-back'... in terms of a 'timeline' all of that could be said to tie in with Oswald then boarding the bus (as claimed by the WC)... on the assumption that that didn't happen, how does that fit in with Roger Craig's claim? If Roger Craig is correct that it was Oswald he saw then Oswald must have, since last being seen by Frazier, walked about for a period of time and headed, not just back to the TSBD, but beyond it and behind it to thus be seen running down the 'grassy knoll' and in to the car... the being picked up by a car must have been something that was pre-arranged, if the timing and the location were indeed what was pre-arranged then how does that explain away Oswald's wee journey in a totally different direction as seen by Frazier. It doesn't make sense (to me, at least). Why not make the arrangement to be picked up on Houston Street or Elm Street or some other location where the car could be parked awaiting Oswald to turn up, or at least have Oswald walk to an 'innocous' position to be picked up by the car at a pre-determinded time...

Regards

P.S.  I earlier said I would offer up an 'innocent' explanation of what Roger Craig saw...

On the day of JFK's visit to Dallas two pals decide to go and see him, and decide to take the car. They park the car on a nearby street and walk to where they know the motorcade is travelling past. The assassination takes place. The one who drove decides that he is going to go and get the car and leave but the other says he wants to look about a bit, he stays whilst the other gets the car, telling him to pick him up on that street where he is looking around, he will keep an eye out for the car. Fine says the driver, should only take 5 minutes for me to be there. Ok. So the driver gets the car, drives down the street slowly, his friend still looking around sees the car and runs down to it and gets in and off home they go...

... it's a possibility as far as I'm concerned.