Paul Trejo Posted April 7, 2018 Author Share Posted April 7, 2018 (edited) On 4/6/2018 at 6:14 PM, Paul Brancato said: Does anyone else here notice how unwilling the two main posters here are to answer my questions? ... ....Skorzeny...was working for US intel. There are good reasons to think he might be QJWIN...Skorzeny operated out of Madrid. Interesting that both E Howard Hunt and William Harvey had some unnamed business in Madrid in 1963. How about we put our considerable knowledge, and access to documents, to looking at this possibility. Paul B., Once again you show your willingness to divert this discourse about General Walker and the Radical Right in Dallas in the JFK Assassination -- and especially our current, intensive focus on the Dallas Police and Sheriff's Office -- into your CIA-did-it hobby horse. That's not "considerable knowledge" in my view, that's just obsolete data. You see perfectly well that we're focusing on a new scrutiny of the Dallas Police and yet you insist on your 50-year-old CIA-did-it CT. I told you that I would give you one more chance -- and this is your response. So now I'm setting your account to IGNORE. You can complain to Moderators all you want -- but there is NOTHING to prevent me from seeing your Forum Account to IGNORE. With utmost sincerity, --Paul Trejo Edited April 10, 2018 by Paul Trejo typos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted April 8, 2018 Share Posted April 8, 2018 Mr. Brancato, You are in good company. The last person who Paul publicly added to his ignore list was Steve Thomas after Paul got caught altering Steve’s post and presenting it as a quote. Trejo was told not to do it again, and Steve was promptly put on his ignore list. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted April 8, 2018 Author Share Posted April 8, 2018 (edited) On 4/6/2018 at 5:58 PM, Jason Ward said: Police and Sheriff testimony in the Warren Commission Part 19: DPD SGT Gerald Hill (34) <snip> CONCERNS: Most of Hill's testimony is in the form of a long pedantic essay which is a meandering monologue unguided by the attorney's questions. This is difficult to read and there are lots of irrelevant details - i.e., concerns over using the correct form and captioning the reports in a procedurally correct way. Isn't Hill's story about informing Fritz of the discovered spent shell casings on the 6th floor different than all other testimony that say Fritz heard this from others? Assistant DA Bill Alexander makes an appearance in Hill's testimony - we learn he is at both the TSBD and Tippit shooting scene; is this the first we've heard of Alexander's presence? Why isn't Hill asked about the detailed arrangement of the spent shell casings at the TSBD? Hill yelling down to the street requesting the "crime lab" is a first in testimony, I think? Why doesn't the witness description of the Tippit shooter given to Hill (170 pounds, bushy hair) match Oswald's description? Hill's testimony around the Tippit scene is confused - it is entirely unclear where he goes and when, although he seems to take a tour around much of the block The cigarette pack holding found shells is an odd and unique detail. Who is first at the Tippit scene from the DPD? Poe? Croy? Westbrook? Who? How many wallets are attributed to Oswald that day and where are they found? Hill says Bentley found one on Oswald on the ride back to Dallas, but aren't these details at odds with other wallet testimony? Doesn't Hill offer yet another version of how Oswald's addresses were found compared to previous testimony? Isn't Hill's testimony about Capt Fritz's actions in arriving at DPD HQ inconsistent with Fritz's testimony? Hill says Fritz was still in search of Oswald upon returning the DPD headquarters, but don't Fritz and others say they already know Oswald is in custody before they even get back to the station? Hill's testimony around what happens at the police station when Oswald is brought back is confused and lacking real details. Why is the personnel office used to process Oswald's gun? Hill is at the TSBD, Tippit murder scene, the Texas Theatre, and the police station with Oswald; yet his testimony is short on details - such as, where is his boss, Capt Westbrook in all this? Overall, Hill's testimony seems like a student essay turned in to describe his big day at work when the president died. His words around the Tippit murder scene are so confused that I am suspicious of everything he says involving this part of his day. There may be pinpoint details in Hill's testimony that don't match up to what others say, but his narrative is so confused that it is difficult to map out a coherent sequence of Hill's actions. This is a terrible, chaotic witness. Hi Jason, Your work on DPD Sergeant Gerald Hill is exactly what I was hoping to see. You and I agree on these key points: 1. Hill's description of Captain Fritz's movements at the TSBD in his story is different from Fritz's and everybody else's. 2. Hill's description of finding the sniper's shell's is different from everybody else's. 3. Hill's claim to be the one who looked outside the TSBD windows and shouted down that the shells were found, and they are ready for Lieutenant Day and the "Crime Lab," mimics the same account given by Deputy Mooney. 4. Then, Hill's description of the Tippit murder scene is different from everybody else's. 4.1. The "cigarette pack" holding found shells comes out of nowhere. 4.2. Asst DA Bill Alexander's attendance comes out of nowhere. 5. Hill's story of who took charge at the Texas Theater is completely different from everybody else's. 6. Hill's story of how Oswald's "wallet" was found is completely different from everybody else's. 7. Hill's story of how Oswald's two addresses were discovered is different from everybody else's. 8. Hill's account of the events at Dallas Police HQ is different from everybody else's. 8.1. Hill's account fails to match Captain Fritz's account of his own movements. 9. Here is yet another DPD officer who was present at the TSBD, at the Tippit murder scene, at the Texas Theater, and at Police HQ when Oswald is booked -- but we caught a break -- instead of lacking details, like most other Dallas cops, Sergeant Hill tells his own version of events which contradicts other Dallas cops. 9.1. In my reading, Sergeant Hill's testimony is as valuable as Deputy Roger Craig's, because he somehow feels free to invent his own version of events. 9.2. This, in my interpretation, reveals a CULTURE among the Dallas Police and Deputies, that "everybody else is doing it, so why not me?" 9.3. Thus, Dallas officers with slightly lower IQ's than others will not grasp what is going on, and will invent absurd details -- and expect to be taken at their word, and with the exception of Roger Craig, will always be taken at their word! 9.4. Here is where the WC account of the Lone Shooter breaks down most clearly, in my reading. OK, that's it. I think we've finally covered all of the Dallas Police and Deputies that I requested back on page 7 of this thread. Now we're on page 21, and it's been a long, hard road. Some readers are stilling trying to catch up. That's OK. But finally, after 19 long WC testimonies, we can finally see real gaps in the Dallas Police and Deputy testimony. How do the Dallas officials account for their time? How do the Dallas officials account for their movements? Who was where, when? What did they see when they were there? Some diversion of accounting is normal -- as when different people see different aspects of a car accident. But the massive diversion in these testimonies is a major key to showing a Dallas-based, Radical Right political motive for the JFK murder in Dallas. I know it seems like a lot of work -- but we're not really done analyzing the Dallas Police and Deputy data. Now that we've publicly revealed the cracks in their WC testimony -- one by one -- now is the time to review all 19 once more -- as a GROUP. The facts that they withheld are as important as any lies that they tell. When they invent stories out of whole cloth, that means to conceal related facts. All best, --Paul Edited April 8, 2018 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted April 8, 2018 Author Share Posted April 8, 2018 (edited) 9 hours ago, Jason Ward said: OK, Paul, we identified ~91 Dallas law enforcement officers in the Warren Commission testimony - and from that we've reviewed the top 19 or so who seem to have the most interesting activity on 22 NOV 63. You once said you have produced a separate look at many of these officers, so I hope you will either post what you think is relevant here from your previous efforts, or otherwise share your analysis. One of our goals was to keep our reading of the testimony separate so as to come to independent conclusions. First, we differ somewhat on two specific officers. Sgt David Harkness and officer Joe Smith you find less honest and forthcoming than I do. For the others, at the highest level it seems there are at least 3 consistent patterns which coincide around a specific time and place: (I) The timeframe of activities at the TSBD is a conflicted, confused mess. Who does what and when is completely uncertain. Exactly how are the shell casings arranged when found? (if "found" at all) Why the ~45 minute delay in searching the 6th floor when witnesses pointed to the 6th floor immediately? (II) The Tippit murder scene is almost a blank page. Testimony around this crime is thin and sporadic. I have no confidence that anything like a complete picture has emerged in this testimony concerning Tippit's murder and aftermath. (III) The Texas Theatre stories are fairly consistent in my view. What happened here seems of little dispute. I don't think the police have much to hide here, considered as an isolated time and place, do you? Jason Hi Jason, All right, you have anticipated where I wanted to go with the past 12 pages of this thread dealing with Dallas Police and Deputies -- namely, summarizing them all as a GROUP. I agree to divide the analysis into the three sections that you identified, but I will add one more, which you had identified last week: (1) The time frame of activities at the TSBD. I include the 5 minutes before the JFK shooting, namely, the starting positions of all the Dallas Police and Deputies. 1.1. This includes people in cars and motorcycles, but also people on foot outside the TSBD. For our purposes, there were no Dallas Police or Deputies police inside the TSBD until after JFK is shot. 1.2. Then we should trace the activities of all these Dallas Police and Deputies for the next 60 minutes at the TSBD. I find several accounts to be contradictory. These contradictions are major clues to the JFK Assassination. (2) The Tippit murder scene. The WC testimony, and additional affidavits, are contradictory. These contradictions are major clues to the JFK Assassination. (3) The Texas Theater stories are fairly consistent. Sergeant Hill claims to be the one who took charge there -- yet others also claimed to have taken charge. We might dismiss this as simple ego-competition. I want to keep my finger here, however. (4) The events at Dallas Police Headquarters -- where Oswald was finally killed -- the TIMING of events is important to me. Contradictions here are also major clues. Why does Hill contradict Fritz on key facts? Why does Roger Craig contradict Fritz on key facts? All best, --Paul Edited April 8, 2018 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Ward Posted April 8, 2018 Share Posted April 8, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said: Hi Jason, All right, you have anticipated where I wanted to go with the past 12 pages of this thread dealing with Dallas Police and Deputies -- namely, summarizing them all as a GROUP. I agree to divide the analysis into the three sections that you identified, but I will add one more, which you had identified last week: ... Contradictions here are also major clues. ... All best, --Paul Hi Paul, Thanks for your interest in talking to me about the police testimony. I'm now concerned about defining a method of evaluation. A few thoughts: I. We lose something by trying to extract meaning from data given in one format but rendered into another format. Specifically, all this is spoken-word testimony. But we are evaluating the written word. It’s like trying to appreciate music by reading only the notes on the page and without hearing it performed. We don’t have juries read transcripts to decide a matter in controversy for a good reason, even though logistically it would be much easier. § I think we two probably put a lot of weight into the written word. It’s the currency of academia. I try to use precision in everything I write, which perhaps makes me expect precision in all writing. But, this testimony isn’t even writing – it’s spoken words translated into writing. § How meaningful is spoken word testimony rendered into writing? Isn’t only half of evaluating a speaker based on the objective meaning of the words they use, with the other half of the evaluation a mix of intuitive subjective inputs and impressions they make? II. With this in mind, how best to evaluate what we have? Some random ideas for discussion: § Is it or is it not useful to pinpoint factual discrepancies? For instance, there are data points all over the place around time. Do we try to plot the exact scattered times given or is it more efficient to use comparative terms, such as X says Y happened before Z said it happened? Time is just one example of objective data we might seek. In some ways WHEN is similar to testimony around WHO and WHERE. Is it more instructive to try comparing precise plot points in the many narratives, or are there more revealing lenses to use – such as terms of relative comparison (before/after; closer/farther; clear/obscure; similar/conflicting)? Or perhaps we try to divine which witnesses are honest and which are not? Or….???? § I might try constructing a master narrative that I hypothesize was distributed to the police testifiers. What do you think about this as a sub-project? § Now that we’ve looked closely at some individual police depositions, should we or should we not draw in other words they say elsewhere? Both official but separate reports and/or unofficial words they’ve said we might find in the media, CT research, hearsay, etc? Unstructured discussions have their place and we can all benefit from brainstorming from time to time. However, I prefer to work in structured effort for the most part. So I think we agree to look at the 4 different scenes (TSBD; Tippit murder; Texas Theatre; DPD with Oswald in custody). I hear your point that contradictions are important clues. Are there any other organizational approaches we can agree upon to form a cohesive plan of attack? I look forward to a meta-analysis of the police witnesses. Jason Edited April 8, 2018 by Jason Ward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted April 8, 2018 Author Share Posted April 8, 2018 (edited) 52 minutes ago, Jason Ward said: Hi Paul, Thanks for your interest in talking to me about the police testimony. I'm now concerned about defining a method of evaluation. A few thoughts: I. We lose something by trying to extract meaning from data given in one format but rendered into another format. Specifically, all this is spoken-word testimony. But we are evaluating the written word. It’s like trying to appreciate music by reading only the notes on the page and without hearing it performed. We don’t have juries read transcripts to decide a matter in controversy for a good reason, even though logistically it would be much easier. § I think we two probably put a lot of weight into the written word. It’s the currency of academia. I try to use precision in everything I write, which perhaps makes me expect precision in all writing. But, this testimony isn’t even writing – it’s spoken words translated into writing. § How meaningful is spoken word testimony rendered into writing? Isn’t only half of evaluating a speaker based on the objective meaning of the words they use, with the other half of the evaluation a mix of intuitive subjective inputs and impressions they make? II. With this in mind, how best to evaluate what we have? Some random ideas for discussion: § Is it or is it not useful to pinpoint factual discrepancies? For instance, there are data points all over the place around time. Do we try to plot the exact scattered times given or is it more efficient to use comparative terms, such as X says Y happened before Z said it happened? Time is just one example of objective data we might seek. In some ways WHEN is similar to testimony around WHO and WHERE. Is it more instructive to try comparing precise plot points in the many narratives, or are there more revealing lenses to use – such as terms of relative comparison (before/after; closer/farther; clear/obscure; similar/conflicting)? Or perhaps we try to divine which witnesses are honest and which are not? Or….???? § I might try constructing a master narrative that I hypothesize was distributed to the police testifiers. What do you think about this as a sub-project? § Now that we’ve looked closely at some individual police depositions, should we or should we not draw in other words they say elsewhere? Both official but separate reports and/or unofficial words they’ve said we might find in the media, CT research, hearsay, etc? Unstructured discussions have their place and we can all benefit from brainstorming from time to time. However, I prefer to work in structured effort for the most part. So I think we agree to look at the 4 different scenes (TSBD; Tippit murder; Texas Theatre; DPD with Oswald in custody). I hear your point that contradictions are important clues. Are there any other organizational approaches we can agree upon to form a cohesive plan of attack? I look forward to a meta-analysis of the police witnesses. Jason Hi Jason, Here's my feedback: I. Because these events occurred nearly 55 years ago, we are almost entirely limited to court-transcript media to get Dallas Police and Deputy eye-witness testimony. I see two alternatives: § When Lee Harvey Oswald's case was tried in London in 1986 by London Weekend Television Productions, using Vincent Bugliosi as prosecutor, a few Dallas Police were called to the witness stand. We can watch some of their facial responses there. § Of the hundreds of newspaper and civilian photographs taken of events around 11/22/1963, there is almost nothing that tracks any Dallas Policeman or Deputy specific testimony. We can only use photographs to show some Dallas Officers at this or that scene -- but none to show the absence of Dallas Officers. In other words, if they are absent from a photo, there's nothing we can conclude. II. As for our methods to proceed: § IMHO, it is less useful than it might seem, to pinpoint disagreements about "facts." First, we would need a computer to keep track of the tons of innocent mistakes and forgetfulness, leading nowhere. § Plotting a time-frame is always useful -- yet we already have the basic timeline in the Dallas Police Radio Records. § IMHO, anybody who disagrees with the Radio Records for more than 30 minutes, is being far too sloppy for the Truth. § IMHO, anybody who gets events in the wrong sequence, is too sloppy for the Truth. § Most Dallas Police and Deputies agree with the Radio Record times and sequence -- so any disagreement is a Red Flag. § IMHO, our main task will be to Declare which WC witnesses are honest and which are not -- and why. § The WC has already declared all of them honest (except for Roger Craig). Yet we have found many contradictions between them -- and this underscores the WC's major flaw -- the myth of a Lone Shooter. § Solely defying the WC about the honesty of some Dallas Police and Deputies -- will be so complicated, that we should not add any other project at this time. § This means that trying to reconstruct the "Master Story" that the main JFK plotters wrote for the Dallas Police and Deputies, is too speculative and controversial. Let's stick closely to the material evidence as we've been doing. § I like your idea, Jason, about using the words that these Dallas Police and Deputies said in later months and years to Newspapers and Magazines, or on Television. Let us proceed then, with a semi-formal meta-analysis of the police witnesses. (It can't be formal, because we're using this public Forum as our means of communication.) As usual, we still welcome any readers who are willing to focus on the issue of the Dallas Police and Deputies, and their WC stories. I assure all readers that this will eventually stream into a hierarchy, with its head at the highest levels of the Dallas Radical Right in 1963 -- namely, the resigned US General Edwin Walker -- the only US General to resign in the 20th century. I ask for the readers' patience in this temporary focus on the Dallas Police and Deputies. All best, --Paul Edited April 8, 2018 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Ward Posted April 8, 2018 Share Posted April 8, 2018 (edited) 4 hours ago, Paul Trejo said: Hi Jason, Here's my feedback: ... § IMHO, anybody who disagrees with the Radio Records for more than 30 minutes, is being far too sloppy for the Truth. § IMHO, anybody who gets events in the wrong sequence, is too sloppy for the Truth. § IMHO, our main task will be to Declare which WC witnesses are honest and which are not -- and why. ... § I like your idea, Jason, about using the words that these Dallas Police and Deputies said in later months and years to Newspapers and Magazines, or on Television. --Paul Hi Paul, It seems we should perhaps start by agreeing on a timeline supported by radio transcripts. Basic Timeline implied in police radio transcripts published by the Warren Commission. As with practically all evidence in this case, the radio transcripts are a subject of dispute and conspiracy theories. I’ve reviewed a few versions of the transcripts and several journal articles from critics. As usual, www.maryferrel.org supplies more than enough data for most any research purpose. There’s plenty here to potentially investigate, but below I tentatively offer a timeline strictly for the purpose of comparing testimony between police officers. Many interesting items are deleted because IMO they are not useful for comparing testimonies. Please critique and offer edits or corrections. I think we need to cut this down quite a bit to 10 or fewer essential times. This is just my first draft to get the project moving. BOTH channels are combined but channel 2 contains most of the usable information. SOURCE: Commission Document 728 ABRIDGED RADIO TIMELINE FOR TESTIMONIAL COMPARISON November 22, 1963 - Dallas, Texas police radio Timestamps are usually provided in separate broadcasts from substantive transmissions. 1230 [Sheriff Decker] Have Parkland stand by…get a man to the triple underpass…pull every one of my men in there. President has been hit. 1234 Witness identifies shots from the TSBD 1235 1236 Witness identifies shots fired from the 5th floor of the TSBD 1237 Officers ordered to the TSBD Wounded witness identified; possibly hit by concrete or bullet fragment Witness identifies gunman in southeast corner of TSBD Officers now searching TSBD 1240 1243 TSBD sealed off 1244 30-30 rifle or Winchester described as weapon Gunman description: about 30, 5’10”, 165 pounds 1245 Attention all squads: suspect age 30, 165 pounds TSBD secured 5th or 4th floor is gunman’s location according to all information 1251 Unit 1 says it is very doubtful president will appear at Trade Mart 1249 Units report arriving at Elm & Houston 1251 Unit 601 standing by at Parkland 1254 Unit 78 reports his current location in Oak Cliff at Lancaster & 8th {this is Tippit} Mention of a witness to JFK shooting at railway overpass 104 A witness to the shooting is in a police car All squads with any information instructed to bring it to 9 at Elm & Houston A suspect is held on the back of a police motorcycle, deadend of Laws St 111 Empty rifle hulls found on 3rd floor of TSBD 115 Civilian uses police radio to report a shot police officer on 10th St 118 “all squads officer shot 400 E 10th” 119 Multiple units respond to report of shot police officer “The subject’s running west on Jefferson…” 400 E 10th St established as location of shot police officer “Suspect just passed 401 E Jefferson” Squad 87 ordered to 4340 W Davis for information regarding suspect 121 All spare manpower requested to Parkland 122 Suspect last seen 300 E Jefferson white male, 30, 5’8”, black hair, white jacket, white shirt, dark slacks Suspect travelling West on Jefferson, 400 block; last seen 401 E Jefferson 124 Order to arrest suspect matching description White station wagon with rifle in the seat seen buying gas 128 JD Tippit announced DOA at Methodist Hospital White jacket found at gas station 400 W Jefferson A witness who can identify Tippit’s shooter is at 12th and Beckely with police NBC reports Tippit DOA Methodist Hospital Dispatcher says the two shootings this day are possibly connected because suspects are similar Suspect running west in alley between Jefferson and 10th 130 Capt Westbrook requests address of Tippit crime scene President Kennedy “is DOA too” 132 Suspect in library at Jefferson & Marsalis “eyeball witness” to Tippit shooting describes white male, 27, 5’11”, 165#, gray jacket, dark trousers, white shirt, last seen on N side of E Jefferson, armed with a .32 automatic Two witnesses to Tippit shooting identified, including one that talked to the officer 140 Tippit shooting suspect in Abundant Life Temple Suspect under arrest Arrested suspect is wrong man Suspect running north on Patton Suspect in Texas Theater Suspect in Balcony Request to arrest TSBD employee Charles Givens 4 slides and metallic kit requested to TSBD 6th floor 148 Suspect apprehended in Texas Theater. 153 Capt Westbrook orders a photographer to the Texas Theater 154 Officer sent to pick up Tippit’s wife 7500 S Beckley 156 Suspect en route Texas Theater to City Hall 159 200 201 Capt Fritz left Elm & Houston one minute ago 226 Squads 75 & 69 ordered to find 2 shell casings at the Texas Theater Unit 105 says 2 shells recovered at the scene and turned over to Pete Barnes 241 No rifle recovered at TSBD – only empty shells Edited April 8, 2018 by Jason Ward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted April 8, 2018 Share Posted April 8, 2018 16 hours ago, Michael Clark said: Mr. Brancato, You are in good company. The last person who Paul publicly added to his ignore list was Steve Thomas after Paul got caught altering Steve’s post and presenting it as a quote. Trejo was told not to do it again, and Steve was promptly put on his ignore list. Yes and he deliberately quotes me out of context. He is so full of himself and so utterly shameless and condescending. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Ward Posted April 8, 2018 Share Posted April 8, 2018 (edited) 14 hours ago, Paul Trejo said: Plotting a time-frame is always useful Paul, <-> I will attempt to reduce the police testimony we've looked at above in this thread into concise time points. I hope you and everyone else will also review the specific witness testimony to add or verify their time references. <-> 4 locations are critical on 22NOV63: TSBD, Tippit crime scene, Texas Theatre, and DPD headquarters <->We are focusing on these policemen's testimony to the Warren Commission and trying to extract the specific time of day (or less precise time references made relative to other events & people): 1. Sheriff Bill Decker, 2. Deputy Eugene Boone, 3. Deputy Luke Mooney, 4. Deputy Buddy Walthers, 5. Constable Seymour Weitzman, 6. DPD Inspector Herbert Sawyer, 7. DPD Captain Will Fritz, DPD Dectives 8. Elmer Boyd, 9. C W Brown, 10. Bob Carroll, 11. Marvin Johnson, 12. Richard Sims. DPD officers 13. Marion Baker, 14.Thomas Hutson, 15. D V Harkness, 16. Welcome Barnett, 17. Joe Smith, 18. DPD Captain W R Westbrook, 19. DPD Reserve Officer Kenneth Croy, 20. DPD Sgt Gerald Hill. TIME STUDY 1 - Dallas County Sheriff Bill Decker Decker is either too clever or too sloppy to recall his activities on 22 NOV 63 in terms of the contrivance commonly used in civilization called “time.” Sheriff Decker admits to being at Dealey Plaza and other events only in relation to what was else what happening and what others were doing. This is my best effort to extract time references from Decker: · Decker in Dealey Plaza at time Oswald arrested · “I can’t tell you that” Decker responds when asked to indicate the time Oswald was arrested · Decker was moving all witnesses at Dealey Plaza to his office, along with FBI man Heitman · Then, Decker talked to Fritz “after he arrived" · “We had by then [Fritz's arrival] located the gun and ammunition” {sheriff’s deputies = we} · “..and Fritz arrived and…then we went across the street and he phoned and that’s when I learned Oswald had been formerly employed there at the building” In Decker's minimalist approach to using time, I see a few points with which to compare to a base timeline, such as: Decker's location at the time Oswald was arrested which he seems to want to keep vague; the implication Fritz arrived after finding the gun and "ammunition;" the implication Fritz and Decker learned of Oswald's TSBD employment from a phone call in Decker's office and the further implication (I think?) that Fritz learned of Oswald's arrest at the time Fritz was in his office making a phone call. The time of Oswald's arrest is particularly important, it seems to me, in analyzing Decker's testimonial timeline. Edited April 8, 2018 by Jason Ward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Ward Posted April 8, 2018 Share Posted April 8, 2018 (edited) 17 hours ago, Paul Trejo said: Plotting a time-frame is always useful TIME STUDY 2 - Dallas County Sheriff's Deputy Eugene Boone Can we extrapolate these parts of his testimony to a timeline? "approximately 1 o'clock when we heard the shots" "I was right there behind" the DPD officer who discarded his motorcycle to run up the grassy knoll (probably a reference to DPD officer Clyde Haygood, but could also be a reference to DPD officer Bobby Hargis. Both Haygood and Hargis are motorcycle officers who run up to the area from where they hear shots.) Asks railroad tower employee Bowers for information "finally," Boone says he talked to a witness amateur photographer named Betzer, who Boone walks over to the Sheriff's office Officers Walters and Gramstaff seek flashlights, then Boone proceeds directly to the TSBD 6th floor "this was after Officer Mooney found the shells," and based on information from Inspector Sawyer....that Boone goes to the 6th floor (I think?) Mooney discovers the rifle near the west side of the TSBD 6th floor after, "I guess," starting on the East side searching among boxes; Mooney announces the discovery "at the time" of the rifle's discovery, Capt Fritz and "an ID man" came over to the rifle the rifle is immediately photographed in place, then removed by Capt Fritz 1:22 is when Boone finds the rifle; Boone says he looked at his watch and made a note of the exact time Capt Fritz was called to the rifle's location as soon as Boone found the rifle Capt Fritz identified the rifle as a 7.65 Mauser Obviously the "1 o'clock" testimony is way off. Can we pinpoint a time of Boone's testified movements with Haygood and/or Hargis, perhaps based on photographic evidence? Does Bowers testify when he speaks to Boone? Does Betzer testify about a specific time of police contact? Walters and Gramstaff testify they go to the TSBD at what time? What time does Mooney testify that he finds the shells? When does Capt Fritz say he arrives at the 6th floor and when do others say he arrives on the 6th floor? The 1:22 time is remarkably consistent. Well rehearsed? Jason Edited April 8, 2018 by Jason Ward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Ward Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 (edited) 21 hours ago, Paul Trejo said: Plotting a time-frame is always useful TIME STUDY 3 - Dallas County Sheriff's Deputy Luke Mooney Can we extrapolate these parts of his testimony to a timeline? "a few seconds" after the president drove by the sheriff's office in the Criminal Courts building, Mooney hears shots ring out "other" unknown officers were already in the railroad track area as Mooney and Walthers join them, running up the Grassy Knoll "a few seconds" later, Mooney is ordered to the TSBD, as "referred" by Sheriff Bill Decker Mooney assumes Decker is at the intersection of Elm & Houston while ordering deputies to the TSBD Mooney enters the TSBD, gets on an elevator, and the power goes off He runs up to the stairs. He encounters other unnamed deputies going the opposite directions - down stairs. Mooney gets off the 6th floor for reasons he can't explain. Mooney is alone on the 6th floor. He can't explain why. He searches the floor solo. Mooney goes to floor 7. He encounters officers Vickery and Webster on the 7th floor. Mooney encounters a press photographer Mooney returns to the 6th floor and runs straight to the southeast corner for unknown reasons. He finds spent shell casings on the floor. Whistling, signals, and hollering are used by Mooney to attract the attention of Fritz and Decker on the street below, but they don't notice Mooney in the 6th floor SE window Mooney tells them to send the crime lab and proceeds to guard the sniper's nest Capt Fritz and numerous other officers come to Mooney The time is now approaching 1 o'clock or exactly 1 o'clock, Mooney says, when Mooney is by himself guarding the sniper's nest Fritz picks up the spent shells After Fritz arrives on the 6th floor, Mooney stays not longer than 20 minutes longer Mooney hears Deputy Eugene Boone find the gun and visually sees the gun himself The time it takes to run from the courts building to the railroad tracks area, plus a few seconds, is when Decker orders deputies to the TSBD - does this match other testimony? Why does Mooney think Decker is already back in Dealey Plaza, doesn't Decker go to Parkland first? Is there other testimony indicating the time power shut off at the TSBD? What do Vickery and Webster say about the point in time they met Mooney? Doesn't Mooney testify that the spent shells are discovered before 1 and that Decker and Fritz are chatting below...is this supported or contrasted by other testimony? Why does the radio log indicate shells found at 1:11 and not 1 or earlier? Edited April 9, 2018 by Jason Ward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Ward Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 Out of 100+ officers on duty in Dallas on November 22, 1963, why do radio logs indicate the singular report of Tippit at 1254 announcing his location in Oak Cliff? Why aren't other officers regularly reporting their location? Is it essential for Tippit to memorialize his time and place for some reason - even as other officers happily wonder around without location updates? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted April 9, 2018 Share Posted April 9, 2018 5 minutes ago, Jason Ward said: Out of 100+ officers on duty in Dallas on November 22, 1963, why do radio logs indicate the singular report of Tippit at 1254 announcing his location in Oak Cliff? Why aren't other officers regularly reporting their location? Is it essential for Tippit to memorialize his time and place for some reason - even as other officers happily wonder around without location updates? The radio transmissions do record officers reporting their locations. Why Tippit's is the only one recorded in logs, as you claim, is an interesting question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted April 9, 2018 Author Share Posted April 9, 2018 Jason, Here are my remarks for your two posts on Sheriff Decker and on Deputy Boone: ON DECKER: Dallas Sheriff Bill Decker is hiding many secrets. This is the reason for his "minimal" testimony -- in my opinion. The main secret is that he was in collusion with Jesse Curry, Captain Fritz, James Hosty, Forrest Sorrels and their closest assistants, in support of General Walker in the selection of Dealey Plaza as the perfect site for the JFK Assassination (i.e. it was already metaphorically owned by the Sheriff's Office). General Walker also selected Lee Harvey Oswald as the "Communist" to blame for the JFK Assassination. The Dallas Police would ambush JFK in support of Walker, and then kill Oswald in the streets in support of Walker, minutes later. (Oswald was sufficiently framed as an FPCC Communist in New Orleans the previous summer -- in newspapers, radio and TV.) Bill Decker arranged for his Deputies (esp. Luke Mooney) to plant the rifle and shells and to "discover" them within one hour after the JFK shooting. This was plausible because they won possession of Oswald's rifle early in the morning. Somebody convinced Oswald to bring his rifle to the TSBD that morning and hand it over to a trusted colleague outside of the TSBD. Bill Decker's connection with General Walker and the Dallas Radical Right focused on the Dallas Minutemen, who faithfully followed General Walker. Walker was a follower of the John Birch Society, but was more radical than the average Bircher, because Walker was willing to take risks and put his beliefs into action. For example, Walker led the Ole Miss riots of 9/30/1962 to support the Bircher goal of impeaching Earl Warren for his Brown Decision (1954). Though many Birchers frowned on the Ole Miss riots, this was Walker's interpretation of the literature, and he always insisted on taking action against anybody that he believed were Communists. Walker had many followers in Dallas. ON BOONE: There is no way, IMHO, that Boone checked his watch when the Oswald rifle was "found". Instead, he checked the Dallas Police Radio Record for the time. That's why it was exactly correct. No other reason. Deputy Boone did anything that Sheriff Decker told him to do. That explains all his actions on 11/22/1963, in my opinion. Yes, I realize all this is speculation -- but all I really want to bring out here is the HIERARCHY. The Dallas JFK plotters follow a HIERARCHY that is already in place in Dallas, namely, the HIERARCHY of the Dallas Sheriff's Office and the Dallas Police Office. At the top of the Sheriff's Office is Sheriff Bill Decker. All the Deputies named in the WC reported to Bill Decker as a matter of professional loyalty and honor. All the Policemen named in the WC reported to Jesse Curry and Captain Fritz. This same HIERARCHY continues in the Dallas JFK plot. I'm not stating this as a fact -- I'm stating this as a proposition -- a hypothesis about HIERARCHY to test as we organize the 20 Dallas WC witnesses that we have surveyed so far. It may come in handy. All best, --Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted April 9, 2018 Author Share Posted April 9, 2018 25 minutes ago, Jason Ward said: TIME STUDY 3 - Dallas County Sheriff's Deputy Luke Mooney <SNIP> The time it takes to run from the courts building to the railroad tracks area, plus a few seconds, is when Decker orders deputies to the TSBD - does this match other testimony? Why does Mooney think Decker is already back in Dealey Plaza, doesn't Decker go to Parkland first? Is there other testimony indicating the time power shut off at the TSBD? What do Vickery and Webster say about the point in time they met Mooney? Doesn't Mooney testify that the spent shells are discovered before 1 and that Decker and Fritz are chatting below...is this supported or contrasted by other testimony? Why does the radio log indicate shells found at 1:11 and not 1 or earlier? Jason, Just a few points to get my wheels turning here. I will return to your timeline ASAP. I find that Mooney's testimony about timing in running from the County Jail at Main and Houston, to the Grassy Knoll picket fence, as soon as Decker orders his men to go there, matches all testimony and the Dallas Police Radio Record. IMHO, all this was planned well in advance. I want to add one remark about your initial timeline -- the very first time should not be Bill Decker's call to his men to run to the railroad yard (behind the picket fence). Instead, just five seconds before that, Jesse Curry ordered Will Fritz's homicide detectives to speed to the triple overpass overlooking that railroad yard. The fact that Deputy Luke thinks his boss, Bill Decker, is already back in Dealey Plaza, proves his inability to stick with the "Master Story." Mooney can't remember the basics, because he is trying to keep track of his own fabrications about "discovering the shells and the rifle." Even the Dallas Police Radio Log tells us that Decker is on his way to Parkland Hospital. Mooney testifies that he found the spent shells before 1pm when the Dallas Police Radio Log says 1:11, only means, IMHO, that Mooney was planting the spent shells before 1pm. It's almost a confession, IMHO. I realize this is speculation -- but I'm setting up my explanation for Mooney's wandering off of the verified Timeline of the Dallas Police Radio Log. All best, --Paul Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now