“The lights all went out,” and the elevators stopped while JFK was murdered. Shelley and Lovelady were near the bottom of the back staircase, by the electrical panel... and Vickie Adams saw them ... until everyone's story changed...

[Tony Krome]

Mr. BAKER - As I was in the homicide office there writing this, giving this affidavit, I got hung in one of those little small offices back there, while the Secret Service took Mr. Oswald in there and questioned him and I couldn't get out by him while they were questioning him, and I did get to see him at that time.
Mr. DULLES - You saw him for a moment at that time?
Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir.

 

 

 

[Ron Bulman]

59 minutes ago, Tony Krome said:

Mr. BAKER - As I was in the homicide office there writing this, giving this affidavit, I got hung in one of those little small offices back there, while the Secret Service took Mr. Oswald in there and questioned him and I couldn't get out by him while they were questioning him, and I did get to see him at that time.
Mr. DULLES - You saw him for a moment at that time?
Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir.

 

 

 

So Dulles next question Should have been,  Did you recognize him as the man you encountered in the lunchroom?  Or as the man you saw on the third or fourth floor.  Or as the man you encountered at the front entrance?

[Ron Bulman]

1 hour ago, Tony Krome said:

Mr. BAKER - As I was in the homicide office there writing this, giving this affidavit, I got hung in one of those little small offices back there, while the Secret Service took Mr. Oswald in there and questioned him and I couldn't get out by him while they were questioning him, and I did get to see him at that time.
Mr. DULLES - You saw him for a moment at that time?
Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir.

 

 

 

"If you had seen him in the lunchroom then recognized him as the same man while you were writing your 11/22 report Why Didn't You Include This Fact In it?

[Tony Krome]

14 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

So Dulles next question Should have been,  Did you recognize him as the man you encountered in the lunchroom?  Or as the man you saw on the third or fourth floor.  Or as the man you encountered at the front entrance?

Notice how Baker is actually stuck in the room and couldn't get past the Secret Service and Oswald. Baker had the opportunity to to inform the Secret Service that he had just pulled a gun on the same man at the scene of the crime.

[Jim Hargrove]

From Marrion Baker’s 11/22/63 affidavit (emphasis added):

“As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from
the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back
toward me. The manager said, "I know that man, he works here." I then
turned the man loose and went up to the top floor. The man I saw was a
white man approximately 30 years old, 5'9", 165 pounds, dark hair and
wearing a light brown jacket.”

The TSBD has a raised first floor.  Baker had to run up the exterior staircase to reach the first floor, and then had to run up another staircase to reach the second floor.  In his haste, he could easily have confused the second floor with the third or even the fourth. His description of Harvey Oswald wasn’t very accurate but was within reason, considering the light wasn’t very good in the 2nd floor lunchroom vestibule.  

People complain that Baker doesn’t mention the fact that “Oswald” was brought into the back room at Homicide while Baker was still writing up his affidavit and Baker doesn’t mention that in his short, handwritten note.  But when Baker handed his report to Det. Marvin Johnson, he DID mention that fact.  Johnson wrote: "Patrolman Baker was in the Homicide Bureau giving an affidavit and Oswald was brought into the room to talk to some Secret Service men. When Baker saw Oswald he stated, 'that is the man I stopped on the 4th floor of the School Book Depository.'" 

Fritz’s notes also seem to confirm the lunchroom encounter: “"claims 2nd floor coke when off came in….”

I, and probably others here, believe that Postal Inspector Harry Holmes was part of the conspiracy to frame Harvey Oswald, but since the following is directly opposed to the Official Story, we should at least consider it.  From the 4-page memo Holmes wrote when he attended the last Oswald interrogation on Sunday morning:

When asked as to his whereabouts at the time of the shooting, he stated that when lunchtime came, and he didn’t say which floor he was on, he said one of the Negro employees invited him to eat lunch with him and he stated, “You go on down and send the elevator back up and I will join you in a few minutes.” Before he could finish whatever he was doing, he stated, the commotion surrounding the assassination took place and when he went downstairs, a policeman questioned him as to his identification and his boss stated that “he is one of our employees” whereupon the policeman told him to step aside momentarily. Following this, he simply walked out the front door of the building.

Richard Gilbride has written an interesting article called DEATH OF THE LUNCHROOM HOAX. The piece begins as follows:

This essay establishes beyond any rational doubt that the 2nd-floor lunchroom encounter
between Lee Harvey Oswald, Marrion Baker and Roy Truly actually happened. The timing of
this incident, roughly 60 seconds after the assassination, strongly suggests that Oswald was
in the lunchroom during the shooting of President Kennedy. 

[Paul Jolliffe]

13 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

To Paul J....

Thanks for the nicely-written post on Baker!  Can you tell me how you know that Baker was right next to “Oswald” when he was writing his 11/22 affidavit?

Jim,

From Baker's own WC testimony:

"Representative BOGGS -Let me ask one other question. You later, when you recognized this man as Lee Oswald, is that right, saw pictures of him?
Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir. I had occasion to see him in the homicide office later that evening after we got through with Parkland Hospital and then Love Field and we went back to the City Hall and I went up there and made this affidavit.
Representative BOGGS -After he had been arrested?
Mr. BAKER - Yes, sir."

 

 

[Jim Hargrove]

Paul,

Thanks for continuing this discussion.  It is an important issue.

I must say, though, that from the excerpts of Baker’s testimony that you and Tony quoted, I don’t see much to truly discredit Baker’s story over time.  The WC testimony was months after the assassination, when you all seem to believe Baker changed his story to put "Oswald" into the encounter.  I’m hoping some people here will at least scan through Richard Gilbride’s article linked below, which does a nice job gathering at least much of the evidence in support of the Harvey Oswald encounter.  Hoping we can avoid getting into a PrayerMan pissing contest, but I do think Gilbride makes some important points.  Here’s one….

If the above was all a big conspiracy to shore up the lunchroom anteroom encounter, it sure happened fast.  The Nov. 24, 1963 edition of the New York Times (a morning paper), included the following:

“The first officer to reach the six-story building, Lieut. Curry said, found Oswald among other persons in a lunchroom.  He said the building manager identified Oswald as an employee of the book-distribution concern that used the building.  Oswald was not questioned then."
 

Image above captured from DEATH OF THE LUNCHROOM HOAX by Richard Gilbride.
 

[Paul Jolliffe]

49 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Paul,

Thanks for continuing this discussion.  It is an important issue.

I must say, though, that from the excerpts of Baker’s testimony that you and Tony quoted, I don’t see much to truly discredit Baker’s story over time.  The WC testimony was months after the assassination, when you all seem to believe Baker changed his story to put "Oswald" into the encounter.  I’m hoping some people here will at least scan through Richard Gilbride’s article linked below, which does a nice job gathering at least much of the evidence in support of the Harvey Oswald encounter.  Hoping we can avoid getting into a PrayerMan pissing contest, but I do think Gilbride makes some important points.  Here’s one….

If the above was all a big conspiracy to shore up the lunchroom anteroom encounter, it sure happened fast.  The Nov. 24, 1963 edition of the New York Times (a morning paper), included the following:

“The first officer to reach the six-story building, Lieut. Curry said, found Oswald among other persons in a lunchroom.  He said the building manager identified Oswald as an employee of the book-distribution concern that used the building.  Oswald was not questioned then."
 

Image above captured from DEATH OF THE LUNCHROOM HOAX by Richard Gilbride.
 

Jim,

I suspect that there was some kind of encounter between our "Oswald" and a DPD cop (probably Marrion Baker) somewhere on the first floor. Note that the NYT story of Sunday morning, 11/24/63 (when "Oswald' was still very much alive) did not specify precisely which "lunchroom" the encounter allegedly occurred. (We all know that there were two eating rooms in the TSBD, one of which was on the first floor.) I also suspect that at the very first interrogation of "Oswald" (as recorded by James Hosty), it became obvious that "Oswald" had an alibi - he was on the first floor of the TSBD during the shooting. The second-floor story was needed to get "Oswald" off the first floor and away from witnesses he might later call to testify on his behalf.  This deserves a much fuller development on a separate thread.

But, I will look carefully at Richard Gilbride's essay over the next few days and get back to you.

Meanwhile,  one incredible fact remains: at the very moment he was completing his first day affidavit by hand, Marrion Baker was literally sitting right next to "Oswald" and nowhere in that affidavit did he state that the man right next to him was the same "lt brown jacket" wearing suspect he'd encountered up on the "3rd or 4th floor"!

Further, the suspect description provided by Baker does not really fit our "Oswald" - 30 years old? 165 pounds? "Oswald" was sitting right next to him!

Edited April 24, 2019 by Paul Jolliffe

[Jim Hargrove]

Fair enough, but the NYT article clearly referred to Truly ("building manager") telling Baker ("first officer to reach the six-story building") that Oswald was an employee

[Paul Jolliffe]

13 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

So Dulles next question Should have been,  Did you recognize him as the man you encountered in the lunchroom?  Or as the man you saw on the third or fourth floor.  Or as the man you encountered at the front entrance?

Ron,

The last thing Allen Dulles wanted to do was to introduce testimony that the suspect encountered by Baker was not "Oswald"!

Allen Dulles was one of the chief architects of the cover-up. How close he was to those who ordered the assassination remains speculative, at least for now. 

[Paul Jolliffe]

3 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Fair enough, but the NYT article clearly referred to Truly ("building manager") telling Baker ("first officer to reach the six-story building") that Oswald was an employee

Yes, but that same story also managed to place the alleged encounter "among other persons", which ought to have raised some mighty interesting questions for honest investigators.

[Andrej Stancak]

Right, however, was this thread not meant to be about the front lift escape theory by John Armstrong in which two assassins were supposed to get to the sixth floor by climbing through the roof of the passenger lift, then to climb the fifth floor using a ladder, open the wooden floor of the sixth floor from beneath against boxes of books resting on these wooden boards, and then return back via the same route while Shelley and Lovelady made sure that the lift stays on the fourth floor by switching the electricity off but then on again to allow the lift to start moving?

However, Mrs. Sarah Stanton was able to enter the passenger lift immediately after the shooting (so, it was on the first floor, not on the fourth floor) and used it to get to the second floor. I understand that she wished to use the lift because she was overweight, weighing more than 300 pounds. So, I wonder how Mrs. Stanton's movements suit John Armstrong's escape theory:

 From the FBI report (Warren Commission Exhibit, CD7, undated) on Mrs. Sarah Stanton:  “… advised that she is employed in the second floor office of the Texas School Book Depository, 411 Elms Street, Dallas, Texas, and at about 12:30 P.M., on November 22, 1963, she was standing on the front steps of the building as the President passed and shortly thereafter she heard three explosions, however, she did not know where they came from and immediately went into the building, caught the elevator and went to the second floor offices and into the office of the Southwestern Publishing Company, located there, to try to look out the window and see what was happening… She knows LEE HARVEY OSWALD by sight, being employed by the same concern, but is not personally acquainted with him and did not see OSWALD on November 22, 1963, and she never seen him with a gun.

 

Edited April 24, 2019 by Andrej Stancak

[John Butler]

"DEATH OF THE LUNCHROOM HOAX

This essay establishes beyond any rational doubt that the 2nd-floor lunchroom encounter between Lee Harvey Oswald, Marion Baker and Roy Truly actually happened. The timing of this incident, roughly 60 seconds after the assassination, strongly suggests that Oswald was in the lunchroom during the shooting of President Kennedy."

I have a problem with this article.  This fellow puts Baker, Truly, and Oswald in the 2nd floor breakroom roughly 60 seconds after the shooting.  I don't think that's possible and the timing of this may very well destroy his premise.

I haven't read this yet but, I am wondering whether I should go any further.  The bold type words through one for a loop.  Didn't the WC lawyers and Baker establish through reenactment that the least time Baker could have arrived at the 2nd floor breakroom is 90 seconds?

Based on my own calculations 60 seconds is to short of a time.  And, 90 seconds is also an incorrect time because Oswald was outside the building when Marion Baker entered the TSBD.  Here is reasoning that may be useful.

Baker is half way down Houston street from Main Street when the shooting begins.  He is between the Court House and the Court Records building.  This at the least is about 75 feet from the intersection of Houston and Elm Street.

1. Weigman’s run to the intersection began with him out of his vehicle and on the street as the 3^rd shot occurs= about 5 seconds to the intersection

2. Weigman begins filming and for some reason the first 8 seconds is blank.  His film begins with the Mayor’s Car and the National Press Pool Car in motion.  This is slightly pass where Mrs. Cabell indicated her vehicle was stopped= 8 seconds or, it could be longer depending on how long the Mayor’s Car was stopped

3. A Weigman frame at 38 seconds shows the Camera Cars in motion= 30 seconds.  Their start into the turn at Houston and Elm may be a second or two earlier.

4. Couch/Darnell shows Officer Baker begin his run as the film starts and at about 2 seconds the film shows Baker running and he takes an estimated 4 seconds to reach the steps and confront Roy Truly there or inside the building= 6 seconds

5. Roy Truly speaks to Officer Baker inside the TSBD or on the TSBD steps= about 5 seconds

6. Inside the TSBD from the South door/ Main Entrance there is about 100 feet to the rear door / freight elevators. = 8 seconds

7. Roy Truly calls twice up the elevator shaft for someone to lower the elevator= 7 seconds

8. Roy Truly and Office Baker proceed to the second floor breakroom= about 20 seconds.

Total:  5 + 8 + 30 + 6 + 8 + 7 + 20 =   1 minute and 24 seconds which is less than the 90 seconds estimated as the least time by the WC.  But, still over the one minute or 60 seconds in time.

These are estimated times and can be adjusted if there is good reason.

Edited April 24, 2019 by John Butler

[Guest]

Richard Gilbride's work is an abomination, it is filled with ifs, perhapses, and other baseless innuendo alike.

Read HERE

And read HERE

If you want to know what really happened, with ALL (!) available evidence on display with regards the 2FLRE then read HERE

Let's not forget that Richard Gilbride was kicked off this forum for his repugnant behaviour not too long ago.

Edited April 24, 2019 by Bart Kamp

[Ray Mitcham]

22 minutes ago, Bart Kamp said:

Richard Gilbride's work is an abomination, it is filled with ifs, perhapses, and other baseless innuendo alike.

Read HERE

And read HERE

If you want to know what really happened, with ALL (!) available evidence on display with regards the 2FLRE then read HERE

Let's not forget that Richard Gilbride was kicked off this forum for his repugnant behaviour not too long ago.

Well said, Bart.