Jump to content
The Education Forum

Identity of "Leopoldo" (Silvia Odio visit)


Recommended Posts

"Leopoldo" of the Silvia Odio story has been identified in some discussions as Bernardo de Torres. So far as I can tell, that identity was first named by James Richards of this site, and all discussions of the Bernardo de Torres identity are derivative from the original James Richards identification. Does anyone know James Richards' basis for the Bernardo de Torres identification? Did James Richards have access to actual information or was it only an educated guess? Did James Richards know that to be true? If so how?

I may have something to contribute in support of that identification which I have not seen previously brought out. But before I say what I have I would like to find out how James Richards came to that identification. Thanks--

 

Edited by Greg Doudna
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 47
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The Chief of Intelligence for Brigada Asalto 2506, Bernardo De Torres, was one of the men who visited Silvia Odio del Torro?

Lee Harvey Oswald was the other man, wasn't he?

In terms of logarithmic degrees of social distance, wouldn't that place Lee Harvey Oswald and David Sánchez “El Indio” Morales just two degrees away from each other, considering Morales was De Torres' immediate commander during "Operation Zapata"?

The man accused of murdering the President of the United States of America (Oswald) was separated by only one man (De Torres) between him and the Pentagon's top CIA consultant to the Deputy Director for Operations Counter-Insurgency and Special Activities (Morales)?

If only "Jim" Garrison knew that bit of information.

He would have solved the case.

But of course, Raymond G. "The Rock" Rocca and Jacob Donald "Jake" Esterline had other plans for Garrison.

Edited by Robert Montenegro
Link to post
Share on other sites

 Robert, I believe Garrison knew that Oswald had been seen at Ruby’s club with a dark complected man with a facial scar. He just didn’t know it was Morales.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

 Robert, I believe Garrison knew that Oswald had been seen at Ruby’s club with a dark complected man with a facial scar. He just didn’t know it was Morales.

Fascinating!

About four years ago, I first saw the James Doyle film of Lee Harvey Oswald handing out "Fair Play For Cuba Committee" leaflets in New Orleans.

I was sure as soon as I saw it that the two men who enter the frame at the sixteen-second mark were Bernardo De Torres and David Sánchez “El Indio” Morales.

You can find that footage here: https://s3.amazonaws.com/wpa-clips-production/540540_1_1_wm.mp4 (watch the two men who swing into the frame at the sixteen-second mark).

Tell me that those two men are not De Torres and Morales.

Edited by Robert Montenegro
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to see. White hat on the right, darker man following?

who is the neck scratcher?

 

Edited by Paul Brancato
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Hard to see. White hat on the right, darker man following?

who is the neck scratcher?

 

Here is the seventeenth second of the footage:

morales_oswald.jpg

The the bull of a man scratching his neck with the camera strap on his shoulder is David Sánchez “El Indio” Morales. 

The man directly to his right front with the male-pattern baldness, flower box in hand and black sunglasses is Bernardo De Torres.

Tell me I am wrong...

Edited by Robert Montenegro
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if "Jim" Garrison ever saw a first generation copy of the James Doyle 1963 film of Lee Harvey Oswald.

If he had, he may of had film evidence of two top CIA anti-Castro terrorists in close proximity to Oswald.

And wasn't De Torres a fixture of the Garrison investigation, having something to do with the torture-murder of Eladio Ceferino del Valle Gutierrez “Yito” and "suicide" of David William Ferrie?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I see from this discussion from 2005 that Gerry Hemming was Joan Mellen's source for both the Bernardo de Torres ("Leopoldo") and Angel Murgado ("Angelo") identities. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/3128-the-odio-incident/?tab=comments#comment-20936.

In this discussion also from 2005 Gerry Hemming claims (unconvincingly) that Leopoldo never made a later phone call to Silvia Odio, while Simkin and other commenters discuss the credibility of Angelo Murgado: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/1919-bernardo-de-torres/page/2/. There is also this (excellent) analysis of the Odio visit on Kennedys and King: https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/sylvia-odio-vs-liebeler-the-la-fontaines.

Although Gerry Hemming as source for the Bernardo de Torres identity by definition raises question marks, in the particular case of the identification of Bernardo de Torres as Leopoldo, I focused on this detail of physical description of Leopoldo by Silvia Odio according to Gaeton Fonzi's report of his interview of her for HSCA (https://maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=60438&search=fonzi_silvia+odio#relPageId=9&tab=page ). Fonzi:

She says the thing she remembers most about one of the guys [Leopoldo, the tall one] is that he had a "funny kind of forehead. It just sort of went back, with no hair on the side. It was peculiar and it's hard to explain" [. . .] Again she mentioned the "weird forehead". 

Bernardo de Torres (left)? Is this a forehead that "sort of went back, with no hair on the side ... peculiar and it's hard to explain".

JFKodioT.jpg

Another of Bernardo de Torres, see fourth from right:

JFKtorres2.jpg

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fellow third from the right in the photo above does have bullish body, thick neck and dark complexion and hair style as the fellow with his back shown, scratching his neck in the Oswald leaflet passing photo. They both seem to have similar clothing with the same amount of white collar showing around the neck?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It was not DeTorres, from my review:

Now right off the bat, this would seem to be a bit puzzling for an obvious reason. Fonzi and the HSCA had picked out Bernardo as a prime suspect for the assassination and they had a plant in his Cuban circle of friends. They even brought him to Washington for an executive session interview. So clearly, Fonzi was familiar with what he looked like. And clearly, as Fonzi writes, he spent many hours with Odio going over her descriptions of the two men. Yet it never struck that blunderbuss Fonzi that Leopoldo was right there in front of him, ripe for the picking. (In Fonzi's book, p. 111, the Odio sisters give a description of "Angel." If you compare it with the Mellen description of Murgado, and the photos and description of de Torres, both here and elsewhere, you will see why Fonzi never had his "Eureka" moment.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

James your point is good but in light of the utter importance of the identity of Leopoldo if an ID could be verified, I believe this is one point which should not be assumed but verified. Is it certain Fonzi had and showed to Silvia Odio a photo of de Torres without a hat on, at the time Fonzi interviewed Silvia Odio in Florida, or in correspondence in later years? Is there certain knowledge that Silvia Odio has ever given an up or down, yes or no on a Bernardo de Torres identity? Leopoldo's unusual forehead was the single most memorable feature of Leopoldo to Silvia Odio, sounding like severe male pattern baldness except more pronounced on one side than the other, in a tall man, exactly the way de Torres looks in photos of the time.

In my opinion Angelo Murgado should be rejected out of hand with the Silvia Odio visit (in agreement with you on that), and given no bearing in assessing the Leopoldo/de Torres question. If the de Torres identity were correct, everything about the intrusion of Angelo Murgado into the Silvia Odio story could be well understood as disinformation to derail the significance of the de Torres identity. I doubt Angelo Murgado was present, despite his claims and despite Joan Mellen's endorsement of Murgado's credibility. Murgado claims to disconnect Oswald from Leopoldo on that evening, with Murgado claiming that he and de Torres did not know Oswald and that Oswald was already in Silvia's apartment when they (he and de Torres) arrived separately and later. That is not the way it happened according to Silvia and also Silvia's sister Annie who was there: Oswald was with Leopoldo and Leopoldo's other companion, outside Silvia Odio's door, the three arriving and leaving together in the same car. The part about your review that most resonated with me was taking down the attempts to impeach the accuracy and truthfulness of Silvia Odio's testimony. 

In a sense the testimony of Silvia Odio, however credible and vetted, almost goes nowhere without a confirmed identification of at least one of those with Oswald that night. Could what Silvia Odio kept calling the "weird forehead" of Leopoldo--that little detail--be a telltale fingerprint of Leopoldo's identity? Is it certain Silvia has excluded Bernardo de Torres?

I keep thinking of the CIA refusing to allow HSCA to ask Bernardo de Torres any questions about any of his activities prior to Nov 22, 1963 (the assassination). What an odd circumscription of what a congressional subcommittee tasked to investigate the assassination is not allowed to ask a person of interest. 

In looking over discussions of this forum on this ca. 2005, I was struck at Gerry Hemming both saying the de Torres identity was true and attempting to scare people from pursuing it. And Hemming was the specific source of introducing Angelo Murgado in person to Joan Mellen, as the "Angel" who would separate Oswald from de Torres even while setting forth a narrative in which de Torres is admitted to have been there.

But it all depends on whether Silvia Odio would confirm or deny a Bernardo de Torres/Leopoldo identity, or if she has done so already. That is the $64,000 question. My take on this.

Edited by Greg Doudna
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/17/2020 at 2:51 AM, Greg Doudna said:

 I focused on this detail of physical description of Leopoldo by Silvia Odio according to Gaeton Fonzi's report of his interview of her for HSCA (https://maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=60438&search=fonzi_silvia+odio#relPageId=9&tab=page ). Fonzi:

She says the thing she remembers most about one of the guys [Leopoldo, the tall one] is that he had a "funny kind of forehead. It just sort of went back, with no hair on the side. It was peculiar and it's hard to explain" [. . .] Again she mentioned the "weird forehead". 

Bernardo de Torres (left)? Is this a forehead that "sort of went back, with no hair on the side ... peculiar and it's hard to explain".

This might explain his "funny kind of" forehead

Bernardo's sister to John Simkin:

https://spartacus-educational.com/JFKtorres.htm

“After he came back from the invasion he was in critical condition for a of couple months. He was shot in the back of his head beneath his cerebellum and the bullet broke into five pieces. He went under surgery and had four of those pieces removed. One had to stay because it was too close to an area that if accidentally harmed could make him paralyzed." (2)

(2) John Simkin, email interview with Bernardo De Torres' daughter (August 2006)

Steve Thomas

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...