Did EVEN the Warren Commission Believe Howard Brennan?

[Richard Price]

I might also add that a bit of "new to me" info cropped up when searching Brennan.  In a book documenting what he was witness to on 11/22/63, published after his death, he says on the night of the 22nd he was visited by some FBI/SS and met a doppelganger for JFK.  This too is discussed in the above mentioned archived discussion.  Strange things just keep coming up.

[James DiEugenio]

Boy was that interesting about the HSCA.

 He would not show up even if he was given a subpoena?

And they gave him five statements to look at in advance.  They contacted him eleven times in a week?  And they offer. him immunity?

And he still will not show up?  I don't recall ever hearing any of this before. I don't think its in the report and when Tim talked to Blakey about it, he did not reveal all of this back and forth.  Maybe he forgot it.

 

 

[Richard Price]

Still continuing my internet search for more on Brennan.  I watched and listened carefully to this YouTube video and noticed something interesting.  As we know Brennan was not directly facing the TSBD, but more in a direction towards the center of the turn from Houston to Elm where he could, as he stated have a panoramic view of the President as he drove by.  In this position the TSBD would have been slightly left and the Dal-Tex slightly right (at least the southern face of the building).  In the video when he is speaking of looking back up at the shooter, notice his subconscious "tell".  As he makes the statement his eyes divert to the right and upwards just as they would have to in order to see a gunman in the SE window of the Dal-Tex.

Edited August 1, 2020 by Richard Price
Add content. Sorry, I forgot to add the link. Howard Leslie Brennan - YouTube

[Richard Price]

I am going to put together a compilation of information on Howard Brennan at some point and try to post it.  My time to research is broken up into small segments, so I will post snippets as I go, with the hope of putting it all together at some point.  I have now started reading Tim Smith's piece at Kennedys and King.  At my first scanning, it is a hatchet piece on Brennan.  So far I have read parts saying he (Brennan) is unreliable, not intelligent and seeking to interject himself in an important event.  All of these are based on a preexisting bias.  I will start to address these issues one by one.  1.  Unreliable- When you take his own words and keep in mind when he's being led/directed by others along with his enormous fear, he is extremely truthful.  2. Not intelligent - In my short readings of his testimony/accounts given to others he has given very specific descriptions of what he saw, he even calculated the hypotenuse of the distance he was from various sights he saw (on the fly and quickly/accurately).  I will cite specific instances of this in the posted snippets to come.  3.  Seeking to insert himself in the event- Hardly necessary to reply to, as seen by his mentioning almost immediately that he was fearful and remained so up until his death.

Snippet #1 - His description of what may have been the 1st shot as quoted in Tim Smith's article.  "I proceeded to watch the President’s car as it turned left at the corner where I was and about 50 yards from the intersection of Elm and Houston and to a point I would say the President’s back was in line with the last window I have previously described [when] I heard what I thought was a back fire."

If you read it correctly (his manner of speaking), I used Google Earth and plotted this out roughly.  He is saying that the President's car is 50 yards from the intersection.  Google Earth shows this distance to be near the eastern edge of the retaining wall on Elm (approximately the Croft photo location).  At this point, the President's back is directly in line with the eastern most window of the south face of the Dal-Tex building and approximately 90 yards away.  Just to also add from other observations:  Brennan said the gunman was aiming at about 30 degrees downward and at an angle to the west & south (ie SW).

Note the specificity and accuracy of his observations IF YOU START AT THE RIGHT WINDOW.

[John Butler]

Howard Brennan on the Retaining Wall

Much as been made of where Howard Brennan sat on the retaining wall near the intersection of Elm and Houston, how he was seated, and what he could see and hear.  His testimony is variable from one statement to the next.  Most people consider Brennan an untruthful man.  And, the question was asked “Did The Warren Commission Even Believe Howard Brennan?”

Yes.  Publicly, they apparently did.  They even took his statements further towards propaganda and untruth.  Privately, I sure they knew his story had been changed to reflect the official story of the assassination and that his statements were adapted by the FBI and the Warren Commission personnel to reflect the official story.

Three films show Howard Baker sitting at a certain place on the retaining wall near the intersection of Elm and Houston.  These are the Zapruder film, the Elsie Dorman film, and the Bell film.  This is enough evidence that one can’t argue logically that he was seated somewhere else. 

That is unless you want to argue this fellow, from the Martin film, is Howard Brennan sitting in a different location. 

It is not a good or reasonable argument.  I don’t know who this is and if someone does please inform us.  It some films he’s there and in others he is not.  The Bell film has both this person and Howard Brennan.

I’ve always thought that reasonable questions to ask Howard Brennan are “Did you see the same thing that Toni Glover saw?”  or “Did you see the same thing that Tina Towner saw?”  He was within about 10 feet of both.  And, as you can see in this frame the p. limo is in front of him.

What Brennan saw and heard is more important than how he was sitting or in which direction he faced.  As you can see from this Bell frame Brennan could simply turn his head and have that “panoramic” view of the motorcade.  Z frame 188 shows that he is doing exactly that.  However, one must always suspect whatever you see in the Z film.  Zapruder said he filmed continuously and filmed the whole motorcade.  The longest part of the Zapruder film is missing.  This is called the Zapruder Gap, about 20 seconds.  How can one trust this film?

I have approached the research on Howard Brennan from a narrow point.  Where was the p. limo when you heard shots?  I think this is a more important question then those that ask from what direction did the shots come or how many shots were there and their sequence.

Howard changed his statement on this several times.  First, he said the p. limo was about 90 yards or 270 feet away.  He then changed that to 30 yards or 90 feet.  And, then he said he couldn’t tell, but it was a “short distance” from him.

At 90 yards from Brennan the limousine would be about at Z frame 275 or perhaps just a few feet down the street.  I chose Z 275 due to its clarity.

Here we can see that Kennedy has been shot.  That has been apparent since the vehicle came out from behind the Stemmons sign.  This scene is coming up on the 2^nd or 3^rd shot.  This 90-yard estimate was apparently not good enough for the FBI because the President had been shot prior to this point.  Howard changed his statement.  There are a couple of extra things to notice in this frame.  Kennedy has his black patch and John Connolly has a flat head.

 

This is Z 95 and Z 188.  They show roughly a spot 30 yards or 90 feet from Howard Brennan.  Here is where Howard said the p. limo was when he heard shots.  The FBI didn’t like this either.  That and subsequent frames show the President was not shot here.  Howard probably caught it good and had to change his statement to a “short distance” at the WC hearing.  The FBI and the WC didn’t like any of his distances.

So, we are left with a “short distance” for the distance from Howard Brennan to the p. limo when he heard a shot.  I say that short distance was in front of him and in front of the TSBD.  Of course, you can’t see that because it is in the Zapruder Gap.  Any other film, except Tina Towner, doesn’t show enough detail to see much of anything.  Tina Towner is a blatant fraud.

At this point, there are 71 witnesses who say that they heard shooting when the p. limo was in front of the TSBD.

 

Edited August 1, 2020 by John Butler

[Richard Price]

John, you have to remember, Brennan was being manipulated by the WC (surprise).  He used specific language most of the time, but reverted to timid replies when pushed by interviewers.  I think this is part of his nature/not wanting to be involved and deferring to people/officials whom he felt were supposed to be much more knowledgeable about what was going on.  In the 1st snippet I posted above, I show how he stated facts, just in a simple manner.  He clearly states exactly what/when he saw and heard and the relationship to his position and the Presidents position in his “country boy” manner of speaking.  Anyone willing to do their homework and get an understanding of what he saw will have to initially approach with a completely blank slate.  Study him and what he said and parse it by time, his manner of speaking, his enormous fear starting from day one, etc.

[Ron Bulman]

Richard, I guess you've seen these?

 

[Chris Davidson]

3 hours ago, Richard Price said:

John, you have to remember, Brennan was being manipulated by the WC (surprise).  He used specific language most of the time, but reverted to timid replies when pushed by interviewers.  I think this is part of his nature/not wanting to be involved and deferring to people/officials whom he felt were supposed to be much more knowledgeable about what was going on.  In the 1st snippet I posted above, I show how he stated facts, just in a simple manner.  He clearly states exactly what/when he saw and heard and the relationship to his position and the Presidents position in his “country boy” manner of speaking.  Anyone willing to do their homework and get an understanding of what he saw will have to initially approach with a completely blank slate.  Study him and what he said and parse it by time, his manner of speaking, his enormous fear starting from day one, etc.

Richard,

I think you nailed it.

The 6th floor of the DalTex building is 10ft 10.5ft higher than the TSBD 6th floor which is 60.7ft at the window sill.

Brennan said approx 75 ft high = 70ft + rifle height of someone standing up aiming.

He also describes the 2nd row of windows from the top which is also the DalTex 6th floor.

The frame is from the SS recreation where they are actually filming from within the car down on Elm St, giving you a LOS perspective to that window

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/26636-did-even-the-warren-commission-believe-howard-brennan/?do=findComment&comment=425477

 

 

Edited August 1, 2020 by Chris Davidson

[James DiEugenio]

Richard,

Unless you do not believe the Z film, the WC lied about where Brennan was seated/standing.  And Belin understood this because he said, I do not see your legs dangling down from the retaining  wall.  Now in the recreation, unless we are all reading those pics wrong, they moved him from where he was.  So that he would be directly facing the TSBD--which he was not.

Do you disagree with that?  If so, what part? The film or the recreations?

Further, in the Z film, he is looking back over his shoulder, not upwards at around the time of the first shot.

Again, do you disagree with this evidence?

He did not ID Oswald for the DPD, no one recalls him at any line up, he did not even know how many suspects were in a line up, or if there were any people of color in them. This is 1963, in Texas, 5 months after Kennedy confronted George Wallace on national TV at Alabama. To this day no one knows who he gave his description to.  And how could he know the height and weight of the suspect?  The window was only open about 13 inches.

Again, to most people these are inexplicable.

And if he was confident in his story, why did he refuse to appear before the HSCA?  Why did they have to seek immunity?  Why did he say he would fight a subpoena?

To most people, these would seem to be serious problems.  Which is what Blakey said to Tim.

 

[Chris Davidson]

On 7/18/2020 at 11:57 AM, Chris Davidson said:

If CE477/8 represents where he thought he was, I'd suggest using the wall block openings as a measuring tool for the distance between the two locations with a minor radius length added in.  The lamp-post at left and my red arrow would be a similar distance.

Plotting Bell's LOS pretty much agrees with this photo that puts him directly across from the western edge of the first window opening in the TSBD.

 

 

The straight line distance between Brennan and the Houston St curb is 20ft.

Houston St curb line was the start of Robert West measurements at Station# 234.5.

That puts Brennan at approx Station# 255.0(little radius thrown in)

I would suggest obtaining extant CE884 for further distance/frame# comparisons to what Brennan described in his first day affidavit, keeping in mind that JFK within the limo was the measuring mark.

 

[Richard Price]

Jim, I appreciate your reading my posts.  I will try to flesh out a little more of what I'm exploring.  First, I'll try to address what you questioned.  I do believe the Z film pretty much as Chris Davidson and others have presented it to be altered.  I don't think that work can be seriously challenged.  As to where he was sitting (he was NOT standing), In the Elsie Dorman film he can be seen sitting on the "ledge" at the eastern edge almost directly over the very 1st column of the decorative holes and only a very short distance from the small concrete abutment at the south eastern end of the wall.  The same abutment he ran around to get out of the line of fire.  He was facing straight across the intersection towards the corner of the Dal-Tex.  Next, he never said he "saw" the first shot, he said he heard what he thought was a "backfire".  He was indeed looking back over his shoulder trying to see the President in the location he defined as 50 yards from the intersection.  I haven't fully found all his testimony/statements/etc. as of yet, but I think in one of his statements he says he couldn't see the president at this time and couldn't/wouldn't say why?  I believe he could not see the president at this time because from his angle there is a short decorative tree/bush which would have obscured his vision.  The position of the limo at this time/distance would have been very close to the time stamp of the Croft picture which shows the eastern end of the low retaining wall on the north side of Elm just at the end of the TSBD.  He did not ID Oswald because that is NOT who he saw with the gun (whole different building).  The gunman he saw was in the eastern most window of the Dal-Tex building and there are NO PICTURES showing how much the window was open.  He, I believe stated it was opened fully (I still have to verify this).  He did definitely say the man at one point (prior to the parade arrival) was sitting on the ledge with his upper torso completely visible. He could see both buildings in his "panoramic viewing position", but he explicitly identifies the Dal-Tex by distances, etc.  He was assigned certain statements early on by "officials".  He was scared to death after seeing the shooting, then being told he was the "only" one that could ID the shooter.  By the time the FBI/SS or whomever got through following him, driving him down to ID Oswald, interviewing him and repeatedly making him go over his story, he had figured out that something was wrong and saw that in order to stay safe and keep his family safe, he had better go along.  Being a conservative southern Baptist he could not understand why he was being led down this path of false information.  He was strong enough in his values that he would not outright lie, but so scared that he would not push the envelope.  He knew very shortly after the event that he or his family could be harmed or killed, after all - the President of the United States had just been shot to death in front of him and no one would believe his story.  I think the serious problem is with those who go into an investigation with preconceived ideas instead of clearing their minds and starting at ground zero.  In my opinion (so far), Brennan is a man caught in the middle.  He tells the truth of what he sees with his better than average distance sight.  He is not seeking publicity, but does his duty in reporting what he saw.  His story is almost immediately refuted/manipulated by the officials that are supposed to be investigating.  Then he gets his eyes "sanded"???  Now with his story having been slanted, he is thrown to the wolves (conspiracy theorists).  He is now completely confined.  He is SCARED TO DEATH of something happening to his family or himself.  He never wanted any attention at all and now he's being hounded on all sides and has no idea how to get out of the situation except to be largely inaccessible and try to blend back into the woodwork.  Let it work itself out, at least he and his family would be safe.  He did not want to be a DEAD HERO.

Sorry for the long reply, I sometimes find it difficult to express myself concisely.

[Richard Price]

4 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

The straight line distance between Brennan and the Houston St curb is 20ft.

Houston St curb line was the start of Robert West measurements at Station# 234.5.

That puts Brennan at approx Station# 255.0(little radius thrown in)

I would suggest obtaining extant CE884 for further distance/frame# comparisons to what Brennan described in his first day affidavit, keeping in mind that JFK within the limo was the measuring mark.

 

Thanks for your interest in this topic, Chris.  I almost agree with your positioning, but from what little film/video I've reviewed so far, I actually think Brennan was farther east and south along the wall.  Right at the 1st column of decorative holes cut/formed in the curved wall.  I say this based on the Elsie Dorman pictures on Robin Unger's site.

Edited August 2, 2020 by Richard Price
Sorry Chris, you have the position correct, I was flitting from one thing to another and had to go back and look at some of the posted pictures.

[James DiEugenio]

So Richard, you agree with Paul?

Brennan was describing what he saw in the Dal Tex and the SS and WC made him change his story.

[Richard Price]

18 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

So Richard, you agree with Paul?

Brennan was describing what he saw in the Dal Tex and the SS and WC made him change his story.

Pretty much, yes.  I don''t know if I would say they made him change his story - as "they" changed his story for him and he did not resist loudly.  He mostly regretted what he had seen and the position it had put him into.  He just wanted to be left alone to live peacefully and safely with his family.  I haven't researched and lined all the info on him up as of yet, but I think he never really changed his statements of fact except when he felt under duress.  Then he would use word spaghetti to conceal what he knew or agree with the words being put into his mouth.  I think the reason he was trying to refuse to answer the subpoena is that he could not violate his deep inner conviction to tell the truth. Old time southern Baptist's do not give up their core beliefs easily (most of my family are).  If they are devout they will always say the read the bible, but not nearly as much as they should.  Had he been forced to testify, I think there is a chance, under the correct questioning that he would have clearly in the plainest of methods, stated what he saw.  As we say down where I'm from,  he would have spilled the beans when it got down to brass tacks.  He was extremely fearful, but he could not have put his hand on that bible (assuming they used one) and swear to a lie.

[Richard Price]

One small question for anyone who might have an idea.  If as I suspect, Brennan is giving almost immediate (within 5 minutes of the shooting) eyewitness accounts of a shooter in the Dal-Tex, who or what group has control so quickly and is able to direct ALL attention to the TSBD irregardless of information coming to light?  This may go to who caused the assassination more than anything else.  Something like that would have to be preplanned in order to carry it out so certain information and people would be discredited/discounted and specific DISINFORMATION would carry the day.