The Secret Life of Jack Ruby

[Benjamin Cole]

7 hours ago, Craig Carvalho said:

Thanks Ben.

I also agree that it was DeMohrenshildt's arranged meeting between Oswald and a Swedish psychiatrist, (the name escapes me at the moment), who later recalled publicly working up a "psychological profile" on Oswald. This, I believe, was the catalyst for the Walker shooting. During this conversation this individual recalls using Walker as a comparison to the rise of Hitler to Walker's political ambitions in order to "win Oswald's confidence" and induce him to speak further on his, (Oswald's), political beliefs. The psychiatrist in question, it has been suggested, had CIA ties as well, (I will get back to you with the name). My perception of Oswald's CIA ties are thus... San Diego (Marine induction), Atsugi, San Diego, (Marine discharge), defection, return, Moore, DeMorehnshilt, David Atlee Philips... James Jesus Angleton from A to Z.

Ruby was interviewed by the Warren Commission in late summer of 64 if I'm not mistaken. Last page of his testimony to Earl Warren, (directly). 

I will paraphrase... "There is a organization here in Dallas. And that organization is the John Birch Society. The leader of that organization is Edwin Walker."

Regards

   

Great quote.

So, in WC testimony, Walker says JR and LHO knew each other and were in a plot, and JR says Walker and his group are in a plot and out to get him. 

Ruby does seem disoriented in his testimony. I have wondered if Ruby was on drugs, but involuntarily. 

 

 

[Pamela Brown]

6 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

If Mailer had instead concluded that Oswald wasn't the shooter, or in the least, didn't act alone...I guarantee you all these high media positive reviews of his book "Oswald's Tale" would have been replaced with equally disparaging ones.

Mailer would have been trashed by these same critics and his OT book sales would have been less than 1/3rd of their "Oswald did it" total.

 

I agree. It seemed that it was treated more like a documentary narrative than a novel as well...

Ironically, it was Norman Mailer who wrote -- if I remember correctly -- the first book about Marilyn Monroe that hinted that she might have been murdered...https://www.amazon.com/Marilyn-Norman-Mailer/dp/0448010291

 

[Ron Bulman]

Let's get right here.  Some need to ketch up.  Ruby was at the Tropicana in Vegas  3-4 days before the assassination asking for his idol Lewis Mc Willie.  Documented, FBI source and separate Vegas Sheriff's office source.  Plus he cashed a check at the Sands using Mc Willie as a reference. 

The same Lewis Mc that was Jacks best friend in Dallas for many years in the 50's who left for Havana to work in the Tropicana there for Meyer Lansky and Santos Trafficante.  Ruby was the bag man to get Santos out of jail in Cuba after Castro's revolution and Santos ensuing incarceration.  Lewis moved on to Vegas, and the Tropicana there.

Johnny Roselli went AWOL from LA the week before the assassination.  He was under FBI surveillance, phone, neighbors, tailed etc.  He did this deliberately, deceiving his followers, evidence of documented.  His former home, home away from home base was still the Tropicana in Vegas.  In addition to management and other casino deal fees over the years it was his bread and butter.  He owned the parking and gift shop concessions.

So Jack was at Johnny's place looking for Louie three days before the assassination.  And Johnny, buddy of Bill Harvey, was MIA.

If you don't believe me read the new book by David Boylan, Bill Simpich and Larry Hancock.  Pages 174 and ?  (Look for yourself!).

Tipping Point: The Conspiracy that Murdered President John Kennedy: Hancock, Larry: 9781736440902: Amazon.com: Books    

Edited June 21, 2021 by Ron Bulman

[Larry Hancock]

Its noteworthy that all the sources on Ruby in Vegas were quite positive,  and that this was all reported and investigated ....but like much else in regard to Ruby they worked very hard at avoiding it.

On a side note and something not brought back up in regard to Ruby in Tipping Point, there is good circumstantial evidence that it was Roselli who made the call to bring in a high powered attorney for Ruby and to cover it up by attributing that (and the funding for the lawyer) to Ruby's brother.  That is in SWHT.

[Greg Doudna]

12 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

Its noteworthy that all the sources on Ruby in Vegas were quite positive,  and that this was all reported and investigated ....but like much else in regard to Ruby they worked very hard at avoiding it.

On a side note and something not brought back up in regard to Ruby in Tipping Point, there is good circumstantial evidence that it was Roselli who made the call to bring in a high powered attorney for Ruby and to cover it up by attributing that (and the funding for the lawyer) to Ruby's brother.  That is in SWHT.

Larry, this is interesting. In light of Roselli being murdered seemingly in association with his testimony to HSCA, and the same with Giancana (and maybe also the questionable suicide of Prio), and Ruby's associations with the same Mob circles part of which you bring out here--and Ruby's killing of Oswald--did Ruby have foreknowledge? There is the informant report of "seeing the fireworks" minutes before the assassination; there is Ruby making some arrangements a month or two prior for shipment and safekeeping of his beloved dogs; the stories of Ruby coming into money at the time of the assassination; the original accidental tipoff via Hosty's son that led to Silvia Odio, in which Ruby had made some legal arrangements just prior to the assassination; and the many Mob phone calls in the prior one to two months. That seems a lot for Ruby not to have had foreknowledge--not knowledge of how or who, but that something was in the works? But then, why would Ruby not himself have been killed just as Oswald and Roselli and Giancana? Is it possible the only reason that did not happen for four years was the accident that Ruby was protected while in custody--if he had been released to the street he would have been dead? Of course Ruby did die of a fast-acting medical condition just before transfer to a different jurisdiction. Some other musings: 

-- Ruby's paranoia, delusions that Jews were being killed screaming in the jail, etc., is it ruled out that that could have been acting? Any time he says something and people respond skeptically, an easy way to discredit or walk it back, just act delusional? (Also a possible legal defense.) 

-- Ruby's final taped interview in which, on his deathbed, he repeated his basic alibi story of acting out of sympathy for Jackie Kennedy etc., and etc.--there could be a rational explanation for that on the assumption that that was not the truth, if Ruby calculated (not thinking of dying immediately): just don't make waves until I get transferred (and am safer), then I can talk . . .

-- his obvious fear for his life, his pleading to Earl Warren to take him some place safe and he would talk (no interest from Earl Warren), his prediction to Earl Warren that he would be dead within days because he had already said too much (did not happen, but a reasonable fear if he did have knowledge and was witnessed signaling he might talk), his plea for the polygraph in hopes that his false story would be discovered . . . that was simply inexcusable, a coverup, that Warren did not get him to safety and find out what he had to say. Ruby was the number one living possible source of information. Any honest effort to crack the case would have gotten him to safety, promised him witness protection, got him to flip and talk, to see if there was anything there. 

-- I have noticed that in your Someone Would Have Talked (per the index), and not sure but may also be the case in The Tipping Point (no index to check), you seem to make no mention of Jarnigan. I know that Jarnigan is widely considered a non-credible witness including in conspiracy research circles, but whereas there are plenty of witnesses that others believe whom I do not think are credible, Jarnigan on the other hand is one I am not so sure should be dismissed. There are two major reasons for dismissing him that I can see, of which I believe one may be a non-issue: the conflict in timing between his claim to have witnessed Ruby and Oswald talking about assassinating Connally, on the same evening that Oswald is known to have caught a bus and hitchhiked to Ruth Paine's house in Irving where Marina was, from the Dallas YMCA. But the night Jarnigan said he was at the Carousel was to celebrate Jarnigan's birthday, and I have found an article which has his birthday on Thursday night Oct 3, the day before Oswald went to Irving Fri Oct 4, which could remove the timeline contradiction, on the assumption that Jarnigan's memory several weeks later was off by one day. The other reason, more substantial, was his spectacular failure on a polygraph test, in which the only answer he was judged to have answered truthfully was when he said yes he had been drinking that night. Was that test straight or crooked? So far as I know no records of that polygraph test have ever come to light for review; and there certainly would have been a law enforcement motive to discredit Jarnigan. A possible argument that his story could be true, not previously raised, I notice from a detail in the article linked to above in this thread that Douglas Caddy posted, William Scott Malone, "The Secret Life of Jack Ruby". The type is too small to read in the link Douglas Caddy gave but here is a link where the article is readable: http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg Subject Index Files/R Disk/Ruby Jack As Gangster Related/Item 01.pdf. The entire article was eye-opening to me, of Ruby's Mob ties and Cuba history, and no doubt this is all familiar to you, but what caught my eye was the inset story on the fourth page online, p. 48 of the print article, "Rubygate", in which Ruby bought professional spy recording equipment that could be worn as a wristwatch, in the context of his being an FBI informant. This was in 1959. "the saleswoman who waited on Ruby told Secret Service agents after Kennedy's assassination that Ruby had bought 'a wristwatch which held a microphone for the equipment, and also an instrument to bug a telephone,' as well as a 'tie clip and attache case.' Professional spy equipment." 

In the many times I have read Carroll Jarnigan's letter to J. Edgar Hoover in Dec 1963 describing his memory of what he claims he overhead Ruby discussing with Oswald at the Carousel, I have had the strongest suspicion that (if what Jarnigan was saying was for real) it sounded to me almost like someone was wired and getting the other to say incriminating things on tape. But I did not realize there was this direct evidence that Ruby had been in possession of exactly the kind of sophisticated equipment to do that.

As for whether that particular conversation that Jarnigan says he witnessed between Ruby and Oswald happened, I think of this: one thing that stands out in Jarnigan's story is that the discussion (Jarnigan said) was about killing Connally, not JFK. Nothing about JFK, just could Oswald shoot Connally. OK. On the night of the assassination, Clare Booth Luce got a phone call from her Latino anti-Castro friends, and they claimed they had Oswald on tape saying he could kill the Secretary of the Navy. On tape. Offering that to the wife of the publisher of an influential national news magazine that would make Oswald look irrevocably guilty. Presumably there was a tape to be delivered, and presumably it was of Oswald, and presumably it had Oswald speaking of killing the Secretary of the Navy (not Kennedy). Connally had been Secretary of the Navy. What I am noticing is that what the friends of Clare Booth Luce told her they had is exactly what Jarnigan says he heard Oswald say to Ruby. There was no connection between these two stories. Could the tape of Oswald threatening to kill the Secretary of the Navy have originated from Ruby the night that attorney Jarnigan, through a freak accident, overheard Oswald telling Ruby that at the Carousel, then wrote J. Edgar Hoover personally telling him so? There is no known contact or mechanism by which Ruby would have had contact with Clare Booth Luce's sources, but that missing link could be filled in if Ruby was an informant, taped Oswald as part of being a good informant, turned in the tape, and by a law enforcement/intelligence channel (unknown to Ruby) that tape came to be accessible to be offered to the publisher of a national news magazine on the evening of the JFK assassination for the purpose of showing evidence of Oswald's guilt. That is, in this scenario Ruby did nothing other than be a good informant and turn in his tape. 

But why would Oswald say such a thing to begin with? Here I think of the Keystone Cops-sounding story of General Edwin Walker's hired detectives in Oklahoma investigating who shot Walker, and trying to pin it on and incriminate Walker's former employee William McEwan Duff by offering to pay Duff to kill Walker, whereupon Duff went to the FBI, reported the attempted murder-for-hire, and went back, pretended to be interested and informed on the informants to the FBI--both trying to get incriminating information on the other! While it is highly speculative, wouldn't it be basically the same thing if Oswald thought he was infiltrating and informing on a plot of Ruby et al to assassinate Connally, and Ruby thought he was informing on Oswald, just as in the case of Walker's detectives and Duff? It would be a clever way to set up a patsy, get him on tape threatening violence . . .

It all sounds bizarre, except . . . except . . . the alleged tape recording of Oswald saying he could shoot the Secretary of the Navy (where did that come from?) . . . Jarnigan independently saying he witnessed a conversation of Oswald saying exactly that . . . and Ruby had tape recording equipment and the law enforcement informant contacts to have taped Oswald saying that, and then the attempt to get a tape of exactly that unusually specific nature mainstreamed into national news media the very night or weekend of the assassination. According to this, https://www.covertbookreport.com/carroll-jarnagin-did-he-actually-witness-ruby-with-oswald/, Jarnigan feared for his life, claimed there had later been an attempt to kill him by an injection, and hid for a number of years which could account for his not having ended up like Oswald or Roselli, if his story was true. Of course Jarnigan had alcoholism issues, was reported to have failed a polygraph test, and there is no other evidential corroboration of his story than his word (and the circumstantial argument of the subject of the alleged tape recording of Oswald). But Jarnigan was an attorney, he shows no signs of having sought publicity or fame (just the opposite), and as an attorney he wrote personally to J. Edgar Hoover about what he said he had seen, almost immediately following the assassination. What do you think, Larry? 

[Larry Hancock]

Well there is certainly a lot in that post to reply to...grin.   Let's try to break it down:

1. Ruby did have foreknowledge that something was to happen during the motorcade but certainly not something as sensational and dangerous as the murder of the President...and something that could put him at risk. His role up to the point of Oswald's unplanned capture was relatively minor and very much routine for him, including identification of dirty cops for minor roles.  I make the case for that in both SWHT 2010 and Tipping Point.

2. My take is that the recording equipment goes back to 1959 when Ruby was in play as an FBI source - most likely in regard to Cuban gun running.  The FBI was most definitely running a sting against gun runners,  evidence of that is in the arrest of Robert McKewon and his associates.  Whether Ruby contributed anything to that is unknown but his use by the FBI stopped once McKewon's ring was busted.

3. I really don't give any credit to the Jarnigan story, for many reasons including having the conversation in Ruby's club.  Ruby was far too cunning to have that sort of conversation in his club (its as stupid as the Oswald/Cuban Embassy conversation story about Oswald taking money to kill JFK).  My take is that Jarnigan inserted the Connally aspect into the dialog after the fact simply to a) give some credence to his story and b) to avoid questions about why he would not have reported and obvious threat to the President before hand....as a member of the bar that would have been a given.

4. On the other hand the Luce call is something entirely different and part of some deep follow-on research to Tipping Point that David and I are doing.  If it jells it could be very significant but as present is very much a work in progress - and has nothing to do with Ruby.

 

 

 

 

[Chuck Schwartz]

Larry, do you agree that Ruby "corrected" the Dallas Police (Wade(?)) at a press conf. in the police station- about LHO's belonging to  a particular Cuban group ? Ruby supposedly corrected the Cuban group Wade said LHO was a part of - Wade said LHO was a part of an anti - Castro group and Ruby said it was a pro- Castro group?  And, then, Wade apparently accepted Ruby's correction?

[Joe Bauer]

Chuck, Wade was feigning not knowing Jack Ruby after Ruby shot Oswald.

Wade knew Jack Ruby well and for many years.

Wade to the press:

" His name is a ... Jack Rubenstein I believe."

Oh please Wade. His name is Jack Ruby and you know it and him well!

Why the act Wade?

Edited June 26, 2021 by Joe Bauer

[Chuck Schwartz]

Joe, I agree with you on Wade.  My focus was/is  on Ruby and that press conf. before Ruby killed LHO.

[Chuck Schwartz]

This is from Wikipedia. " Ruby was seen in the halls of the Dallas Police Headquarters on several occasions after Oswald's arrest on November 22, 1963. Newsreel footage from WFAA-TV (Dallas) and NBC shows that Ruby impersonated a newspaper reporter during a press conference at Dallas Police Headquarters that night.^[4]:349 District Attorney Henry Wade briefed reporters at the press conference telling them that Lee Oswald was a member of the anti-Castro Free Cuba Committee. Ruby was one of several people there who spoke up to correct Wade, saying, "Henry, that's the Fair Play for Cuba Committee", a pro-Castro organization.^{[17][18][4]:349–350} One month after his arrest for killing Oswald, Ruby told the FBI that he had his loaded snub-nosed Colt Cobra .38 revolver in his right pocket during the press conference.^{[19][20][4]:350"}

[Pamela Brown]

13 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

Chuck, Wade was feigning not knowing Jack Ruby after Ruby shot Oswald.

Wade new Jack Ruby well and for many years.

Wade to the press:

" His name is a Jack Rubenstein I believe."

Oh Please Wade...his name is Jack Ruby and you know it and him well!

Why the act Wade?

Good point. Wade was disingenuous at best...

[Greg Doudna]

On 6/22/2021 at 5:16 AM, Larry Hancock said:

Well there is certainly a lot in that post to reply to...grin.   Let's try to break it down:

1. Ruby did have foreknowledge that something was to happen during the motorcade but certainly not something as sensational and dangerous as the murder of the President...and something that could put him at risk. His role up to the point of Oswald's unplanned capture was relatively minor and very much routine for him, including identification of dirty cops for minor roles.  I make the case for that in both SWHT 2010 and Tipping Point.

2. My take is that the recording equipment goes back to 1959 when Ruby was in play as an FBI source - most likely in regard to Cuban gun running.  The FBI was most definitely running a sting against gun runners,  evidence of that is in the arrest of Robert McKewon and his associates.  Whether Ruby contributed anything to that is unknown but his use by the FBI stopped once McKewon's ring was busted.

3. I really don't give any credit to the Jarnigan story, for many reasons including having the conversation in Ruby's club.  Ruby was far too cunning to have that sort of conversation in his club (its as stupid as the Oswald/Cuban Embassy conversation story about Oswald taking money to kill JFK).  My take is that Jarnigan inserted the Connally aspect into the dialog after the fact simply to a) give some credence to his story and b) to avoid questions about why he would not have reported and obvious threat to the President before hand....as a member of the bar that would have been a given.

4. On the other hand the Luce call is something entirely different and part of some deep follow-on research to Tipping Point that David and I are doing.  If it jells it could be very significant but as present is very much a work in progress - and has nothing to do with Ruby.

 

Thanks Larry. The idea that Jarnigan inserted the Connally aspect into the dialog to give credence to his story would mean his story was of seeing Oswald with Ruby (fabrication), to which he added the Connally murder-for-hire aspect for embellishment (more fabrication) and chose Connally not JFK so as to avoid questions why he had not reported the JFK threat previously. This would be in agreement with the polygraph test indicating lying, and in agreement with Dale Myers' interview of Leavelle in which Leavelle said Jarnigan had admitted to the DPD that he made the whole thing up to get in on the ground floor of Oswald-Ruby connection sightings (however that statement from Leavelle appears to be hearsay; is the hearsay reflecting an actual confession statement by Jarnigan to a prosecutable crime [which however DPD decided not to turn over for prosecution?], or a DPD interpretation of Jarnigan?). Oddly District Attorney Wade told the Warren Commission re the Jarnigan polygraph that he, Wade, believed Jarnigan was sincere in believing what he said he saw even though the polygraph indicated lying (which sounds contradictory, as if Wade was telling the WC he did not believe the polygraph). If Jarnigan fabricated the story in his letter to Hoover (lied to the FBI), as an attorney he would know there were heavy penalties for giving false information to the FBI and in sworn affidavits, yet he did so anyway? Nevertheless, your reasons are sensible and the story does have the ring of uncorroborated "too good to be true".

On your final comment on the Luce call, I will be very interested in your research on that. The question there to me is under what hypothetical circumstances would Oswald be caught unwittingly on a tape saying that he could "kill the Secretary of the Navy" (of all people)? The easy explanation would be that no such tape existed, but if the Luce story was a story of an attempt to plant a story in national news media in real-time after the assassination (which did not succeed, but not because the attempt was not made)--and the odd assassination target reference (Secretary of the Navy) uttered by Oswald was told to Luce because that was what was on tape whereas there was no statement of Oswald on tape re JFK--then the question remains, and I look forward to whatever light you may shed on that. 

[Ron Bulman]

Ruby in Vegas three days before the Assassination should have been a red flag for the warren omission.  The FBI, their investigative source, knew about it.  Neither wanted anything to do with this fact.  Telling.  

[Joe Bauer]

Looking back at the "live" national television coverage of Ruby murdering Oswald, I find it fascinating, even surreal, that in the following footage we actually see an almost full profile shot of Ruby just seconds before he jumps out from his front row position in the press line and blasts Oswald in the gut with his 38.

This is at the 15 second mark of the video.

To see Ruby up close like that, ready to pounce  just before his infamous act on live National TV is an incredibly dramatic and iconic bit of historic news coverage.

Ruby not only got into that basement press crowd suspiciously, but he was even able to position himself as close to Oswald as any newsman there - without being noticed?

Sorry, way too improbable and way beyond happenstance luck in my opinion.

Notice also, that in that quick profile camera footage of Ruby we see he is standing right next to one of his closest police buddies "Blackie" Harrison. A close cop buddy of Ruby...for years!

When you see the scanned shot of Ruby in this following video, tell me it isn't a surreal aspect to the Oswald murder scene to follow?

WATCH LATER

ADD TO QUEUE

Lee Harvey Oswald shot by Jack Ruby

 

 

 

5.1M views7 years ago

 

CNN

 

Jack Ruby shoots and kills Lee Harvey Oswald in front of news cameras. From "T

Edited June 26, 2021 by Joe Bauer

[Tony Krome]

48 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

Looking back at the "live" national television coverage of Ruby murdering Oswald, I find it fascinating, even surreal, that in the following footage we actually see an almost full profile shot of Ruby just seconds before he jumps out from his front row position in the press line and blasts Oswald's in the gut with his 38.

Ruby on Sunday, morning and afternoon. He rushed his shave that morning, he mis-matched his sideburns