Jump to content

The 2nd-Floor Baker/Oswald Encounter Has Been Debunked


Recommended Posts

Oswald was interrogated several times. In three of his interrogations he talks about his trip to the second floor to buy a coke for lunch. If you read those reports you will see that they are consistent:

 

DPD Report -- Hosty's handwritten notes:

[Oswald] stated he was present for work at the T.S.B.D. on the morning of the 22nd and at noon went to lunch. He went to 2nd floor to get a coca cola to eat with lunch and returned to 1st floor to eat lunch. Then he went outside to watch [Presidential] Parade.

 

FBI Report #1

Oswald stated that he went to lunch at approximately noon and he claimed he ate his lunch on the first floor in the lunchroom; however he went to the second floor where the Coca-Cola machine was located and obtained a bottle of Coca-Cola for his lunch. Oswald claimed to be on the first floor when President John F. Kennedy passed this building.

 

FBI Report #3

Oswald stated that ... he was on the second floor of said building, having just purchased a Coca-cola form the soft-drink machine, ... he took this Coke down to the first floor and stood around and had lunch in the employees lunch room. He thereafter went outside and stood around for five or ten minutes with foreman Bill Shelly, and thereafter went home.

 

From these we can see that Oswald

  1. Bought a coke on the second floor.
  2. Took it down to the first floor for lunch.
  3. Ate lunch.
  4. And remained on the first floor (inside or out) after
    that as the presidential motorcade went by.

 

The Coverup

None of the above accounts is compatible with the official WC narrative of Oswald being on the 6th floor during the shooting. The FBI decided to invent a story around Oswald's trip to get a coke, and this invention is the 2nd floor Oswald/Baker encounter.

The FBI decided to add their story to a couple of the interrogation reports. Unfortunately for them, doing so left behind a clue that one of the reports had been altered.

 

Inconsistency in DPD Report #3 Revealing the Coverup

If you look closely at DPD Report #3 above, you will see that I removed two sections of text and put ellipses (...) in their place. It is in those two places that the FBI coverup artists added their bogus 2nd floor story. Here is the same text with the two sections (in red) put back in place:

Oswald stated that on November 22, 1963, at the time of the search of the Texas School Book Depository building by Dallas police officers, he was on the second floor of said building, having just purchased a Coca-cola form the soft-drink machine, at which time a police officer came into the room with pistol drawn and asked him if he worked there. Mr. Truly was present and verified that he was an employee and the police officer thereafter left the room and continued through the building. Oswald stated that he took this Coke down to the first floor and stood around and had lunch in the employees lunch room. He thereafter went outside and stood around for five or ten minutes with foreman Bill Shelly, and thereafter went home.

 

From this we can see that Oswald

  1. Bought a coke on the second floor.
  2. Had an encounter with Officer Baker.
  3. Took his coke down to the first floor for lunch.
  4. Ate lunch.
  5. And remained on the first floor (inside or out) after
    that.

Now, with the added bogus 2nd-floor encounter, we have Oswald eating lunch AFTER the shooting. And there is our clue.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 152
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

Other ways the 2nd floor encounter has been debunked:

  1. In his first-day statement, Officer Baker never mentions an encounter with Oswald. Though he DID mention a similar encounter with another man on a different floor. You'd think that he'd want to mention the man taken into custody. LOL
  2. Officer Baker supposedly made a mad dash for the TSBD, and up the steps in time to encounter Oswald on the second floor. But the Darnell film makes it is easy to prove that he wasn't headed toward the TSBD door at all. He was headed toward the corner of Houston and Elm. (See this.) But the WC had to make Baker enter the TSBD quickly to get their timing right.
  3. Bill Shelley and Billy Lovelady kept changing their stories regarding seeing Vickie Adams as she reached the first floor. And there is proof of some of their lies. (For example, Shelley first said that he ran across to the concrete island where he met Gloria Calvery. The Darnell film is consistent with that. But for the WC he said that he stayed on the steps for ~3 minutes for Calvery to arrive at the steps. This is inconsistent with the Darnell film, but it helped the WC discredit Vicki Adams.)
  4. The Darnell film shows that Gloria Calvery arrived at the TSBD stairway within 30 seconds after the last shot. Yet both Shelley AND Lovelady estimated the time to be 3 minutes! I can see people getting the time wrong, but having it off by exactly the same number sounds like witness coaching to me!
  5. Not surprisingly, Vickie Adams told Barry Earnest that she did not see Shelley and Lovelady upon reaching the first floor.
  6. The Stroud document shows how introduction of the 2nd-floor encounter fabrication introduced a new unforeseen problem... not a surprising effect of mixing fiction with fact.
  7. And there's more! Read Bart Kamp's Anatomy of the Second-Floor Lunchroom Encounter. Where all of his evidence and analyses are thoroughly documented.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

The FBI decided to invent a story around Oswald's trip to get a coke, and this invention is the 2nd floor Oswald/Baker encounter.

I see the silliness of CTers concerning the Lunchroom Encounter continues unabated.

Lunchroom-Encounter-Logo.png

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

I see the silliness of CTers concerning the Lunchroom Encounter continues unabated.

...

you ONLY see "silliness," if, IF it was so silly, I doubt you'd spend your quasi retirement getting fat & sassy whilst promoting more loon nut, conspiracy disinfo... lmao!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, David G. Healy said:

you ONLY see "silliness," if, IF it was so silly, I doubt you'd spend your quasi retirement getting fat & sassy whilst promoting more loon nut, conspiracy disinfo... lmao!

Another lovely unintelligible statement from Mr. Healy. (As per usual.)

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Skipping over the silliness DH mentions I imagine Sandy has seen this before.  But relating to his thread topic, a dive too deep for many here?  Too many darn details in there for some to ingest.  Since I linked it on another thread a little bit ago and I've still got it up.

Anatomy of the second floor lunch room encounter Aug 27 2017-by_Bart Kamp.pdf (prayer-man.com)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah Ron, Bart Kamp is the expert regarding the 2nd floor encounter. I haven't read his work because I was satisfied with what my own research showed. He's probably got more bullet points that could be added to my list. Of course, he was the one who discovered the important Hosty "P. Parade" note, which I used in my first post above. (Or maybe it was Malcolm Blunt who found it?)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

But relating to his thread topic, a dive too deep for many here?

 

It didn't occur to me that maybe some haven't accepted what Bart and I and others say about the second-floor encounter being a fabrication simply because they don't understand why it was fabricated in the first place.

I will try to explain the whole thing as succinctly as possible. In another thread.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, David G. Healy said:

you ONLY see "silliness," if, IF it was so silly, I doubt you'd spend your quasi retirement getting fat & sassy whilst promoting more loon nut, conspiracy disinfo... lmao!

Evidence he can't respond to is "silliness".

In his world, cops don't frame people for crimes they don't commit. They don't construct lineups that are unfair. They don't deny suspects legal representation. They don't continue to question a suspect after he's "lawyered up ". They don't plant evidence. There are no such things as coverups. Investigators don't pressure witnesses to change their stories. The US government is honest and would never lie to its people. Conspiracies don't exist and political murders are carried out by one person.

But in the real world, Henry Wade sent 19 innocent people to prison for crimes they did not commit, convictions that were overturned years later on DNA evidence. Richard Nixon resigned the Presidency because he got caught trying to coverup the Watergate break-in. The government lied to the people when it said that Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 election. Finally, the assassination of Lincoln was a conspiracy and not the work of one man.

David Von Pein lives in his own little world where anyone who questions the official version of any event is considered a "kook" and a candidate for ridicule and scorn. People like him don't research the evidence. They wait for the next "Oswald-did-it" book to come out and are the first ones to buy it so they can use someone else's work to "win" their "arguments" and post them on their blogs.

You'll notice as I have, that they always refer to Bugliosi, Myers, Posner or any other author's book that supports the Warren Commission. They thrive on the work of others, they don't do any research themselves. Perhaps they don't have the time or perhaps they're just lazy, I don't know. 

As I've said before, I don't consider myself a "conspiracy theorist" in as much as I don't see conspiracies under every rock. But I have a problem with the evidence in this case and how it was handled. I believe the evidence does NOT support the Warren Commission's conclusions of a sole assassin and that the assassin was Oswald.

I will continue to present the evidence in support of my position and if that makes me a "kook" in the eyes of the Von Peins of the world, then I will wear that badge with honor. I personally find the opinions, insults and comments of Commission apologists to be of no value so I have him ( and others ) on ignore. Anyone who reads my posts can double-check my sources as they're always provided, unlike those who support the Commission's fantasy. I provide testimony, documents and exhibits from the government's own files. I also provide witness videos so researchers can see what they said in their own words and not what the government said they said.

Those who deal in truth have nothing to hide. And the Commission hid a lot. Lying by omission and suppression of evidence is no less a lie and in the end we'll see who the "kooks" really are: those who exposed the lies for what they were, or those who blindly supported them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.prayer-man.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/FBI-Report-Nov-23-1963.jpg

I dunno. This statement to the FBI was made by Truly on Nov. 22. 

It pretty much outlines the usual story: Truly met Baker at or near the entrance of the TSBD and then encountered LHO in second floor snack bar. 

On Nov 22, I suspect a lot of the "official story" was still in flux. Something had gone wrong in 11/22. Why would Truly give this statement on Nov. 22? 

Truly does say he thought the gunshots had came from the railroads yards, that is the Grassy Knoll area. That's not on cue. 

Truly was already lying on Nov 22? This version omits the waiting by the elevators moment. This is no mention of coke bottles or drinks, etc. But it is a single page version. 

I am uncomfortable with explanations of the JFKA that involve too many same-day participants, or pre-event witting participants. People blab. 

If Truly was lying on Nov. 22, then Truly was onboard with the JFKA conspiracy nearly from the get-go. Well maybe so. 

Or the FBI fabricated the Baker-LHO encounter by Nov. 23 (when the statement as typed up), and altered Truly's statement. 

I dunno--especially since the LHO-Baker encounter, happening so quickly after the JFKA, is often cited as evidence LHO was not on the sixth floor. 

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337201/

This is Marion Baker's statement, also made on Nov 22. He outlines the LHO encounter, although he thought it had happened on the third or fourth floor.  But running up steps in a strange building in the moments after the JFKA...really, is this a sign of deception? Baker was in on the plot on Nov. 22? 

----

BTW, yes, the WC was a post facto show trial of LHO, no defense counsel, no exculpatory evidence or witnesses sought, the narrative decided in advance. You know, write the abstract and conclusion first, then hold committee or commission hearings.

But likely the even bigger, the whole story was hidden---which would possibly still involve LHO, but as part of a small conspiracy (in terms of same-day participants) with CIA roots or connections. Maybe a false flag op. 

If LHO was totally uninvolved, there would have been no reason to murder him. IMHO...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

 

But likely the even bigger, the whole story was hidden---which would possibly still involve LHO, but as part of a small conspiracy (in terms of same-day participants) with CIA roots or connections. Maybe a false flag op. 

If LHO was totally uninvolved, there would have been no reason to murder him. IMHO...

 

There would be one scenario -- maybe:

LHO informs on either the Cubans training in LA or the Chicago plot or both.

He's found out by the plotters or they are notified and do a 2-for-1 with the planned murder of LHO somewhere then to frame him with the MC rifle.  However, he luckily eludes them, goes back to get his firearm then proceeds to the designated meetup place -- the theatre.

Would explain why he was so unperturbed when arrested as he has a lot of information at his disposal and must be silenced.

Again - it's only a possible scenario.  But I do remember reading that he was at Lake Pontchartrain before one of the raids on the training centers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Andrew Prutsok said:

Mueller did not "evaluate" for collusion. Doesn't mean it didn't happen or the government lied. Danchenko was acquitted of charges he lied just two days ago.

Are you suggesting the government doesn't lie to its people ?

Ever hear of the Tuskegee experiments ?

The Gulf of Tonkin incident ? 

The sinking of the USS Maine in Havana harbor ?

Saddam Hussein's possession of "weapons of mass destruction" ?

MK-Ultra use of mind altering drugs on unsuspecting military personnel ?

Today the drug companies have people like you and me to experiment their drugs on --- with the blessing and power of the federal government and its mandates behind them. And with no liability whatsoever.

And we still don't know what the long term effects of these "vaccines" are. "Vaccines" that neither protect you from getting it or spreading it. Meanwhile, healthy young people are suddenly dying at a rate never seen before.

People who won't go to a restaurant if four people give it a bad rating on GOOGLE are the same people who will ignore thousands, including doctors, who say that the "jab" is bad. They'll keep going back for a "booster" and even take their kids. 

I certainly hope you're not naive enough to think that the American government has a history of being squeaky clean.

Because it doesn't.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...