Bob Tanenbaum and Jim Lesar presentation at Duquesne U. 2013

[Gil Jesus]

 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Dan Hardway:

"For the past few years Robert Tanenbaum has been telling a fascinating tale of a 1976 encounter with David Atlee Phillips.  I first heard his presentation at Duquesne University’s Wecht Institute’s Passing the Torch Conference in October, 2013.  He told the story with great detail, drama and flourish."

Unfortunately for Tanenbaum, there is no evidence that this encounter actually occurred as Hardway explains:

Real Hillbilly Views: The Prosecutor's Tale

[Gerry Down]

7 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Dan Hardway:

"For the past few years Robert Tanenbaum has been telling a fascinating tale of a 1976 encounter with David Atlee Phillips.  I first heard his presentation at Duquesne University’s Wecht Institute’s Passing the Torch Conference in October, 2013.  He told the story with great detail, drama and flourish."

Unfortunately for Tanenbaum, there is no evidence that this encounter actually occurred as Hardway explains:

Real Hillbilly Views: The Prosecutor's Tale

Been meaning to read this article by Dan Hardiway. Thanks for the reminder. Tanenbaum tells this story with such conviction, it would be shocking if it were untrue. I have no idea if it is or not. 

[James DiEugenio]

Gerry, it is true.

In this community, everyone likes to slam each other.  And so Parnell used this to to slam Tanenbaum, as others on his side have also done.

What Bob meant was that when Sprague did the first interview with Phillips, he did not have the document.

In the interim, Don Freed had found it, and given it to Mark Lane.  Lane had then dropped it off with Tanenbaum, so when he called in Phillips for a second interview, he had it.

And IIRC, Fenton was there.

 

[Bob Ness]

3 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Gerry, it is true.

In this community, everyone likes to slam each other.  And so Parnell used this to to slam Tanenbaum, as others on his side have also done.

What Bob meant was that when Sprague did the first interview with Phillips, he did not have the document.

In the interim, Don Freed had found it, and given it to Mark Lane.  Lane had then dropped it off with Tanenbaum, so when he called in Phillips for a second interview, he had it.

And IIRC, Fenton was there.

 

So did Phillips go stomping off at that interview? Hardaway takes Tanenbaum to task pretty badly.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

4 hours ago, Bob Ness said:

So did Phillips go stomping off at that interview? Hardaway takes Tanenbaum to task pretty badly.

No, the incident could not have happened as Tanenbaum said it did. Theorists have correctly pointed out that Phillips did make inconsistent statements to the HSCA. That is why he was called back for a second time to clarify his remarks. I discuss this here:

26. “Only on Two Occasions Did I Think That I Was Taken” ~ W. Tracy Parnell (wtracyparnell.blogspot.com)

[W. Tracy Parnell]

4 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

And so Parnell used this to to slam Tanenbaum, as others on his side have also done.

I was not the one "slamming" Tanenbaum in this instance-Hardway (who is not on my "side" BTW) was.

[James DiEugenio]

Yes, Bob said that Phillips walked out.

And then they could not get him back.

It was only after Blakey took over for Sprague, and the committee had new leadership under Stokes, that they were able to get Phillips back.

 

Edited November 12, 2022 by James DiEugenio

[James DiEugenio]

Let me add a couple of other comments.

What Bob says here about the file he got from Schweiker and what Schweiker told him about the CIA involvemnet in the assassination,  and how Fenton read the file and said, "We are in over our heads here."  That is just really memorable and valuable stuff.  Fenton turned out to be right.

Phillips apparently did not want to return because he suspected Tanenbaum was going to try and write up a perjury wrap for him.  Well, he had lied had he not? The tapes did not all disappear, so not all of them were recycled every 7-8 days.  And you can read about why not in the Lopez Report.

The irony of it all is that Eddie and Danny also wrote up a bill of indictment for not just Phillips, but Anne Goodpasture. Clearly, they both lied their heads off to the HSCA.

But, the committee failed to turn over the bill of indictment to the DOJ.

[Gerry Down]

14 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

And IIRC, Fenton was there.

 

What does IIRC stand for?

[Bob Ness]

1 hour ago, Gerry Down said:

What does IIRC stand for?

If I recall correctly.

[Ron Bulman]

4 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

But, the committee failed to turn over the bill of indictment to the DOJ.

There's the most important part.

[James DiEugenio]

Yes, i agree.  

Very telling about what had happened to the HSCA by 1978.

[Gerry Down]

7 hours ago, Bob Ness said:

If I recall correctly.

Thanks. I thought it was some sub committee of the HSCA or something.

[Gerry Down]

10 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

The irony of it all is that Eddie and Danny also wrote up a bill of indictment for not just Phillips, but Anne Goodpasture. Clearly, they both lied their heads off to the HSCA.

But, the committee failed to turn over the bill of indictment to the DOJ.

I wonder what the HSCAs reasoning was for not turning it over to the DOJ? I mean if DAP could make it look like he just forgot, that in itself would collapse any perjury charge. I would imagine the HSCA would only proceed with such a charge if they knew it would definitely stick. A failed perjury charge would damage the reputation of the HSCA.