Moments Leading to Oswald's Deserved Death

[Bill Brown]

1 hour ago, Bob Ness said:

Wanna make sure I got this right. Somebody calls saying they're going to kill Oswald in the garage tomorrow. Oswald gets killed in the garage as stated in the message and Ruby is the one to do it. Later, one of the DPD said it sounded like Ruby whom he knew. And that leads you to believe it wasn't Ruby who called?

And "you guys" lack critical thinking skills? That's your conclusion? Who should we call in to figure out this big mystery?

Pretty thin thread you're hanging by Bill.

 

No.  You don't "have it right".

 

"Somebody calls saying they're going to kill Oswald in the garage tomorrow."

 

So far, so good.

 

"Oswald gets killed in the garage as stated in the message and Ruby is the one to do it."

 

I'm still with ya.  Yes.

 

"Later, one of the DPD said it sounded like Ruby whom he knew."

 

Yes, later.  Much later.  Like the late 1980's later.

 

"And that leads you to believe it wasn't Ruby who called?"

 

No.  This is where you have it wrong.  I'm simply saying that we don't hear anything from anyone, Grammer or otherwise, that the call that night was made by Jack Ruby, until roughly 25 years later.  I have Arizona beachfront property to sell you at a really great price.

 

Use your damn head.  Unless you can provide citation for Grammer ever saying ..... in the 60's during the Warren Commission investigation or the Ruby trial or the Clay Shaw trial ..... or the 70's during the HSCA investigation ..... that the caller was Jack Ruby, then it SHOULD be obvious to any logical person with critical thinking skills that Grammer added the part about the caller being Ruby in order to get his (Grammer's) mug on a documentary in the late 80's.

 

Edited February 16, 2023 by Bill Brown

[Bob Ness]

36 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

...then it SHOULD be obvious to any logical person with critical thinking skills that Grammer added the part about the caller being Ruby in order to get his (Grammer's) mug on a documentary in the late 80's.

 

No. That's YOUR supposition (The act and mental result of a hypothetical inference). Not mine or anyone else's. Grammer may have had any number of reasons to not include that, and we don't really know he DIDN'T. He certainly did at one point later, but Curry ditched the contemporaneous report, didn't he? So, he may or may not have included that in the report. We don't know.

What is being stated here is not a supposition on my part - he did say that. What you're saying is.

It's no wonder you have beachfront property in Arizona you're desperate to sell.

Edited February 16, 2023 by Bob Ness

[Denny Zartman]

24 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

Yes, later.  Much later.  Like the late 1980's later.

It doesn't automatically make it false, as you well know. Why are you polluting the forum with nonsense?

25 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

No.  This is where you have it wrong.  I'm simply saying that we don't hear anything from anyone, Grammer or otherwise, that the call that night was made by Jack Ruby, until roughly 25 years later. 

So, yes, you believe it wasn't Ruby that called because the report that it was Ruby that called came out too late for you to personally accept as a fact. Like you would ever have been convinced even if it came out earlier. Would you care to go down the list of witnesses who said things in the '60's and the '70's that were contrary to the lone nut theory and you can then acknowledge that they're all true by virtue of the fact they were said before the 1980's? Give me a break. And you're going to lecture us on critical thinking?

[Bill Brown]

19 minutes ago, Bob Ness said:

No. That's YOUR supposition (The act and mental result of a hypothetical inference). Not mine or anyone else's. Grammer may have had any number of reasons to not include that, and we don't really know he DIDN'T. He certainly did at one point later, but Curry ditched the contemporaneous report, didn't he? So, he may or may not have included that in the report. We don't know.

What is being stated here is not a supposition on my part - he did say that. What you're saying is.

It's no wonder you have beachfront property in Arizona you're desperate to sell.

 

"...but Curry ditched the contemporaneous report, didn't he?"

 

You have no way of knowing that.  When is the earliest that you hear of the claim that Curry ditched the report?

 

[Denny Zartman]

November 24: Ruby is so broken up about the death of his beloved President John F. Kennedy that Ruby is ready and willing to risk riding the lightning to relieve poor Jackie Kennedy of the unimaginable emotional trauma of having to come back to Dallas and testify in a trial.

November 22: Ruby wouldn't cross the street to see John and Jackie Kennedy in person.

-

Apparently, to some folks, this makes perfect sense.

[Bill Brown]

1 minute ago, Denny Zartman said:

November 24: Ruby is so broken up about the death of his beloved President John F. Kennedy that Ruby is ready and willing to risk riding the lightning to relieve poor Jackie Kennedy of the unimaginable emotional trauma of having to come back to Dallas and testify in a trial.

November 22: Ruby wouldn't cross the street to see John and Jackie Kennedy in person.

-

Apparently, to some folks, this makes perfect sense.

 

This only tells me that you don't know what you're talking about.

 

If you knew what you were talking about, then you'd be aware that the whole "I did it so Jackie wouldn't have to come back for a trial" was the invention of Ruby's original defense attorney.  You DO understand what the goal of a defense attorney is.  Right?

 

[Gene Kelly]

3 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

 

You seem confused.

 

Your quote above (from Hurt's book) doesn't mention Grammer saying the caller was Jack Ruby.

 

It appears to me that you guys lack critical thinking skills.

 

Come on Bill ... do your homework.  The story is related on pages 407-409 of Hurt's "Reasonable Doubt", first published in January 1985 ... three years before "The Men Who Killed Kennedy": 

"Dallas Police Lieutenant Billy R. Grammer, then a rookie policeman, was working in the communications section of the police department in 1963. Lieutenant Grammer, who is highly respected among his colleagues, was on duty in the communications room on the Saturday night prior to Oswald's murder the next morning. 

Late in the evening, one of the women on the switchboard received a call from a man who asked her to look around the room and to name the police officers who were there. He explained to her that he wanted to talk to someone that he knew. The woman began telling the caller the names of different men in the communications room. When she named Billy Grammer, the caller stated that he knew Grammer and that he wanted to speak to him. Grammer, who had taken about fifty calls that evening, immediately felt that he recognized the voice that he heard, but he could not put a face or name with the voice. When Grammer asked the caller's identity, the man said, "I can't tell you that, but you know me." Grammer did not press the caller for his identity.

Grammer said that when he asked the caller who he was, he replied, "I can't tell you that, but you know me.". The caller also said, "We are going to kill Lee Harvey Oswald in the basement tomorrow." and urged that DPD change their schedule. The caller described precise details of the transfer plans. As the man spoke, Grammer did not know whether or not the details were correct. The caller described the decoy vehicle that would be sent out with red lights and sirens and police escorts, only to be followed a little later with the real car containing Oswald.

Grammer then pressed the man to say who he was, but the man insisted that it made no difference. "You're going to have to make some other plans," he warned, "or we're going to kill Oswald right there in the basement. - When the caller hung up, Grammer told Lieutenant Putnam, "I know I know who that is, but I cannot recall his name." Lieutenant Putnam told Grammer that, indeed, the caller did have solid inside information on the secret police plans for moving Oswald. He told Grammer to type up a report of the call for Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry. Grammer did so, and he and Putnam together went to Curry's office, which was swarming with reporters, and handed the report to Curry. The FBI and sheriff's office were notified about the call. 

It was sometime later that two inspectors from the Dallas Police Department asked Grammer about the call. He described it, adding that he had submitted a report to Chief Curry. Even though Lieutenant Putnam supported Grammer's version of events, the report of the incident has never surfaced. The reported warnings that are in the record—the ones the police concede were ignored—did not include knowledge of secret inside plans for the transfer.

Here is the link to the book ... you can read it for your own critical thinking:

https://www.krusch.com/books/kennedy/Reasonable_Doubt.pdf 

 

[David Josephs]

1 hour ago, Denny Zartman said:

It doesn't automatically make it false, as you well know. Why are you polluting the forum with nonsense?

So, yes, you believe it wasn't Ruby that called because the report that it was Ruby that called came out too late for you to personally accept as a fact. Like you would ever have been convinced even if it came out earlier. Would you care to go down the list of witnesses who said things in the '60's and the '70's that were contrary to the lone nut theory and you can then acknowledge that they're all true by virtue of the fact they were said before the 1980's? Give me a break. And you're going to lecture us on critical thinking?

 1 hour ago, Bill Brown said:

No.  This is where you have it wrong.  I'm simply saying that we don't hear anything from anyone, Grammer or otherwise, that the call that night was made by Jack Ruby, until roughly 25 years later. 

 

If Bill fell out of a boat in the middle of the ocean, he'd still miss the water...  when you miss simple concepts as often as he does all he has left are these vapid posts so his life is not so totally meaningless...   Poor Bill... Let's all gather round and give him a big hug...  he remains so starved for attention, he posts... well, y'all see what he posts...  

 

The testimony of J. W. Fritz was taken at 9 a.m., on July. 14, 1964.
(DJ: So Bill, to you 1964 was 25 years after 1963?  well done big brain, well done )

Mr. FRITZ. During the night on Saturday night, I had a call at my home from uniformed captain, Captain Frazier, I believe is his name, he called me out at home and told me they had had some threats and he had to transfer Oswald.
And I said, well, I don't know. I said there has been no security setup, and the chief having something to do with this transfer and you had better call him, because---so he told me he would.
Mr. BALL. Did you think----
Mr. FRITZ. He called me back then in a few minutes and he told me he couldn't get the chief and told me to leave him where he was. I don't think that transferring him at night would have been any safer than transferring, may I say this?
Mr. BALL. Yes.
Mr. FRITZ. Any safer than transferring him during the day. I have always felt that that was Ruby who made that call, I may be wrong, but he was out late that night and I have always felt he might have made that call, if two or three. of those officers had started out with him they may have had the same trouble they had the next morning.

[Gene Kelly]

3 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

Gene, so there were even more detailed aspects of the callers message.

He said "in the basement tomorrow." ?  That's a bombshell.

So, again, was it the specific logistical details in the call-in message that prompted Grammer and Putman to make a report of the call and take it directly to their Chief? Details 99.999% of other threat makers wouldn't know?

Did Grammer also mention his belief that the caller was Jack Ruby to Chief Curry?

The caller says to Grammer ( after Grammer asks who he is ) "I can't tell you that but you know me." ???

Again, mind blowing.

Now, the FBI certainly taped their calls back then.

Just another tid-bit they withheld from the Warren Commission?

Joe

Grammer's story is related on pages 407-409 of Henry Hurt's "Reasonable Doubt", first published in January 1985: 

"Dallas Police Lieutenant Billy R. Grammer, then a rookie policeman, was working in the communications section of the police department in 1963. Lieutenant Grammer, who is highly respected among his colleagues, was on duty in the communications room on the Saturday night prior to Oswald's murder the next morning. Late in the evening, one of the women on the switchboard received a call from a man who asked her to look around the room and to name the police officers who were there. He explained to her that he wanted to talk to someone that he knew. The woman began telling the caller the names of different men in the communications room. When she named Billy Grammer, the caller stated that he knew Grammer and that he wanted to speak to him. Grammer, who had taken about fifty calls that evening, immediately felt that he recognized the voice that he heard, but he could not put a face or name with the voice. When Grammer asked the caller's identity, the man said, "I can't tell you that, but you know me." Grammer did not press the caller for his identity."

Grammer was apparently known to Ruby ... they had met a week earlier when he and another policeman were having a meal at an all-night restaurant not far from police headquarters. Ruby had come into the restaurant, spotted the two policemen, introduced himself, and sat down and insisted on paying for the meal. Before that, Grammer had seen Ruby around town, but that occasion was the only time he ever sat down and talked to him. Hurt described Grammer as "a cautious, conservative man, who wasn't certain that the voice on the telephone had been that of Jack Ruby".

When Grammer returned to the police station, he consulted with Lieutenant Putnam (his supervisor) who also had heard Ruby's voice previously. Grammer related that the caller described precise details of the transfer plans ... he described the decoy vehicle that would be sent out with red lights and sirens and police escorts, only to be followed a little later with the real car containing Oswald. Grammer then pressed the man to say who he was, but the man insisted that it made no difference.

"You're going to have to make some other plans, or we're going to kill Oswald right there in the basement." 

When the caller hung up, Grammer told Lieutenant Putnam, "I know I know who that is, but I cannot recall his name." Lieutenant Putnam told Grammer that, indeed, the caller did have solid inside information on the secret police plans for moving Oswald. He told Grammer to type up a report of the call for Chief Curry. Grammer did so, and he and Putnam together went to Curry's office, which was swarming with reporters, and handed the report to Curry. The FBI and sheriff's office were also notified about the call. 

Gene

[Bob Ness]

53 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

 

"...but Curry ditched the contemporaneous report, didn't he?"

 

You have no way of knowing that.  When is the earliest that you hear of the claim that Curry ditched the report?

 

What difference does it make? There are plenty of explanations for Grammer not including those details which could result in problems either for he or others in the DPD. Those are suppositions of mine but at least as reasonable as you dismissing what he says based on the time he said it.

It's possible he was grandstanding but I'm sure by that time he had more credits the Charton Heston in front of cameras due to the JFKA. As far as motives to switch his story or come up with something post facto it's one of the weaker possibilities in my view. He seems credible on camera (but I'm not sure about anyone at the DPD). If it was completely made of whole cloth, I'm sure he wouldn't have mentioned several potential corroborating sources. 

His story seems to match with what happened and other reports at the time. The only detail you have brought up is the timing of his mentioning Ruby's voice, but we don't know if his report said that or not. His not mentioning it publicly at the time isn't too surprising as it would have sent his bosses into orbit and threatened his future, if true. He dispensed with his responsibility apparently.

And hey Bill! I know an attorney who might be able to help you get that money back from buying ocean front in Arizona! He's kind of retired but I'm sure he'd take a look.

[Gene Kelly]

22 minutes ago, Gene Kelly said:

Come on Bill ... do your homework.  The story is related on pages 407-409 of Hurt's "Reasonable Doubt", first published in January 1985 ... three years before "The Men Who Killed Kennedy": 

"Dallas Police Lieutenant Billy R. Grammer, then a rookie policeman, was working in the communications section of the police department in 1963. Lieutenant Grammer, who is highly respected among his colleagues, was on duty in the communications room on the Saturday night prior to Oswald's murder the next morning. 

Late in the evening, one of the women on the switchboard received a call from a man who asked her to look around the room and to name the police officers who were there. He explained to her that he wanted to talk to someone that he knew. The woman began telling the caller the names of different men in the communications room. When she named Billy Grammer, the caller stated that he knew Grammer and that he wanted to speak to him. Grammer, who had taken about fifty calls that evening, immediately felt that he recognized the voice that he heard, but he could not put a face or name with the voice. When Grammer asked the caller's identity, the man said, "I can't tell you that, but you know me." Grammer did not press the caller for his identity.

Grammer said that when he asked the caller who he was, he replied, "I can't tell you that, but you know me.". The caller also said, "We are going to kill Lee Harvey Oswald in the basement tomorrow." and urged that DPD change their schedule. The caller described precise details of the transfer plans. As the man spoke, Grammer did not know whether or not the details were correct. The caller described the decoy vehicle that would be sent out with red lights and sirens and police escorts, only to be followed a little later with the real car containing Oswald.

Grammer then pressed the man to say who he was, but the man insisted that it made no difference. "You're going to have to make some other plans," he warned, "or we're going to kill Oswald right there in the basement. - When the caller hung up, Grammer told Lieutenant Putnam, "I know I know who that is, but I cannot recall his name." Lieutenant Putnam told Grammer that, indeed, the caller did have solid inside information on the secret police plans for moving Oswald. He told Grammer to type up a report of the call for Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry. Grammer did so, and he and Putnam together went to Curry's office, which was swarming with reporters, and handed the report to Curry. The FBI and sheriff's office were notified about the call. 

It was sometime later that two inspectors from the Dallas Police Department asked Grammer about the call. He described it, adding that he had submitted a report to Chief Curry. Even though Lieutenant Putnam supported Grammer's version of events, the report of the incident has never surfaced. The reported warnings that are in the record—the ones the police concede were ignored—did not include knowledge of secret inside plans for the transfer.

Here is the link to the book ... you can read it for your own critical thinking:

https://www.krusch.com/books/kennedy/Reasonable_Doubt.pdf 

 

Here are the footnoted references ... Grammer was interviewed by Henry Hurt in May 1984:

57. Interview with Billy Grammer, May 1984

58. Ibid.; XXIV WC, pp. 429, 434, 436

59. Interview with Grammer, May 1984

 

[Bill Brown]

32 minutes ago, Gene Kelly said:

Come on Bill ... do your homework.  The story is related on pages 407-409 of Hurt's "Reasonable Doubt", first published in January 1985 ... three years before "The Men Who Killed Kennedy": 

"Dallas Police Lieutenant Billy R. Grammer, then a rookie policeman, was working in the communications section of the police department in 1963. Lieutenant Grammer, who is highly respected among his colleagues, was on duty in the communications room on the Saturday night prior to Oswald's murder the next morning. 

Late in the evening, one of the women on the switchboard received a call from a man who asked her to look around the room and to name the police officers who were there. He explained to her that he wanted to talk to someone that he knew. The woman began telling the caller the names of different men in the communications room. When she named Billy Grammer, the caller stated that he knew Grammer and that he wanted to speak to him. Grammer, who had taken about fifty calls that evening, immediately felt that he recognized the voice that he heard, but he could not put a face or name with the voice. When Grammer asked the caller's identity, the man said, "I can't tell you that, but you know me." Grammer did not press the caller for his identity.

Grammer said that when he asked the caller who he was, he replied, "I can't tell you that, but you know me.". The caller also said, "We are going to kill Lee Harvey Oswald in the basement tomorrow." and urged that DPD change their schedule. The caller described precise details of the transfer plans. As the man spoke, Grammer did not know whether or not the details were correct. The caller described the decoy vehicle that would be sent out with red lights and sirens and police escorts, only to be followed a little later with the real car containing Oswald.

Grammer then pressed the man to say who he was, but the man insisted that it made no difference. "You're going to have to make some other plans," he warned, "or we're going to kill Oswald right there in the basement. - When the caller hung up, Grammer told Lieutenant Putnam, "I know I know who that is, but I cannot recall his name." Lieutenant Putnam told Grammer that, indeed, the caller did have solid inside information on the secret police plans for moving Oswald. He told Grammer to type up a report of the call for Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry. Grammer did so, and he and Putnam together went to Curry's office, which was swarming with reporters, and handed the report to Curry. The FBI and sheriff's office were notified about the call. 

It was sometime later that two inspectors from the Dallas Police Department asked Grammer about the call. He described it, adding that he had submitted a report to Chief Curry. Even though Lieutenant Putnam supported Grammer's version of events, the report of the incident has never surfaced. The reported warnings that are in the record—the ones the police concede were ignored—did not include knowledge of secret inside plans for the transfer.

Here is the link to the book ... you can read it for your own critical thinking:

https://www.krusch.com/books/kennedy/Reasonable_Doubt.pdf 

 

 

Right.  And as I've said about a half dozen times now, there is no mention of Jack Ruby being the caller until 1988.  So what is your point exactly?

 

[Gene Kelly]

19 hours ago, Bill Brown said:

 

I'm not copy and pasting jack dooky.

 

Any posts I make are my own words unless I give proper credit.

 

John McAdams (20+ years ago) on The Kennedy Assassination Home Page: Why did Grammer never come forward with his information that Ruby had, indeed, premeditated murder. DA Henry Wade would have made Grammer a star witness for the state in Ruby's trial.

Bill Brown (yesterday): During Ruby's trial, Bill Alexander (and in effect, Henry Wade) were trying to prove that Ruby murdered Oswald with malice and forethought.  They wanted the death penalty.  If Ruby really did make that phone call and Grammer really did recognize that it was Ruby, then Grammer would have been their star witness during Ruby's trial since he (Grammer) would have been the perfect witness to prove malice and forethought on Ruby's part.  Despite this, we do not hear from Grammer until 1988 in The Men Who Killed Kennedy.

 

 

[Bill Brown]

3 minutes ago, Gene Kelly said:

John McAdams (20+ years ago) on The Kennedy Assassination Home Page: Why did Grammer never come forward with his information that Ruby had, indeed, premeditated murder. DA Henry Wade would have made Grammer a star witness for the state in Ruby's trial.

Bill Brown (yesterday): During Ruby's trial, Bill Alexander (and in effect, Henry Wade) were trying to prove that Ruby murdered Oswald with malice and forethought.  They wanted the death penalty.  If Ruby really did make that phone call and Grammer really did recognize that it was Ruby, then Grammer would have been their star witness during Ruby's trial since he (Grammer) would have been the perfect witness to prove malice and forethought on Ruby's part.  Despite this, we do not hear from Grammer until 1988 in The Men Who Killed Kennedy.

 

 

 

And where exactly is the "cut and paste" you spoke of?

 

I first got the idea from my private conversations with Gary Mack back in 2012.

 

[Gene Kelly]

3 minutes ago, Bill Brown said:

 

Right.  And as I've said about a half dozen times now, there is no mention of Jack Ruby being the caller until 1988.  So what is your point exactly?

 

Henry Hurt interviewed Billy Grammer in May 1984 ... four years before the documentary that you (and Dennis Morrissette) imply was Grammer's incentive to share his story.  

Denis Morissette (18 years ago):  "Looks like Grammer preferred to be a star witness for The Men Who Killed Kennedy."