How was the Warren Commission allowed to change testimony?

[Gerry Down]

4 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

A lot of his correspondence re his FOIA cases are available at the Weisberg Archives website. I don't think they are in chronological order. But there's a heap of it. 

That's what I was worried about. It would seem to be a monumental task to find what i'm looking for by going through his correspondence, such as the Cadigan document. And even then i'm not sure if it was Weisberg that got that document released. 

Another document i'm interested in is the FOI released document, sometime in the 1970s, in which the "laying on of interviews" is discussed in relation to a possible debrief of LHO. Again not sure if it was Weisberg that got this released. That document is discussed in this video:

I'd like to be able to see when all these key documents were released via the FOI process. 

Does the Harold Weisberg archive by any chance have a section on Harold Weisbergs correspondence that relates specifically to his FOI successes? Or is it all jumbled together in his correspondence as a whole?

[Lawrence Schnapf]

Harold filed half a dozen or so lawsuits in the 1970s and early 1980s. created some good FOIA law and actually prompted an amendment to the FOIA law enforcement exemption that narrowed this exemption.  Some of the litigation materials are on the Weisberg Archives. Wrone published a great book on some of these cases.

[Gerry Down]

14 minutes ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

Harold filed half a dozen or so lawsuits in the 1970s and early 1980s. created some good FOIA law and actually prompted an amendment to the FOIA law enforcement exemption that narrowed this exemption.  Some of the litigation materials are on the Weisberg Archives. Wrone published a great book on some of these cases.

I presume the Wrone book you are referencing is this one mentioned on Wrones Wikipedia page:

Wrone has devoted more than 40 years to researching the assassination of John F. Kennedy. He is a frequent author of book reviews on the assassination, and edited The Legal Proceedings of Harold Weisberg v. General Services Administration (1975), the court record on the lawsuit to obtain the executive session transcripts of the Warren Commission from January 20, 1964 and January 27, 1964. Wrone sued the United States government for records of Abraham Zapruder's 26-second film of Kennedy's assassination, in particular records relating to its acquisition and purchase.

[Lawrence Schnapf]

@Gerry Down yes- that is the book. I have many of the opinions. 

 

 

[Lawrence Schnapf]

another example of how the historic record was manipulated. When Helms and McCone testified before the WC, Dulles was the principal examiner. he was asking them questions about what the CIA knew about Oswald in Russia-when he was the CIA director!! He gave them leading questions to put the blame on State Department.

 

Only in the Seinfeldian Bizzarro world of the WC could the man who ran the agency and knew the answers be in a position of asking his successors about events that occurred on his watch!  

[Gerry Down]

6 minutes ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

another example of how the historic record was manipulated. When Helms and McCone testified before the WC, Dulles was the principal examiner. he was asking them questions about what the CIA knew about Oswald in Russia-when he was the CIA director!! He gave them leading questions to put the blame on State Department.

 

Only in the Seinfeldian Bizzarro world of the WC could the man who ran the agency and knew the answers be in a position of asking his successors about events that occurred on his watch!  

Great point. I wonder if Helms and Dulles met in private beforehand to plan out how their answers and questions would go to make sure the CIA came out looking in the best light possible. 

[Leslie Sharp]

In addition to altering testimonies, what about those who were never called to testify? 

Despite Dallas FBI SA Bardwell Odum’s follow through with Silvia Odio’s claims, including at least one interview with her, Odum was never called to testify before the Warren Commission . . . However, as revealed in the following snippet of her testimony before the commission, in a scene worthy of the film The Godfather, Odum hovered:

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you say that you also started working at a new job that same day?

Mrs. ODIO. No, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. But you had been working on the day that you did move? 

Mrs. ODIO. I started working initially the 15th of September, because it was too far away where I lived in Irving. I started the 15th of September, I am almost sure of the 15th or the 9th. Let me see what day was the 9th. It was a Monday. It was the 9th, sir, that I started working at National Chemsearch.

(Special Agent Bardwell Odum of the Federal Bureau of Investigation entered the hearing room.)

Mr. LIEBELER. This is Mr. Odum from the FBI. As a matter of fact, Mr. Odum was the man that interviewed you.

Mrs. ODIO. I remember. He looked very familiar. 

Mr. [LIEBELER]. What is the name? 

Mr. [sic] ODIO. I interview so many people, it slips my mind at the moment.

Agent Odum left the hearing room…

Little more can be said about the high strangeness of Federal Bureau of Investigation Special Agent Bardwell Dewitt Odum leaving the Warren Commission hearing room without being invited to testify. — Coup in Dallas…

 

So, why should Odum be called before the Warren Commission?  

***

In a July 1998 volume of the The Fourth Decade, a highly regarded publication focused on the assassination, researcher Raymond F. Gallagher presented a brilliant exposé of Special Agent Odum titled “The Ubiquitous Bard.” According to Gallagher, from the moment Odum ascended the stairway to the 6th floor of the TSBD to witness the recovery of the alleged murder rifle, he was an ever-present fixture in advancing Oswald as the lone gunman.

            Less than an hour after the rifle discovery, Bard Odum, along with Lt. Day of the Dallas Police Department, was photographed leaving the depository building with the alleged rifle used by an alleged assassin from the sniper’s nest. Lt. Day later stated that en route to headquarters, SA Odum had used his car radio to contact the Dallas FBI office and described the rifle. As Gallagher pointed out in 1998, there didn’t seem to be a record of this communication, but there is no doubt that early descriptions of the rifle set in motion rampant confusion as to the official identification of the alleged weapon. 

            Odum, an agent of the federal government, was at the DPD headquarters only briefly before dashing to the Texas Theater where a suspect in the shooting of a Dallas police officer was about to be apprehended. It has yet to be explained what prompted Odum to attend that particular arrest in the middle of what should have been the most aggressive manhunt in the nation’s history. Why would his boss, SAC Gordon Shanklin pull one of his prize protégés from the search for Kennedy’s assassin to pursue a local shooting, unless of course, Shanklin had already been advised that Lee Oswald would not only be charged with gunning down Officer J.D. Tippit, but that he would soon be charged with the assassination of Kennedy. 

            Once Oswald was in custody at the Texas Theatre, Odum, instead of tracking federal arrests being made in critical hours of the assassination, inexplicably spent another hour and a half in pursuit of the Tippit shooting along with nearly a dozen DPD staff. Federal detentions in the Dallas area during that twenty-four hour period—persons of interest to the Feds since the spring of 1963—stand out: Jean Rene Souetre and Michel Mertz and possibly Michel Roux.

            Rather than being ordered to question Souetre and or Mertz or Roux, Odum seems focused on Tippit’s murder, even taking time to interview Helen Markham who had witnessed a young male fleeing the scene. In another rarely heralded essay published in the Fourth Decade in 1997, researcher Tom Wallace Lyons summed up Odum’s early influence over the Tippit investigation, asserting that Odum sewed the confusion that contributed to Markham being labeled as an inconsistent, unreliable witness for decades to come. 

            In another noteworthy timeline, while Odum is biding time in Oak Cliff, pursuing a case that was technically outside his jurisdiction, Lee Oswald’s various addresses were being nailed down at the school book depository. Meanwhile, Oswald was being driven to police headquarters in Car Number 2 under the custody of Jerry Hill and his colleagues. According to Bill Simpich, another researcher who has long recognized that the elusive Bard demands close scrutiny, Jerry Hill had been on the sixth floor of the depository building when Mannlicher-Carcano shells were found and reported as a match to the rifle that Bard Odum escorted to police headquarters. Either the police department and the FBI were stretched thin that afternoon, or this was one of numerous serendipitous coincidences that would unfold in the next few days. 

            Once Lee Oswald was identified as AWOL during an alleged formal roll call of depository employees, and once his addresses were known, including that of the Paines, Odum seems to have finally returned his keen eye to the assassination, and with every subsequent step he took, the profile of the lone nut commie suspect was advanced. . . .

[Bill] Simpich reminds us that J. Walton Moore, agent in charge of the CIA’s Dallas office, was a college roommate of Wallace Heitman. It was Moore that introduced George de Mohrenschildt to the returned “defector,” Oswald, and Moore and de Mohrenschildt shared a friendship with Texas oilman and former WWI Col. Lawrence Orlov who is named in the Lafitte datebook.

CIA agent Heitman’s buddy, SA Odum was teamed up that evening with James Hosty, the agent assigned to Oswald since his return from the Soviet Union and infamous for having destroyed an alleged note from Oswald in the weeks prior to the assassination. Odum was the only agent to later claim that Hosty’s story about the Oswald note was erroneous. Ruth Paine soon changed her assessment of the note to align with Bard’s by insisting that the note was yet “another lie” told by Lee.

            When the photos arrived from Mexico City, after cropping any vestiges of the embassy building behind the image of a man in the photo that they intended to present to Marina for identification, the Hosty/Odum team proceeded to the motel in Garland, north of downtown, to confront her. Enter Marguerite Oswald who ran interference that night, and refused to allow Odum to interrogate either of the two women. 

Despite those seeming early unpleasantries, a photo of the Bard facing Marina who is cradling her newborn (see photo section of this book), attests to the FBI agent’s persistence. It also reveals that Ilya Mamantov was no longer her translator. The woman in the middle of the photo has been identified as a skilled Russian translator. Apparently Ilya had served his purpose.

            Over the ensuing months, while CIA’s Heitman relentlessly pursued a very vulnerable Marina, pressuring her to confirm the latest official version of the investigation, whatever version that was, Bardwell would have cordial visits with Ruth Paine and Michael at least ten more times. In fact, Ruth referred to Bardwell as her “primary contact”; Freudian slip perhaps, or, it is also possible that both she and Michael were always kept in the dark. 

Researcher Gallagher additionally draws attention to Ruth’s testimony which indicates that Agent Odum was involved in the seizure of Lee’s wedding ring—a ring that in the following decades would serve as centerpiece of the Sixth Floor Museum, ensconced in a plexiglass case positioned dead center in the passageway through the main floor. The ring has been a nuanced symbol advancing the pathos of the lone gun assassin in the minds of millions upon millions of visitors to the Dealey Plaza over decades. Odum also pursued employees at the Texas Employment Commission responsible for placing Oswald in several jobs. One of those TEC employees made a permanent move from the area she had lived in for decades within months of Odum’s interviews. Some suggest she was terrified. Also, it was Odum who ordered construction of a replica of the alleged bag that concealed the alleged weapon, from materials found in the depository shipping room, to show to Wesley Buel Frazier, the Paine's neighbor and Lee's ride to work the morning of November 22. There can be little doubt that Bard was hell bent on perpetuating the case against the patsy, Lee Oswald.

            Researcher/author Simpich also references records that indicate the confusion facilitated by Odum around the identification of a Minox camera discovered in the Paines’ garage, discrepancies that were fueled by Michael Paine’s sudden realization that the camera was his. Simpich then reminds us of perhaps the most intriguing fact relevant to the pursuit of the real caretaker: SA Odum and Oswald had shared the same Irving barber, Cliff Shasteen. Absent the official records of Odum’s work schedule throughout 1963 to determine who he may or may not have been assigned, Shasteen provides perhaps the single most solid clue in support of the hypothesis that Odum was the Oswald caretaker named by Lafitte beginning in March 1963. 

 

***
And yet, those responsible for determining who would be called before the Warren Commission apparently found no justification for adding SA Bard Odum to the list?
 

[Gerry Down]

1 hour ago, Leslie Sharp said:

 

In addition to altering testimonies, what about those who were never called to testify? 

Despite Dallas FBI SA Bardwell Odum’s follow through with Silvia Odio’s claims, including at least one interview with her, Odum was never called to testify before the Warren Commission . . . However, as revealed in the following snippet of her testimony before the commission, in a scene worthy of the film The Godfather, Odum hovered:

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you say that you also started working at a new job that same day?

Mrs. ODIO. No, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. But you had been working on the day that you did move? 

Mrs. ODIO. I started working initially the 15th of September, because it was too far away where I lived in Irving. I started the 15th of September, I am almost sure of the 15th or the 9th. Let me see what day was the 9th. It was a Monday. It was the 9th, sir, that I started working at National Chemsearch.

(Special Agent Bardwell Odum of the Federal Bureau of Investigation entered the hearing room.)

Mr. LIEBELER. This is Mr. Odum from the FBI. As a matter of fact, Mr. Odum was the man that interviewed you.

Mrs. ODIO. I remember. He looked very familiar. 

Mr. [LIEBELER]. What is the name? 

Mr. [sic] ODIO. I interview so many people, it slips my mind at the moment.

Agent Odum left the hearing room…

Little more can be said about the high strangeness of Federal Bureau of Investigation Special Agent Bardwell Dewitt Odum leaving the Warren Commission hearing room without being invited to testify. — Coup in Dallas…

 

So, why should Odum be called before the Warren Commission?  

***

In a July 1998 volume of the The Fourth Decade, a highly regarded publication focused on the assassination, researcher Raymond F. Gallagher presented a brilliant exposé of Special Agent Odum titled “The Ubiquitous Bard.” According to Gallagher, from the moment Odum ascended the stairway to the 6th floor of the TSBD to witness the recovery of the alleged murder rifle, he was an ever-present fixture in advancing Oswald as the lone gunman.

            Less than an hour after the rifle discovery, Bard Odum, along with Lt. Day of the Dallas Police Department, was photographed leaving the depository building with the alleged rifle used by an alleged assassin from the sniper’s nest. Lt. Day later stated that en route to headquarters, SA Odum had used his car radio to contact the Dallas FBI office and described the rifle. As Gallagher pointed out in 1998, there didn’t seem to be a record of this communication, but there is no doubt that early descriptions of the rifle set in motion rampant confusion as to the official identification of the alleged weapon. 

            Odum, an agent of the federal government, was at the DPD headquarters only briefly before dashing to the Texas Theater where a suspect in the shooting of a Dallas police officer was about to be apprehended. It has yet to be explained what prompted Odum to attend that particular arrest in the middle of what should have been the most aggressive manhunt in the nation’s history. Why would his boss, SAC Gordon Shanklin pull one of his prize protégés from the search for Kennedy’s assassin to pursue a local shooting, unless of course, Shanklin had already been advised that Lee Oswald would not only be charged with gunning down Officer J.D. Tippit, but that he would soon be charged with the assassination of Kennedy. 

            Once Oswald was in custody at the Texas Theatre, Odum, instead of tracking federal arrests being made in critical hours of the assassination, inexplicably spent another hour and a half in pursuit of the Tippit shooting along with nearly a dozen DPD staff. Federal detentions in the Dallas area during that twenty-four hour period—persons of interest to the Feds since the spring of 1963—stand out: Jean Rene Souetre and Michel Mertz and possibly Michel Roux.

            Rather than being ordered to question Souetre and or Mertz or Roux, Odum seems focused on Tippit’s murder, even taking time to interview Helen Markham who had witnessed a young male fleeing the scene. In another rarely heralded essay published in the Fourth Decade in 1997, researcher Tom Wallace Lyons summed up Odum’s early influence over the Tippit investigation, asserting that Odum sewed the confusion that contributed to Markham being labeled as an inconsistent, unreliable witness for decades to come. 

            In another noteworthy timeline, while Odum is biding time in Oak Cliff, pursuing a case that was technically outside his jurisdiction, Lee Oswald’s various addresses were being nailed down at the school book depository. Meanwhile, Oswald was being driven to police headquarters in Car Number 2 under the custody of Jerry Hill and his colleagues. According to Bill Simpich, another researcher who has long recognized that the elusive Bard demands close scrutiny, Jerry Hill had been on the sixth floor of the depository building when Mannlicher-Carcano shells were found and reported as a match to the rifle that Bard Odum escorted to police headquarters. Either the police department and the FBI were stretched thin that afternoon, or this was one of numerous serendipitous coincidences that would unfold in the next few days. 

            Once Lee Oswald was identified as AWOL during an alleged formal roll call of depository employees, and once his addresses were known, including that of the Paines, Odum seems to have finally returned his keen eye to the assassination, and with every subsequent step he took, the profile of the lone nut commie suspect was advanced. . . .

 

[Bill] Simpich reminds us that J. Walton Moore, agent in charge of the CIA’s Dallas office, was a college roommate of Wallace Heitman. It was Moore that introduced George de Mohrenschildt to the returned “defector,” Oswald, and Moore and de Mohrenschildt shared a friendship with Texas oilman and former WWI Col. Lawrence Orlov who is named in the Lafitte datebook.

CIA agent Heitman’s buddy, SA Odum was teamed up that evening with James Hosty, the agent assigned to Oswald since his return from the Soviet Union and infamous for having destroyed an alleged note from Oswald in the weeks prior to the assassination. Odum was the only agent to later claim that Hosty’s story about the Oswald note was erroneous. Ruth Paine soon changed her assessment of the note to align with Bard’s by insisting that the note was yet “another lie” told by Lee.

            When the photos arrived from Mexico City, after cropping any vestiges of the embassy building behind the image of a man in the photo that they intended to present to Marina for identification, the Hosty/Odum team proceeded to the motel in Garland, north of downtown, to confront her. Enter Marguerite Oswald who ran interference that night, and refused to allow Odum to interrogate either of the two women. 

Despite those seeming early unpleasantries, a photo of the Bard facing Marina who is cradling her newborn (see photo section of this book), attests to the FBI agent’s persistence. It also reveals that Ilya Mamantov was no longer her translator. The woman in the middle of the photo has been identified as a skilled Russian translator. Apparently Ilya had served his purpose.

            Over the ensuing months, while CIA’s Heitman relentlessly pursued a very vulnerable Marina, pressuring her to confirm the latest official version of the investigation, whatever version that was, Bardwell would have cordial visits with Ruth Paine and Michael at least ten more times. In fact, Ruth referred to Bardwell as her “primary contact”; Freudian slip perhaps, or, it is also possible that both she and Michael were always kept in the dark. 

Researcher Gallagher additionally draws attention to Ruth’s testimony which indicates that Agent Odum was involved in the seizure of Lee’s wedding ring—a ring that in the following decades would serve as centerpiece of the Sixth Floor Museum, ensconced in a plexiglass case positioned dead center in the passageway through the main floor. The ring has been a nuanced symbol advancing the pathos of the lone gun assassin in the minds of millions upon millions of visitors to the Dealey Plaza over decades. Odum also pursued employees at the Texas Employment Commission responsible for placing Oswald in several jobs. One of those TEC employees made a permanent move from the area she had lived in for decades within months of Odum’s interviews. Some suggest she was terrified. Also, it was Odum who ordered construction of a replica of the alleged bag that concealed the alleged weapon, from materials found in the depository shipping room, to show to Wesley Buel Frazier, the Paine's neighbor and Lee's ride to work the morning of November 22. There can be little doubt that Bard was hell bent on perpetuating the case against the patsy, Lee Oswald.

            Researcher/author Simpich also references records that indicate the confusion facilitated by Odum around the identification of a Minox camera discovered in the Paines’ garage, discrepancies that were fueled by Michael Paine’s sudden realization that the camera was his. Simpich then reminds us of perhaps the most intriguing fact relevant to the pursuit of the real caretaker: SA Odum and Oswald had shared the same Irving barber, Cliff Shasteen. Absent the official records of Odum’s work schedule throughout 1963 to determine who he may or may not have been assigned, Shasteen provides perhaps the single most solid clue in support of the hypothesis that Odum was the Oswald caretaker named by Lafitte beginning in March 1963. 

 

***
And yet, those responsible for determining who would be called before the Warren Commission apparently found no justification for adding SA Bard Odum to the list?
 

You said that Odum was the only agent to say that Hostys story about the LHO note he destroyed was erroneous.

What did Odum say was erroneous about Hostys story regarding the note?

[Leslie Sharp]

4 hours ago, Gerry Down said:

 

 

4 hours ago, Gerry Down said:

 

 

4 hours ago, Gerry Down said:

You said that Odum was the only agent to say that Hostys story about the LHO note he destroyed was erroneous.

What did Odum say was erroneous about Hostys story regarding the note?

 
Gerry,
Bardwell Odum affadavit, Sepember 24, 1975
Until certain newspaper publicity about thirty days [ago] I had never heard any reference made to a note suposedly [sic] left by Lee Harvey Oswald for SA James P. Hosty. I am quite positive I have never heard anything evidentiary, gossip-wise, fourth-hand or otherwise about the existence of any such note until the year 1975.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=118884#relPageId=204

I'm curious to hear your thoughts on the salient issue raised in my post — why wasn't SA Bard Odum called to testify before the WC? I believe the question is somewhat parallel to the concerns you raise in topic of this thread. 

 

Edited March 7, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Tom Gram]

5 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

And yet, those responsible for determining who would be called before the Warren Commission apparently found no justification for adding SA Bard Odum to the list?

This is a bit off topic but worth mentioning. Paul Bentley went directly from the Tippit murder scene, where he collected fingerprints from Tippit’s cruiser, to the Texas Theater where he was directly involved in the arrest of Oswald. 

According to Bentley’s report on the arrest, he went straight to the balcony and ordered the lights turned on, then headed downstairs just in time to assist McDonald in subduing Oswald before any other officers got there. Bentley subsequently sat right next to Oswald in the back seat of the cruiser on the ride back to City Hall, and was the first law enforcement official to look through Oswald’s wallet. Bentley also 1) initialed the revolver before it was turned over to homicide, even though he never officially handled the gun; 2) told the press on Saturday the exact same story that was later adopted by McDonald about preventing a misfire with his hand - and even claimed that he got a bruised hand from it; and 3) claimed that he personally turned over Oswald’s identification to Lt. Baker in homicide. Bentley was also the head of the DPD polygraph division. 

The WC got away with pretending Bentley didn’t even exist, despite his gigantic initials P.B. appearing on the butt of the revolver. He was never deposed, his key role in the arrest and chain of custody of the revolver was never acknowledged, and his story about the alleged misfire was never investigated, even after the WC heard expert FBI testimony that could’ve corroborated Bentley’s story about getting a hand injury.

I’m falling asleep, but my point is that if the WC failed to depose guys like Bentley, not to mention some of the closest witnesses to the assassination in Dealey Plaza, is it really that surprising that they never called Bardwell Odum? 

Edited March 7, 2023 by Tom Gram

[Lawrence Schnapf]

lots of witnesses were never deposed. Warren approved the use of unrecorded initial interviews so the attorney staff could interview witnesses and if they didnt like what they were saying or appeared that they would not be compliant in modifying their accounts, there was no "record" of those interviews. Just another quiver for them to use to manufacture a false history record. 

[Gerry Down]

3 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

 

 

 
Gerry,
Bardwell Odum affadavit, Sepember 24, 1975
Until certain newspaper publicity about thirty days [ago] I had never heard any reference made to a note suposedly [sic] left by Lee Harvey Oswald for SA James P. Hosty. I am quite positive I have never heard anything evidentiary, gossip-wise, fourth-hand or otherwise about the existence of any such note until the year 1975.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=118884#relPageId=204

I'm curious to hear your thoughts on the salient issue raised in my post — why wasn't SA Bard Odum called to testify before the WC? I believe the question is somewhat parallel to the concerns you raise in topic of this thread. 

 

Hosty said 30 agents knew about the note, so I would have thought Ofum must have known about it.

It looks to me like Odum was not called to testify because he is never at the center of any one issue the WC were interested in but only playing bit parts here and there.

[Leslie Sharp]

10 hours ago, Gerry Down said:

Hosty said 30 agents knew about the note, so I would have thought Ofum must have known about it.

It looks to me like Odum was not called to testify because he is never at the center of any one issue the WC were interested in but only playing bit parts here and there.

 As Bill Simpich observes, Odum was the only agent who denied the existence of the note.

We argue Odum was hardly playing bit parts but that he was actually at the center of a number of issues ... accompanying the rifle from the TSBD, witnessing Oswald's arrest at the theatre in the middle of a manhunt for the president's assassin, interviewing at least one witness at the scene of the shooting of a DPD officer in spite of his responsibilities as a Federal Agent, familiar personally with Ruth and Michael Paine, involved in the initial search of their home, recipient of the photo from MC and subsequent attempt(s) to interview Marguerite and Marina, photographed with Marina and her new born and the translator to indicate he remained in contact with Marina, etc. etc.

[Leslie Sharp]

13 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

lots of witnesses were never deposed. Warren approved the use of unrecorded initial interviews so the attorney staff could interview witnesses and if they didnt like what they were saying or appeared that they would not be compliant in modifying their accounts, there was no "record" of those interviews. Just another quiver for them to use to manufacture a false history record. 

It would seem that failure to depose is no less egregious than changing testimony in an investigation of this magnitude.

[Pat Speer]

16 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

lots of witnesses were never deposed. Warren approved the use of unrecorded initial interviews so the attorney staff could interview witnesses and if they didnt like what they were saying or appeared that they would not be compliant in modifying their accounts, there was no "record" of those interviews. Just another quiver for them to use to manufacture a false history record. 

When Belin interviewed DPD crime scene chief Day in DC Day brought up that Belin had previously interviewed him in Dallas. This in itself is not surprising. A number of witnesses were interviewed in Dallas then brought before the commission in DC. But Day's was disappeared.