Pierre Lafitte datebook, 1963

David Josephs · July 30, 2023

5 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

Leslie's whole reaction of personal attacks and deflection in response to questions raised regarding the authenticity question is so bizarre. It is how a wilful forgery operation would respond, not how most sincere researchers would respond. And Leslie seems to be on a continuum in disdaining of questions raising the authenticity question from Albarelli.

I'm curious Greg,

Do you approach all the JFK evidence like this? How much authentication of documentation have you partaken in over your years involved?

Simply because something is "authentic" does not mean it is factual - FBI reports about Oswald on a bus to Mexico, or that he bought a rifle.... are all "authentic" but complete cr-ap.

It does not bother you the Zfilm has never been "authenticated" with Zavada's sleight of hand revealed for what it was?
Why do we not hear you screaming about what is accepted as THE definitive representation of the government's position about the assassination?

Why again is it when the CIA releases documents they are used to prove points but never considered "inauthentic" until much later, when CONTEXTUAL VERIFICATION is finally done? The Hunt letter comes to mind, or the Nov 8th typewriter letter...

The physical characteristics have been found authentic for 1963. Easily faked though, right?

So far, have you been able to refute anything contextually within the notes?

Your "If..then" offering is kind of weak as well. A willful forger is so confident their work will not be found out, they are usually willingly handing over materials for examination... part of the forger's jollies. (if you can speculate, so can I)

So far, the reasons you've offered for the forgery have not panned out for you, the idea it's a fraud is easily dismissed... deeming something "authentic" does not establish factual integrity.

So how about trying the "factual integrity" course for a little while and move on already.

How much whining about the same exact thing can one man do?

Leslie Sharp · July 30, 2023

5 hours ago, David McLean said:

A few random observations on an enthralling but tedious word slam…

George White and Pierre Lafitte were from at least 1953 engaged in highly illegal druggings and worse (Frank Olsen!) at the behest or employ of the CIA. It seems they both kept factual diaries as insurance against “the pigeon way” that assuredly befell Lee Harvey Oswald.

“Authentification” may take different forms and degrees, through physical examination, through contextual verification and corroboration, through the credibility and propenquinity of/to the source material, eg the Gospels and Apostles, or Pierre, Renee and Phen Lafitte.

One would hope that accusations of fraud or forgery would be accompanied by some evidence or hint of malfeasance. So far, not convincing. Lafitte was indeed a con man, but predominantly in the service of the US government.

Albarelli was a cautious researcher, refusing for example to endorse the judgment of Frank Olsen’s son re American CBW in Korea or of the esteemed Douglas Valentine re the CIAs LSD ambitions. And the integrity of Hank’s relationship with his sources over many years impressed me, and Leslie seems to be respectful of the responsibility she has inherited from him.

May some empathy and compassion go some way to healing the wounds of division and bring better understanding of our common purpose.

May some empathy and compassion go some way to healing the wounds of division and bring better understanding of our common purpose.

Beautifully stated. I too trust this burnishing is leading to resolution and reconciliation, perhaps on a scale we don't fully understand; at least that's what Hank and I hoped.

David Josephs · July 30, 2023

6 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said:

Analysing the datebook as a whole would also allow to evaluate the importance of individual records by someone else than the Authors team. This is essential for acceptance of any conclusions.

May I ask to kindly respond to my points in one post rather in separate posts?

I ask you the same question... where is all this indignation for the 2017-2023 documents released?

Where is the cry for authentication of the most important evidence in the case?

The hypocrisy of these requests is mind-bogging, as if a high res images will allow you to better understand the context.

How about giving us an example of how authenticity would be dis-proven from a better version of these notes.

How would you know if Angleton knew LaFitte or vice versa - as just one example.

In reverse, what what convince you it was authentic simply because the notes were larger and clearer?

What say you...? @Greg Doudna ? @Benjamin Cole

Leslie Sharp · July 30, 2023

6 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said:

Leslie:

while it may be an interesting exercise to compare how primary data have been handled by different researchers, such exercise is not an appropriate response to my and others members' request to submit for analysis a high-resolution copy of the datebook. It is your responsibility as the surviving author and the one who promotes the datebook as a breakthrough in the case to provide the sources on which you base your conclusions. Please post all high-resolution scans (pages) of the datebook you have at your disposal in public domain, for instance on a dedicated web page or a suitable Open Access server. This is the open access policy which has become a standard in modern research. There is no way forward without this step.

My analysis of one of the pages that I showed in my yesterday post was based on a Kindle version of the book. I opened the document on a PC and made a screenshot from a large screen. I then applied different enhancement methods, such as resizing, adding light, increasing the contrast and reducing the noise. I cannot know what my procedure did with bits of the original text.

In addition to making the high-resolution copies of datebook pages available to the research community, it will be necessary to proceed with authentication of the datebook by a criminal investigation body based on the fact that the diary suggests that the alleged assassin Lee Oswald was unjustly blamed for the murder of the US President. I am not a lawyer and neither am I familiar with the US legal system. However, there must be a legal way to subpoena the datebook and let it be analysed by experts. The authentication process would not be a simple matter, however, it can be done. You may appreciate that I am not asking you to arrange for the authentication of the datebook which may be a costly affair.

Analysing the datebook as a whole would also allow to evaluate the importance of individual records by someone else than the Authors team. This is essential for acceptance of any conclusions.

May I ask to kindly respond to my points in one post rather in separate posts?

Andrej, I will respond forthwith in one fell swoop, I promise. Yesterday's tech issues compelled me to answer in that fashion.

If only we could walk in one another's shoes for just one hour.

Leslie Sharp · July 30, 2023

7 hours ago, Ed Berger said:

Thank you Leslie. I have to say, when I got to the section of CiD that discussed Canadian Javelin, I nearly dropped the book in surprise—such a foreign topic, one that I had come to via the World Commerce Corp, and yet there it was. It was only after that, via looking into Mark Millard, that I found that Javelin also directly interlocked with well-trod assassination research alleyways like D.H. Byrd's companies and Great Southwest.

LO. Full transparency, Ed. The last few months with Hank were focused on several specific threads, one of which was the reference to nickel in the PL datebook, with inference to a "shipment." I had written up the general research into the metal — Dulles' concern that Castro was cutting off supply — which he agreed should be included in the narrative, but I hadn't fully fleshed out Doyle and Javelin; so what you read is mine and I take full responsibility. Similar to your approach, I worked in reverse, not realizing it would lead to WCC. I wish Hank had been here to read the results because I think he could have made even more sense of it. I was more focused on Doyle's presence in the Bahamas, a Hilton flag on his property, and how that might provide an ideal venue for interactions with Sir Stafford Sands, Hjalmar Schacht, Ilse Skorzeny, Leo Corrigan and Clint Murchison among others. (Conrad Hilton appears at least once in Lafitte's ledger.)

I had not uncovered the Millard, Byrd, Great Southwest link ... but there's one thread we can count on, Clint Murchison of GS!

I have a side story related to "nickel" and William King Harvey for another time.

I would love to know more about the flower scheme, if you're in a position to share that information. The essential component of financial fraud is far too overlooked in studies of dark operations, yet they're vital because they induce much-needed revenue streams for off-the-books matters, in addition to enriching the participants. This became near-universal by the 1980s, but there is a long history of development that got us to that juncture. That's part of the reason I'm interesting in other figures that "danced between the raindrops" like David Baird and Alexander Guterma.

LO I only know that this woman's father imported exotic flowers, and Lafitte and he engaged in a particular scheme and I believe diamonds were a factor as well since the flowers were imported from Africa. I believe she might talk to me again, assuming she is still with us. Can you elaborate on why it might be of interest to you? And yes, these were definitely deeply hidden revenue streams; but, we're not sure Lafitte was running these schemes on behalf of any particular, or specific government agency. They may well have been mob related, or purely private enterprise.

A question I'd like to pose: in the study of Javelin, did you or Hank ever come across anything on the mysterious Jean-Pierre Francois or his company Societe Transshipping? The encounter between Javelin and JPF/Societe Transshipping dates to at least 1965 (so post-assassination and Lafitte/Loomis fraud, but around the same time as the Roselli stock purchase in Jubilee), and culminated in a deal in 1968 that became the subject of a General Assembly of Newfoundland inquiry:

LO The Francois that Hank pursued was Spirito; otherwise your JP isn't ringing a bell. I recall seeing Society Transshipping on a list but didn't pursue it. Sounds important to me; and you read that Thomas Eli Davis mentions as a reference a Newfoundland company?

Subsequent inquires clarified that the person hiding behind Societe Transshiping was Jean-Pierre Francois. While not much has been written about JPF in English, French press and books have linked him to a wide gamut of shadow-world players, such as the Cagoule, the mafia, the P2 lodge... Take this from a profile that the French paper Liberation did on him after his death (apologies for wonky google-translate):

LO This is exceptionally intriguing. A researcher in New Orleans and I have said for months and months, "we're missing something." Either esoteric, twilight realm, something, so we've been reviewing Opus Dei, P2 John XXIII death, Aldo Moro, Knights Templars, K of M's, Arthurian cycle (Lancelot Project), Ireland ... Several clues: Pierre's repetition of OSARN in the Oct 9 entry is almost ritualistic, and mimics his four 848's periodically. Either a code, or?

LO Let me read the link.

Given what is written about Vichy and the Cagoule in CiD, it all makes me wonder...

LO Agree. And we have more on Vichy-related, including Jean Nepote, head of INTERPOL in 1963.

Edited July 30, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

Leslie Sharp · July 30, 2023

12 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Leslie Sharp writes on page 8:

My Latin is a bit rusty these days, but the word for the number two is duo, not duum.

Duum is one of the genitive forms of duo, and an archaic form at that. The standard Latin genitive form of duo would be duorum, not duum.

To clarify, 'genitive' refers to the possessive form of a noun. Whereas in English you might use 'of the' to indicate possession, in Latin you'd change the ending of the noun and its associated words: duo becomes duorum or (if you were being deliberately old-fashioned) duum.

Leslie's sentence, "two rifles are in the building", doesn't require the use of the genitive. To justify the word duum, the sentence would need to be something like "of the two rifles in the building". But this doesn't make sense if we look at the extract Andrej posted, which clearly contains the word 'into', not 'in'.

I suspect that the squiggle in question isn't DUUM at all. What it actually is, I've no idea, and until the datebook is properly authenticated, it doesn't really matter.

The Latin word duo is indeed, as Leslie implies, cognate with the French deux, though I fail to see why a native French speaker, when writing in English, would use an incorrect and archaic version of a Latin word when he could have written 'two' or 'deux'.

Sorry for the linguistic pedantry, but the DUUM question illustrates a basic problem with the Nostradamus-like nature of the datebook. There's too much vagueness, too much room for interpretation. I suspect that, like Nostradamus, the author or authors deliberately left things vague, so that readers could fill in the gaps themselves to fit whatever pre-conceived ideas they already have. That's part of its attraction: it's a puzzle to be solved.

On the subject of demonstrating the authenticity of the datebook, making a facsimile of the full manuscript publicly available would be only the beginning of the process. The main thing that needs to be verified by properly accredited experts is the physical object: the ink and the paper. If, as Leslie writes, "The disposition of the physical instrument is mine to make", and she has the power to get this essential task done, she should get things moving as soon as possible.

Who knows - despite what most people seem to think, it might turn out to be genuine after all!

Jeremy, what is your evidence that I haven't "gotten things moving"?

Why do some on this forum regard themselves as competent researchers, rising to the highest standards, yet fail to execute a simple review of the trajectory of and the impediments to final authentication?

Edited July 30, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

Greg Doudna · July 30, 2023

Forensic ink analysis of the physical object, the Lafitte datebook

As I understand it, the ink on the Lafitte datebook has already been examined by a reputable forensic agency.

Nobody here knows the results of that examination, except in a hearsay form reported by Leslie in 2021.

The reason nobody knows those results, may be because nobody in the JFK research community has asked that agency or its examiners or the film producer who hired them.

The reason nobody has asked is because nobody is able to know who to ask, who they are.

In reporting this, Leslie said she was not legally restricted from saying who the forensic examining agency was, said both the filmmaker and examining agency were free to come forward, but that she was not going to disclose their identities to JFK assassination researchers.

Analysis of the ink is likely one of the two best opportunities or means for detection of forgery relevant to the Lafitte datebook--to find out if it was a forgery, if it was--the other being handwriting analysis.

This expert ink analysis that was done--mention is made of "hours" of expertise time involved in the undertaking--was not commissioned by Albarelli or Leslie. Leslie has explained that Albarelli's position was "take it or leave it", disinterest in having any test done of the physical item to check for forgery, since Albarelli, who first saw the item post-2000, had determined that he knew it was genuine from 1963 and everyone else should take his word for it, "take it or leave it", without forensic examination.

It was a UK film company, arranged by Albarelli to do a film featuring the sensational Lafitte datebook, which obtained the ink analysis. This ink analysis which the film company had done, information which presently exists of forensic examination already carried out, remains secret and forbidden knowledge to the JFK assassination researchers, remains undisclosed somewhere in England, with the filmmaker free to disclose it, if it were possible to ask.

The hearsay of the findings of that ink analysis suggested a finding of anomalies in the ink used in the handwriting of the Lafitte datebook that could not be matched to standard inventories of known inks from 1963. In the case of those anomalies, according to the hearsay, the expert said the ink of the datebook's writing could have come from some other part of the world not in the expert's known ink types inventory/databases for 1963. Or, well, (beginning to sound like Pat Speer here) maybe the ink used by the writer wasn't from 1963, and was from a later date. Maybe that's the reason the ink of the 1963 Lafitte datebook entries could not be matched by the analyst to any of the known inks for 1963,

It is not possible to understand with further clarity the expert interpretation of those anomalies which could not be matched to known 1963 ink type inventories, because it is not known who to ask.

There also was forensic analysis at the same time looking at the handwriting. According to the hearsay report, the handwriting analysis found that the handwritten entries of the Lafitte datebook "were all made by one and the same individual within a constricted timeframe".

Now that last detail, that the writing of all entries of twelve months of calendar were all done "within a constricted time frame", could be a detail of interest meriting closer inquiry.

The general principle is authentic writing of calendars and appointment books and ledgers show varied kinds of writing indicating writing at different times over a span of time. But in forgeries, all of a calendar year's date entries might be written at one or two or three goes over only a few days' time, or in some cases even in a single sitting. Most forgers, aware of this, will attempt to disguise that by intentionally trying to show variety, but such attempts are not necessarily successful. Skilled examiners can often spot the difference between real and fake on this point. I understand that IRS criminal investigators deal with this issue all the time with enterprising taxpayers' attempted retroactive fraudulent creation of expense books and calendars and ledgers--first thing they look at is do all the entries look the same and written by the same pen. That principle.

Therefore an expert finding concerning the Lafitte datebook, told in hearsay form to have found that all the writing on the datebook was done "within a constricted timeframe"--what does that mean? Was that expert suggesting possible indication of forgery with that language? Or not?

It is not possible to know more specifically, because the examiners and their findings are not available to ask.

It is not possible for anyone to ask because no JFK assassination researcher knows whom to ask, except Leslie, and Leslie has not seen fit to disclose.

~ ~ ~ from Leslie Sharp, Dec. 22 and 24, 2023 (link is at the end below) ~ ~ ~

"He [Hank] had NOT [emphasis added] initiated authentication himself because he knew the chain of custody of the Lafitte records firsthand; however he recognized that the proposed authentication process would provide compelling visuals that could advance public knowledge of these exclusive revelations of the plot to assassinate President Kennedy—End Quote. I explain that the documentary film co. contracted with Hank to produce a multi-series based on the book; the initial foray would be to film the first phase of authentication of the Lafitte datebook in London so Hank made arrangements to have the datebook in his possession for that filming.

"... Within the first few hours of handling the datebook, the analyst in London assured his client, the documentary producer, as well as Hank, that his instinctive reaction (based on decades of experience in his field) was the instrument, cover and paper, is a 1963 traditional, commercial datebook and that the entries were all made by one and the same individual within a constricted timeframe.

"... The ink analyst also offered a preliminary assessment. After taking hundreds of samples from the datebook, he told Hank that he was persuaded that the only anomalies were likely the result of rare writing instruments Lafitte could have picked up during 1963 while traveling that would not necessarily be in the analyst’s database.

"... The contractual agreement in this instance is related to the parties that hired the analysts, and has nothing to do with the owners of the datebook ...

"... For the record, all parties involved, including the analysts and the film group, have had ample opportunity to distance themselves, and even disavow the record of their participation in the preliminary findings and their conversations with Hank and me. To date, to our knowledge, no such public or private pronouncement has been made. They’re all invited to come forward with their version of events, anytime. In the meantime, there is nothing contractual to preclude me from identifying those parties; however, out of professional courtesy, I will refrain, for now.

"... The science of authentication … paper and ink dating, etc … is fundamental. I can assure you that the analyst did not hesitate to confirm to Hank that the instrument itself comports with products available in 1962; the cover stamp is 1963 (the Christmas gift distributed for the forthcoming year), and the frontmatter including calendars, etc. align with a 1963 (and ensuing years) publication. I’ve addressed ink analysis previously. This leaves us with handwriting analysis, and as stated before, the expert told Hank within hours, before he spent the requisite time applying the tools of his trade, that he believed the datebook was maintained by one and the same person in a constricted timeframe. You want to see the written preliminary report? That is understandable. So do we.

"I shared with a colleague just this week that I’m prepared to receive a call or a letter to indicate that the analysists consider the datebook “highly dubious.” But I ask, why have they not issued a statement to the effect to those involved, and/or why are they unwilling to respond to my inquiries? Thus far, the response, “non-disclosure” remains in play, which I respect objectively; but what if theirs is an ongoing exercise that could result in a documentary that excludes the authors and publisher, and presents the Lafitte story in an alternative context and narrative?"

(Dec 22 and 24, 2021, https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/27407-coup-in-dallas/page/6/)

~ ~ ~

I looked up the two names, Valery Aginsky and Oliver Thorne.

Oliver Thorne is Forensic Manager, Forensic Document Examination at LGC Forensics, London, England (https://uk.linkedin.com/in/oliver-thorne-27a31040).

Valery Aginsky runs Aginsky Forensic Document Dating Laboratory in East Lansing, Michigan. Look at his credentials and the laboratory method for determining age of inks described at the end.

"Valery N. Aginsky, Ph.D. is a forensic chemist of over 37 years of experience specializing in the field of ink analysis (ink comparison, ink dating) and document dating. He has worked for a major government laboratory for twenty years (1980 - 2000) as a Forensic Chemist and Document Analyst. Since 2001, he has worked full time in the private sector.

"Dr. Aginsky has conducted seminars on ink analysis and dating in the United States, Canada, Russia, Israel, Turkey, Spain, Columbia, and Australia. He testified regarding ink (paper, toner) analysis and ink and document dating in criminal and civil matters and in arbitrations in the United States, Canada, England, Russia, Cayman Islands, Hong Kong, Israel, China, Iceland, Poland, and Gibraltar. (See Statements by Courts of Law and Cases of Note)

"Dr. Aginsky is experienced in a wide range of physical (optical) and chemical examination techniques, including the analysis and dating of ink on documents and the comparative analysis of inks, toners and paper by Microscopy, Microspectrophotometry, Ultraviolet/Visible and Infrared Spectroscopy (FT-IR microscopy), Thin-Layer Chromatography, and Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry. He is the author of more than 25 peer-reviewed articles on ink analysis and dating, including chapters in several books and encyclopedias. (See Publications)

"Dr. Aginsky is the author of two ink aging methods that analyze ink volatile components (not ink dye components) and that have been tested and applied to actual cases by multiple forensic laboratories. These two ink aging methods are the Sequential Extraction Technique (SET) and Solvent Loss Ratio Method (SLRM). The SET and SLRM measure certain parameters of ink that decrease as ink ages on paper. Other ink entries are not necessary for comparison.

"Dr. Aginsky has developed the SET as a result of many years of research of the "extent (percent) of extraction" ink aging methodology developed and published by Dr. Antonio A. Cantu in the 1980s. The SET is the only ink aging method that has proven its reliability through outside proficiency testing using "blind" samples (outside proficiency tests in 1995, 2001, and 2011)." (https://www.documentdating.com/about-valery-aginsky)

Edited July 30, 2023 by Greg Doudna

Ed Berger · July 30, 2023

54 minutes ago, Leslie Sharp said:

The nickel material definitely caught my eye too! In 1953, Canadian Javelin and Doyle begin moving forward in Newfoundland by gaining concessions from the Newfoundland & Labrador Corporation Ltd (NALCO), and in 1958 Javelin took control of NALCO outright, with NALCO becoming a subsidiary. The line back to the WCC is direct in the most literal sense: the original organizer of NALCO was William Stephenson, and he was joined by Woody, Gundy & Co, which was one of the WCC's original investors. But other NALCO initial principles included Harriman Ripley, and most importantly where nickel is concerned, Charles Shipman Payson.

Payson's wife was Joan Whitney Payson—of that Whitney family, and his brother-in-law was John Hay "Jock" Whitney. Besides being second cousins with Tracy Barnes, there's the whole business of Jock controlling Freeport Sulphur and its nickel interests in Cuba. If I'm remembering correctly, doesn't CiD recount the odd circumstances of Clay Shaw and an Freeport executive flying to Canada in connection with nickel business?

I did catch the reference to Thomas Eli Davis! Given the link from Davis to Proctor, the fact that Proctor's partner Paul McNutt was also almost certainly an WCC insider, the question posed about Davis and Newfoundland in the book seemed very pertinent.

Can you elaborate on why it might be of interest to you? And yes, these were definitely deeply hidden revenue streams; but, we're not sure Lafitte was running these schemes on behalf of any particular, or specific government agency. They may well have been mob related, or purely private enterprise.

I'm interested due to a pattern I've been noticing: that many of those in the 'orbit' of the WCC were, by the mid-1950s, neck-deep in byzantine frauds of all kinds. These include David Baird (whose inner circle included WCC-linked notables such as Floyd Odlum of the Atlas Corporation and Robert Young, an early WCC 'client', as well as William Zeckendorf of Great Southwest and... Conrad Hilton), who operated a mind-boggling chain of hinky securities dealing through his 'philanthropic' foundations, one of which later became outed as a CIA funding conduit. They also include Stewart Hopps, the OSS veteran who alleged to have worked with Stettinius at the WCC before embarking on carousel ride of stock and insurance frauds. There is also Sonny Fassoulis of the Commerce International Corporation, who engaged in his own blizzard of funny stock wheeling and dealing that landed him in hot water more than once (Peter Dale Scott once wrote that Commerce International was a subsidiary of the WCC, and then later walked it back; I don't believe it was a subsidiary but in all likelihood was linked—after all, Commerce International was originally incorporated around the same time as the WCC's debut and went by the initial name of the North African Commerce Corporation). The list can go on and on.

To make this pattern even more stark, I've founded that while the frauds are often different, they share a score of overlapping participants, both in terms of personnel and companies. I believe, simply put, that there is a dark, vast and maze-like terrain pouring across the 1950s and early 1960s that remains yet to be fully charted, likely due to the sheer complexity of the networks in play.

I would be interested to know to what degree Lafitte's own conman activities overlap with the network I'm describing. His appearance in connection with Javelin is one giant step in that direction (as is the reference in the datebook to Conrad Hilton!). It seems to me that this pattern could easily repeat in his other activities.

Either esoteric, twilight realm, something, so we've been reviewing Opus Dei, P2 John XXIII death, Aldo Moro, Knights Templars, K of M's, Arthurian cycle (Lancelot Project), Ireland ... Several clues: Pierre's repetition of OSARN in the Oct 9 entry is almost ritualistic, and mimics his four 848's periodically. Either a code, or?

Extremely interesting! The presence of the Order of St. John via Willoughby etc is definitely food for thought. Not only did they mimic the official K of M, but got up to all manner of esoterica themselves.

Leslie Sharp · July 30, 2023

GD Forensic ink analysis of the physical object, the Lafitte datebook

As I understand it, the ink on the Lafitte datebook has already been examined by a reputable forensic agency.

Previously stated, repeatedly.

Nobody here knows the results of that examination, except in a hearsay form reported by Leslie in 2021.

LS Second hand accounts, a.k.a. hearsay are admissible in certain legal cases.

The reason nobody knows those results, may be because nobody in the JFK research community has asked that agency or its examiners or the film producer who hired them.

LS The documentary film company bound Hank to a non-disclosure agreement, and vice versa; after four years, and having encountered insurmountable obstacles to secure the preliminary reports from Aginsky and Thorne, with the aid of counsel I've determined that I am not technically bound to that NDA. My obligation is that which I continue to honor: my respect for Hank's efforts, his sources, my continued advancement of his/our exclusive investigation, and my personal 30-year commitment to contribute to resolution of this cold case murder investigation.

The reason nobody has asked is because nobody is able to know who to ask, who they are.

LS I've provided you with two names. Go for it, Greg. Let's see how far you get in persuading them to break a legally binding agreement. The copyright holders of Coup will be interested in their response.

In reporting this, Leslie said she was not legally restricted from saying who the forensic examining agency was, said both the filmmaker and examining agency were free to come forward, but that she was not going to disclose their identities to JFK assassination researchers.

LS I still am not going to reveal the documentary film company. If you're the researcher you claim to be, you might figure it out for yourself.

Analysis of the ink is likely one of the two best opportunities or means for detection of forgery relevant to the Lafitte datebook--to find out if it was a forgery, if it was--the other being handwriting analysis.

LS Sherlock.

This expert ink analysis that was done--mention is made of "hours" of expertise time involved in the undertaking--was not commissioned by Albarelli or Leslie. Leslie has explained that Albarelli's position was "take it or leave it", disinterest in having any test done of the physical item to check for forgery, since Albarelli, who first saw the item post-2000, had determined that he knew it was genuine from 1963 and everyone else should take his word for it, "take it or leave it", without forensic examination.

LS That's right. Hank had first hand experience with "the community." He did not suffer fools.

It was a UK film company, arranged by Albarelli to do a film featuring the sensational Lafitte datebook, which obtained the ink analysis. This ink analysis which the film company had done, information which presently exists of forensic examination already carried out, remains secret and forbidden knowledge to the JFK assassination researchers, remains undisclosed somewhere in England, with the filmmaker free to disclose it, if it were possible to ask.

LS Who said it was a UK company, Greg? Show me where it says "Albarelli arranged to do a film . . . "? You would twist words publicly? "secret and forbidden knowledge" "Remains somewhere in England?" Huh? That's weird. I'm looking at it in New Mexico. "with the filmmaker free to" .. what... Greg?

LS I'm relieved you're revealing your ignorance of the facts. This may illuminate to your followers a unique approach to research.

The hearsay of the findings of that ink analysis suggested a finding of anomalies in the ink used in the handwriting of the Lafitte datebook that could not be matched to standard inventories of known inks from 1963. In the case of those anomalies, according to the hearsay, the expert said the ink of the datebook's writing could have come from some other part of the world not in the expert's known ink types inventory/databases for 1963. Or, well, (beginning to write like Pat Speer here) maybe the ink used by the writer wasn't from 1963, and was from a later date. Maybe that's the reason the ink of the 1963 Lafitte datebook could not be matched by the analyst to any of the known inks for 1963,

LS So, let me get this right: ink that was available in 1963, wasn't available later? Is that what you're saying?

It is not possible to understand with further clarity the expert interpretation of those anomalies which could not be matched to known 1963 ink type inventories, because it is not known who to ask.

LS I've provided you with a name, Greg. Go for it.

There also was forensic analysis at the same time looking at the handwriting. According to the hearsay report, the handwriting analysis found that the handwritten entries of the Lafitte datebook "were all made by one and the same individual within a constricted timeframe".

Now that last detail, that the writing of all entries of twelve months of calendar were all done "within a constricted time frame", could be a detail of interest meriting closer inquiry.

The general principle is authentic writing of calendars and appointment books and ledgers show varied kinds of writing indicating writing at different times over a span of time. But in forgeries, all a calendar year's date entries might be written at one or two or three goes over only a few days' time, or in some cases even in a single sitting. Most forgers, aware of this, will attempt to disguise that by intentionally trying to show variety, but such attempts are not necessarily successful. Skilled examiners can often spot the difference between real and fake on this point. I understand that IRS criminal investigators deal with this issue all the time with enterprising taxpayers' attempted retroactive fraudulent creation of expense books and calendars and ledgers--first thing they look at is do all the entries look the same and written by the same pen. That principle.

LS And here you present your expertise in forgeries: If A forged a document, and C forged a document, then surely B forged a document.

Therefore an expert finding concerning the Lafitte datebook, told in hearsay form to have found that all the writing on the datebook was done "within a constricted timeframe"--what does that mean? Was that expert suggesting possible indication of forgery with that language? Or not?

LS Second hand knowledge is sometimes rejected as hearsay in court: but if you're following the Trump indictments, "hearsay" is admissible in certain court cases. I have second hand knowledge of the examination done in London. "Take it or Leave it."

It is not possible to know more specifically, because the examiners and their findings are not available to ask.

LS Go for it.

It is not possible for anyone to ask because no JFK assassination researcher knows whom to ask, except Leslie, and Leslie has not seen fit to disclose.

LS That is now an inaccurate statement. Please retract.

Edited July 30, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

Leslie Sharp · July 30, 2023

9 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said:

Leslie:

while it may be an interesting exercise to compare how primary data have been handled by different researchers, such exercise is not an appropriate response to my and others members' request to submit for analysis a high-resolution copy of the datebook. It is your responsibility as the surviving author and the one who promotes the datebook as a breakthrough in the case to provide the sources on which you base your conclusions. Please post all high-resolution scans (pages) of the datebook you have at your disposal in public domain, for instance on a dedicated web page or a suitable Open Access server. This is the open access policy which has become a standard in modern research. There is no way forward without this step.

LS The Pierre Lafitte datebook is private property.

LS With respect, you are not the arbiter of my responsibilities.

My analysis of one of the pages that I showed in my yesterday post was based on a Kindle version of the book. I opened the document on a PC and made a screenshot from a large screen. I then applied different enhancement methods, such as resizing, adding light, increasing the contrast and reducing the noise. I cannot know what my procedure did with bits of the original text.

LS This sort of reads like an advertisement for your services?

9 hours ago, Andrej Stancak said:

In addition to making the high-resolution copies of datebook pages available to the research community, it will be necessary to proceed with authentication of the datebook by a criminal investigation body based on the fact that the diary suggests that the alleged assassin Lee Oswald was unjustly blamed for the murder of the US President. I am not a lawyer and neither am I familiar with the US legal system. However, there must be a legal way to subpoena the datebook and let it be analysed by experts. The authentication process would not be a simple matter, however, it can be done. You may appreciate that I am not asking you to arrange for the authentication of the datebook which may be a costly affair.

LS Proceed Andrej, with your own exclusive material.

Analysing the datebook as a whole would also allow to evaluate the importance of individual records by someone else than the Authors team. This is essential for acceptance of any conclusions.

LS Precisely. "someone" who might be intent on cherry picking entries from the datebook to support and protect pre-existing speculation? I'm navigating this exercise with a fairly keen sense of the pitfalls, and with first hand knowledge that not everyone on this forum is focused on resolving a cold case murder investigation, but are more interested in the historical context of the assassination and the government documents thought to hold the secrets.

May I ask to kindly respond to my points in one post rather in separate posts?

Edited July 30, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

Leslie Sharp · July 30, 2023

@COPYRIGHT softcover edition Coup in Dallas

CLAY SHAW, PIERRE LAFITTE, AND TWO DEGREES OF SEPARATION . . .

THURSDAY, MAY 9, 1963

SOUETRE AND DAVIS IN APRIL HERE [HOTEL]

-SHAW WHERE?

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 1963

SPRAY-GUN 2

WILLOUGHBY-SHAW?

Clay Laverne Shaw, the only individual to have been formally charged with involvement in the conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy, kept a social and personal diary that included some 216 names, most of whom were associated with theatre and the arts. Shaw himself was a playwright. His name appears in the datebook of Pierre Lafitte so we can assume that he was at best privy to if not an active player on some level in the lead up to the assassination. In light of that probability, the names in his personal diary hold a fascination providing possible clues to a broader understanding of a long term agenda in the plot to weaken the spread of democracy worldwide.

We are greatly indebted to the exhaustive research into the names in Shaw’s diary done by Anthony Edward Weeks aka Anthony Frewin who served for decades as assistant to renowned film director Stanley Kubrick. Weeks astutely identified that Shaw’s welcome into a certain milieu of British society which included nobility closest to the Royal Family was most likely the result of his love affair with one Sir Charles Michael Robert Vivian Duff, 3rd Baronet. According to Weeks, Duff was one of only two true loves of Clay Shaw.

It was also Weeks who years ago in the Calcott Memorial Issue of Lobster Magazine laid down the gauntlet to researchers concerning another name in the Shaw diary: “This enquiry had produced at least one significant name that merits further research and attention and which may help us to understand more fully the political and intelligence face of Clay Shaw: Peter Montgomery.” Weeks continued “ . . . I was disappointed to find that I was the only person driving down the highway, and doubly disappointed because I was just about to hit the off-ramp. I hope this piece prompts some other researchers to hit the road.” It did, Mr. Weeks.

Indeed, Captain Peter Stephen Montgomery was a character of interest in and of himself but his associations proved even more so considering the authoritative positions they held during WWII and the subsequent Cold War. However, before we expand on Weeks’s own research into Capt. Montgomery, we have reason to first consider Shaw’s lover, Michael Duff.

Born in 1907 at Vaynol Park, Anglesey, one of the most picturesque manors in Wales, Sir Michael was the son of the 2nd Baronet Duff and his wife Juliet Lowther, the daughter of the 4th Earl of Lonsdale. Duff’s godmother, Mary of Teck was married to King George V, the grandfather of Queen Elizabeth II. Duff was also was deeply rooted in the history of Wales and Ireland thru a maternal grandmother who was a direct descendant of Richard deClare, the Anglo-Norman invader known as Strongbow. Strongbow’s daughter married William Marshall, an equal of her father’s on the battlefield, and it is thru this marriage that the title Earl of Pembroke was created by King Stephen of England in the 12^th century. Since 1605, the Earls of Pembroke from whom Sir Michael descended have also held the title of the Earls of Montgomery. This particular period in the history of Ireland provides a road map to contemporary Kennedy-Fitzgerald dynasties from which John Fitzgerald Kennedy descended, a study which is for another time, another investigation; but suffice to say that volumes have been written related to the significance of Strongbow and his lineage in the evolution of what became the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland. For our purpose it is important to emphasize that Michael Duff could claim relationships to much of the nobility of Europe and was no doubt very well informed of the history and subsequent British colonization of Ireland, India, New South Wales, the Caribbean, and the ‘New World.’

Aristocrat Michael Duff Assheton-Smith as he was known initially married first the Hon. Millicent Joan Marjoribanks whose grandfather, the Scottish Baron Tweedmouth and grandmother who was the aunt of Winston Churchill financed the purchase and development of the Rocking Chair Ranch in Collingsworth Co. in northeastern Texas Panhandle in the late 1800’s during a period when Scottish and English bankers saw the potential for investments in cattle grazing across the Panhandle and Staked Plains. Millicent’s relatives, the Lord and Lady Aberdeen (Aberdeen being a shire in Scotland famous for its hearty Aberdeen-Angus cattle) are recorded as having visited the windswept 150,000 acre ranch, one of several enormous ranches in the area, all of which benefited from financing by Scottish and British banks. We pause to remind the readers of the presence of John A. “Jack” Crichton in the Texas Panhandle in the late 1950s and early ’60s where the headquarters of his Dorchester Gas were located at the time he was employed by Empire Trust – a private investment firm with deep English and Scottish roots and significant investments in the Panhandle via the Texas Land and Development Co. whose president was Minor Cooper Keith of United Fruit. Assassination researchers have pursued Jack Crichton’s genealogy for decades to no avail; perhaps a faint hum can be heard in the remainder of this analysis.

While it is most likely that Michael Duff was able to introduce Clay Shaw (whom he had met in London while Shaw was stationed there during the war) to Prime Minister Winston Churchill through his marriage into the Marjoribanks nobility, Duff’s own family history and that of his second wife would have opened as many more doors into British society which he chose to share with his lover Duff’s marriage to Millicent Marjoribanks ended in annulment after one year and he did not marry again until 1949 when Lady Caroline Paget became Lady Caroline Duff. Caroline was the eldest daughter of another British peer, Lieutenant-Colonel Charles Henry Alexander Paget, 6^th Marquess of Anglesey and Lady Marjory Manners, daughter of the 8th Duke of Rutland. The name Paget will surface again in this critique.

For context of the relationship between Sir Michael - who apparently spent his life in the pursuit of worldly pleasures rather than active participation in the military, agriculture, banking or other commercial endeavors - and Clay Shaw, it should be noted that both Duff and Caroline Paget Duff were known bisexuals.

Michael’s sister, Veronica Duff, married a grandson of British politician, chemist and powerful industrialist Sir Charles Clow Tennant whose involvement with Nobel Explosives and United Alkali company which was enveloped in the 1920s with the mega global conglomerate Imperial Chemicals are sufficient evidence of not only his wealth but the influence had on Britain’s very own military-industrial complex. The entanglement of centuries old intermarriages in the United Kingdom is well exemplified in the Tennant family. Sir Charles Clow, Sr. bore 17 children from two marriages, four of whom were born after he turned 76; only an expert genealogist can chart the precise chain of command but suffice to say that Tennant and those who inherited his name and the wealth derived from conglomerates that fed a war machine for decades prove intriguing. Among them was John Edward Tennant, a young pilot who advanced to Wing Commander at the outset of WWII who married Veronica, the sister of Clay Shaw’s lover, Michael Duff.

Another grandson of Sir Charles was Sir Christopher Colin Paget Tennant, the 3rd Baron of Glenconner, a highly colorful aristocrat of extreme interest to our story. Again, a skilled genealogist would recognize precisely how closely related were Sir Caroline Paget Duff and Sir Colin Paget Tennant who would have been closely related to Sir Michael Duff thru the marriage of his sister Veronica to John Edward Tennant, but we know from the social escapades of Sir Colin Tennant and Sir Michael Duff that they were acquainted, if not very well acquainted.

Early in his life, Sir Colin fell head over heels for Princess Margaret, the sister of Queen Elizabeth II, both of whom were granddaughters of King George V whose wife Mary of Teck stood as Michael Duff’s godmother; but as shared in his memoirs, Sir Colin suspected the princess ‘wouldn’t have me.’ Clearly that did not inhibit his seduction of her when he gifted her Les Jolies Eaux , an exquisite villa situated on ten acres of the island of Mustique in the Grenadines. Tennant had created a playground for the rich and famous on the island where riotous partying is legendary and no doubt Princess Margaret proved a delightful magnet.

The story continues: Colin Tennant eventually chose a somewhat traditional marriage to Lady Anne Coke, the daughter of the 5th Earl of Leicester, who had been one of Queen Elizabeth’s Maids of Honor at her coronation along with Lady Moyra Kathleen Hamilton, the daughter of the 4th Duke of Abercorn and Lady Crichton of Crom Castle. Lady Kathleen would soon assume the role of Mistress of the Robes to Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother in 1964.

Sir Colin and Lady Anne selected a relatively well-known professional photographer of his day, Tony Armstrong-Jones to capture their nuptials, and according to legend it was at that wedding that Armstrong-Jones (the future Lord Snowden) met his soon to be wife, Princess Margaret. The godfather of Tony Armstrong-Jones was Sir Michael Duff; considering that deep bond, and Duff’s lineage and relations with the Paget-Tennant families we can safely presume that Sir Michael - a great love of Clay Shaw – was at the wedding at that he knew Sir Colin Tennant (if not Lady Anne or Princess Margaret) on a first name basis at the very least.

* * *

One might ask why this matters.

Later in the decade, according to legend, Colin Tennant made an offhanded remark to the president of international real estate brokerage Previews, Inc. that he needed the firm to move quickly on the promotion of the island of Mustique that Tennant had decided to sell. John Colquhoun Tysen, the president of Previews, Inc. when Otto Skorzeny’s wife Ilse was no doubt using the company as a vehicle for travel, introduction and cover, agreed to help Tennant, and in the process convinced him to purchase 80% of Previews. Such a transaction could not have been made frivolously let alone without agenda. Allegedly Tysen and Tennant’s introduction came about when Tennant had developed the island; however, as we shall see, there is a possibility that their introductions were made earlier and based more on familial relationship than a casual commercial opportunity.

Sir Iain Colquhoun, 7th Baronet of one of the oldest Scottish seats of nobility married another grandchild of Sir Charles Clow Tennant (1st Baronet), Geraldine Dinah Tennant which means that Colquhoun and Colin Tennant and Michael Duff were related through marriage. Whether or not Sir Colquhoun is a direct ancestor of John Colquhoun Tysen (who was obviously so proud of the surname Colquhoun that he named his daughter Anne Colquhoun Tysen) has not been established but the circles the two families traveled in suggest that Tysen may have known Sir Colin before the sale of Previews. According to Tysen, he was also descended from the Dutch settlers of Staten Island and that his father was posted in Paris with the Morgan bank dynasty at the time of his birth. It should be noted that Sir Ian Colquhoun, who died in 1948, was the Grand Master of the Grand Lodge of Scotland; it does not get any higher in Freemasonry than that. His antecedent, J. C. Colquhoun, Esq. of Killermont penned the highly inflammatory “Ireland—Popery and Priestcraft, the cause of her misery and crime.” Published under the superintendence of the Glasgow Protestant Association. Sir Ian was succeeded as Grand Master of Scotland by the Duke of York who would ascend to the throne of England as King George VI. George VI’s Lord in Waiting included the 6th Earl of Erne, John Henry George Crichton who was related thru his aunt Kathleen (Crichton) Hamilton to the 4th Duke of Abercorn. The significance of the Duke of Abercorn, whose grandfather, the 2nd Duke had served as the Grand Master of Ireland, will be discussed shortly in relation not only to Captain Peter Montgomery but events in Texas.

In order to grasp the significance of Capt. Montgomery we must first understand the people he served. The thirteenth child of Sir Charles Tennant, Margaret “Peggy” Tennant who was born on his 76th birthday and who would be an aunt of the various Tennants thus far named, married John deVere Loder, 2nd Baron Wakehurst, who in 1937 was appointed the Governor of New South Wales King George VI. In 1952, Baron Wakehurst was appointed Governor of Northern Ireland as the representative of the British monarch in The North. Wakehurst was only the third governor of N.I. since 1922 following the official establishment of the Republic of Ireland which preserved the greater portion of the island under one independent, self-governing rule.

Baron Wakehurst, Grand Prior of the Venerable Order of St. John of Jerusalem from 1948 to 1969, and Dame Margaret - a rare title bestowed by the Order - were both enthusiastic patrons of theatre and the arts; they were also dedicated members of the English Speaking Union, an organization that included American Archibold van Beuren, chief of security for Wild Bill Donovan’s OSS and one of the original directors (and later chairman) responsible for bringing John Colquhoun Tysen on board Previews, Inc.

Peter Montgomery was born in 1909 in Blessingborne, outside Fivemiletown, Co. Tyrone, Northern Ireland. Twenty-miles down the road and across the border into County Fermanah sits the stunning Crom Castle, the seat of the Crichton family, Earls of Erne. Crom is considered one of the finest estates in Northern Ireland. Members of the Crichton family held the post of Lord Lieutenant of Fermanagh off and on for decades. In the 1960’s the title was held by Viscount Henry Crichton, the 5th Earl of Erne. As mentioned, his daughter, Kathleen married a neighbor in Co. Tyrone, James Hamilton (of the Hamiltons who descended from King James II of Scotland), the 4^th Duke of Abercorn who will help us close out this analysis.

Peter Montgomery joined the BBC Northern Ireland in the mid-1930’s, a position he retained thru the mid 1970s, advancing to General Advisory Council of BBC by 1963. His father, an avowed Ulster Unionist was a member of the Senate of Northern Ireland, served as Deputy Lieutenant of Tyrone, then appointed High Sheriff of Co. Fermanagh and later High Sheriff of Co. Tyrone. Peter’s second cousin was the famed Field Marshall Bernard Montgomery, 1st Viscount of Alemein, a connection that would prove fortuitous for Peter by 1945. Peter attended Trinity College, Cambridge where he encountered the love of his life for a number of years, Anthony Frederick Blunt who the reader will recognize as the “fourth man” among the Cambridge Five of the infamous Russian spy scandal in Great Britain. Blunt was also the surveyor of the King’s photos and later the Queen’s. We are reminded that James Jesus Angleton was a close friend of another of the ‘five’, Kim Philby as was Mexico City station chief Winston Scott. As Weeks’s points out, “Clay Shaw, in other words, had one stop access to Blunt, Philby and Burgess and their milieu.” Whether or not Angleton was aware of Shaw’s easy access to Montgomery, and Blunt thru Shaw’s lover Michael Duff, warrants further investigation.

We do know that at the beginning of the war, Peter Montgomery joined the Intelligence Corp, rising to the rank of Captain. There is no specific indication to suggest he didn’t remain active with the BBC during this period. In 1945, he was assigned as aide-de-Camp to the Viceroy of India, Viscount Archibald Wavell who is seen in photographs conferring with Peter’s cousin, Field Marshall Montgomery during the war. It is not verified that Peter remained in the post in India after Wavell’s death in ’47; Lord Mountbatten, a close relation of the Queen as well as her husband Prince Phillip accepted the assignment as the last viceroy and served until India assumed charge of running its own government. Most readers will know that Mountbatten was killed in 1979 in a spectacular bombing incident carried out by the IRA just miles from the noxious border between Northern Ireland and the Republic, in retaliation for the violence Mountbatten had managed over the years. This incident ignited a new and perhaps the most virulent wave of violence in Ireland since 1916. But most readers would not be aware that according to his own memoirs, Otto Skorzeny - himself living in the Republic of Ireland off and on from 1957 to the mid-’60’s - studied Mountbatten’s guerrilla war tactics and considered him a master.

In 1954, Capt. Montgomery was again assigned the role of aide-de-Camp; this time to the Governor of Northern Ireland, John Loder, Baron Wakehurst. We need not repeat the details of Wakehurst’s ties to Michael Duff thru the Tennant family nor his associations thru the English Speaking Union with Archibald van Beuren of Previews, Inc., or his passion for theater and the arts that could brush against Clay Shaw; but we should highlight once again that both Duff and Montgomery are named in Clay Shaw’s diary, Shaw and Duff were lovers, and Montgomery was a lover and later ‘sister’ in the parlance of the gay world of Anthony Blunt. According to Anthony Weeks, when Blunt was interrogated by the Secret Service in 1964, Montgomery feared that his name would come up and on other occasions he thought their relationship would come out and he would ‘get the chop’. On the contrary, he was appointed Vice Lieutenant of Co. Tyrone under the then 4th Duke of Abercorn, Lord Lieutenant of Tyrone. We remind the reader that Abercorn whose antecedents were Grand Masters of the Masonic Lodge of Ireland married the daughter of Viscount Crichton, the 5^th Earl of Erne whose seat was 20 miles from the home of Capt. Peter Montgomery.

According to the travel itinerary of former Texas Governor Allan Shivers, The Duke and Duchess of Abercorn were dining at his private home Woodlawn house, Austin, Texas, on October 31 (Halloween), 1963. It should be noted that a thorough search for any press coverage of the visit has thus far produced no evidence the Duke and Duchess were in Texas; however, there is no reason to think they did not keep their dinner date with the Shivers, which prompts the question, ‘why wouldn’t there be press coverage?’ Allan Shivers was a lifelong active and influential figure in the Freemasons of Texas, achieving the coveted 33°status. A critical date in the Lafitte datebook – October 17, with the note, JA call yest. Says high-level gathering in DC—Lancelot - cross references with Shivers’ itinerary that places him in Washington D.C. within 24 hours of that meeting. Further, according to his itinerary, an investiture for new 33° Masons was held on December 7, 1963, just two weeks after the president of the United States was assassinated in his state. Shivers also served on The Supreme Council, 33°, Ancient & Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, Southern Jurisdiction, Washington D.C., U.S. He was also a member of the highly select Knights of the Brotherhood of San Jacinto, the advanced membership of the Sons of the Republic of Texas that extended the formal invitation to President Kennedy to visit the state in November of 1963. However, according to his itinerary for the month of November and just three weeks after the dinner with James Hamilton, the Duke Abercorn and Lieutenant of Co. Tyrone - whose Vice Lieutenant was Captain Peter Montgomery named in the Shaw diary - Shivers was scheduled to travel from Austin to Houston on the 21st, and on to New York and Washington DC on the 22nd-23rd instead of remaining in Texas to participate in hosting visit of the president of the United States. For whatever reason, perhaps fate, this would place Shivers in DC when John Kennedy’s body was flown from Dallas to Bethesda. The other entries for the month included a meeting of the board of Neil Mallon’s Dresser Industries.

Arguably, the details presented here can be struck off as little other than dot-connecting, yet when one absorbs the highly select milieu of British aristocrats and spies into which Clay Shaw seems to have been welcomed and trusted, it is difficult to deny that he remains an intriguing character among those Pierre Lafitte included in his records.

Greg Doudna · July 30, 2023

Wait a minute Leslie. You never identified those two names you gave before as having been involved in having examined the Lafitte datebook. You just out of the blue blasted two names at me repeatedly, in bold, demanding to know if I had been in contact with them or knew them, without saying who they were, why you wanted to know, or how it related to anything on topic.

I wrote concerning the forensic examination that has been done: "The reason nobody has asked is because nobody is able to know who to ask, who they are."

You reply now: "LS I've provided you with two names. Go for it, Greg. Let's see how far you get in persuading them to break a legally binding agreement."

Are you saying that the two names, Valery Aginsky of Michigan, and Oliver Thorne of London, did forensic work on the Lafitte datebook?

You never said that before. Can you confirm that clearly--both of them?

I might be willing to attempt a phone call to Aginsky of Michigan if you will help me a little here: are you certain there is a legally binding agreement that would be broken if he were to talk to me? Can you identify the nature of that agreement and with whom? (So that if that was a block, I could contact and request a release?)

You write: "LS Who said it was a UK company, Greg?"

Didn't you say Albarelli flew to London, Lafitte datebook in hand, so it could be filmed in London by a documentary filmmaker? Just going by what you wrote, best as I could make it out. Oh.... OK, maybe it was a US filmmaker flying to London, and had Albarelli also fly to London, datebook in hand, to film a forensic examination in London, because that is where the examiner was? Whatever. Please clarify if you care to say.

You write (quoting me first): "'secret and forbidden knowledge' 'Remains somewhere in England?' Huh? That's weird. I'm looking at it in New Mexico."

Now you disclose for the first time that you have received a written report of the forensic examination on the Lafitte datebook, your possession of which not to my knowledge previously disclosed. The last information I read on that was in 2021 when you reported frustration that you did not have that. Said you wished you had it as much as anyone else.

Glad you got it! Well done!

Would you be willing to let me, and other JFK researchers, see that?

Would it be accurate to say that written report is no longer "secret and forbidden" for JFK researchers to see, since you have it and are willing to make it accessible?

That is truly good news!

I wrote: "It is not possible for anyone to ask because no JFK assassination research knows whom to ask, except Leslie, and Leslie has not seen fit to disclose."

You reply now: "LS That is now an inaccurate statement. Please retract."

If you will confirm clearly that the two names you said to me (Aginsky in Michigan and Thorne in London), both are ones who did that forensic work on the Lafitte datebook, I will be most happy to update a clear correction.

That is the kind of correction I would love to make.

Edited July 30, 2023 by Greg Doudna

Greg Doudna · July 31, 2023

5 hours ago, David Josephs said:

So far, the reasons you've offered for the forgery have not panned out for you, the idea it's a fraud is easily dismissed... deeming something "authentic" does not establish factual integrity.

So how about trying the "factual integrity" course for a little while and move on already.

How much whining about the same exact thing can one man do?

David, do I understand you correctly--that you personally are confident beyond reasonable doubt that the Lafitte datebook is authentic (written by Lafitte in 1963); that you see no need for forensic examination to check to see if it was forged; and that the JFK assassination research community should accept those first two propositions as settled at this point, "and move on already"?

Three statements--do I have you right that you agree on all three of those?

Leslie Sharp · July 31, 2023

2 hours ago, Ed Berger said:

The nickel material definitely caught my eye too! In 1953, Canadian Javelin and Doyle begin moving forward in Newfoundland by gaining concessions from the Newfoundland & Labrador Corporation Ltd (NALCO), and in 1958 Javelin took control of NALCO outright, with NALCO becoming a subsidiary. The line back to the WCC is direct in the most literal sense: the original organizer of NALCO was William Stephenson, and he was joined by Woody, Gundy & Co, which was one of the WCC's original investors. But other NALCO initial principles included Harriman Ripley, and most importantly where nickel is concerned, Charles Shipman Payson.

Payson's wife was Joan Whitney Payson—of that Whitney family, and his brother-in-law was John Hay "Jock" Whitney. Besides being second cousins with Tracy Barnes, there's the whole business of Jock controlling Freeport Sulphur and its nickel interests in Cuba. If I'm remembering correctly, doesn't CiD recount the odd circumstances of Clay Shaw and an Freeport executive flying to Canada in connection with nickel business?

LS I'm fairly certain we didn't refer to the flight; I think the story involves David Ferrie and Carlos Marcello. It blends into the Winnipeg bar story, and gets even murkier when Souetre is alleged to have gotten drunk and spilled the beans. Too hard to nail down, BUT, if you've come across Winnipeg native Burt Sucharov (sp?? writing from memory here) in Coup yet, and his alleged tie to John Wilson-Hudson . . .

In addition to what you lay out, I've tracked the Vanderbilt angle because an heiress married Northern Ireland investor John Adair and together they established the JA Ranch with Charles Goodnight in the Palo Duro Canyon located in the Texas Panhandle. Amarillo, as you know, was HQ for Crichton's Dorchester, with Byrd on the board. I think I posted this in a recent comment so I won't expand here, except to say when I first saw Executive Action, I thought it had been filmed in the Palo Duro. JA Ranch attorney was a senior partner in Boston-based White Weld; he was on the board of United Fruit and FNB Boston. His brother was Jock Whitney's consigliere. An heir to the JA married into the Symington family — Stuart Symington first Sec. Air Force and partner with Clark Clifford during the BCCI debacle.

I did catch the reference to Thomas Eli Davis! Given the link from Davis to Proctor, the fact that Proctor's partner Paul McNutt was also almost certainly an WCC insider, the question posed about Davis and Newfoundland in the book seemed very pertinent.

LS I don't think we nailed down McNutt with WCC. That would be most interesting.

Can you elaborate on why it might be of interest to you? And yes, these were definitely deeply hidden revenue streams; but, we're not sure Lafitte was running these schemes on behalf of any particular, or specific government agency. They may well have been mob related, or purely private enterprise.

I'm interested due to a pattern I've been noticing: that many of those in the 'orbit' of the WCC were, by the mid-1950s, neck-deep in byzantine frauds of all kinds. These include David Baird (whose inner circle included WCC-linked notables such as Floyd Odlum of the Atlas Corporation and Robert Young, an early WCC 'client', as well as William Zeckendorf of Great Southwest and... Conrad Hilton), who operated a mind-boggling chain of hinky securities dealing through his 'philanthropic' foundations, one of which later became outed as a CIA funding conduit. They also include Stewart Hopps, the OSS veteran who alleged to have worked with Stettinius at the WCC before embarking on carousel ride of stock and insurance frauds. There is also Sonny Fassoulis of the Commerce International Corporation, who engaged in his own blizzard of funny stock wheeling and dealing that landed him in hot water more than once (Peter Dale Scott once wrote that Commerce International was a subsidiary of the WCC, and then later walked it back; I don't believe it was a subsidiary but in all likelihood was linked—after all, Commerce International was originally incorporated around the same time as the WCC's debut and went by the initial name of the North African Commerce Corporation). The list can go on and on.

LS I need to refresh my memory of Fassoulis. I think I shared that Hilton is named in Lafitte's ledger, along with Rosser Reeves who was a brother-in-law of Ogilvie, an original signature of World Commerce if we're not mistaken?

Seems to me you are nailing down the real purpose, agenda of WCC. Is it possible Lafitte was more pivotal than we realize relative to WCC. We concentrated on Otto and Ilse, Frank Ryan, the Countess Romano, but ...

Have you looked into the stolen bonds scheme? Cuban / American mercenaries seem fond of them as income streams? I could never figure out why. And worked with the hypothesis that Otto and Ilse opted for nickel bonds rather than suitcases of money.

To make this pattern even more stark, I've founded that while the frauds are often different, they share a score of overlapping participants, both in terms of personnel and companies. I believe, simply put, that there is a dark, vast and maze-like terrain pouring across the 1950s and early 1960s that remains yet to be fully charted, likely due to the sheer complexity of the networks in play.

LS Are you seeing heroin, cocaine, the Corsicans, in this scenario? It has been posited that the Rat Lines served more than one purpose.

I would be interested to know to what degree Lafitte's own conman activities overlap with the network I'm describing. His appearance in connection with Javelin is one giant step in that direction (as is the reference in the datebook to Conrad Hilton!). It seems to me that this pattern could easily repeat in his other activities.

LS Weird! I hadn't read this when I wrote the aforementioned.

Either esoteric, twilight realm, something, so we've been reviewing Opus Dei, P2 John XXIII death, Aldo Moro, Knights Templars, K of M's, Arthurian cycle (Lancelot Project), Ireland ... Several clues: Pierre's repetition of OSARN in the Oct 9 entry is almost ritualistic, and mimics his four 848's periodically. Either a code, or?

Extremely interesting! The presence of the Order of St. John via Willoughby etc is definitely food for thought. Not only did they mimic the official K of M, but got up to all manner of esoterica themselves.

LS See my recent post: Clay Shaw, Pierre Lafitte, and Two Degrees of Separation . . . Watch for Baron Lakehurst.