Lansdale in DP on 11/22/63?

[Thomas Graves]

Were individuals "found" or in need of protection at the railyards?

I believe the Bum Walk was staged, in that it was a non-arrest,

it was more of a security escort for these three characters.

______________________________________________

Even though the cops are carrying shotguns, I've often wondered if they weren't the shooters and if the "tramps" weren't the ones doing the "escorting" (in order to create plausible deniability for the cops).

--Thomas

______________________________________________

[John J. McCarthy]

I read in Mark Lane's Plausible Denial that he had a conversation with Fletcher Prouty in which Prouty referred to a photograph taken in DP on 11/22/63 and stated that Ed Lansdale was in the photo. Does anyone know of (or have a copy of) that particular photo? Any info would be appreciated. Thanks.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Greg,

Here is the Tramps photograph in question and a crop/blow-up of the supposed Lansdale figure.

James

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Could that be the guy thought to be Lansdale in this photo to the old tramp's left?

A quick glance tells me that is Ed Lansdale. Could we get a side by side of the earlier frontal photo of Ed with a cropped comparison photo above. Prouty did not see this photo or we would have sure heard about it.

Bests,

John McCarthy

I read in Mark Lane's Plausible Denial that he had a conversation with Fletcher Prouty in which Prouty referred to a photograph taken in DP on 11/22/63 and stated that Ed Lansdale was in the photo. Does anyone know of (or have a copy of) that particular photo? Any info would be appreciated. Thanks.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi Greg,

Here is the Tramps photograph in question and a crop/blow-up of the supposed Lansdale figure.

James

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Could that be the guy thought to be Lansdale in this photo to the old tramp's left?

Is the gent in the last photo behind the cop Ken Harrelson? Previous photo shows Sturgis with shiny shoes.

Bests,

John McCarthy

Edited October 1, 2006 by John J. McCarthy

[John J. McCarthy]

There is not one police agency in the world that would 'escort' the 'tramps' in this manner. First, they have no handcuffs or other restraints placing both 'officers' in immenent danger. First cop has his shotgun mere feet from the lead 'tramp'. Last cop has his shotgun cradled like he was off on a pheasant hunt. If the lead tramp attacks the lead cop, the last cop is too far away to assist and cannot afford to shoot because of the close proximatey of the first cop. This whole scenario sucks. And do we have a legit photo of the real uniform of Dallas Police Department Officer?

Do all 'tramps' in Texas have sport coat jackets and shiny black shoes for travelling by box car?

Bests,

John McCarthy

[John J. McCarthy]

Hi Greg,

The photographic evidence is far from being a clincher but given Prouty's relationship with Lansdale, I guess we should at least take notice.

That aside, I find the Tramps photo itself a very strange one. Given that these guys were under arrest and being escorted by armed guards, why would someone be allowed to get that close to them? And why would that person want to get that close to people who were obviously under police guard?

Then we have the cops themselves. Check out the guy bringing up the rear (see below). Ill-fitting uniform, casual manner of weapon handling - he would look more at home with the Keystone cops.

Baffling.

James

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Bill Bass is the one who is the lead policeman, looking directly to the camera. The cop isolated by James in a photo is unknown.

In this photo, Gonzalez is not shown, appears that Harrelson has taken his place. And even under police escort, last tramp wearing hat gets to carry a bag or sorts....not a good idea guys.

Bests,

John McCarthy

[Wim Dankbaar]

John McCarthy

Just curious, do you now also believe that Virgilio Gonzalez was one of the tramps?

Did you just pick up that idea from Stephen Turner or have you cultivated it longer than that?

In that case, could you show us some resemblance with Gonzalez? Or maybe some other evidence that I missed?

Wim

By the way, these "tramps" were not under arrest, they were escorted to the Sheriff's office because they had identified themselves as ATF undercover agents. So the police officers assumed they were law enforcement collegues.

Edited October 1, 2006 by Wim Dankbaar

[Guest Mark Valenti]

By the way, these "tramps" were not under arrest, they were escorted to the Sheriff's office because they had identified themselves as ATF undercover agents. So the police officers assumed they were law enforcement collegues.

Can you please cite testimony from these police officers that supports your assertion?

Can you cite Dallas police documentation that supports this?

[Wim Dankbaar]

Dear Mark Valenti,

Before I answer, have you ever heard a more likely explanation for the lax attitude in this "arrest"?

Wim

[Guest Mark Valenti]

Dear Mark Valenti,

Before I answer, have you ever heard a more likely explanation for the lax attitude in this "arrest"?

Wim

If the three men pictured were spotted and detained several hours after the shooting, in all likelihood they are being brought to the police station as a matter of procedure and not out of excitable suspicion on the part of the Dallas cops.

Professional police training and actual field experience, a much different life experience than that of a latter day arm-chair detective, gives cops an important set of actual, real-world skills. Among them is the ability to tell the difference between peripheral details which lead to blind alleys, and substantive evidence.

Remember the scenario: A US President is gunned down. An entire area is secured by police personnel. Buildings, cars, bushes, tunnels are searched in the first thirty minutes after the shooting. For the next hour, everyone is on heightened alert. Anything even remotely suspicious is noted and recorded.

More police and investigative personnel arrive. Civilians are removed. An evidentiary perimeter is established.

And then....some two hours later....three of the most sadsack, bad-timing, wrong place, wrong time men ever to draw a breath, show up on the scene.

Police have already scoured the area for snipers, suspicious behavior, etc. And these down on their luck losers show up.

Police instantly understand them for who they are - history's goats, latter-day Jobs, three feckless accidental participants in one of the century's stunning events.

Because of their training, the officers operate under an abundance of caution and bring them in for examination. But the police obviously realize, from the first instant of the tramps' detention, that they are bystanders.

And now, let's go back to the original questions.

Your quote:

By the way, these "tramps" were not under arrest, they were escorted to the Sheriff's office because they had identified themselves as ATF undercover agents. So the police officers assumed they were law enforcement collegues.

My question:

Can you please cite testimony from these police officers that supports your assertion?

Can you cite Dallas police documentation that supports this?

MV

[John J. McCarthy]

John McCarthy

Just curious, do you now also believe that Virgilio Gonzalez was one of the tramps?

Did you just pick up that idea from Stephen Turner or have you cultivated it longer than that?

In that case, could you show us some resemblance with Gonzalez? Or maybe some other evidence that I missed?

Wim

By the way, these "tramps" were not under arrest, they were escorted to the Sheriff's office because they had identified themselves as ATF undercover agents. So the police officers assumed they were law enforcement collegues.

My conversations with Fletcher Prouty re the 'tramps' in 1995 is where I first heard that Gonzalez and Sturgis were in these photos. The last man was suspected of being E. Howard Hunt. Harrelson's name didn't come up.

Mark Lane would later write about the 'Cubans' who drove to Dallas from Miami in a Van and met with Jack Ruby on November 21, 1963.

The initial photo of the 'tramps' being escorted by the Dallas PD is long thought to have been Gonzalez, walking with his head down. One of the later close up photos of Gonzoles appears to be the same person.

BTW, Rosseli later went for a swim inside a 55 gallon drum wrapped in chains (but later floated to the surface) and this information was discussed relative to solving his murder by the Dade and Miami Police Homicide Detectives in 1973. The conclusion at that time was that Rosseli had been talking way too much about his involvement in the JFK assassination and he was 'cut out' of the chain of evidence.

Bests,

John McCarthy

Edited October 2, 2006 by John J. McCarthy

[Wim Dankbaar]

Dear John Mc Carthy,

Please take the trouble to compare known photos of Virgiolio Gonzalez with the short tramp,

http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/slide/DSC00129.JPG

so that we don't have to waste more time on this allegation.

For your convenience, photos of Gonzalez are right here on this website:

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/AAgonzalez1.jpg

***************************

Dear Mark Valenti,

First of all, let me say, respectfully, that the explanation you provide for the lax attitude of the DPD officers, is highly incredible to me, the more so when you know these men were alledgedly detained in relation to the murder of a President, secondly because the questionig DPD officer was alledgedly told: Find out which one shot the President.

Now back to your question:

Can you please cite testimony from these police officers that supports your assertion?

Can you cite Dallas police documentation that supports this?

You should know that the Gedney, Abrams, Doyle strory broke right after Mr. Holt went public with his story.

As you will see here:

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senat.../Documents.html

all the Dallas Police officers involved, backed up the story and could suddenly remember the names of these these 3 individuals, where they could not in their 1963 testimonies, neither in their HSCA depositions.

It is one the greatest authoritive conjobs in this case, a frantic , but reasonably succesful attempt to discredit Holt's revelations.

I encourage you to study the interviews on that website and let us know where you'll find the holes in their stories.

I'll give you some hints up front. They are unanimous that they detained the three "hobo's" right after the shooting and before officer Tippit was shot, as well as before Oswald was arrested and became the main suspect.

Do a shadow analyis. Compare them with the shadows of the known pictures and films at the time of the murder. Shadows don't lie, you know.

Also, try to determine if these officers knew Jack Ruby and what they thought of him, like if they believed he was "pro law enforcement" or operating outside of the law.

Try to find me ONE contemporary photo of either Doyle, Gedney or Abrams. But PLEASE don't try to sell me that "tramps" or their families do not keep photos of themselves.

Did you know that Doyle was arrested and photographed in 1975 but that his photo is "missing" from the arrest file? Did you know that Gedney was in the US Airforce and had an honorable discharge? Don't you think the FBI would have gone a little further in proving their case ........ if they could have?

Let us know all the discrepancies you can find. There's much more.

Wim

Edited October 2, 2006 by Wim Dankbaar

[Guest Mark Valenti]

First of all, let me say, respectfully, that the explanation you provide for the lax attitude of the DPD officers, is highly incredible to me, the more so when you know these men were alledgedly detained in relation to the murder of a President, secondly because the questionig DPD officer was alledgedly told: Find out which one shot the President.

Mr. Dankbaar,

I think you may be under the mistaken impression that the quote "find out which one shot the President" was meant to be serious. It could not have been. It was a comment made by a seasoned veteran of the police department to another officer in reference to several smelly, seedy tramps who were almost certainly fouling up the atmosphere with their stink. A professional cop would immediately recognize that these three men were human flotsam, and would welcome the chance to give them their due process and send them on their malodorous way.

If there was any reasonable suspicion that these three men were in any way related to to the shooting, they would have been detained. Obviously it was clear to the police, who after all were present on the scene, that the tramps had no connection to the shooting whatsoever.

In my opinion, you are reading something into the testimony that simply isn't supported by the evidence.

And once again, I renew my request to you to cite testimony from the police officers that prove that they believed the tramps were ATF officers. Your quote:

By the way, these "tramps" were not under arrest, they were escorted to the Sheriff's office because they had identified themselves as ATF undercover agents. So the police officers assumed they were law enforcement collegues.

The testimony states that the arresting officers believed they were tramps, not ATF undercover agents.

Your next series of questions/statements/challenges swerve away from the point. Which police officer thought the tramps were ATF agents? You said it, you must have a valid reason for doing so.

Do a shadow analyis. Compare them with the shadows of the known pictures and films at the time of the murder. Shadows don't lie, you know.

Also, try to determine if these officers knew Jack Ruby and what they thought of him, like if they believed he was "pro law enforcement" or operating outside of the law.

Try to find me ONE contemporary photo of either Doyle, Gedney or Abrams. But PLEASE don't try to sell me that "tramps" or their families do not keep photos of themselves.

Did you know that Doyle was arrested and photographed in 1975 but that his photo is "missing" from the arrest file? Did you know that Gedney was in the US Airforce and had an honorable discharge? Don't you think the FBI would have gone a little further in proving their case ........ if they could have?

Let us know all the discrepancies you can find. There's much more. Wim

These are details which may or may not back up your assertion - but they are also not necessarily discrepencies, not necessarily subterfuge, sabotage nor conspiratorial smoke and mirrors.

Isn't it possible that official agencies felt no need to lay out the microscopic details of every facet of their activities until they were challenged? In other words, maybe they saw no need to dig for the full story of the tramp IDs until they were hit with the false statements by Chauncey Holt?

MV

Edited October 2, 2006 by Mark Valenti

[Frank Agbat]

Dear John Mc Carthy,

Please take the trouble to compare known photos of Virgiolio Gonzalez with the short tramp,

http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/slide/DSC00129.JPG

so that we don't have to waste more time on this allegation.

For your convenience, photos of Gonzalez are right here on this website:

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/AAgonzalez1.jpg

...

Wim

Wim,

If I'm following you correctly, you do not believe that Virgiolio Gonzalez is the short tramp. If so, I must agree with your conclusion. The overall face/head shape is the same, but the hairline and hair texture are notably different. Not the same person, to my eye at least.

[Wim Dankbaar]

Frank,

Once again, It is certain for me that the tramps were Holt, Harrelson and Rogers.

Therefore I reject any other candidates. Some of them are easier to disprove than others. Gonzales is in the easy category.

This thread started as Lansdale on Dealey Plaza, specificly on one of the tramsp photos. I have always rejected that thesis, simply because it seemed implausible to me that a high ranking figure like him, would hang around on the crimescene for more than an hour. Recently I revised that opinion based on new information.

Wim

[Wim Dankbaar]

Isn't it possible that official agencies felt no need to lay out the microscopic details of every facet of their activities until they were challenged? In other words, maybe they saw no need to dig for the full story of the tramp IDs until they were hit with the false statements by Chauncey Holt?

Well, anything is possible, untill you convincingly refute it. In the new thesis you provide, the Gedney, Abrams, Doyle story also emerged as a direct result of Chauncey's revelations, however for a different reason, namely that Chauncey's statements are false.

Apart from the many other reasons to refute that, don't you think they would have done it sooner? The tramps story has been lingering on for decades going back to the sixties.

My two cents as to why they didn't do it sooner, is because

1) Why worry about false ID's like Hunt and Sturgis?

2) They couldn't do it sooner, as their candidates (Gedney, Doyle and Abrams) were either still alive or too young to conceal the facial discrepancies with the photographed tramps. Which is also why you won't find any pictures of a younger Gedney, Doyle or Abrams.

By the way, since you don't appear to believe that Holt was one of the tramps, do you believe they were in fact Doyle Abrams and Gedney?

Do you believe that this man (far right) was the short tramp, Frenchie or whatever you want to call him?

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/slide/DSC00109.JPG

Now, investigators came out saying that this man, Harold Doyle, was the short tramp. I do not believe that anyone needs a degree in structure, facial structure, to notice that the head is just shaped differently for this individual. His chin is a little longer, his nose is way bigger and his lips are further away from his nose and the eyebrow-shape is completely different.

- Lois Gibson

[Mark Johansson]

This thread started as Lansdale on Dealey Plaza, specificly on one of the tramsp photos. I have always rejected that thesis, simply because it seemed implausible to me that a high ranking figure like him, would hang around on the crimescene for more than an hour. Recently I revised that opinion based on new information.

Wim

Wim, I agree with you 100%. You can compare it with Jack White’s assertions that E. Howard Hunt was the old tramp. Why would a high-ranking member of the CIA expose himself of danger, when one of his agents can do his dirty work?

Mark