Jean Ceulemans Posted November 13, 2023 Share Posted November 13, 2023 (edited) Yes, thanks, here's the result. Now ofcourse we don't know how it was when they found it, and was handled up to the moment of taking pictures of the bulky items. Edited November 24, 2023 by Jean Ceulemans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Gram Posted November 13, 2023 Share Posted November 13, 2023 (edited) So the official story is that Oswald just strolled up to the Walker home in broad daylight and snapped that photo, right? Why would someone with zero connection to the Walker home obliterate a random license plate in photo taken for personal use? Perhaps the car belonged to someone who could be connected to Oswald? Maybe that someone gave Oswald a ride to the house? Either that or the license plate belonged to a cop; and someone in the DPD recognized it and poked it out. I really have no idea. Edited November 13, 2023 by Tom Gram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean Ceulemans Posted November 13, 2023 Share Posted November 13, 2023 Also, some time ago I tried comparing this photo with the others allegedly taken the same day or period (the road next to the house/the railroad-track/...). That didn't really work... Like the BYP, different finishing/format. And why would anyone take a picture of a railroad-track ?? To remember the spot where the rifle was to be hidden ? So for now I have largely stayed away from this case, and I believe even Hosty said he assumed the whole thing could have been staged (I have read that in Greg Doudna's essay on the topic) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted November 13, 2023 Author Share Posted November 13, 2023 1 minute ago, Tom Gram said: So the official story is that Oswald just strolled up to the Walker home in broad daylight and snapped that photo, right? Why would someone with zero connection to the Walker home obliterate a random license plate in photo taken for personal use? Perhaps the car belonged to someone who could be connected to Oswald? Maybe that someone gave Oswald a ride to the house? Either that or the license plate belonged to a cop; and someone in the DPD recognized it and poked it out. I really have no idea. The key question is, "Did the DPD or FBI engage in evidence tampering?" Marina Oswald said the photo was intact, after it was in FBI hands. Then the image of the license plate was removed. The deduction is, officials did not want anyone to know whose auto was parked at the Walker home. IF LHO was, as I suspect, a low-level intel-state asset, then spying on Waker to gain compromising information is one explanation of why he took the photo, and why officials later cut the image of the plate out. The plate, if traced to reporters and others, might suggest why LHO took the photo. This makes two pieces of evidence from the Walker shooting where reasonable doubt is justified. The first is of course, the steel-jacketed bullet found in the Walker home that night of the Walker shooting, that became the copper-jacketed CE 573 by the time it arrived at the FBI in early December. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Boylan Posted November 13, 2023 Share Posted November 13, 2023 The car belonged to Charles Klihr. He was a buddy of Robert Surrey. https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=96282#relPageId=18 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Gram Posted November 13, 2023 Share Posted November 13, 2023 (edited) 3 hours ago, David Boylan said: The car belonged to Charles Klihr. He was a buddy of Robert Surrey. https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=96282#relPageId=18 Was that ever confirmed? I just did a quick search and didn’t see anything regarding Klihr being interviewed, shown the photo, etc. A cop finding out that Klihr owned a ‘57 Chevy isn’t exactly proof that it’s Klihr’s car in the photo. That FBI report doesn’t even mention the color. Surrey also refused to positively identify the car in his WC testimony. This is kind of interesting: In 1966, Wesley Liebeler wrote to Klihr, enclosed a copy of the photo, and tried to get Klihr to identify the car because he couldn’t find any evidence the FBI ever spoke with him. Klihr refused to respond and called the FBI. No comment on the car. Klihr also claimed that he never received the enclosed photo. The FBI confirm in this memo that Klihr was never interviewed during the investigation. That seems pretty damn strange, IMO: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=62241#relPageId=58 Liebeler also wrote to J. Edgar Hoover on this. He pointed out Surrey’s refusal to identify the car under oath, the missing interview, etc. https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=62389#relPageId=138 Basically, it does not seem like a slam-dunk that the car belonged to Klihr. Not even close. I could be missing something though. Edited November 13, 2023 by Tom Gram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean Ceulemans Posted November 13, 2023 Share Posted November 13, 2023 (edited) I can see Klihr didn't like to get involved in the whole case, but that shouldn't have stopped FBI from going after him and get a decent explanation for his presence at the scene. Unless he was an informant for who knows what agency.... Very well possible someone within DPD knew that car and the owner/driver and ripped off the license plate on the picture. Also, no matter who took that picture, Klihr (or at least his car) was there the same time Or even if the shooting was staged, what was LHO doing with those pictures ? Was that just the reason for Hosty to say it was staged (re-direct attention, protecting an informant ? Many questions... Edited November 13, 2023 by Jean Ceulemans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Gram Posted November 13, 2023 Share Posted November 13, 2023 (edited) 2 hours ago, Jean Ceulemans said: Unless he was an informant for who knows what agency.... That’s what popped in my head when I saw that Klihr was never interviewed. Still though, unless I’m missing something here, the only evidence that the car in the photo is even Klihr’s is that Klihr owned a ‘57 Chevy. That’s it. Surrey said the car looked like Klihr’s, but he refused to positively identify the car in the photo under oath, despite saying that he’d seen Klihr’s car “many times”. Wesley Liebeler clearly had doubts that the car belonged to Klihr. Why shouldn’t we? Even if Klihr was an informant, there’s no good reason why the FBI couldn’t have obtained a simple statement from him identifying the car as his own. It’s not like it was a secret that Klihr spent time at the Walker home. Edited November 13, 2023 by Tom Gram Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jean Ceulemans Posted November 13, 2023 Share Posted November 13, 2023 I have not checked the releases since 2017 on this, perhaps there is something to connect him one way or another, approval of expenses, something like that. But I need to check those releases for many other things as well, I started with a short list, by now I'm making lists per topic... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted November 14, 2023 Author Share Posted November 14, 2023 Again, the worrisome point is federal intel agencies treating evidence are something that can be tampered with. Yes, I have read the stuff on Klihr, and it seems mushy. But Klihr or not, tampering with evidence suggests a predisposition to make evidence fit a prosecution. If the FBI was willing to excise evidence from a photo, how about switching a bullet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Krome Posted November 14, 2023 Share Posted November 14, 2023 The only time Oswald got close to Walker was in October 1963. Charles Kllhr and his wife Virginia were friends of Walker. Charles was affiliated with a church over at Oak Cliff. I'm not aware of any nefarious deeds by Charles, except so say that if the car was postively connected to him, it would have warranted a close look at people close to him in Irving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted November 14, 2023 Author Share Posted November 14, 2023 17 hours ago, Jean Ceulemans said: Also, some time ago I tried comparing this photo with the others allegedly taken the same day or period (the road next to the house/the railroad-track/...). That didn't really work... Like the BYP, different finishing/format. And why would anyone take a picture of a railroad-track ?? To remember the spot where the rifle was to be hidden ? So for now I have largely stayed away from this case, and I believe even Hosty said he assumed the whole thing could have been staged (I have read that in Greg Doudna's essay on the topic) LHO had in his possession various photos showing approaches to the Walker home. Speculation: I would want photos if I wanted to clue in a conspirator where to meet me, or various exit routes. This is all pre-internet, smartphones of course. The report of a mushroom-shaped steel-jacketed bullet, found in between bundles of paper on April 10 (when one bundle was lifted up, there was the bullet, no discussion of tunneling) does sound fishy, and suggestive of a staged event. (Though I wonder if Walker, a war veteran, might be better than that at staging an event). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Cole Posted November 14, 2023 Author Share Posted November 14, 2023 (edited) 15 hours ago, Tom Gram said: Was that ever confirmed? I just did a quick search and didn’t see anything regarding Klihr being interviewed, shown the photo, etc. A cop finding out that Klihr owned a ‘57 Chevy isn’t exactly proof that it’s Klihr’s car in the photo. That FBI report doesn’t even mention the color. Surrey also refused to positively identify the car in his WC testimony. This is kind of interesting: In 1966, Wesley Liebeler wrote to Klihr, enclosed a copy of the photo, and tried to get Klihr to identify the car because he couldn’t find any evidence the FBI ever spoke with him. Klihr refused to respond and called the FBI. No comment on the car. Klihr also claimed that he never received the enclosed photo. The FBI confirm in this memo that Klihr was never interviewed during the investigation. That seems pretty damn strange, IMO: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=62241#relPageId=58 Liebeler also wrote to J. Edgar Hoover on this. He pointed out Surrey’s refusal to identify the car under oath, the missing interview, etc. https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=62389#relPageId=138 Basically, it does not seem like a slam-dunk that the car belonged to Klihr. Not even close. I could be missing something though. This is kind of interesting: In 1966, Wesley Liebeler wrote to Klihr, enclosed a copy of the photo, and tried to get Klihr to identify the car because he couldn’t find any evidence the FBI ever spoke with him. Klihr refused to respond and called the FBI. No comment on the car. Klihr also claimed that he never received the enclosed photo. ---TG That is more than interesting. Really? The WC had wrapped up by then. There are times when even the WC seemed mildly incredulous at the evidence they were receiving. Why all the fancy dancing by Klihr and Surry? No one says, "Yeah, that's my car." Surry says he does not know whose car it is. I guess Walker never said so either. So, this car that no one wants to ID just happens to have the license plate ripped out of the photo of it. Edited November 14, 2023 by Benjamin Cole Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now