Chauncey Holt

[James Richards]

Holt, Hunt and LHO are all said to be 5'9". Here is a comparison.

Jack

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Jack,

I think there were some interesting characters associating with Oswald that day in New Orleans. As to the guy Holt claims he was, I have always considered this guy below to be a contender. I have yet to discover his name but I do know he was part of the Bay of Pigs invasion force and mixed with some interesting company including Bernardo De Torres who I believe was at Sylvia Odio's with Oswald.

FWIW.

James

[Jack White]

He has the short torso. It could be him.

Why would Holt claim it is Holt?

Jack

[James Richards]

He has the short torso. It could be him.

Why would Holt claim it is Holt?

Jack

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Jack,

I gave up trying to figure people out years ago.

I guess we will never know if pressures were brought to bear. Holt lived the life, he mixed in suspect circles, and who knows what aspects of his life could have been held over him and his family.

The best disinformation is 90% truth.

James

[Mark Johansson]

Mr. White,

You said: It is pointless to have a discussion with someone

who thinks these photos represent the same man in 1963.

Which I qualify as a rather cheap evasion to avoid a constructive and meaningful debate, with valid questions posed to you. Let me repeat them below.

Again, your picture comparison makes a good case for Holt being the tramp AND the man in the New Orleans picture with Oswald. Although it strikes me as funny that you seem to know where the top of the head is if it cannot be seen for it is covered with a hat.

This(from Holt fading into the New Orleans man) will probably not convince you, but it is for others that I post this. Did you know that many more overlays like these exist, also to compare Holt to the older tramp?

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/images/holtneworleans1.rm

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/slide/DSC00076.JPG

Forensic expert Lois Gibson: He said he was there the day that Lee Harvey Oswald was handing out flyers in New Orleans, pro Cuba, and if you look at the man on the right with the sunglasses ... and then on the far right he posed for me. Notice the shape of the flesh on the forehead, right above the eyeglasses, even that is identical. And the hairline has receded more, as some men, this happens, your hair recedes more as you get older. That is receded more, but it is actually the same shape. Just more receded. Even the arm-shape. Everything, the shoulders, the slope of the shoulders, which is unique with various individuals.

You asked why Holt came forward with his story? Holt's answer is verbatim to his daugher: "This is not for me , this is not for you, this is for the American public and my little granddaughter out there".

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aside from the flaws of comparing lengths and body proportions from different pictures, different clothes and different camera angles and positions, I think your analysis and comparisons make a good case for Holt being the tramp. At least much better than for Hunt. I trust this was not your intention.

Also, you say that Hunt was the older tramp and Harrelson the tall one, just like Holt said, so no disagreement there. Is there any evidence that Hunt and Harrelson have worked together or knew each other? Would you agree that Hunt was a high ranking CIA official rather than a low level operative? If so, what is your explanation that he would take the risk of dressing up as a tramp on the crime scene, with a known gun-for-hire like Charles Harrelson?

Then you say that Holt was much too young to be the older looking tramp. I don't think so. He was 42, and worn out from a 2 day car-trip with no sleep.

Furthermore, you must not think very highly of Mr. Fetzer if you say that he readily fell for the tale of a "charming conman". Is it fair to say that Mr Fetzer has done a lot more study on Holt, and actaully met with the man, while you never have? Also, do you have any evidence that Holt was a "charming conman"? Or was this just your opinion based on a few phonecalls?

Have you read Holt's review on Posner? I understand it has never been published before, so I would think this should interest you. What do you think of it? What is your opinion on all those names and details that he mentions, like Twombly, Reynolds, Belcher, Ball, Henzie, etcetera, not to speak about their partnerships and family connections. Are they all fictitious too and part of his "charming conmanship"?

For how long have you been stating that Hunt is the older tramp? Do you have any investments in this theory, other than emotional, like in books maybe?

Mark

Edited September 23, 2005 by Mark Johansson

[Jack White]

Mr. White,

You said:  It is pointless to have a discussion with someone

who thinks these photos represent the same man in 1963.

Which I qualify as a rather cheap evasion to avoid a constructive and meaningful debate, with valid questions posed to you. Let me repeat them below.

IF YOU CLAIM THAT THE MAN IN THE PHOTO IS HOLT  YOU

ARE NOT PERCEPTIVE ENOUGH TO HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH.

THIS IS NOT A CHEAP EVASION BUT A JUDGMENT OF YOUR

POWERS OF OBSERVATION.

Again, your picture comparison makes a good case for Holt being the tramp AND the man in the New Orleans picture with Oswald. Although it strikes me as funny that you seem to know where the top of the head is if it cannot be seen for it is covered with a hat.

THE HAT DOES NOT COVER THE FACIAL FEATURES. THE HAT

DOES NOT AFFECT BODILY STATURE.

This(from Holt fading into the New Orleans man) will probably not convince you, but it is for others that I post this. Did you know that many more overlays like these exist, also to compare Holt to the older tramp?

I HAVE BEEN STUDYING THE TRAMP PHOTOS FOR MORE THAN THIRTY

YEARS. I AM FAMILIAR WITH MOST ALL STUDIES.

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/images/holtneworleans1.rm

http://jfkmurdersolved.com/slide/DSC00076.JPG

I AM UNABLE TO ACCESS THESE WEBSITES BECAUSE THEY ARE IN "REALPLAYER"

FORMAT, AND MY MAC 9.2 DOES NOT SUPPORT NEWER REALPLAYER FORMAT. BESIDES,

I DO NOT TRUST ANYTHING POSTED BY WIM DAANKBAR, WHO MAY BE A DISINFO

AGENT.

Forensic expert Lois Gibson: He said he was there the day that Lee Harvey Oswald was handing out flyers in New Orleans, pro Cuba, and if you look at the man on the right with the sunglasses ... and then on the far right he posed for me. Notice the shape of the flesh on the forehead, right above the eyeglasses, even that is identical. And the hairline has receded more, as some men, this happens, your hair recedes more as you get older. That is receded more, but it is actually the same shape. Just more receded. Even the arm-shape. Everything, the shoulders, the slope of the shoulders, which is unique with various individuals.

GIBSON IS A POLICE SKETCH ARTIST, NOT A PHOTOANALYST. HER CONCLUSIONS

ARE HIGHLY SUSPECT. SHE WAS LED INTO HER CONCLUSIONS BY PERSONS WHO

WERE INTENT ON PUBLISHING A BOOK. HER "OPINIONS" MAY BE DISINFORMATION.

You asked why Holt came forward with his story? Holt's answer is verbatim to his daugher: "This is not for me , this is not for you, this is for the American public and my little granddaughter out there".

I HAVE DISCUSSED WITH KARYN HER FATHER'S ALLEGATIONS. SHE HAS NO

PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT HE SAID. IF HE WAS LYING, WHY WOULD

HE TELL HIS DAUGHTER THE TRUTH?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aside from the flaws of comparing lengths and body proportions from different pictures, different clothes and different camera angles and positions, I think your analysis and comparisons make a good case for Holt being the tramp. At least much better than for Hunt. I trust this was not your intention.

YOU HAVE NOT COMPRENDED MY STUDIES. IN THAT CASE PERHAPS I DID NOT

EXPLAIN THEM GOOD ENOUGH. BUT MAYBE YOUR PERCEPTION IS FAULTY

Also, you say that Hunt was the older tramp and Harrelson the tall one, just like Holt said, so no disagreement there. Is there any evidence that Hunt and Harrelson have worked together or knew each other? Would you agree that Hunt was a high ranking CIA official rather than a low level operative? If so, what is your explanation that he would take the risk of dressing up as a tramp on the crime scene, with a known gun-for-hire like Charles Harrelson?

HOLT WAS VERY FAMILIAR WITH JFK LITERATURE. I FIRST IDENTIFIED HARRELSON

AS THE TALL TRAMP IN THE EARLY 80s, AND THEREAFTER THIS I.D. WAS PICKED UP

BY MANY OTHERS. HUNT WAS INDEED A HIGH LEVEL CIA OFFICIAL. I CANNOT OFFER

ANY EXPLANATION FOR HIS ACTIONS. IN 1963, HARRELSON WAS NOT KNOWN AS

A GUN-FOR-HIRE.

Then you say that Holt was much too young to be the older looking tramp. I don't think so. He was 42, and worn out from a 2 day car-trip with no sleep.

HOLT WAS YOUNGER LOOKING IN THE 90s THAN THE TRAMP WAS IN THE 60s. PHOTOS

OF HOLT IN THE 60s SHOW HIM TO BE MUCH YOUNGER LOOKING THAN THE TRAMP.

Furthermore, you must not think very highly of Mr. Fetzer if you say that he readily fell for the tale of a "charming conman". Is it fair to say that Mr Fetzer has done a lot more study on Holt, and actaully met with the man, while you never have? Also, do you have any evidence that Holt was a "charming conman"? Or was this just your opinion based on a few phonecalls?

I THINK VERY HIGHLY OF DR. FETZER. HE IS WRONG ABOUT HOLT AND O.J. SIMPSON

IN MY OPINION.  IT IS FAIR TO SAY THAT HE MET HOLT, SINCE I HAVE PHOTOS OF THEM

TOGETHER. IT IS NOT FAIR TO SAY HE HAS DONE MORE STUDY...AT LEAST NOT OF THE

PHOTOS. IT WAS MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE THAT HOLT WAS A CHARMING CONMAN BASED

ON MY DEALINGS WITH HIM. I HAD 3 LETTERS FROM HIM (UNSOLICITED), AND I REPLIED

TO ONE OR TWO OF THEM. HE TELEPHONED ME ONCE. HE WAS A VERY GOOD STORYTELLER.

Have you read Holt's review on Posner? I understand it has never been published before, so I would think this should interest you. What do you think of it? What is your opinion on all those names and details that he mentions, like Twombly, Reynolds, Belcher, Ball, Henzie, etcetera, not to speak about their partnerships and family connections. Are they all fictitious too and part of his "charming conmanship"?

I HAVE NOT READ "HOLT'S REVIEW ON POSNER". IN MY DEALINGS WITH HOLT HE

MENTIONED THOSE SAME NAMES, ALONG WITH MANY OTHERS. I PARTICULARLY

REMEMBER THE NAME BALL. HE WAS GOOD AT SPRINKLING HIS WRITINGS WITH

LEGITIMATE INFORMATION. THE MARK OF A GOOD CONMAN IS THAT MUCH OF

WHAT HE SAYS IS BELIVEABLE.

For how long have you been stating that Hunt is the older tramp? Do you have any investments in this theory, other than emotional, like in books maybe?

I HAVE BEEN SAYING HUNT IS THE OLDER TRAMP SINCE ABOUT 1975. I HAVE NO

INVESTMENT OF ANY KIND IN THE IDEA, WHICH WAS FIRST POINTED OUT BY CANFIELD

AND WEBERMAN. IN THIRTY YEARS I HAVE SEEN NO EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY.

I HAVE NO EMOTIONAL OR FINANCIAL INVESTMENT IN HUNT BEING THE TRAMP. IT

IS RATHER TIRESOME TO DISCUSS SINCE IT IS A SETTLED ISSUE AND TIME IS

BETTER SPENT ON NEW RESEARCH.

JACK

Mark

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Mark Johansson]

Mr. White, I don't think it is worthwhile responding anymore. It is clear that you will NEVER change your position. You offered no new insights, other than that you accuse Lois Gibson, who is a highly respected and honest forensic expert in facial recognition, of being a disinformation agent. Moreover you did not answer my question if you are aware of the existence of these overlays? I 'll bet that Holt sent you those letters because he was pissed with so much stubborness to recognize the truth. I challenge you to post those letters, for I am sure that Holt told you the truth in them in no uncertain words.

Oh, and I saw that you think Wim Dankbaar is disinfo too. That's a good one! You seem to see conspiracies everywhere. Then why do known disinfo people and Posnerites like John McAdams try to discredit his work instead of praising him to high heavens?

Mark

Edited September 23, 2005 by Mark Johansson

[Ron Ecker]

Lois Gibson identified Frenchy as Charles Rogers. If that's not disinformation (witting or unwitting), I don't know what is. But here, see for yourself. Or is there something I'm

missing?

Edited September 23, 2005 by Ron Ecker

[Jack White]

Mr. White, I don't think it is worthwhile responding anymore. It is clear that you will NEVER change your position. You offered no new insights, other than that you accuse Lois Gibson, who is a highly respected and honest forensic expert in facial recognition, of being a disinformation agent. Moreover you did not answer my question if you are aware of the existence of these overlays?  I 'll bet that Holt sent you those letters because he was pissed with so much stubborness to recognize the truth. I challenge you to post those letters, for I am sure that Holt told you the truth in them in no uncertain words.

Oh, and I saw that you think Wim Dankbaar is disinfo too. That's a good one! You seem to see conspiracies everywhere. Then why do known disinfo people and Posnerites like John McAdams try to discredit his work instead of praising him to high heavens?

Mark

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have seen Gibson's work. I was present when she first presented her

theories. She is an excellent artist but a lousy photoanalyst.

If you think Rogers looks at all like Frenchy, I know people who

want to sell you some prime real estate in New Orleans.

I have no idea why Holt wrote to me, nor where he got my address.

He was very friendly and cordial. He did not mention any of my work.

I would post his letters, except they were at least 15 years ago, and

are in storage cartons among about 30 cartons of JFK materials. I last

saw them a couple of years ago when I was searching for something.

It is not worth a search of several hours to find them.

Why do you separate Posner-McAdams from people like Dankbaar? I probably

know more about Wim than you do, from people who have dealt firsthand

with him. I have no inkling why these people are disputing each other.

I have no time to waste with them.

I look forward to your not responding more.

Jack

Edited September 23, 2005 by Jack White

[Shanet Clark]

GREETINGS

My home software was wiped out in the recent Virus/Worm,

so I have not been posting, but I am still around and will post more soon.

My take on the tramps:

Chauncey Holt

Charles Harrelson

Unknown OAS assassin

Best wishes

Shanet Clark

[Ron Ecker]

You must be kidding to say that Doyle could possibly be the handsome

"Frenchy"

Come on, Jack, you know that many a handsome man has lost his looks over a 30-year period. (You and I are among the fortunate exceptions.) I can easily see how Frenchy could have dissipated into Doyle over three decades. I've seen many similar cases. I went to a high school reunion a few months ago, and it was like some kind of freak show. I was one of the few recognizable people there. At least I like to think so. I see nothing about Doyle's features that are not a decrepit form of Frenchy's. That's what entropy does to you. It gets us all in the end.

Ron

[John Dolva]

Mr White,

Did you read the review on Posner from Chauncey Holt?

Is it fair to say that you have a disagreement with your friend James Fetzer on the ID of the old tramp?

You and Holt both agreed on the Gedney, Abrams, Doyle cover story, and also on Harrelson being the tall tramp.

Mark

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In my dealings with Holt (a couple of letters and a phone call), I found him

to be a rather charming con man. 1960s photos of Holt are dissimilar to

the tramp photos. Jim spent several days with Holt and believed his story.

My dealings with other "retired" agency people leads me to believe that

nobody ever retires from the company.

In the attached New Orleans photo, Holt identified himself as being the

little guy in dark glasses at right, who plainly does not look like the tramp.

Jack

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I am wondering if members agree that maybe something is not right re this photo of Lee.

If a photo known to be Lee is resized so that the eyes are spaced the same, and other facial proportions are confirmed as the same in both photos, then the size of the head that the face appears on is different.

On the other hand, if one makes the distance from shoulders to top of head the same , then the top of head to tip of chin is correct, but the facial proportions are significantly different.

The pixelation also is different over the face area, as if the resolution of two merged images was different. Also to my eye the orientation or aspect of the face seems to not be as I would expect it to be if the face was turned as it is.

It seems to be obvious to me so has this been noted/dealt with before? Perhaps I'm seeing it all wrong? Please check.

[John Dolva]

Mr White,

Did you read the review on Posner from Chauncey Holt?

Is it fair to say that you have a disagreement with your friend James Fetzer on the ID of the old tramp?

You and Holt both agreed on the Gedney, Abrams, Doyle cover story, and also on Harrelson being the tall tramp.

Mark

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

In my dealings with Holt (a couple of letters and a phone call), I found him

to be a rather charming con man. 1960s photos of Holt are dissimilar to

the tramp photos. Jim spent several days with Holt and believed his story.

My dealings with other "retired" agency people leads me to believe that

nobody ever retires from the company.

In the attached New Orleans photo, Holt identified himself as being the

little guy in dark glasses at right, who plainly does not look like the tramp.

Jack

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I am wondering if members agree that maybe something is not right re this photo of Lee.

If a photo known to be Lee is resized so that the eyes are spaced the same, and other facial proportions are confirmed as the same in both photos, then the size of the head that the face appears on is different.

On the other hand, if one makes the distance from shoulders to top of head the same , then the top of head to tip of chin is correct, but the facial proportions are significantly different.

The pixelation also is different over the face area, as if the resolution of two merged images was different. Also to my eye the orientation or aspect of the face seems to not be as I would expect it to be if the face was turned as it is.

It seems to be obvious to me so has this been noted/dealt with before? Perhaps I'm seeing it all wrong? Please check.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yup, perhaps I am seeing it wrong. Thomas in another thread posted an image which makes me think it's possible that what I am taking as a chin may be the part where the throat rises up to the chinline above the adamas apple.

[Robin Unger]

[Mark Johansson]

Mr. White, I don't think it is worthwhile responding anymore. It is clear that you will NEVER change your position. You offered no new insights, other than that you accuse Lois Gibson, who is a highly respected and honest forensic expert in facial recognition, of being a disinformation agent. Moreover you did not answer my question if you are aware of the existence of these overlays?  I 'll bet that Holt sent you those letters because he was pissed with so much stubborness to recognize the truth. I challenge you to post those letters, for I am sure that Holt told you the truth in them in no uncertain words.

Oh, and I saw that you think Wim Dankbaar is disinfo too. That's a good one! You seem to see conspiracies everywhere. Then why do known disinfo people and Posnerites like John McAdams try to discredit his work instead of praising him to high heavens?

Mark

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I have seen Gibson's work. I was present when she first presented her

theories. She is an excellent artist but a lousy photoanalyst.

If you think Rogers looks at all like Frenchy, I know people who

want to sell you some prime real estate in New Orleans.

I have no idea why Holt wrote to me, nor where he got my address.

He was very friendly and cordial. He did not mention any of my work.

I would post his letters, except they were at least 15 years ago, and

are in storage cartons among about 30 cartons of JFK materials. I last

saw them a couple of years ago when I was searching for something.

It is not worth a search of several hours to find them.

Why do you separate Posner-McAdams from people like Dankbaar? I probably

know more about Wim than you do, from people who have dealt firsthand

with him. I have no inkling why these people are disputing each other.

I have no time to waste with them.

I look forward to your not responding more.

Jack

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Mr. White, it seems you don't like the message and must resort to attacking the messenger. I am one of those dealing firsthand with Wim. The experience has been most enlightening and very pleasant. Also, I know various people sharing my opinion. Anyway, it is good to see that so few people agree with you on Hunt being the older tramp. It is good, because it is not true that Hunt is the the older tramp.

Mark

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Hi Mark, you are correct, the older tramp isn;t Hunt, his name is Gus Abrams. Identified by his sister with whom he been living for 15 years up to his death. Steve.