Tosh Plumlee

[James Richards]

Regarding the image I posted at the beginning of this thread, below is the uncropped version for the first time. I can tell you the man on the far right shaking hands with Raul Castro is CIA man and Vice Consul, Robert Weicha.

The question is, was Weicha a source of funds for the 26th of July movement? The Agency may have been maintaining contacts with both sides so to position themselves for any outcome the conflict may produce.

FWIW.

James

[James Richards]

Just so things don't get confusing, Robert Wiecha is the man shaking hands with Raul Castro, not William Wieland who I originally thought it was. Wieland was the Director, Office of Middle American Affairs for the Department of State.

Wieland below.

James

Edited May 11, 2006 by James Richards

[William Plumlee]

Just so things don't get confusing, Robert Wiecha is the man shaking hands with Raul Castro, not William Wieland who I originally thought it was. Wieland was the Director, Office of Middle American Affairs for the Department of State.

Wieland below.

James

In reference to "Wiecha" I recalled, at the time of post, from memory and phoe spelling (Wieland or Whica): I met the man from Washington DC State Department at Raul's hide-a-way along with Life Magazine personal; Andrew St George and Lee Hall, I think.

From Dec 07- 05 post: "... The picture first appeared public in Life Magazine in 1957 in reference to the hostages taken by Raul at his northern camp. I think it was taken by Andrew St George. It was taken at the time that the US State Department sent a represenitive from Washington DC (Wieland or Whica ??) to negotiate the release of the American hostages. I think they settled for tractors. I am not sure if Dunkin covered this meeting at Raul's camp. I was only aware of one photographer from life Magazine. ".

The young man with the cross is another "Sergio". But not the Sergio of Dallas fame.

Edited May 11, 2006 by William Plumlee

[James Richards]

Just so things don't get confusing, Robert Wiecha is the man shaking hands with Raul Castro, not William Wieland who I originally thought it was. Wieland was the Director, Office of Middle American Affairs for the Department of State.

Wieland below.

James

In reference to "Wiecha" I recalled, at the time of post, from memory and phoe spelling (Wieland or Whica): I met the man from Washington DC State Department at Raul's hide-a-way along with Life Magazine personal; Andrew St George and Lee Hall, I think.

From Dec 07- 05 post: "... The picture first appeared public in Life Magazine in 1957 in reference to the hostages taken by Raul at his northern camp. I think it was taken by Andrew St George. It was taken at the time that the US State Department sent a represenitive from Washington DC (Wieland or Whica ??) to negotiate the release of the American hostages. I think they settled for tractors. I am not sure if Dunkin covered this meeting at Raul's camp. I was only aware of one photographer from life Magazine. ".

The young man with the cross is another "Sergio". But not the Sergio of Dallas fame.

Thanks, Tosh.

In another post, I remember you mentioning Robert Weicha but wasn't sure of the spelling. I may have been responsible for confusing the issue somewhat by confusing Weicha with Wieland. My apologies.

Cheers,

James

[William Plumlee]

Regarding the image I posted at the beginning of this thread, below is the uncropped version for the first time. I can tell you the man on the far right shaking hands with Raul Castro is CIA man and Vice Consul, Robert Weicha.

The question is, was Weicha a source of funds for the 26th of July movement? The Agency may have been maintaining contacts with both sides so to position themselves for any outcome the conflict may produce.

FWIW.

James

In the early days the M-26-7 was receiving funds from the USA and then later the 26th of July received funding and support from the CIA. The State Department was the "go between" in reference to the early M-26-7 and the CIA was a direct covert cut out funding for the later 26th of July early support. At one time there were two groups operating in Cuba to overthrow Batista. The 26th of July (Castro's group) won out with the CIA's under the table support and the M-26-7 faded out of the picture and some members merged with Castro. I might add we, the USA, was also sending arms and ammo as well as money to Batista at the same time we were funding the M-26-7 and Castro's Revolution. (kind of a circle jurk of politics of the time)

[James Richards]

Comandante Antonio Enrique Lusson permitted the only American in his "Columna" -- to use one of Dickey's cameras to take this photo near Palma Soriano, during late 1958. the then 17 year old Leutenant ["Teniente"] Donald Soldini, didn't want either his photo taken, nor his name mentioned in her later article in "Readers Digest".

Don Soldini was interviewed a few years back by Miami New Times, and the article was styled as "Cuba's Yanqui Fidelistas" -- and can be found on the Web. Also interviewed were the three young kids from GITMO who went up into the Sierra Maestra to join Fidel for a short period. Only the oldest, Ryan stayed on when the others returned to the base. One of the three turned strongly anti-Fidel many years ago.

The only "Gringo" there with Dickey who consented to "go public" was: U.S. Marine Corps deserter Gerald "Gerry" Holzthaus, who upon return to CONUS -- was convicted and sent to the Portsmouth, New Hampshire Naval Prison for 3 years. I last visited with him at his Daytona Beach home during the 1970s.

Fidel financed Don Soldini's education at the University of Mexico (D.F.); and Jim Bishop wrote a story about him during the 1960s. Don has been an international land developer for over 50+ years, and visits Cuba about every 4 months. He and his sons also live and do business in Fort Lauderdale, and I doubt that he would discuss anything over the telephone with anybody !! (Gerry Hemming)

Soldini certainly didn't like his image taken but there was the rare occasion when he was photographed. In the image below, that is Soldini on the right.

James

[William Plumlee]

Tom Willson some years ago did photo work on this print. Peter Lemkin somehow got the orginal neg for him. Tom said his findings were two people in the shadow of the trees one down low on the slope of the hill; one a little higher up. The light areas are in contrast and brake the shadow lines of the tree and tree trunk, indicating something iwithn the shadows. He also said to Lemkin and others that he thought he had found another person near the overpass at the parking lot near parked cars.

He and Peter had a falling out and he would not release the picture or his findings to Pete. I talked with Tom before he died and he told me he wanted to do more work before he released his findings. Jim Marrs also knows this information and I think was told the same thing by Wilson, however I am not sure about this. It does appear from just new tech that people are at that location. I have said for years that this needs to be investigated futher, but for whatever reasons nobody has taken it serious. In fact some have gone out of their way to discrerdit the possibility that someone is there even to the point of altering the picture to discredit the south knoll story.

Tom Died suddenly. Not sure of the date. Jack White also studied the picture but he said there was nothing there almost to the effect 'it was all in my head", hence no real work was done on it at that time 1989-90 by him.

I have never gone public with this information and never even told you Tosh all the details. I did get an original uncropped cancellare - all others are cropped. I gave this copynegative to Tom Wilson [friend of C. Wecht I thought I could trust]. We had a signed agreement that the negative was to be returned to me along with his analysis. [He had a special computer program to enhance the photo and (he claimed) even identify the material reflecting the light - glass, metal, etc.]. Tosh, as you know we met at a hotel in Boulder, Colorado specifically to talk about this. Tom Wilson called me at the hotel and asked me questions of you in real time - based on his photo analysis. (I am in Europe now and don't have my original notes with me - though still have them elsewhere - so this is from memory...) Wilson said he saw two men on the South Knoll in the shadows in the area you had always said you were with your buddy that day in Dallas. He claimed further that he could make out in the enhancement a communication device matching others seen that day in size and shape. He further said he could see an optical device [binocular or monocular] held by the same [smaller, darker] man who held the communication device and that there was over the shoulder some rectangular photo-type case. There was more he could see in the photo including other locations and he promised to get me a written analysis, the photo enhancements and the negative back. I never got anything back!! I had two further phone calls with Wilson in which he described more of what he saw. He said the photo contained too much important information on the case to give back to me - that he wanted to use it as evidence in some trial....without being more specific. He demanded you tell him through me certain things before he returned the negative and the analysis report. You in turn wanted the anlysis before you answered any more of his questions. I was very upset and as you were getting angry at me - demanding the analysis I had promised - and unable to deliver it. I was in turn upset at Wilson for not keeping his agreement and denying me [and you and the world] whatever he had found. At about that time my own life underwent a 'collapse' and Wilson was less important than just survival. I did try through letters and calls to Wilson directly and through a few others who knew both of us to get the negative, enhancements and his analysis -but never did. I didn't know that you had spoken with him before he died. Can you tell a bit more of what he said in that conversation - either here on the forum or to me privately. If anyone in the Forum knows more about this matter, I'd be interested to know. If what Wilson claims he found are true, they would be rather significant [i am not putting it all here - as without any photo enhancements it is just speculation as to whether they can really be seen in the photos or not]. To my knowledge he never released his analyses on any of several photos. It is one of many examples of how other researchers can be even greater blocks to research and progress than the official disinformation/cover-up campaign. Sorry Tosh. Peter

Plumlee:

Thanks Pete for the clearification. I will try to keep this brief:

I remember that day in Boulder well. It seemed to me that Wilson was not being honest with me and was trying to lead me into saying things I could not remember. Sergio did have a radio (not sure about the binoculars and he did have a concealed pistol) I had a clip board which we had drawn diagrams on earlier. (of which I had told you and Jim Marrs about earlier) I was not armed. This I told you and Wilson at Boulder. He (Wilson) told me that there were other images he had found in the picture and wanted me to tell him what they were. I wanted more information from him and you as to what those other images were. I was the one who lead you to the picture and you had Wilson to do photo work-- to try and prove there were two people at that location at the time of the shooting, thus proving a "front shoot" from the south knoll.

He nor you would tell me (I see why now) what had been found. I was upset and thought I was being set up to confirm someone elses theroy and it was going to be used in their book or research. The object was to prove two people were standing in the shadows. If this had been proven as claimed by you and Wilson, I could not understand why the informationm was not being released. Yes, I was upset. I was more upset when Denver FBI came to Grant Colorado to talk to me about that picture. How did they know? I felt I was being set-up by you and Wilson and I told you so. And I told Jim Marrs also. It was at this point that I pulled away from all researchers and would not have anything futher to do with JFK matters. Then came along Joe West and the BS JF story, Oliver Stone and his BS story and a host of other BS planted stories and falsehoods. Some concerning me. Then came the IRS and attatched everything I owned (which was not a hell of a lot)

A few years later and just before Tom Wilson died I got in touch with him and was told he, "... wanted to do more work before he released his findings..". I ask him if he would confirm for me that two people were standing at that location. He said there were two people standing there and he had found another person concealed near the railroad tracts and ask me about that person. That is when I was told, by Tom, copies of his work had been turned over to law enforcement and he would not release any information to me without their approval. I was mad as hell and felt betrayed and released, or tried to release, the picture you had obtained, to the public. I begged you and others to take a closer look at that picture. You told me it had been lost and your place had been broken into a most of your research had been removed. That is when all hell broke loose and I was discredited by a host of researchers... some of these "so-called experts" did not even try to prove or disprove..., or even look at the picture. They just said nothing was there. I knew then that this JFK research is nothing but BS in itself.... infiltrated by "special interest" type personal, including law enforcement on a national level, as well as publishers who want to make history rather than record history

Not long after that I was called to DC to testifie about other matters. In DC the "south knoll" picture was shown to me by Kerry's people and I was asked about it. I refused to comment

Pete. Its a lost cause the picture and the information behind it has become "contaminated" and is of no use. Thats the way I intend to leaveit. I learned "...don't cast you pearls before the Swine... ".

......we should put this to bed...... its of no value.

Again thanks again for the clearification. Your Friend Tosh

Edited June 11, 2006 by William Plumlee

[Dawn Meredith]

Tom Willson some years ago did photo work on this print. Peter Lemkin somehow got the orginal neg for him. Tom said his findings were two people in the shadow of the trees one down low on the slope of the hill; one a little higher up. The light areas are in contrast and brake the shadow lines of the tree and tree trunk, indicating something iwithn the shadows. He also said to Lemkin and others that he thought he had found another person near the overpass at the parking lot near parked cars.

He and Peter had a falling out and he would not release the picture or his findings to Pete. I talked with Tom before he died and he told me he wanted to do more work before he released his findings. Jim Marrs also knows this information and I think was told the same thing by Wilson, however I am not sure about this. It does appear from just new tech that people are at that location. I have said for years that this needs to be investigated futher, but for whatever reasons nobody has taken it serious. In fact some have gone out of their way to discrerdit the possibility that someone is there even to the point of altering the picture to discredit the south knoll story.

Tom Died suddenly. Not sure of the date. Jack White also studied the picture but he said there was nothing there almost to the effect 'it was all in my head", hence no real work was done on it at that time 1989-90 by him.

I have never gone public with this information and never even told you Tosh all the details. I did get an original uncropped cancellare - all others are cropped. I gave this copynegative to Tom Wilson [friend of C. Wecht I thought I could trust]. We had a signed agreement that the negative was to be returned to me along with his analysis. [He had a special computer program to enhance the photo and (he claimed) even identify the material reflecting the light - glass, metal, etc.]. Tosh, as you know we met at a hotel in Boulder, Colorado specifically to talk about this. Tom Wilson called me at the hotel and asked me questions of you in real time - based on his photo analysis. (I am in Europe now and don't have my original notes with me - though still have them elsewhere - so this is from memory...) Wilson said he saw two men on the South Knoll in the shadows in the area you had always said you were with your buddy that day in Dallas. He claimed further that he could make out in the enhancement a communication device matching others seen that day in size and shape. He further said he could see an optical device [binocular or monocular] held by the same [smaller, darker] man who held the communication device and that there was over the shoulder some rectangular photo-type case. There was more he could see in the photo including other locations and he promised to get me a written analysis, the photo enhancements and the negative back. I never got anything back!! I had two further phone calls with Wilson in which he described more of what he saw. He said the photo contained too much important information on the case to give back to me - that he wanted to use it as evidence in some trial....without being more specific. He demanded you tell him through me certain things before he returned the negative and the analysis report. You in turn wanted the anlysis before you answered any more of his questions. I was very upset and as you were getting angry at me - demanding the analysis I had promised - and unable to deliver it. I was in turn upset at Wilson for not keeping his agreement and denying me [and you and the world] whatever he had found. At about that time my own life underwent a 'collapse' and Wilson was less important than just survival. I did try through letters and calls to Wilson directly and through a few others who knew both of us to get the negative, enhancements and his analysis -but never did. I didn't know that you had spoken with him before he died. Can you tell a bit more of what he said in that conversation - either here on the forum or to me privately. If anyone in the Forum knows more about this matter, I'd be interested to know. If what Wilson claims he found are true, they would be rather significant [i am not putting it all here - as without any photo enhancements it is just speculation as to whether they can really be seen in the photos or not]. To my knowledge he never released his analyses on any of several photos. It is one of many examples of how other researchers can be even greater blocks to research and progress than the official disinformation/cover-up campaign. Sorry Tosh. Peter

Plumlee:

Thanks Pete for the clearification. I will try to keep this brief:

I remember that day in Boulder well. It seemed to me that Wilson was not being honest with me and was trying to lead me into saying things I could not remember. Sergio did have a radio (not sure about the binoculars and he did have a concealed pistol) I had a clip board which we had drawn diagrams on earlier. (of which I had told you and Jim Marrs about earlier) I was not armed. This I told you and Wilson at Boulder. He (Wilson) told me that there were other images he had found in the picture and wanted me to tell him what they were. I wanted more information from him and you as to what those other images were. I was the one who lead you to the picture and you had Wilson to do photo work-- to try and prove there were two people at that location at the time of the shooting, thus proving a "front shoot" from the south knoll.

He nor you would tell me (I see why now) what had been found. I was upset and thought I was being set up to confirm someone elses theroy and it was going to be used in their book or research. The object was to prove two people were standing in the shadows. If this had been proven as claimed by you and Wilson, I could not understand why the informationm was not being released. Yes, I was upset. I was more upset when Denver FBI came to Grant Colorado to talk to me about that picture. How did they know? I felt I was being set-up by you and Wilson and I told you so. And I told Jim Marrs also. It was at this point that I pulled away from all researchers and would not have anything futher to do with JFK matters. Then came along Joe West and the BS JF story, Oliver Stone and his BS story and a host of other BS planted stories and falsehoods. Some concerning me. Then came the IRS and attatched everything I owned (which was not a hell of a lot)

A few years later and just before Tom Wilson died I got in touch with him and was told he, "... wanted to do more work before he released his findings..". I ask him if he would confirm for me that two people were standing at that location. He said there were two people standing there and he had found another person concealed near the railroad tracts and ask me about that person. That is when I was told, by Tom, copies of his work had been turned over to law enforcement and he would not release any information to me without their approval. I was mad as hell and felt betrayed and released, or tried to release, the picture you had obtained, to the public. I begged you and others to take a closer look at that picture. You told me it had been lost and your place had been broken into a most of your research had been removed. That is when all hell broke loose and I was discredited by a host of researchers... some of these "so-called experts" did not even try to prove or disprove..., or even look at the picture. They just said nothing was there. I knew then that this JFK research is nothing but BS in itself.... infiltrated by "special interest" type personal, including law enforcement on a national level, as well as publishers who want to make history rather than record history

Not long after that I was called to DC to testifie about other matters. In DC the "south knoll" picture was shown to me by Kerry's people and I was asked about it. I refused to comment

Pete. Its a lost cause the picture and the information behind it has become "contaminated" and is of no use. Thats the way I intend to leaveit. I learned "...don't cast you pearls before the Swine... ".

......we should put this to bed...... its of no value.

Again thanks again for the clearification. Your Friend Tosh

WOW!!!

Tosh and Peter,

This certainly sounds very exciting. I am too busy with law at the moment to have much time for the forum so I just glanced and saw Tosh (always interested in what he has to say, especially since he was close to our pal Jay Harrison!!) so I just read Peter's post then Tosh's. With all due respect, and knowing little of what this is, it sure sounds like there is photographic evidence of some conspirators (or tosh and friend) ??

and that this guy who suddenly died seems like another "coincidence".

Sadly, I do totally agree with Tosh that MANY in the so called "research community" are plants, or ego trippers and I have seen enough hostility up close and personal in this little world in my 33 years of active investigation of this case to last a lifetime. I used to be trusting and am still overly so...but I do keep confidences.

Sounds like this could be a break in the case, or wishful thinking on my part. (Tosh I totaly respect your opinion and if you saya this evidnece is too compromised to be of use then you're most likely correct...but....???)

Sure would be nice. (fwiw)

Dawn

[William Plumlee]

Dawn; Good to hear from you. I do not mean ALL researchers into the JFK matter. However, its a shame that some who have big eggos seem to become the"point persons" and they soon become the final word as to what to believe and what not to belive.... kind of like "Lobbiest".

Jay and I talked about this questionable photo many times and he was going to try and have one of his people who he was working with look into as well as the "fingerprint" copy he was working on. He wanted to talk with Tom Watson and I think he did. However, you know how cryptic Jay was when you asked him about something direct. Never did know for sure if he talked with Wilson or not. Jay told me he was trying to get a good negative.., from who or how I again never knew. "I'm working on it" was about all he would say.

Any word on the "Rambler" ? Leslie asked me about it a few weeks ago. Seems other people are also trying to find it. Who or why, I have no idea. Leslie and Dig said it was still at the place where they had it towed. They have the hub caps and the pictures of Jay and I when we took it to the farm a year or two before Jay died....????

It seems when a lead does develope many seem to try and discredit the lead rather than investigate with an open mind.... its like some do not want new information to surface on this case... perhaps if it did and was proven then they would have to re-write their books and retract all their research and you know that would never happen...its their "Cash Cow". If you tell someone this is what I heard or think was said-- then it becomes written in stone. Thats why Jay was so cautious about what he said and how he said it. I have been told many things about Red Bird airport and who flew in there. And I too made the mistake passing it on as fact. When something is written or published then it becomes fact... right or wrong. Hear say becomes research references years later, because it is in print.

Thanks again Dawn and lets keep Jay's memory alive. He was one of the honest researchers who stayed behind the sceans.

Later Tosh

Edited June 11, 2006 by William Plumlee

[Pat Speer]

Peter, Cyril Wecht wrote about Wilson in his book Cause of Death. The feeling I got was that Wilson presented himself as having this breakthrough technology that could look into the shadows of photographs and tell us what was really there. While quite a few were taken in, my undertstanding is that his work was eventually discredited.

[Dawn Meredith]

Any word on the "Rambler" ? Leslie asked me about it a few weeks ago. Seems other people are also trying to find it. Who or why, I have no idea. Leslie and Dig said it was still at the place where they had it towed. They have the hub caps and the pictures of Jay and I when we took it to the farm a year or two before Jay died....????

Tosh: That's good to know. J told me where it was just before he died but since I have no place to store it I did not do anything. I did get an email a few months back from someone here on the forum asking. But nothing came of it.

Thanks again Dawn and lets keep Jay's memory alive. He was one of the honest researchers who stayed behind the sceans.

Later Tosh

I agree about J and the best way to keep his memory alive I think is to further develop the fingerprint issue. Tho whenever I try I come to a brick wall. Hoping Walt Brown is able to take this issue farther. J put a lot of his life and time into that part of the case. Without J's work -( obtaining the print and then finding Nathan Darby)- Barr's book would have been mere conjecture, so perhaps Barr will move this aspect of the case further with new evidence.

Glad to see you posting Tosh, I see your "buddy" G Hemming has left our midst. Seemed to coincide with the departure of Tim Gratz...curious. I sure miss the debates those two had with the inimitable RObert Donne (sp? Dunne?).

Dawn

[William Plumlee]

Peter, Cyril Wecht wrote about Wilson in his book Cause of Death. The feeling I got was that Wilson presented himself as having this breakthrough technology that could look into the shadows of photographs and tell us what was really there. While quite a few were taken in, my undertstanding is that his work was eventually discredited.

If anyone else have more on this, I'd appreciate it. He certainly did get 'right' apparently 'seeing' in the photo things that Plumlee had told me [and that I did not tell to Wilson!] were there. Of course, he could have gotten that information from others and made it look impressive.....I don't know what to think at this point. If he did in fact give the photos and 'information' to 'law-enforcement' I can only think he was greatly misguided or acting against the best interests of moving the case forward...but I will withhold my final opinion on this until I know all there is to know. Peter

plumlee reply:

Thanks Pete: I received your Email. However, I make everything public now days. I have found some play fast and loose with the truth. ( not referring to you) and some things I have clarified in private does not seem to be correct when I see it again later in someones book or research. I do hope you understand. You know the drill and how the system works. You too, have paid your dues in that regard. No more secret stuff on my part. "Classified or otherwise".

The first time I was back in DC was the day Iraq invaded ( I think it was August 2nd 1991). (or 90) Then about a year later in the Spring (May I think) was called back to clarify various points from the first session. The first time in August we talked off the record about that day in Dallas. The second time we went into closed session and the photo and other matters were discussed as well as other Contra matters. I ask them how they knew about the photo of the south knoll? They said they had obtained it from a "source". They also said it was hard to believe the parts about the "abort" story and some details about the day Kennedy was assassinated, of which I provided to them.. BUT in view of other information which had come to their attention from multiple sources and because of information they had received from others associated with the Iran-contra investigations they were looking into the Kennedy matter with a different view point. It was shortly after that my whole testimony Kennedy- Contra was classified Top Secret/Committee Sensitive and remains so today.

They brought a large folder to the table marked TOP SECRET..., I had to re read everything they had transcribed concerning my testimony and initial each paragraph before it completed its classified status. When I ask to see the transcript some months later, I was told I could not see it because I did not have the necessary clearances.

I never knew you had talked to Senator Kerry's investigators. However, the second time I testified was more about where Sergio and I were standing and why we were there. I was under the impression that most of their information about the south knoll photo had came from the FBI because of what was said to me about Roselli and the (FBI) not knowing for sure where he (Roselli) was that day or the day before the assassination. (reference the Phoenix Roselli file) I was told they had other information which confirmed much of what I told them. When I asked "...on the Contra matter?...". their reply was "... both; the Kennedy and the Contra...". I was told "...most of what we have is still being investigated and we cannot compromise that investigation at this time...". (something to that effect)

Around that time I was shown a copy of the south knoll photo and ask again to point out where Sergio and I were standing. This I did. Another photo was put next to the first one. However the second one had been marked by me and was a copy from Shaw's book of which I had marked and given to you and Jim Marrs a few months (or year before) I felt betrayed and I was pissed at you, or whoever, for giving them the photo in the first place.

Why has it been so important to discredit this photo and its source? To this day we do not know if someone was photographed in that photo or not. All I have ever asked for some years now was to have the photo checked. If "badge man" and other shadows" can be such a "focal point" then why not the south knoll photo? I do not know about Tom Wilson or his credibility. He was brought into this photo investigation by you and it looks like you got shafted. It seems the real negative was destroyed or lost by the FBI shortly after it was taken (reference DPD info from blank source relay by MI Fourth Army Reserve Dallas Love Field Co C 156 Tk Bat to Dallas PD) This I was told soon after I led investigators to the picture some years ago. I have no way of confirming any of this with a paper trail...hopefully we never left paper trails...

Now it is about time for some to come forward and take issues with these postings, thus drawing away from any investigations as to that photo. That has been the MO for a number of years now.

As far as I am concerned its a dead issue for me. I can no longer be of help in this Kennedy affair or the south knoll investigations. I have been contaminated and compromised. There is no paper trail... so it never happened... Right? And as 'Forest Gump has said. "Thats bout all I can say bout that".

As to you second question. Anything I would have to say about that would be just speculations. There was talk but only rumors as far as I could tell. You know I would help you if I could. "YE'all write whens yous finds works"

Edited June 12, 2006 by William Plumlee

[William Plumlee]

[

reply from plumlee:

Dawn: Jay once told me "...the fingerprint is much like your photo..". I replied. "...its not my photo...".

"...but your in it...". "...how do you know...", I asked. "... I know. I just know".

Sound like Jay?

Edited June 12, 2006 by William Plumlee

[Dawn Meredith]

[quote name='William Plumlee' date='Jun 12 2006, 06:18 PM' post='65218']

[

reply from plumlee:

Dawn: Jay once told me "...the fingerprint is much like your photo..". I replied. "...its not my photo...".

"...but your in it...". "...how do you know...", I asked. "... I know. I just know".

Sound like Jay?

God yes. He could be so damn cryptic. Like he was waiting for you to tell HIM. But often it was hard to tell...just what was up with the sometimes cat and mouse game. Because it was NEVER a game to him. This case was his LIFE.

Your note just reminded me of a call he made to me one day telling me to go get a certain news paper.

I did. Now, due to some new info, I am wondering if J was just proud of the story in the paper or was trying to give me a clue. (I did TAKE the clue if that was his intent). So now it's just one more question I will never get to ask....

Dawn

[William Plumlee]

additional background info:

Pete: I found some old notes and part of a letter from that time. Perhaps you have a copy. I think I gave one to you in Denver, but not sure. And too, I am not sure if any of this helps at this late date. I have had a number done on me... as well as you.:

Note in reference to letter and phone call to DC ref. Senator Kerry's aid made in May of 91 (blank.. I think you know both of these gentleman) Copy of complete letter was sent to Senator Gary Hart, Denver Colorado.

from letter:

".... I am not sure if anyone was at the rail road tracts or our side (south). We had checked that area earlier and had cleared it. You asked, "... Who told you somebody was there?..". I did not see anyone at that location but that does not mean someone could have came from the parking lot after we had walked from the area. Nobody told me somebody was there. Who told you I said that? .....

..... I remember the shot and felt it came from that area left of where I was standing near the steps in the shadows. I think there is a picture that might prove where we were at that moment or shortly after. However, the shot could have been just an echo of sorts. The wind was swriling around the Plaza. We did smell gun powder as we neared the bridge. I have never said that a shot came from that area only that I felt one had came from over our heads and to the left. I also said that the smell of gun powder could of come from across.., from the north knoll, and drifted to our location. Our communications with that section (north) were not complete and spoty at best. Why, I do not know.

(cont) ... you asked me if Roselli was there? I have noway of knowing. I did not see him there. I do not think he was. For some reason I think he was in Oak Cliff, but I could be wrong. You also asked if I would come back and give testimony on this. I have no problem with that. Let me know when and how you would make the arrangements. I would like for it to be "Hush-Hush", for security reasons..... you know what happen to my house in Grant Colorado the last time I got involved in this mess". (End)