The JFK Grand Jury: The Evidence

[Mark Stapleton]

... ramifications resulting in the whole Dealey Plaza imbroglio with its rotting foundation of transparently odious deception being exposed at last ....

Wow. Can you do that again?

Duke,

LOL. Can't help jumping on that soap box now and then, I guess. . JFK shot like a dog. Two others shortly thereafter. An explanation from the US Government and the US media (fearless upholder of truth and justice) which I consider to be a personal insult. No wonder people get steamed. Plus it's hot here in Sydney, too.

[Thomas Graves]

It makes perfect sense to me that Oswald, even if innocent of killing Kennedy, would nevertheless be smart enough to understand that he'd been set up as Kennedy's assassin, and would not willingly surrender.

_________________________________________________

I agree. I think Oswald might have believed he was participating in a "fake assassination" and it only dawned on him that he'd been set up as a patsy when he had his famous encounter with the policeman (with gun drawn) and Mr. Truly on the second floor of the TSBD as well as when the woman at the TSBD told him that (real?) shots had been fired at the President. I think Oswald's leaving the TSBD after the shooting (with the excuse that he later gave during interrogation) "I didn't think there would be any more work that afternoon, so I left" looks either very lame or very self-incriminating, unless it is viewed from the perspective that he felt his life was in serious danger and went to his boarding room to get his revolver and to change his clothes. I think he did these things out of self defense-- defense from both the DPD as well as the people who had "set him up" in the first place. I think that someone he trusted told him before the ("fake") assasination that if anything went wrong, they were to rendevous at the Texas Theater, and that that person could very well have been Jack Ruby.

FWIW, Thomas

__________________________________________________

Edited December 26, 2005 by Thomas Graves

[J. Raymond Carroll]

. I think Oswald's leaving the TSBD after the shooting (with the excuse that he later gave during interrogation) "I didn't think there would be any more work that afternoon, so I left" looks either very lame or very self-incriminating,

FWIW, Thomas__________________________________________________

Thomas, no offense intended, but I don't care how many million people agree with you, I am not one of them.

Best Wishes,

Ray

[Mike Perez]

Bill, John and everyone else interested:

I believe IMHO that the start to finding the truth is in the Autopsies. Notice Autopsies is plurel.

I believe that the are a number of bodies that NEED to be exhumed before we can get anywhere

with this investigation and definately before we would be able to present it to a Grand Jury. I know

of at least 2 exhumations that need top be preformed. In order to get ALL the medical evidence

that we need to present to the Grand Jury. We need for once to go to these people with "ALL" of our

ducks in a row and ALL of us working together to a common goal, instead of working for ourselves

for our own agendas. We need to go at this with a united front.

And now for the exhumations I think need to be preformed.

First I would like to know what exactly happened to John F. Kennedy, sooooo I would exhume his body

and do an extensive examination of his wounds and the extent of damage to his body.

And then just for ***** and giggles i would want to exhume J.D. Tippet, just to see who's body is buried there.

I make no accusations I just really want to know this information.

After that then we need to get Marina (Oswald) Porter on our side so she can file a wrongful death suit

against DPD then we'll be on our way o finding out what happened on Nov. 22, 1963

Mike

[Thomas Graves]

. I think Oswald's leaving the TSBD after the shooting (with the excuse that he later gave during interrogation) "I didn't think there would be any more work that afternoon, so I left" looks either very lame or very self-incriminating,

FWIW, Thomas__________________________________________________

Thomas, no offense intended, but I don't care how many million people agree with you, I am not one of them.

Best Wishes,

Ray

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Ray,

I only know that if I had been working at the TSBD on 11/22/63 and the assassination of a U.S. President had just occured a couple hundred feet down the same street on which my place of work was situated and which the President's motorcade had just gone down after passing by my place of work, I would feel obligated to "hang around" my place of work (the TSBD) for "rollcall" purposes (and also because I would be just plain curious as to what the hell had just happened), unless, of course, I was directly or indirectly involved in the assassination or unless I had (finally) figured out that I had been "set up" to take the fall [in which case I would go home (using whatever "tradecraft" I could), get my pistol (if I had one), change my clothes, go to a prearranged rendevous spot (if I felt I could still trust the person with whom I was supposed to rendevous), or otherwise "bug out," "get out of Dodge," or however you want to put it, Ray. If I were innocent and simply left my place of work, I would just be drawing unwarranted and unnecessary attention to myself. Given his background and that of his wife, I don't think LHO would want to be "hassled" by the DPD or the FBI. Bottom line: I don't think he would have left work unless he had a damn good reason (like realizing that he'd been "set up," for example?).

FWIW, Thomas

P.S. Wow! Do millions of people really believe this? (I wouldn't have known that if you hadn't told me...)

P.P.S. Why didn't you quote the whole sentence I wrote instead of just the first half of it?

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Edited December 27, 2005 by Thomas Graves

[J. Raymond Carroll]

If I were innocent and simply left my place of work, I would just be drawing unwarranted and unnecessary attention to myself. Given his background and that of his wife, I don't think LHO would want to be "hassled" by the DPD or the FBI. Bottom line: I don't think he would have left work unless he had a damn good reason (like realizing that he'd been "set up," for example?).

Lee Oswald thinks: "Its Friday afternoon, and it is pretty obvious there will be no more work today. I have absolutely nothing to contribute to the police investigation here, so I may as well go to the movies."

I suggest that all the rest is hindsight bias.

[John Dolva]

If I were innocent and simply left my place of work, I would just be drawing unwarranted and unnecessary attention to myself. Given his background and that of his wife, I don't think LHO would want to be "hassled" by the DPD or the FBI. Bottom line: I don't think he would have left work unless he had a damn good reason (like realizing that he'd been "set up," for example?).

Lee Oswald thinks: "Its Friday afternoon, and it is pretty obvious there will be no more work today. I have absolutely nothing to contribute to the police investigation here, so I may as well go to the movies."

I suggest that all the rest is hindsight bias.

yet another viewpoint:

What if Lee had no thought about actually having been set up but realised that a consideration of his background could put him in an uncomfortable situation. Perhaps he'd want to take control of the situation as far as he could. So his actions from then on was to just find a place sit low and wait, until the cops had made an arrest.

And surprise surprise. Here they are at the theatre.

At THAT point he begins to get an idea he might be in the situation of being set up, and 'I'm just a patsy' stems from that.?

[Thomas Graves]

yet another viewpoint:

What if Lee had no thought about actually having been set up but realised that a consideration of his background could put him in an uncomfortable situation. Perhaps he'd want to take control of the situation as far as he could. So his actions from then on was to just find a place sit low and wait, until the cops had made an arrest.

And surprise surprise. Here they are at the theatre.

At THAT point he begins to get an idea he might be in the situation of being set up, and 'I'm just a patsy' stems from that.?

____________________________________________

John,

I like your scenario.

FWIW, Thomas

____________________________________________

[Robert Howard]

yet another viewpoint:

What if Lee had no thought about actually having been set up but realised that a consideration of his background could put him in an uncomfortable situation. Perhaps he'd want to take control of the situation as far as he could. So his actions from then on was to just find a place sit low and wait, until the cops had made an arrest.

And surprise surprise. Here they are at the theatre.

At THAT point he begins to get an idea he might be in the situation of being set up, and 'I'm just a patsy' stems from that.?

____________________________________________

John,

I like your scenario.

FWIW, Thomas

____________________________________________

With regards to the potential 'JFK Grand Jury' are there any plans to submit the photos of the 'Rip Robertson & John Adrian O'Hare individuals?' Obviously the fact that they are both deceased might make it appear to be a moot point, but at the same time, 'proving' that there were CIA officers in Dealey that were more than 'low level agents' appears to me to be one of the most significant discoveries made in the last few months, all due to the efforts of James Richards. Also the image of the 'Hunt figure' in the Cancellare photo would add even more of an impact if the image could be 'photographically enhanced' to the point where the incontrovertibility (IMO) of the 'Hunt figure' was just as obvious as the RipRobertson/John A. O'Hare images.

To be more specific, can you imagine the furor in the United States if this facet of the new 'information' was rejected. It might not be 'picked up by the media' in the United States, but it certainly would elsewhere. That my friends is called leverage, something that appears to be in short supply.

Edited December 27, 2005 by Robert Howard

[William Kelly]

With regards to the potential 'JFK Grand Jury' are there any plans to submit the photos of the 'Rip Robertson & John Adrian O'Hare individuals?' Obviously the fact that they are both deceased might make it appear to be a moot point, but at the same time, 'proving' that there were CIA officers in Dealey that were more than 'low level agents' appears to me to be one of the most significant discoveries made in the last few months, all due to the efforts of James Richards. Also the image of the 'Hunt figure' in the Cancellare photo would add even more of an impact if the image could be 'photographically enhanced' to the point where the incontrovertibility (IMO) of the 'Hunt figure' was just as obvious as the RipRobertson/John A. O'Hare images.

To be more specific, can you imagine the furor in the United States if this facet of the new 'information' was rejected. It might not be 'picked up by the media' in the United States, but it certainly would elsewhere. That my friends is called leverage, something that appears to be in short supply.

Robert,

Any grand jury in whatever jurisdiction would review photo evidence, and I'm kind of disapointed in the analysis of the post-assassination Dealy Plaza photo evidence. We should be able to identify many of the people there, and we haven't been able to identify and follow the movements of Jim Braden, the Brown Coat Man and others we know are there.

Bill Kelly

[William Kelly]

Susan Brenner, the dean of the University of Dayton Law School, and the foremost authority on grand juries in the country, who wrote the book on the subject, will be one of the primary advisor to the JFK Grand Jury Project, along with a number of other lawyers.

She is traveling at the moment, but in response to a question concerning the need for a target suspect individual before conveining a grand jury for a crime she wrote:

"Grand juries investigate crimes, not people, so if there is a basis to suspect a crime has been committeed, an investigation can be launched even if the name of the perpetrator(s) is (are) not known - (Witness Plamegate)."

Bill Kelly

bkjfk3@yahoo.com

[Duke Lane]

... I think Oswald's leaving the TSBD after the shooting (with the excuse that he later gave during interrogation) "I didn't think there would be any more work that afternoon, so I left" looks either very lame or very self-incriminating, unless it is viewed from the perspective that he felt his life was in serious danger and went to his boarding room to get his revolver and to change his clothes. I think he did these things out of self defense-- defense from both the DPD as well as the people who had "set him up" in the first place. I think that someone he trusted told him before the ("fake") assasination that if anything went wrong, they were to rendevous at the Texas Theater, and that that person could very well have been Jack Ruby. ....

If you review the March 1964 statements of the TSBD employees, you will see that more than a few (I'm going to compile a list of these) were either told by other employees that, if they went inside they would not be allowed back out, or that they would not be allowed in, or found the doors of the building locked (there were at least two people who made this statement).

That said, Oswald's "excuse" seems to be fairly valid. He is apparently not the only one to have left the TSBD early, but the only male to have done so other than Cason, who had driven home for lunch and did not return after hearing the news. (Incidentally, this makes him the third male besodes Oswald and Givens who was "not accounted for" during the "roll-call.")

Among the other employees that did not return into the building:

• one woman (Virgie Rackley) went to a restaurant(!) at 2:15 after hanging out in front of the TSBD until then (talk about "excessively calm," she actually ate!)
  
• five women (Dragoo, Holt, Johnson, Hicks and Palmer - the last of whom had taken the day off, but went to DP after hearing the news) found the doors locked, with one of them (Hicks) finding the doors locked a "few minutes" after the shooting as she tried to leave
  
• five in toto (Givens, Rackley, Holt, Johnson and Whatley) said that they were told by fellow employees that they could not leave if they went inside, and thus stayed outside.
  
• six (Barnum, Jacob, Kounas, Parker, Williams and Viles) stated that they either were "not allowed in" or were only allowed to enter as far as the lobby. Viles was also a white male, allowed only into the lobby; and
  
• two women (Reese and Dean) were allowed in, but only under police escort and then only to their offices.
  

So, after all this, the question remains: in and of itself, was it really all that strange that Lee Oswald left because he "didn't think there'd be any more work that day?"

[J. Raymond Carroll]

....

If you review the March 1964 statements of the TSBD employees, you will see that more than a few (I'm going to compile a list of these) were either told by other employees that, if they went inside they would not be allowed back out, or that they would not be allowed in, or found the doors of the building locked (there were at least two people who made this statement).

That said, Oswald's "excuse" seems to be fairly valid. really all that strange that Lee Oswald left because he "didn't think there'd be any more work that day?"

Duke< I'm sure many of us will be looking forward to this, and I suggest you post it as a seperate Topic.

[William Kelly]

Why speculate on the motives and possible thoughts of the patsy?

And what does that have to do with the evidence being prepared for a Grand Jury Petition?

Such speculation isn't admissible.

If you want to do that, please read Mae Brussell's "The Last Words of Lee Harvey Oswald."

BK

[Duke Lane]

I think Oswald's leaving the TSBD after the shooting (with the excuse that he later gave during interrogation) "I didn't think there would be any more work that afternoon, so I left" looks either very lame or very self-incriminating,

FWIW, Thomas

Thomas, no offense intended, but I don't care how many million people agree with you, I am not one of them.

Best Wishes,

Ray

Ray,

I only know that if I had been working at the TSBD on 11/22/63 and the assassination of a U.S. President had just occured a couple hundred feet down the same street on which my place of work was situated and which the President's motorcade had just gone down after passing by my place of work, I would feel obligated to "hang around" my place of work (the TSBD) for "rollcall" purposes (and also because I would be just plain curious as to what the hell had just happened), unless, of course ... If I were innocent and simply left my place of work, I would just be drawing unwarranted and unnecessary attention to myself. Given his background and that of his wife, I don't think LHO would want to be "hassled" by the DPD or the FBI. Bottom line: I don't think he would have left work unless he had a damn good reason (like realizing that he'd been "set up," for example?).

FWIW, Thomas

P.S. Wow! Do millions of people really believe this? (I wouldn't have known that if you hadn't told me...)

P.P.S. Why didn't you quote the whole sentence I wrote instead of just the first half of it?

Unfortunately, what any of us think that we might do in such a circumstance, we clearly cannot know. Moreover, I've posted what people who were there, then, actually did in the "Robert MacNeil and the three calm men" thread. Two women went to the bank to transact some personal business immediately after the shooting. Another went to a restaurant a short while later. Still another had driven home for lunch and did not return (a third "missing person" during the roll-call whom nobody's mentioned before! Yes, he was a white man).

For a complete list of TSBD employees and what they said they did (and in some cases, why), see this link. It needs some prettying up, but the facts is there!

If I were innocent and didn't believe that I'd be working any more on any given day, I probably wouldn't even think about getting hassled simply because I knew I didn't do (whatever it was).