Jump to content
The Education Forum

Robert Easterling


Recommended Posts

From Simkin's Spartacus. Is there anything more anyone has to add? I find this story very interesting. it took me a lot of effort to find anything at all on this story without buying Hurt's book. If Easterling was on the level - and bailed on his assignment, seems logical in regards to some of the bizarre events that may have followed. Is Easterling still alive I wonder?

Robert Wilfred Easterling was born at Hattiesburg, Mississippi, on 30th June, 1926. After dropping out of high school he joined a rodeo and obtained the nickname Cowboy.

Easterling eventually became involved in criminal activity. In the 1950s he became a safecracker and helped run an interstate car-theft operation. He was arrested and convicted of burglary and bootlegging and spent some time in prison. He later admitted that he got away with the most serious of his crimes, the placing of a bomb on a National Airlines plane as part of an insurance fraud scheme. Easterling also confessed to killing a man who became aware of this crime.

Easterling was arrested in 1964 and charged with safebreaking in Hagerstown, Maryland and Durham, North Carolina. Found guilty, he was sentenced to five years in the Louisiana State Penitentiary. After his release he moved to Mexico City. In 1974 Easterling was committed to a mental institution. The following year he got in touch with the Federal Bureau of Investigation about his knowledge of the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Although interviewed by the Secret Service several times between 1974 and 1982, Easterling felt his story was not being fully investigated. He therefore contacted the journalist, Henry Hurt.

Easterling told Hurt that he had been recruited by Manuel Rivera to drive Lee Harvey Oswald from Dallas on the day of the assassination. Easterling claimed that David Ferrie, Jack Ruby and Clay Shaw had been involved in this conspiracy. So also were unnamed members of the Texas oil industry. Easterling also told Hurt that Rivera had been the gunman who killed Kennedy. Rivera used a 7-mm Czech-made automatic rather than the Mannlicher-Carcano that had been planted in the Texas Book Depository to implicate Oswald.

Easterling decided not to take part in this conspiracy to kill John F. Kennedy and instead fled to Jackson, Mississippi. On 21st November, 1963, Easterling informed the FBI in Washington of the plot. He was told they knew of the conspiracy. The FBI agent told him: "We know all about it. We're going to catch them red-handed." You're in too deep. You're going to get killed."

Easterling's story appeared in Hurt's book, Reasonable Doubt: An Investigation into the Assassination of John F. Kennedy (1986).

As always - it makes me wonder when documents are postponed in full if they are nothing more than bs.

AGENCY : DOJ

RECORD NUMBER : 179-20004-10067

RECORDS SERIES : CLASSIFIED SUBJECT FILE 129-11, OFFICIAL MAIL SECT. 43

DOCUMENT INFORMATION

ORIGINATOR : FBI

FROM : JACKSON, MS

TO : [No To]

TITLE : [No Title]

DATE : 10/12/1982

PAGES : 2

DOCUMENT TYPE : PAPER, TEXTUAL DOCUMENT

SUBJECTS : EASTERLING, ROBERT

CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED

RESTRICTIONS : REFERRED

CURRENT STATUS : POSTPONED IN FULL

DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 00/00/0000

COMMENTS : INCLUDES A COVER MEMO; BOX 61

Link to comment
Share on other sites

File Easterling in the file that contains:

Files.

Holt.

Baker.

and a few other suspects.

Back when Gary Mack was still doing research, he

thouroghly debunked Easterling.

Jack

Thanks Jack.

I would like to at least examine what the man had to say, and I am not sure exactly what that was. Also - it still is interesting that a file concerning Easterling would have been pulled from NARA. Only one of eight - not like Bud Culligan for example, where it was closer to 70%.

Maybe I will simply buy Hurt's book.

- lee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

File Easterling in the file that contains:

Files.

Holt.

Baker.

and a few other suspects.

Back when Gary Mack was still doing research, he

thouroghly debunked Easterling.

Jack

Thanks Jack.

I would like to at least examine what the man had to say, and I am not sure exactly what that was. Also - it still is interesting that a file concerning Easterling would have been pulled from NARA. Only one of eight - not like Bud Culligan for example, where it was closer to 70%.

Maybe I will simply buy Hurt's book.

- lee

Hurt's book was published by Holt, Rinehart and Winston...and as I recall

excerpted by Reader's Digest, both said by some to be conduits for the CIA.

Lots of good stuff in the book, but a technique called "limited hangout" allows

for using accurate information as a vehicle for inserting misleading material.

I consider Hurt's book a limited hangout. The Easterling info is the red herring

in the book.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Easterling info is the red herring in the book.

Jack

I think Henry Hurt is an honest man and a really excellent writer. I think his book is an excellent introduction to the case, but of course there is one big caveat: Hurt was suckered by Easterling's phoney story, which he was foolish enough to pay for. In that sense Easterling is a red herring. Hurt does warn his readers that Easterling is a very tainted witness, yet his own interpretation of some key issues in the case is clearly colored by what he "learned" from Easterling.

Hurt spent quite a bit of time conferring with Harold Weisberg, and Weisburg's influence is quite apparent throughout much of the book. If the book was rewritten slightly, and updated, and if the Easterling material was eliminated, it would be perhaps the single best introduction to the case, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Henry Hurt is an honest man and a really excellent writer. I think his book is an excellent introduction to the case, but of course there is one big caveat: Hurt was suckered by Easterling's phoney story, which he was foolish enough to pay for. In that sense Easterling is a red herring. Hurt does warn his readers that Easterling is a very tainted witness, yet his own interpretation of some key issues in the case is clearly colored by what he "learned" from Easterling.

This has happened to several people writing books about JFK. For example, would we see the Joan Mellen book differently if Gerry Hemming had not introduced her to Angelo Murgado? I wonder if Larry Hancock has had to face this problem?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that the Easterling thing just doesn't add up to a serious topic of research. But just FYI, I was struck in reading a Garrison-era interview with Betty Parent, a close friend of William Wayne Dalzell of Friends of Democratic Cuba in New Orleans in 1961, which includes this:

"Members of the group included Sergio Arcacha Smith, Bill Craig, Bill Dalzell, Grady Durham, an individual named Logan, who was also a member of the CIA, Bill [Klein], an attorney, Regis Kennedy, a member of the FBI, an individual named Hoffman, and an individual named Easterling."

This was written nearly 20 years before Hurt's book came out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that the Easterling thing just doesn't add up to a serious topic of research. But just FYI, I was struck in reading a Garrison-era interview with Betty Parent, a close friend of William Wayne Dalzell of Friends of Democratic Cuba in New Orleans in 1961, which includes this:

"Members of the group included Sergio Arcacha Smith, Bill Craig, Bill Dalzell, Grady Durham, an individual named Logan, who was also a member of the CIA, Bill [Klein], an attorney, Regis Kennedy, a member of the FBI, an individual named Hoffman, and an individual named Easterling."

This was written nearly 20 years before Hurt's book came out.

Thank you for that Roy. Regis Kennedy I have commented on before. His report on Marcello makes him a rotten tomatoe - pun intended - I don't see any other way to view it.

So what is it that Easterling said that we aren't buying? Is this it?

Easterling told Hurt that he had been recruited by Manuel Rivera to drive Lee Harvey Oswald from Dallas on the day of the assassination. Easterling claimed that David Ferrie, Jack Ruby and Clay Shaw had been involved in this conspiracy. So also were unnamed members of the Texas oil industry. Easterling also told Hurt that Rivera had been the gunman who killed Kennedy. Rivera used a 7-mm Czech-made automatic rather than the Mannlicher-Carcano that had been planted in the Texas Book Depository to implicate Oswald.

Easterling decided not to take part in this conspiracy to kill John F. Kennedy and instead fled to Jackson, Mississippi. On 21st November, 1963, Easterling informed the FBI in Washington of the plot. He was told they knew of the conspiracy. The FBI agent told him: "We know all about it. We're going to catch them red-handed." You're in too deep. You're going to get killed."

Let's break it down?

Easterling sounds like the kind of guy you'd want. Plausible denial all the way.

From the Garrison investigation, Easterling is naming some of the same players we are all familiar with.

He is involving Texas oil.

In terms of the shooter on the 6th floor - he is fingering a Cuban. Camper does as well, but doesn't name him. Stone received consultation from someplace, and used a dark skinned individual for one of his two 6th floor shooters in the film JFK.

Here's a 7mm Czech rifle.

Easterling says he bailed. We are left with the conundrum of what Oswald was supposed to be doing - during and after the shooting -- how he ended up in the Theatre and why. Loy Factor claims to have headed to the bus stop after the shooting - only to hang around for several hours and get picked up again. ? Do we also believe Loy Factor to be a limited hangout as well? What was Factor's role that day? Who was supposed to get Oswald out of the Country, if indeed that was the plan [as per Martino].

Easterling calls the FBI. Probably no record of this even if it's true? But there is no record of the call made by Elisabeth Cole either - and I spoke to her personally. She has no reason to lie.

So what am I missing that may be contained in the Hurt book? How was Easterling 'debunked?'

- lee

post-675-1152634869_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what am I missing that may be contained in the Hurt book? How was Easterling 'debunked?'

- lee

Ask Gary Mack, who wrote several Easterling articles for his excellent newsletter

COVERUPS!

As I recall, it had something to do with New Orleans Fire Department records

showing that a fire Easterling talks about was not true. That, plus a lot of other

stuff about supplying rifles, etc. Sticking in my memory is something about

firing a rifle into a barrel of water to recover a pristine Carcano bullet.

My memory may not be very accurate unless I look up my newsletter copies.

Email Gary, and he can summarize; post his reply for us.

My main thought about Easterling: No plotters in their right minds would

select such an unreliable goofy guy as a crucial part of a sophisticated plot.

That is not the way the agency operates. Better to use him as a red herring.

Hurt threatened to sue Gary over the allegations in his newsletter, proving

to me that Gary was onto something.

Jack

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what am I missing that may be contained in the Hurt book? How was Easterling 'debunked?'

- lee

Ask Gary Mack, who wrote several Easterling articles for his excellent newsletter

COVERUPS!

As I recall, it had something to do with New Orleans Fire Department records

showing that a fire Easterling talks about was not true. That, plus a lot of other

stuff about supplying rifles, etc. Sticking in my memory is something about

firing a rifle into a barrel of water to recover a pristine Carcano bullet.

My memory may not be very accurate unless I look up my newsletter copies.

Email Gary, and he can summarize; post his reply for us.

My main thought about Easterling: No plotters in their right minds would

select such an unreliable goofy guy as a crucial part of a sophisticated plot.

That is not the way the agency operates. Better to use him as a red herring.

Hurt threatened to sue Gary over the allegations in his newsletter, proving

to me that Gary was onto something.

Jack

Thanks Jack.

Just thinking again...if we hypothesize that something went wrong with how Oswald was handled immediately after the shooting - it still leaves a lot of open questions. Say for example that it wasn't Oswald on McWatters bus.

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/the_critics/g...ith_Malice.html

Moreover, McWatters' WC testimony suggests he gave the bus transfer to a young passenger named Roy Milton Jones, not to Oswald. The day after he viewed the police lineup, McWatters recognized one of his regular passengers, the teenager Jones, as the man who had boarded his bus at 12:40. McWatters only gave out two transfers on that trip, one of them to a woman. The WC asked McWatters if he could identify Oswald as the man who had boarded his bus and to whom he had given a transfer. McWatters answered that he could not make that identification (2 H 370). McWatters even denied telling the Dallas police that the number two man in the lineup, i.e., Oswald, was the same man who boarded his bus. Since McWatters said the man who boarded his bus at 12:40 and who asked for a transfer was Jones, not Oswald, and since McWatters only gave out two transfers during that trip, the logical conclusion is that one of the transfers was given to Jones and the other to the woman.

Furthermore that it wasn't Oswald in Whaley's cab.

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/the_critics/g...ith_Malice.html

Whaley testified that Oswald "had on two jackets." The commission decided there was none. At the police lineup, Whaley picked out eighteen-year-old David Knapp instead of twenty-four-year-old Lee Harvey Oswald (Knapp did not even resemble Oswald). Whaley registered 12:30 p.m. in his logbook as the time when his passenger entered the cab. This, of course, eliminated Oswald, since Oswald was in the Depository building at that time. The commission attempted to explain this by noting that Whaley recorded all trips in fifteen-minute intervals, regardless of how long the actual trip took. Since the commission decided Oswald entered the cab at 12:47 or 12:48, it did not explain why Whaley entered 12:30 instead of 12:45 in his book. Nor did it explain why other trips were entered at 6:20, 7:50, 8:10, 9:40, 10:50, and 3:10, rather than regular quarter-hour intervals. In his original log, Whaley entered 500 North Beckley as the spot where he let Oswald out. The commission decided that Whaley was wrong here, also.

Oswald instead was picked up by the guys in the Rambler, and then driven perhaps to the bus station. Loy Factor claims to have been driven to the bus station directly after the shooting - if we can believe him - another potentially unreliable figure - why would he be picked up again in a few hours? Why is he at the bus stop at all? If he's supposed to be escaping - what bus does he need to wait several hours for? However, if Easterling was assigned to drive Oswald and perhaps Factor - from the bus station - then it might make sense.

Instead, what we have, possibly, is Oswald taking a different bus - not McWatters at all, to his roominghouse, or getting there by some other method. One of the 2 squad cars [as per Culligan] used in the operation stop by the roominghouse checking for Oswald, but they don't want to hang around. Somehow - and I don't think anyone has satisfactorily explained this - Oswald makes his way to the Texas Theatre. He is in no way connected with Tippit's murder. Oak Cliff appears to have been chock full of interesting individuals at this point in time - Ruby, Dolan and Vaganov to cite a few. Oswald is sitting next to different folks in the theatre - looking for his contact. In the meanwhile - someone is sitting outside of the theatre waiting? Can't find the document from the DPD files.

Anyway - if Easterling is simply another con-artist, still leaves room for the question about where Oswald was going, who was helping him get around, etc.

- lee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, I'm not sure whether I faced it or intentionally avoided it. One of my starting

assumptions was that anyone who willingly volunteered (at this late date) to come forward

and disclose "new" information about the JFK assassination had to be met with some skepticism.

One exception to that in which my first edition was to use Noel Twyman's interview

with Roy Hargraves. That was a mixed bag of course as Hargraves had been identified

as a possible suspect to the FBI immediately following the assassination.

I feel more comfortable with individuals who either never intended their information

to be disclosed or with those who initially offered it to legal or government representatives

under strict understanding of confidentiality. Of course some of those folks did later

become visible under various record disclosure acts but that was not voluntary

on their part. I also tend to be more interested in individuals who told one

story for a long period of time and then privately took another stance shortly

before their deaths, that seems a little more "real" to me.

One exception occurs to me, I think a number of folks could still come forward with

knowledge of Lee Oswald that contradicts the official story of his activities and

contacts. These would be people who were directly at risk if they had volunteered

such information in 1963/1964. This includes FBI, CIA and Navy/Marine personnel.

The same thing could apply to those involved in the legally ordered cover-up, but not

the conspiracy itself.

-- Larry

I think Henry Hurt is an honest man and a really excellent writer. I think his book is an excellent introduction to the case, but of course there is one big caveat: Hurt was suckered by Easterling's phoney story, which he was foolish enough to pay for. In that sense Easterling is a red herring. Hurt does warn his readers that Easterling is a very tainted witness, yet his own interpretation of some key issues in the case is clearly colored by what he "learned" from Easterling.

This has happened to several people writing books about JFK. For example, would we see the Joan Mellen book differently if Gerry Hemming had not introduced her to Angelo Murgado? I wonder if Larry Hancock has had to face this problem?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what am I missing that may be contained in the Hurt book? How was Easterling 'debunked?'

- lee

Ask Gary Mack, who wrote several Easterling articles for his excellent newsletter

COVERUPS!

As I recall, it had something to do with New Orleans Fire Department records

showing that a fire Easterling talks about was not true. That, plus a lot of other

stuff about supplying rifles, etc. Sticking in my memory is something about

firing a rifle into a barrel of water to recover a pristine Carcano bullet.

My memory may not be very accurate unless I look up my newsletter copies.

Email Gary, and he can summarize; post his reply for us.

My main thought about Easterling: No plotters in their right minds would

select such an unreliable goofy guy as a crucial part of a sophisticated plot.

That is not the way the agency operates. Better to use him as a red herring.

Hurt threatened to sue Gary over the allegations in his newsletter, proving

to me that Gary was onto something.

Jack

I have the Henry Hurt book and hadn't read it in years. I recalled some of the allegations of Easterling because he was such an unusual character. The fire incident really stood out to me in that some of what Easterling claimed might indeed be correct. A fire did occur on September 24, 1963 in New Orleans. The records were located by Tom Noonan, a PI that Hurt had hired. Seems Noonan found a ledger in the basement of the New Orleans Public Library with a handwritten description by a fireman. The address was listed and it was within a few minutes drive of Easterling's original description. The Noonan information is on page 371 of Hurt's book. I have Gary Mack's book Coverup somewhere, but can't locate it right now so am unable to say how he might have debunked the fire incident. The fire certainly seems plausible based on Noonan's discovery.

Nick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that the Easterling thing just doesn't add up to a serious topic of research. But just FYI, I was struck in reading a Garrison-era interview with Betty Parent, a close friend of William Wayne Dalzell of Friends of Democratic Cuba in New Orleans in 1961, which includes this:

"Members of the group included Sergio Arcacha Smith, Bill Craig, Bill Dalzell, Grady Durham, an individual named Logan, who was also a member of the CIA, Bill [Klein], an attorney, Regis Kennedy, a member of the FBI, an individual named Hoffman, and an individual named Easterling."

This was written nearly 20 years before Hurt's book came out.

Billings...

Garrison is hot in the CIA angle . . . He is reading "The Invisible Government" . . . mentions "Friends of Free Cuba," an organization of interesting types: Bill Dalzell, for one, who came to New Orleans week before to confer with Novel's lawyers . . . Also a man named Logan who worked or works for Company . . . Regis Kennedy, an FBI agent who told a lady (Betty Parrott) that Shaw was a Company man . . .

Gary Mack informed me that Easterling apparently alleged to have taken the shot(s) from the 6th floor, handed the rifle to Oswald, then proceeded to urinate out the back window, and clamber down to the ground by a rope. J. Edgar Hoover met him at the bus station.

So, Easterling is either not worth pursuing, or someone who brought absurd attention to himself intentionally in order to discredit / distance himself. The Logan bit is interesting.

124-10369-10050 (17-May-1967): ADMIN FOLDER-M9: HSCA ADMINISTRATIVE FOLDER, LEE HARVEY OSWALD INCOMING COMMUNICATIONS VOLUME IV pg 196

REPRESENTATIVE FNU LOGAN OR THAT SA REGIS I. . KENNEDY HAS BEEN IN CONTACT WITH A CIA REPRESENTATIVE BY THAT NAME. SA KENNEDY ADVISES HF DOES NOT KNOW A CIA REPRESENTATIVE BY THE NAME OF FMU LOGAN AND HAS...

FNU - First Name Unknown, I assume.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/jimlie.htm

Claimed the "notes" from statement of one David Logan, who connected Ferrie and Shaw, were stolen from his office (pp. 119, 319). Transcript of Logan interview was in Garrison files, and placed in the National Archives along with other papers after his death (Lambert, p. 281). Conceal real reason for failure to use Logan's testimony - his lack of credibility.

Would that be David Logan, or another Logan? Postponed in full again. Is this the interview being referred to above?

ORIGINATOR : NEW ORLEANS DISTRICT ATTORNEY

FROM : SCIAMBRA, ANDREW

TO : GARRISON, JIM

TITLE : INTERVIEW WITH "BP" (2ND PARROTT INTERVIEW) IN RE;

FRIENDS OF .....

DATE : 12/18/1967

PAGES : 2

DOCUMENT TYPE : MEMORANDUM

SUBJECTS : FRIENDS OF DEMOCRATIC CUBA; DALZELL, BILL; BANNISTER,

GUY; MARTIN, JACK; MOORE, JOSEPH; BALTER BUILDING;

LOGAN; CIA; PARROTT, BETTY; CIA

CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED

RESTRICTIONS : REFERRED

CURRENT STATUS : POSTPONED IN FULL

DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 07/16/1993

COMMENTS : Folder 2 of 2. Box 152.

AGENCY INFORMATION

AGENCY : SSCIA

RECORD NUMBER : 157-10011-10173

RECORDS SERIES : LETTER & MEMORANDUM

DOCUMENT INFORMATION

ORIGINATOR : DOJ/FBI

FROM : SHAHEEN, MICHAEL E.

TO : CHURCH, FRANK, CHAIRMAN

TITLE : TRANSMITTAL OF MEMORANDUM AND MATERIALS PREPARED BY

THE FBI

DATE : 12/23/1975

PAGES : 3

DOCUMENT TYPE : PAPER, TEXTUAL DOCUMENT

SUBJECTS : FAIR PLAY FOR CUBA COMMITTEE; LOGAN, RICHARD, SPECIAL

AGENT CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED

RESTRICTIONS : OPEN IN FULL

CURRENT STATUS : OPEN

DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 03/11/1994

COMMENTS : SSCI Box 472, Folder 120

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that the Easterling thing just doesn't add up to a serious topic of research. But just FYI, I was struck in reading a Garrison-era interview with Betty Parent, a close friend of William Wayne Dalzell of Friends of Democratic Cuba in New Orleans in 1961, which includes this:

"Members of the group included Sergio Arcacha Smith, Bill Craig, Bill Dalzell, Grady Durham, an individual named Logan, who was also a member of the CIA, Bill [Klein], an attorney, Regis Kennedy, a member of the FBI, an individual named Hoffman, and an individual named Easterling."

This was written nearly 20 years before Hurt's book came out.

Billings...

Garrison is hot in the CIA angle . . . He is reading "The Invisible Government" . . . mentions "Friends of Free Cuba," an organization of interesting types: Bill Dalzell, for one, who came to New Orleans week before to confer with Novel's lawyers . . . Also a man named Logan who worked or works for Company . . . Regis Kennedy, an FBI agent who told a lady (Betty Parrott) that Shaw was a Company man . . .

Gary Mack informed me that Easterling apparently alleged to have taken the shot(s) from the 6th floor, handed the rifle to Oswald, then proceeded to urinate out the back window, and clamber down to the ground by a rope. J. Edgar Hoover met him at the bus station.

So, Easterling is either not worth pursuing, or someone who brought absurd attention to himself intentionally in order to discredit / distance himself. The Logan bit is interesting.

124-10369-10050 (17-May-1967): ADMIN FOLDER-M9: HSCA ADMINISTRATIVE FOLDER, LEE HARVEY OSWALD INCOMING COMMUNICATIONS VOLUME IV pg 196

REPRESENTATIVE FNU LOGAN OR THAT SA REGIS I. . KENNEDY HAS BEEN IN CONTACT WITH A CIA REPRESENTATIVE BY THAT NAME. SA KENNEDY ADVISES HF DOES NOT KNOW A CIA REPRESENTATIVE BY THE NAME OF FMU LOGAN AND HAS...

FNU - First Name Unknown, I assume.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/jimlie.htm

Claimed the "notes" from statement of one David Logan, who connected Ferrie and Shaw, were stolen from his office (pp. 119, 319). Transcript of Logan interview was in Garrison files, and placed in the National Archives along with other papers after his death (Lambert, p. 281). Conceal real reason for failure to use Logan's testimony - his lack of credibility.

Would that be David Logan, or another Logan? Postponed in full again. Is this the interview being referred to above?

ORIGINATOR : NEW ORLEANS DISTRICT ATTORNEY

FROM : SCIAMBRA, ANDREW

TO : GARRISON, JIM

TITLE : INTERVIEW WITH "BP" (2ND PARROTT INTERVIEW) IN RE;

FRIENDS OF .....

DATE : 12/18/1967

PAGES : 2

DOCUMENT TYPE : MEMORANDUM

SUBJECTS : FRIENDS OF DEMOCRATIC CUBA; DALZELL, BILL; BANNISTER,

GUY; MARTIN, JACK; MOORE, JOSEPH; BALTER BUILDING;

LOGAN; CIA; PARROTT, BETTY; CIA

CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED

RESTRICTIONS : REFERRED

CURRENT STATUS : POSTPONED IN FULL

DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 07/16/1993

COMMENTS : Folder 2 of 2. Box 152.

AGENCY INFORMATION

AGENCY : SSCIA

RECORD NUMBER : 157-10011-10173

RECORDS SERIES : LETTER & MEMORANDUM

DOCUMENT INFORMATION

ORIGINATOR : DOJ/FBI

FROM : SHAHEEN, MICHAEL E.

TO : CHURCH, FRANK, CHAIRMAN

TITLE : TRANSMITTAL OF MEMORANDUM AND MATERIALS PREPARED BY

THE FBI

DATE : 12/23/1975

PAGES : 3

DOCUMENT TYPE : PAPER, TEXTUAL DOCUMENT

SUBJECTS : FAIR PLAY FOR CUBA COMMITTEE; LOGAN, RICHARD, SPECIAL

AGENT CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED

RESTRICTIONS : OPEN IN FULL

CURRENT STATUS : OPEN

DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 03/11/1994

COMMENTS : SSCI Box 472, Folder 120

FWIW, Beverly Oliver [babushka Lady] asserted that Regis Kennedy was the individual who took her camera, after the assassination.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[

FWIW, Beverly Oliver [babushka Lady] asserted that Regis Kennedy was the individual who took her camera, after the assassination.

...In January, 1961 the Friends for Democratic Cuba was founded by ex-FBI

agent Guy Bannister and former Oswald employer Gerard Tujague. Members

included FBI Agents Lansing Logan and Regis Kennedy, CIA Agents William

Dalzell and Joseph Newbrough, anti-Castro Cubans Sergio Arcacha Smith

and Carlos Quiroga, soldier of fortune types like ex-marine Joseph Moore

and Jim Ivey and local businessmen like Gerard Tujague and Grady Durham.

Newman.

Thanks Robert - I remember once posting about an incident at Parkland, which someone had ascribed to Regis Kennedy, but Gary Mack corrected me, and another individual - DPD? - came forward over the years to claim responsibility - had to do with the man trying to run into the room where Kennedy was being held. The thing that troubled me then, and now, aside from what appears to be obvious -- that Regis was a 'Philby' - puns intended, is of course that he shouldn't have been there. Assigned at that time to New Orleans, his presence in Dallas on 11/22/63 would require some explanation from the Dame.

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/ToA/ToAappend.html

193 Pinewood Road

Hartsdale, NY 10530

November 24, 1978

Representative Louis Stokes

Select Committee on Assassinations

U.S. House of Representatives

3369 House Office Building, Annex 2

Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Louis:

I am still waiting for a reply to my letter of October 30,

1978. I thought I should write again to remind you that

the witnesses you should call in December are not going to

be around much longer. I'm afraid that Gorden Novel,

Richard Case Nagell, James Hosty and Warren de Brueys, in

particular may go the same way that Regis Kennedy, William

Sullivan, and George de Mohrenschildt went. You really

must call them before they die.

Regis Kennedy reportedly died of natural causes the day

before you were to talk with him. I do not believe that.

How many more key witnesses have to die before you would

be convinced? Kennedy, du Brueys and Hosty were Oswald's

points of contact in the FBI, receiving his reports on the

conspiratorial group planning JFK's assassination. I have

known this since 1971 directly from Hosty's own lips via

Carver Gaten and Jim Gochenaur. Regis Kennedy also knew

why the FBI was searching for Clay Shaw under his alias

Clay Bertrand in New Orleans, before Dean Andrews received

that phone call from him about defending Oswald. Kennedy

may also have been one of the three agents who took the

Babushka lady's film away from her. At least she told me

he was one of them from his photo.

So Regis Kennedy had to die. So do Warren du Brueys and

James Hosty. If they die of "natural causes" in the next

month or two, don't say I didn't warn you.

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/ToA/ToAchp16.html

There is a distinct possibility that Kennedy was sent by Hoover and Sullivan to Dallas immediately after the assassination, to help coordinate the FBI/CIA cover-up.

How immediately was immediately?

http://www.jfklancer.com/mobconnections.html

[Jack] Martin and [David] Lewis noted in their affidavit that Robert Kennedy had established his own secret channel of communication to communicate with Banister, by-passing J. Edgar Hoover and the local FBI Special Agent in Charge .

This FRD group, through Banister, was additionally serviced by an FBI Special Agent, Regis Kennedy, who we often met during this period at Banister's office. Sometimes, we would run into him several times a day. Banister once told [another of his investigators, Joseph] Newbrough and we that [Regis] Kennedy's daily reports on these activities were forwarded straight to one Assistant FBI Director Mohr, subservient only to John Edgar Hoover in Washington, always by-passing [Regis] Kennedy's own local Special Agent in Charge (resident agent) for numerous top-security reasons. From here [Washington], they were viewed by none other than Philby and RFK, the story goes.

Inasmuch as we were for many years associated with Banister, we had upon occasion engaged (independently) in some of these activities, cooperating with FRD and Dalzell operations. From time to time, our code names had been "El Gringo" and "Jauquin" during these periods.

Returning to the subject, RFK allegedly tendered several documents in the form of "Letters-Marques" giving "carte-blanche" status to any and all of those about to participate in this pending pseudo-legal hijacking. These were directed to all concerned to "seize munitions or arms, the property of a foreign government, that are illegally located within the US, which might otherwise be used against nations friendly to the US, using any and all means to do so." They, of course, supposedly bore the signature of none other than RFK himself, because they were issued on Justice Department Attorney General's letterhead stationery.

Needless to say, as we recall it, everyone was overjoyed by this prospective arms hijacking. Furthermore, someone had said that either the FBI or CIA were to supply the keys to pull this "job" (robbery), so no locks would be broken.

Later on that following afternoon, we heard Banister talking over the telephone to who we were told was a Mr M.E. Loy, the South-Eastern Manager of Schlumberger in New Orleans. (Loy at this writing is the President of all Schlumberger incorporations here in the US, whose home office is in Houston, Texas.) This conversation was in regard to the pending Schlumberger operation. Banister seemed to be setting the time and date, like H hour and D date. In short, they of the Schlumberger company knew that we were coming in the fake bakery truck. ....

That evening, FBI Agent Kennedy made his daily appearance at Banister's office as usual. It was about this time that the Letters-Marque and the keys showed up. No one ever said that Agent Kennedy brought them, but they did come to light shortly after he had left.

Anyway, the story goes that it was in the dark of night that the very "chosen people" hijacked those munitions at the Houma Schlumberger bunker, transported, and stored them in their designated location, the storage area ajoining Banister's office. The following day, everyone in the "know" came to look and gloat. Boy, ol' Castro should sure catch hell now! ....

Well, at any rate, it appears that after the Houma bunker haul, Philby and company may have progressed in activity. We say this because later the next evening, apparently some other band of thieves filched those promised arms and munitions from the safety of their hiding place at Banister's office. However, no robbery report was made, nor search launched for them. Banister was ordered to do nothing about this matter and to remain silent, as were the rest of us so instructed.

Some bastard about this time circulated the rumor (we understand that it was believed by all or most of the Cubans) that Dr Arcacha had either sold or had given away these arms and munitions to the pro-Castro Cubans or others. So he engineered another hijacking of his own. On this, they only found low-yield projectiles looking like small aerial bombs, but with not much explosive power. However, the Cubans thought they were for real and feated Arcacha to a blow-out in one of the local hotels (St Charles) to celebrate the occasion. Although a few days later, they (the Cubans) found out that these were oil-well equipment or exploration low-yield explosive units. With this, the Cubans really believed that they'd been crossed, and Arcacha left town immediately in fear of his life. ....

Now, what happened, and where did they [the stolen arms] go? It seems that there were some others, a bunch of discontented people, who just wanted to take over Guatemala using these weapons far more than we needed them to give the "works" to Castro. Thus, via Philby and company, General Ydigoras went out of office, and Guatemala had a completely new political administration. Somebody fulfilled the vendetta for the Carlos Marcello caper in spades! JFK had gotten his revenge one way or another. ....

This left Dr Cardona's Frente under the total command of Arcacha's former assistant, Carlos Quiroga. He claims to be an avid anti-Communist. We believe he protests far too much upon this subject. Hence, we did some checking. Quiroga says he left Cuba just at the time his father was arrested and imprisoned within the Isle of Pines near Havana. Our sources inform us that Quiroga's father may have been assisted into confinement by none other than Quiroga himself, just as he is said to have assisted Arcacha to be removed. He is truly an assistant, however, according to our information. Moreover, it is highly speculative that this subject, Quiroga, may well be as Philby, a double agent. [text rearranged slightly into chronological order; punctuation fixed] [unquote]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...