Jack Ruby's Dog

[Tony Austin]

Ron, I enjoyed reading your article. A few months ago I wrote an article on the same subject but because of various things going on in my life ( eg my wife having a baby! ) I never got around to having it published or put on a web site. Having read your article I thought it was about time I presented my article in which I put forward my own theory as to what was going on with Jack Ruby's dog. It is quite long so I am putting it on tonight as a new thread with the title "The Tale of Jack Ruby's Dog" and I would be interested to know what you (and other forum members) think of it.

Best wishes, Tony Austin

[Ron Ecker]

Tony,

I look forward to reading your article.

BTW I can't stand the kind of dog that Ruby had. Two of those little yelpers live next door to me.

Ruby and Sheba deserved each other.

Ron

[Greg Parker]

Ron,

Just an aside regarding carpark attendant, Theodore Jackson. Quite an interesting guy. A Korean War veteran who was taken prisoner in 1951. Released in an exchange in 1953. Jackson died in 1973 in a Dallas hospital. Have not been able to find out the cause.

I am still trying to figure out if John L. Daniels was the same John L. Daniels (Dallas resident) who in 1953 was a First Lt. with the 82nd Airborne Division at Fort Bragg.

And if he was the same John L. Daniels who in 1976 was busted in a Dallas motel room with a gram of heroin. The ages of the three possibles match regarding the 1953, 1963 and 1976 time line.

I think background is always important to the context of what is being said, or in some cases, what is not being said.

James

James, I have a great interest in the Korean POW "brainwashing" investigations and recommendations, so this really caught my eye enough to see what else might be found about Jackson.

His service number was RA38416335, and he was from Anderson, Texas at the time of enlistment.

He was wounded in battle and evacuated for medical treatment on Nov 30, 1950, but was "returned to military control" the very next day.

The part of real interest however, is that after his capture, he was one of many who collaborated with the enemy in a propaganda exercise - the POW Olympics held Nov 15 to 27, 1952. This had most of the normal track and field events, please some team sports, and other events like boxing, wrestling etc. He was listed under "entertainment" (presumably for opening and closing ceremonies).

I could well imagine that if this collaboration was known, he might easily be manipulated into a little perjury. Though obviously I don't know that he was manipulated, some of his testimony sure puzzle me. More on that in a later post.

I do have one question on what you posted. Date of death. How sure are you? Unless there was another Korean POW named Theodore Jackson, I have his death listed as Dec 28, 2002.

[James Richards]

Greg,

Yes, the thought of manipulation had occured to me regarding Jackson. Curious indeed.

As to his death, I dug up this obit. Have I got the wrong guy?

James

[Greg Parker]

Greg,

Yes, the thought of manipulation had occured to me regarding Jackson. Curious indeed.

As to his death, I dug up this obit. Have I got the wrong guy?

James

James, all I can say for sure is that this is highly unlikely to be the same Theodore Jackson as the one I've mentioned. Your guy is most likely the one who became a car park attendant. On reflection, I think you may have conflated information about the TJ who was a POW with the one here.

The one I found is listed at http://www.koreanwarexpow.org/images/KPOW06_2006.pdf. with the date of death as previously indicated.

Your guy was a native of Rice, Navarro County who moved to Dallas in '43 and is the right age for car park guy. I don't have an age or DOB for my guy, but he was a native of (or at least enlisted from) Palestine in Anderson County. His rank in the army had been Corporal.

Maybe you can get further clarification?

[James Richards]

Greg,

Okay, I went back and checked all my notes and I have indeed given the wrong date for his death. I posted the wrong obit for the Theodore Jackson we are interested in. That man's mother is listed as being Mary Jackson where 'our' Theodore Jackson's mother's name was Maggie Davidson.

I apologize for the sloppy work.

Anyway, this is the correct Theodore Jackson below. Back on track now.

James

[Greg Parker]

Greg,

Okay, I went back and checked all my notes and I have indeed given the wrong date for his death. I posted the wrong obit for the Theodore Jackson we are interested in. That man's mother is listed as being Mary Jackson where 'our' Theodore Jackson's mother's name was Maggie Davidson.

I apologize for the sloppy work.

Anyway, this is the correct Theodore Jackson below. Back on track now.

James

Thanks James. No need for apologies. It's something of a relief to find out you're a mere mortal, after all! Besides, I actually think you nailed the right guy the first time. You just conflated some of his background with that of the other guy who had been the Korean POW.

Your first guy was the right age, and did live in Dallas. The other guy might have been be the right age, and may have lived in Dallas... but so far, I have no evidence to support either. He was definitely a POW, but I can't find anything to suggest there was another POW with the same name.

[Greg Parker]

Greg,

There you go again! Thanks for the input, which I will take in order:

In that original thread, I said, "Maybe, just maybe, someone slipped Sheba INTO the car." In your revised article, you have added, "It is quite possible, by the way, that someone slipped Sheba into the car after Ruby headed for the DPD."

Well if I got that idea from you, and apparently I did, I will add a footnote to credit you accordingly.

it still hasn't plumbed all that can be plumbed.

If there are other things in addition to the following, I'd plumb like to know what they are.

There is the testimony of John L Daniels,

Just read it. How did I miss him? Did we discuss Daniels? Anyway, he corroborates Jackson's testimony that they took the car away with the dog still in it. At first blush this would indicate that Lt. Smart lied under oath when he said they had a squad come pick the dog up and take it to the animal shelter. But Griffin gave him an out with his questioning.

Mr. GRIFFIN. Where was the dog when you got to the car?

Mr. SMART. The dog had crawled under a newspaper in the front seat.

Mr. GRIFFIN. And what did you do with the dog when you got in?

Mr. SMART. We had the squad come by and get it and take it to the animal shelter.

Was Smart lying? It depends on what "got in" means. It obviously reads like Griffin meant when he got in the car. But Smart could have taken it to mean what did he do when he got back to DPD (as when someone "gets in to work"), particularly if that is when he had the dog picked up. And it really doesn’t make much sense for Griffin to ask "what did you do with the dog when you got in" the car. "Did you pet it? Did you say 'good doggie' to it?”

questions on the ticket issued by the attendant

Can you elaborate?

Ron, a lot rides on what was the "norm" in '63. This was a "for profit" business, yet if Jackson is to be believed the place was open, but unattended until midday. Hubert tried to get to the bottom of how they were making any money with an arrangement like this, but to no avail:

Mr. HUBERT. How can a person park on your lot without there being any attendant there?

Mr. JACKSON. Well, they pull in and leave their car, and take the key and lock it up if you are not there.

Mr. HUBERT. Was there anybody on duty before you got there?

Mr. JACKSON. No, sir; I unlocked the door and opened up.

Mr. HUBERT. Opened up? Well, the parking lot is not a closed parking lot?

Mr. JACKSON. No, sir; it is open 7 days a week.

Mr. HUBERT. It is an open lot so that when you unlocked the door, what do you mean?

Mr. JACKSON. The office door.

Mr. HUBERT. Are there any chains or anything to keep a person from driving right on in so that before anyone comes on duty any person can drive in and leave his car?

Mr. JACKSON. Drive in and leave it.

Mr. HUBERT. And if they depart before one of the attendants comes, well, then, they don't pay anything?

Mr. JACKSON. They pay it when they get back. I put a ticket on the car.

Mr. HUBERT. No, you misunderstood me. If they leave before you get there, then, of course, you----

Mr. JACKSON. No, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. There would be no payment, but if you find a car there when you get there----

Mr. JACKSON. If it is not monthly.

Mr. HUBERT. Someone that pays by the month and those cars you would recognize, or have some sort of a seal on them to indicate that they pay by the month?

Mr. JACKSON. Yes, I know.

Mr. HUBERT. You know the cars?

Mr. JACKSON. Yes.

Mr. HUBERT. Mr. Ruby did not park by the month there?

Mr. JACKSON. No, sir.

Mr. HUBERT. When you came up and saw this car did you put a ticket on it?

Mr. JACKSON. I put a ticket on it.

Mr. HUBERT. Were there any other cars parked in the lot?

Mr. JACKSON. Yes, sir; about, oh, I guess about six--about six more besides his, five or six more, I disremember.

Mr. HUBERT. Now, and you put a ticket on the car, did you notice whether the car was open, or closed?

Mr. JACKSON. No, sir; I didn't. I just looked at the car and the key was gone. The keys wasn't in the switch, and I just got a ticket, just stamped the ticket and put it on the windshield.

Clear as mud how that worked? Since there are theories being thrown around, here's mine admittedly based largely on a couple of assumptions. Jackson falsely claimed he arrived at noon but didn't know Daniels was also primed to lie about it (he too, claimed a noon arrival) and said Daniels was already there. In this lie, he also failed to take into account how many cars were actually there at noon, and instead told Hubert the number there at the (much earlier) time he'd actually arrived - about 6 including Ruby's.

Why lie about his time of arrival? Because of the TIME stamped ticket he placed on the car. This ticket should have been taken as evidence because it would have cleared up for all time just when Ruby arrived. It wasn't taken. It was given back to Jackson. As a result, WC supporters rely heavily upon the time stamped Western Union paperwork as the best indicator of when he arrived. Poppycock! All it proves is when he sent the money...

-- as well as much evidence that supports the notion that the Carlins lied through their teeth about the urgent need for money.

I didn't go into whether or not the Carlins were lying because I don't see it as relevant. As I state in the article, Ruby did not need any phone call from Carlin as an excuse to wind up at DPD. If Ruby supposedly walked on the spur of the moment from Western Union to DPD, he could have just as well driven on the spur of the moment to DPD, parking right where he did or somewhere else, instead of driving straight to the club. Oswald's transfer was made into a much anticipated media event, and it would be understandable if Ruby drove down to see it.

Goddamn it Ron. I see in the other pooch thread you're doing a backflip and now support the notion the sending of the money was to skirt premeditation... so it's another point we can now say we agree on?

But in the end, it's your article. You're the one who has to be happy with it.

I wouldn't say I'm "happy" with it at all. I debated with myself whether or not to put it online again because of its marginal value to the JFK case. I just hate to see effort go to waste.

So do I. I don't think it was wasted effort - nor do I think it has only marginal value. You and Tony should collaborate and combine both pieces (assuming you can reach agreement on all key areas )

[Greg Parker]

Ron,

Your article states, "...it was cool that late November morning, with Oswald given a sweater to wear for his transfer..."

Just thought I'd share something I just stumbled on while looking for another story. This is an AP story run by the Ada Evening News on 11/25/63:

"Some 200 newsmen and officials gathered in a basement ramp leading from a City Hall elevator to a driveway outside. Other curious spectators stood in bright sunshine to await Oswald's emergence."

I can't say if that's accurate or not, but if it is, it's hard to imagine the dog not being in terrible shape - if not dead - by the time of it's alleged rescue. Possibly crawling under the newspapers kept it a bit cooler... but even so...

I also want to underline Jackson's testimony of how many cars were in the lot when he arrived. He claimed 6 or 7 including Ruby's. I seriously question how this could be with about 200 newsman over at City Hall, and a crowd out on the street. The number given seems more like an accurate figure for earlier in the morning. But this would mean Jackson lied about what time he arrived -- and a cover-up of what time was stamped on Ruby's ticket.

Edited May 20, 2007 by Greg Parker

[Duke Lane]

A couple of years ago I put an article online called "Jack Ruby's Dog." Ruby leaving his dog Sheba in his car when he went to shoot Oswald supposedly suggests that the shooting was a spontaneous act. The question is did Ruby really leave Sheba in his car, or was the dog planted in the car later, or was the dog never in the car at all. ....

This is just a little off-topic, but I happened to run across it and thought it an interesting addition to the discussion.

In his 1966 Whitewash II: The FBI-Secret Service Coverup, Harold Weisberg discussed (pp 48-49) Oswald's relationship with the FBI and noted allegations apparently originating from Houston newspaper reporter Alonzo "Lonnie" Hudkins, including that of Oswald having an "informant number (179)" and being paid by the FBI as part of its "payroll" at the rate of $200/month at the time of his death.

"There is further information from Hudkins in the [Warren] Commission's files," Weisberg notes, "and it relates to another of the pressing questions about the assassination and the investigation of it: how Jack Ruby fits into the entire picture." He cites a "second Hudkins document" dated December 11, 1963, reporting "an interview of the previous day." Weisberg goes on to say:

In the document the Secret Service reports that Ruby customarily traveled armed with a guh; that it was common knowledge that he was usually armed; that he was recognized and known to have no business in the police station [on November 22-23]; that, to his lawyer's knowledge, he was armed and present the night of Oswald's so-called "press conference" [see

Whitewash

66-68, 88];

and that this lawyer, Tom Howard, "arrived at the County Sheriff's Office for the purpose of obtaining the release of Ruby two minutes before Oswald was delivered to the hospital.

"

This document is to be found in the fifth folder of File 87, folio 640 in a five-volume USSS Report forwarded to the WC on January 8, 1964, and duplicated in WC File 81, page 326, from the Texas Attorney General. The quotations may be Hudkins' allegations, or they may be a report of an actual event, so I'll only call it "interesting" at this point.

EDIT: On page 91 of WW2, Weisberg quotes this report: He [Hudkins] states that one thing occurred while he was at the County Jail which was significant to him. He states that Attorney Tom Howard, who was allegedly at the Police Department at the time of the shotting, arrived at the County Sheriff's office for the purpose of obtaining a writ for the release of Ruby two minutes before Oswald was delivered to the hospital. It does not indicate how Hudkins, likewise at the Sheriff's Office at the same time, knew what time Oswald had arrived at Parkland, or why he had noted the time that Howard arrived at DCSO. (Weisberg's point, however, is that it was a claim that the WC knew about but did not investigate.) END EDIT.

Oswald was shot at 11:21 a.m. CST, an event that was broadcast live, with only as much as an eight-second delay. I don't know offhand the exact time he arrived at Parkland, but figure it couldn't take much more than 10 minutes, and possibly much less at a high rate of speed, sirens blaring. Today's Yahoo maps puts it at 4.2 miles and 9 minutes using the Woodall Rogers (which I don't believe was in operation back then) and Stemmons Freeways, or 3.6 miles and 10 minutes using city streets.

If LHO arrived at Parkland at 11:30 sharp, that would put Tom Howard at the Sheriff's Office at 11:28, seven minutes after his client had shot someone on live television. That's seven minutes not only to make the trip, but first to notice what had happened, recognize his client, assimilate what had happened, possibly get dressed (or at least get a jacket on?), go to his car, start it, and then drive from wherever he'd been watching TV (his home? where was that?) to the downtown Sheriff's Office. Or it means that Howard was not at all far from DCSO, "in place" as it were to secure his client's release immediately following his act of murder.

EDIT: Apparently, Howard was at DPD at the time of the shooting, at least according to Hudkins's report to the USSS. If that is so - is there other indication that DPD is indeed where Howard was? - then he was but 9/10 mile and 3 minutes away, plenty of time to get from DPD to DCSO, as well as to get to his car, etc., if it was parked nearby. That he could manage that, however, doesn't speak well of the tightness of the post-shooting security at DPD if Howard was also in the basement area! END EDIT.

There is the long-standing presumption that Jack Ruby thought he'd be hailed as a hero for killing Oswald and would not be charged with a crime, or that being so charged, would be released quickly and never stand trial. While we know this not to have been the case, if that was in fact Ruby's presumption, then his leaving his dog in his car could well have been based on the presumption that the dog wouldn't be alone for long. (The average daily temperature in Dallas for November is only about 66°F, so it was in no way "cruel" to have left the dog in a sweltering car, since it would probably be reasonably cool inside.)

If the Hudkins allegation is true, and Tom Howard was at DCSO two minutes before Oswald arrived at Parkland - even ten minutes after the shooting - it strongly suggests that Ruby had, in fact, premeditated the murder (or been put up to it, as may well have been the case ... more on that some other time) and taken steps to ensure his timely release, to wit, having his attorney present to quickly post bail.

But alas, even the best laid plans of mice and men oft go awry! Did Jack ever see Sheba again?

Edited May 24, 2007 by Duke Lane

[James Richards]

In his 1966 Whitewash II: The FBI-Secret Service Coverup, Harold Weisberg discussed (pp 48-49) Oswald's relationship with the FBI and noted allegations apparently originating from Houston newspaper reporter Alonzo "Lonnie" Hudkins, including that of Oswald having an "informant number (179)" and being paid by the FBI as part of its "payroll" at the rate of $200/month at the time of his death. (Duke Lane)

Duke,

In 1975, Hudkins said that he and two other Dallas men fabricated the Oswald/FBI story as a means to determine if their telephones were being tapped. Hudkins said he had no idea if Oswald worked for the FBI or not.

The story and the so-called ficticious FBI number appeared in a column written by Dorothy Kilgallen and Hudkins said he decided to come clean after the allegations were reapeated in a network television documentary.

Ex CIA man, George O'Toole also made mention of the FBI connection in a book he wrote and said Hudkins got the Oswald/FBI link from DPD officer Allan Sweatt.

FWIW.

James

[Duke Lane]

In his 1966 Whitewash II: The FBI-Secret Service Coverup, Harold Weisberg discussed (pp 48-49) Oswald's relationship with the FBI and noted allegations apparently originating from Houston newspaper reporter Alonzo "Lonnie" Hudkins, including that of Oswald having an "informant number (179)" and being paid by the FBI as part of its "payroll" at the rate of $200/month at the time of his death. (Duke Lane)

Duke,

In 1975, Hudkins said that he and two other Dallas men fabricated the Oswald/FBI story as a means to determine if their telephones were being tapped. Hudkins said he had no idea if Oswald worked for the FBI or not.

The story and the so-called ficticious FBI number appeared in a column written by Dorothy Kilgallen and Hudkins said he decided to come clean after the allegations were reapeated in a network television documentary.

Ex CIA man, George O'Toole also made mention of the FBI connection in a book he wrote and said Hudkins got the Oswald/FBI link from DPD officer Allan Sweatt.

FWIW.

James

Thanks. Knew that part, the reason for posting this was the Tom Howard story.

Further to your point, however, I'm wondering if I recall correctly that the story actually began with Hugh Aynesworth ... if I recall what Hugh had said about this at one point. I think it had something to do with Hudkins being a fly in everyone's ointment, and Aynesworth wanting him to "bug off," so concocted this story for Hudkins' benefit, and came up with the "179" number off of something on his desk (a calendar?).