JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[Fiver]

Read my earlier post. Brennan in his ghost written account (1987) said no such thing. He made no comment on race, height, weight or clothing when he first approached police at 12.35. Everything else was added afterwards, possibly after Oswald was actually in custody.

Here's from the police radio.

Dispatcher Yes, 12:44 p.m.
9 (Inspector J.H. Sawyer) The type of weapon looked like a 30-30 rifle or some type of Winchester.
Dispatcher 9, it was a rifle?
9 A rifle, yes.
Dispatcher 9, any clothing description?
9 About 30, 5'10", 165 pounds.

And from testimony.

Mr. BELIN. Now the next time that No. 9 appears is at what time?
Mr. SAWYER. Immediately after 12:43 and before 12:45.
Mr. BELIN. What did you say then?
Mr. SAWYER. "The wanted person in this is a slender white male about 30, 5 feet 10, 165, carrying what looks to be a 30-30 or some type of Winchester."
Mr. BELIN. Then the statement is made from the home office, "It was a rifle?"
Mr. SAWYER. I answered, "Yes, a rifle."
Mr. BELIN. Then the reply to you, "Any clothing description?"
Mr. SAWYER. "Current witness can't remember that."

[cobalt]

Howard Brennan saw the shooter describing him as a "white male, approximately thirty, slender build, height five feet ten inches, 165 pounds".

Read my earlier post. Brennan in his ghost written account (1987) said no such thing. He made no comment on race, height, weight or clothing when he first approached police at 12.35. Everything else was added afterwards, possibly after Oswald was actually in custody.

We know that Brennan, by his own admission, was a nervous man. I think that is a fair assessment of his character.

[Herlock Sholmes]

So 7 people saw a person-rifle in the 6th floor window George.

How many saw a gunman elsewhere?

[Herlock Sholmes]

You are misremembering. Oswald's dark jacket was found in the first floor lunch room. Oswald leaving without his jacket is, at best, extremely odd if he was innocent.

Thanks Fiver. It’s entirely possible though that Oswald took off his jacket whilst firing but my main point to George would be that in a darkened window it would have been his light shirt that stood out to anyone looking in.

[Fiver]

Perhaps Fiver might provide the list of those that saw someone in the 6th floor window?

Again?

After the first shot, several people spotted the rifle in the sixth story window of the Book depository - Robert Jackson, Malcom Couch, James Crawford, Mrs Earle Cabell, James Worrell, and Amos Euins. Howard Brennan saw the shooter describing him as a "white male, approximately thirty, slender build, height five feet ten inches, 165 pounds".

[Fiver]

You mention his dark jacket but you conveniently forget to mention that the jacket was left on the 6th floor by Oswald. Therefore he had taken it off.

You are misremembering. Oswald's dark jacket was found in the first floor lunch room. Oswald leaving without his jacket is, at best, extremely odd if he was innocent.

[Fiver]

There were several clicks heard as someone was trying to shoot someone, but the revolver had a bent firing pin and could not be discharged. Remarkable for a revolver that had allegedly fired 4 shots into Tippet.

It would be remarkable if it were correct. Virtually all of the witnesses heard only one click and the revolver worked in all test firings by ballistic experts.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Cunningham, to focus this line of questioning, Officer McDonald, who has reported that he was in a struggle with Lee Harvey Oswald on November 22d, while Oswald was in possession of this revolver, has stated that--I am reading now from an affidavit, from a letter from Officer McDonald to Mr. J. E. Curry, chief of police of the Dallas Police Force, dated December 3, 1963.
He states in this letter that as he came in contact with Oswald, "I managed to get my right hand on the pistol over the suspect's hand. I could feel his hand on the trigger. I then got a secure grip on the butt of the pistol. I jerked the pistol and as it was clearing the suspect's clothing and grip, I heard the snap of the hammer, and the pistol crossed over my left cheek. I marked the pistol and six rounds at central station. The primer of one round was dented on misfire at the time of the struggle with the suspect."
Now, in light of your examination of this weapon, and your discussion, could you comment on this statement?
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I personally have fired this weapon numerous times, as well as Special Agents Robert Frazier and Charles Killion. At no time did we ever attempt to fire this weapon that it misfired. It operated excellently and every time we have tried to fire it, it has fired.
It is very possible when he says that he reached across, and he grabbed it, that he locked the cylinder, which I think any trained police officer would do. You want to stop this cylinder from rotating. As soon as you do that, you have actually stepped the hammer falling on a live round, because if the hammer is allowed to go forward again, and it hasn't gotten into the cocked position, the rebound slide, as I was stating before, would block the firing pin from striking the primer of the cartridge.

Mr. EDGAR. Thank you.
Regarding CE-143, Oswald's revolver, do your test-fired bullets match, microscopically, with CE-602, 603, 604, and 605?
Mr. LUTZ. Are these the bullets that were recovered from Officer Tippit?
Mr. EDGAR. These were the bullets that were recovered from the body of Officer Tippit.
Mr. LUTZ. Our microscopic examination and comparison of these bullets failed to positively identify this revolver as the one that fired those bullets. We did find the class characteristics that were present, the number of lands and grooves, the width of those lands and grooves, to be the same. However, the individual characteristics were not present in sufficient quantities that we could say that that revolver and no other revolver fired them.
Mr. EDGAR. Can you describe whether this is a traditional problem and why?
Mr. LUTZ. It is not an uncommon problem. The problems being in this case we are dealing with a revolver that has been fired numerous times, by all reports that we have received, the condition of the revolver itself is not new, and there is all indications of considerable wear involving the rifling, the chambers of the cylinder have been bored out to accept the longer .38 special cartridge as opposed to the shorter but larger diameter .38 S&W cartridges. So that these in conjuction with the gas erosion,
the firing of the lead bullets, not picking up and not retaining enough striations and as a result of going through or into a body and obliterating some of those markings that we could not identify them positively.
Mr. EDGAR. Didn't you say earlier that the firing pin impressions on your test-fired cartridge cases matched the ones recovered at the scene of the murder?
Mr. LUTZ. Yes, sir; we did.

[Fiver]

Many witnesses saw the scuffle but how many testified that they actually saw Oswald pull the revolver?

Now lets look at the police testimony.

Mr. McDONALD - Yes. I went at him with this hand, and I believe I struck him on the face, but I don't know where. And with my hand, that was on his hand over the pistol.
Mr. BALL - Did you feel the pistol?
Mr. McDONALD - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - Which hand was--was his right hand or his left hand on the pistol?
Mr. McDONALD - His right hand was on the pistol.
Mr. BALL - And which of your hands?
Mr. McDONALD - My left hand, at this point.
Mr. BALL - And had he withdrawn the pistol
Mr. McDONALD - He was drawing it as I put my hand.
Mr. BALL - From his waist?
Mr. McDONALD - Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. I mean, were Oswald and McDonald struggling together?
Mr. CARROLL. Yes, sir; and then when I got up close enough, I saw a pistol pointing at me so I reached and grabbed the pistol and jerked the pistol away and stuck it In my belt, and then I grabbed Oswald.
Mr. BALL. Who had hold of that pistol at that time?
Mr. CARROLL. I don't know, sir. I just saw the pistol pointing at me and I grabbed it and jerked it away from whoever had it and that's all, and by that time then the handcuffs were put on Oswald.

Mr. BALL. What was Officer McDonald doing at that time?
Mr. HAWKINS. I remember seeing him standing beside Oswald, and when I arrived where they were, both of them were down in the seat--Oswald and McDonald had both fallen down into the seat, and very shortly after I got there, a gun was pulled, came out of Oswald's belt and was pulled across to their right, or toward the south aisle of the theatre.
Officer McDonald grabbed the pistol, and the best I can remember, Sergeant Hill, who had gotten there, said, "I've got the gun," and he took the gun and we handcuffed Oswald.
Mr. BALL. Did you hear any snap of the hammer?
Mr. HAWKINS. I heard something that I thought was a snap. I didn't know whether it was a snap of a pistol--I later learned that they were sure it was.
I didn't know whether it was a snap of the gun or whether it was in the seats someone making the noise.

Mr. HUTSON. McDonald was at this time simultaneously trying to hold this person's right hand. Somehow this person moved his right hand to his waist, and I saw a revolver come out, and McDonald was holding on to it with his right hand, and this gun was waving up toward the back of the seat like this.
Mr. BELIN. Now you had your left hand, or was it McDonald's left hand, on the suspect's right hand?
Mr. HUTSON. McDonald was using both of his hands to hold onto this person's right hand.
Mr. BELIN. Okay.
Mr. HUTSON. And the gun was waving around towards the back of the seat, up and down, and I heard a snapping sound at one time.
Mr. BELIN. What kind of snapping sound was it?
Mr. HUTSON. Sounded like the snap of a pistol, to me, when a pistol snaps.
Mr. BELIN. Do you know which way the pistol was pointing when you heard the snap?
Mr. HUTSON. Was pointing toward the back of the seat.

Mr. BELIN. When you saw Oswald's hand by his belt, which hand did you see then?
Mr. WALKER. He had ahold of the handle of it.
Mr. BELIN. Handle of what?
Mr. WALKER. The revolver.
Mr. BELIN. Was there a revolver there?
Mr. WALKER. Yes; there was.
Mr. BELIN. All right.
Mr. WALKER. And it stayed there for a second or two. He didn't get it out. McDonald had come forward and was holding his hand. Ray Hawkins was behind me to my left at that time, and whether or not he came at the same time we did or not, but he was there, and there was a detective. Oswald had ahold of my shirt and he practically pulled off my nameplate by ripping it with his hand. and I was bent over, and I was in an awkward position, and I could see severall hands on the gun. The gun finally got out of his belt, and it was about waist high and pointed out at about a 45 degree angle. I turned around and I was holding Oswald trying to get his arm up behind him in a hammeriock, and I heard it click. I turned around and the gun was still pointing at approximately a 45 angle. Be pointed slightly toward the screen, what I call. Now Hawkins was in the general direction of the gun.
Mr. BELIN. When you heard a click, what kind of click was it?
Mr. WALKER. A real light click, real light.
Mr. BELIN. Was it a click of the seat?
Mr. WALKER. Well, I assume it was a click at a revolver on the shell

[Fiver]

Many witnesses saw the scuffle but how many testified that they actually saw Oswald pull the revolver?

Three civilian witnesses testified that they saw Oswald with a pistol in his hand try to shoot the police.

George Jefferson Applin, Jr. He worked at a service station.
"this boy took a swing at the officer and then the next thing I could see was this boy had his arm around the officer's left shoulder and had a pistol in his hand. I heard the pistol snap at least once."

Johnny Calvin Brewer. he was assistant manager at a shoe store.
Mr. BREWER - McDonald was back up. He just knocked him down for a second and he was back up. And I jumped off the stage and was walking toward that, and I saw this gun come up and----in Oswald's hand, a gun up in the air.
Mr. BELIN - Did you see from where the gun came?
Mr. BREWER - No.
Mr. BELIN - You saw the gun up in the air?
Mr. BREWER - And somebody hollered "He's got a gun." And there were a couple of officers fighting him and taking the gun away from him, and they took the gun from him, and he was fighting, still fighting, and I heard some of the police holier, I don't know who it was, "Kill the President, will you." And I saw fists flying and they were hitting him.

John Gibson. He managed a camera store.
Mr. BALL. What was he doing?
Mr. GIBSON. Well, he had this pistol in his hand.
Mr. BALL. Was anybody near him?
Mr. GIBSON. Just the officers.
Mr. BALL. What was the officer doing--did you say officers or police officer?
Mr. GIBSON. Officers.
Mr. BALL. Plural, officers?
Mr. GIBSON. Yes; there were more than one.
Mr. BALL. What were they doing?
Mr. GIBSON. Well, they were going toward him.
Mr. BALL. Did they have ahold of him at the time?
Mr. GIBSON. No; I don't believe so.
Mr. BALL. Did anyone have ahold of him at that time?
Mr. GIBSON. I don't think so.
Mr. BALL. Did you see any officer grab hold of Oswald?
Mr. GIBSON. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Which one can you describe where he was and what he did--just tell us in your own words what you saw him do?
Mr. GIBSON. Well, just like I guess you have heard this a lot of times--the gun misfired--it clicked and about the same time there was one police officer that positively had him.

They may not have specifically testified that Oswald drew the gun, but how else could it have ended up in his hand?

[cobalt]

Originally posted by cobalt

Brennan also offered up a couple of interesting observations. Regarding the line up, he was asked by a Dallas officer, 'Does the guy standing second from the left look the the man you saw?' Not much quality control in evidence there.

(Fiver)

That is not an accurate summary.

What I wrote was an accurate summary of the account published by Brennan's ghost writer in 1987. It's obvious that the WC would not have welcomed such a detail in their own questioning. Brennan at the WC thought there were 6 or 7 men in the ID line up he attended; the evidence is that there were only ever 4, so this point was obviously not pursued by the WC either.

As I have acknowledged there are problems with a ghost written account but it was Brennan who wanted such an account to be laid before the public to set the record straight. Brennan trusted his pastor to deliver a fair and accurate account of what he experienced that day.
The 1987 account has Brennan swiftly approaching policemen, both uniformed and plain clothes, and offering his description of the man he saw on the 6th floor. His memory is that he detailed a man 25-35, about average height with receding dark hair. He didn't at this point state race (presumably white unless stated otherwise), weight or clothing. This was being blurted out within 5 minutes of the shooting and for obvious reasons no one was in a position to write down what he said, but this sketchy description strikes me as an honest attempt to help the police. He would have been asked to repeat this description to various LE officials until he was identified by Forrest Sorrels, Secret Serviceman for Dallas area, as a key witness - although this could not have happened before 12.55 at the earliest. Brennan was then taken to the police station to make a signed statement in the early afternoon.

Yet at 12.45 Inspector Sawyer broadcast an ID of a possible suspect over police radio which added a couple of details to Brennan's original account. The age is reasonably enough averaged out to '30 years old' but we have the race (white), build (slender) accompanied by an estimation of height (5'10) and weight (165lbs). Did this additional information come from Brennan as he recalled more about what he had seen? In a ten minute period when other members of the public were swarming the police trying to assist?

Well it certainly chimes with the signed statement Brennan made that afternoon but the 1987 account in 'Eyewitness to History' does not specify when these extra details came to his mind. However Inspector Sawyer had no memory of who gave him the description, understandable since the bush telegraph would have been in full swing at that time. And in a letter to Rankine, one of the WC lawyers from memory, J. Edgar Hoover said that he did not believe Brenna to be the source of the police bulletin description broadcast at 12.45. The suspicion is that Brennan's signed statement was influenced by what he heard from other members of the public and police officers after 12.35.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Let's reduce this to a simple question. Regardless of what Brennan may have assumed, do you believe that it was physically possible for a gunman to make the shots through the open window on the 6th floor of the TSBD from a standing position?

Of course not. He simply made an assumption that the guy was standing which most people would have done because most windows aren’t so low to the floor.

[GBinOz]

If Fishy was posting I wonder if he’d be getting angry over you calling Brennan a liar. The idea that he lied is a joke I’m afraid George. Especially considering the line up of clowns, loonies and fantasists that the conspiracy side rely on as witnesses.

Let's reduce this to a simple question. Regardless of what Brennan may have assumed, do you believe that it was physically possible for a gunman to make the shots through the open window on the 6th floor of the TSBD from a standing position?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Just to address this nonsense individually. He can assume all he likes but the fact is the shooter wasn't standing and Brennan should have observed him getting up from a prone position, contrary to his assumption. But Brennan's fantasy has him standing and "Very slowly and deliberately he set the rifle on its butt and just stayed there for a moment to savor what he had done, like a hunter who had "bagged his buck." Then, with no sense of haste, he simply moved slowly away from the window until he disappeared from my line of vision".

You can't have it both ways. Brennan only assumed he was standing? But didn't observe that he actually wasn't standing in the fact that the actual gunman, who can't have been standing, had to get up if Brennan's observations were actually based on fact rather than fantasy.

If Fishy was posting I wonder if he’d be getting angry over you calling Brennan a liar. The idea that he lied is a joke I’m afraid George. Especially considering the line up of clowns, loonies and fantasists that the conspiracy side rely on as witnesses.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I am disappointed that you have avoided every question and just given a reply that cites a description that is wrong in every aspect as "a very reasonable description of Oswald". I didn't realise that asking that one detail of a description be correct is "nitpicking". You follow up with the standard nonsense list of debunked apologist pejoratives regarding Oswald that would do Bugliosi proud. Unable to debate actual issues, you call on the resident master of deception to come to your aid.

I expected a higher standard of debate from you my friend.

Not one thing on that list has been debunked George. All that has happened is that those on the conspiracy side have spent years finding ever more complex ways of trying to discredit evidence. That Oswald tried to assassinate Walker comes from Marina herself. His action before the assassination, going earlier to the Paine’s, leaving the cash and his ring etc) are beyond question. That he carried a large package to work is proven by the Fraziers (apart from attempts to discredit them or to quibble over why Randle’s couldn’t give precise measurements - he carried a large package and they weren’t curtain rods) So done was seen at a window where CT’s say no one was there, the rifle was his, the prints were his, he did flee and jump from bus to taxi, he did pass the correct bus stop, he did get the taxi driver to drop him a distance from his room and he did kill Tippit. Nothing that the conspiracy side says on these issues is remotely believable.

Oswald was guilty. All else should be dismissed. I can’t understand how people like yourself and others have fallen for this fantasy George. I really don’t. Such a large conspiracy involving so many people and agencies couldn’t have happened. And I’m not saying that it was unlikely George. Or that it’s doubtful. I’m stating full on that it is totally 100% impossible. Such a conspiracy cannot have happened.

[GBinOz]

The question of standing is a bit of a low blow I’m afraid George. Brennan was simply assuming that he was standing. He’d assumed that he was standing because he assumed that the window was of such a height from the floor that meant that he could stand and fire.

Just to address this nonsense individually. He can assume all he likes but the fact is the shooter wasn't standing and Brennan should have observed him getting up from a prone position, contrary to his assumption. But Brennan's fantasy has him standing and "Very slowly and deliberately he set the rifle on its butt and just stayed there for a moment to savor what he had done, like a hunter who had "bagged his buck." Then, with no sense of haste, he simply moved slowly away from the window until he disappeared from my line of vision".

You can't have it both ways. Brennan only assumed he was standing? But didn't observe that he actually wasn't standing in the fact that the actual gunman, who can't have been standing, had to get up if Brennan's observations were actually based on fact rather than fantasy.