JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[Herlock Sholmes]

In Humes own words.

I don’t recall Humes knowing Kennedy’s exact position and posture in the car. Perhaps he saw the faked Zapruder film before Zapruder filmed it?

[Aethelwulf]

In Humes own words.

You know something just occurred to me based on GB's posts. I have a horrible feeling the origin of the faked autopsy photos lies (at least partly) in the apparent difference between the diagrams, descriptions and photos.

Anyone with an IQ greater than a roast peanut can see the issue.

[caz]

‘So why is Holland a good witness from the overpass? Three witness who must trump all others in terms of location are Williams, Norman and Jarman on the 5th floor directly below and a very few feet from Oswald; both of whom were in open windows. Those three were 100% certain that the shots came from directly above them. We don’t really need other witness. Those three seal the deal.’

No they don’t.

Bonnie Ray Williams thought he heard two shots, not three. He changed his mind later. He was not asked by the WC about where he thought the shots came from. He heard neither shots nor movement above him on the 6^th floor. Since Williams was eating alone on the 6^th floor until at least 12.15pm, the time the motorcade was due to arrive, he would have had the opportunity to sense if someone else was in that area. He said he was aware of no one else being there at that time.

Junior Jarman thought the shots came from ‘below him and to the left.’ He thought the 3^rd shot came ‘right behind’ the 2^nd shot. He heard neither shots nor movement from the 6^th floor.

Harold Norman alone heard what he thought were ejected shells and a bolt action rifle being operated ‘directly above us.’ He did not mention this in his first interview where he talked about poking his head out of the window and trying to look up to the 6^th floor, something verified by other witnesses.

‘Please don’t ask me anymore questions until you and the rest of the Conspiracy Clan actually start answering some.’

These three Black American witnesses were all asked by the WC whether they had been in trouble with the law, a courtesy not extended to others giving testimony. They were interviewed at length and on a number of occasions by the Dallas Police and the FBI in an effort to get their stories to line up. They had grounds for suspecting they were facing a different sort of Klan altogether.

I doubt that it would have been very easy for anyone to determine with 100% accuracy where unexpected shots were being fired from in the heat of the moment. A reasonable sense of the direction, for those close enough to where the shots were actually being fired, but also too far away to be influenced by the sight of JFK reacting to each bullet, might be the best we should expect, but we would still not know for certain which of those ear witnesses were the most accurate, without reliable eyewitness testimony to the gunman's actual position when JFK was hit.

In the summer, when I'm weeding or reading at the top end of our back garden, which gives a clear view of the sky, I often hear a military or rescue helicopter approaching, but I have very little idea of its position or direction of travel merely from the sound, even when it's low flying. As soon as I scan the heavens I can see it immediately and sight and sound then come together.

We also live on a busy crossroads, and the double glazing cuts out all traffic noise but the sirens of emergency vehicles that need to drive straight through the lights, most often ambulances, and the occasional police car or fire engine. There are twelve routes a vehicle could be taking, but there is no way to narrow it down from the siren alone. I can only tell where it has come from and where it's going, if I get to the window fast enough to see it as it reaches the crossroads.

In both these examples, there is one source for both the sound and the sight, which in theory should make things easier. But the sounds of the gunfire in Dallas obviously originated in a difference place from the sight of the President being shot. Our eyes can deceive our ears, or the other way round, in any sudden traumatic situation, and both senses may give the brain different and confused messages. So maybe the best ear witness would have been a blind person close to the gunman, and the best eye witness would have been a deaf person close to the motorcade.

I'd be interested in thoughts from all sides and on the fence.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

This is how to work this out PI.

Holland saw a puff of smoke.

Could have been smoke wafting from anywhere.

We know that there was no one behind the fence.

Either he was mistaken or lying…..take your pick.

We know that the shots came from the 6th floor of the TSBD.

Therefore……into the bin Holland goes with the other liars and loonies like Hofmann and Oliver.

The puff of smoke - whether real or imagined - would have appeared to confirm the evidence of his ears, which could easily have misled him.

I doubt he had anything to gain from lying, so for my money it would have been a common enough misperception in the heat of the moment. Once the first person was seen heading pointedly in any particular direction, others would automatically follow suit.

As a complete coward, and a contrary so-and-so, I'd have probably torn off in the opposite direction.

Not quite a case of the blind leading the blind, or the deaf leading the deaf, but you get the general idea...

Love,

Dagenham Dave
X

[caz]

I think HS is conflating the conspiracy with the cover-up.

The conspirators had little interest in the medical reports and autopsies. Their aim was regime change which meant killing the President. If that resulted in the discovery of multiple shots being fired in what was described at the time by Walter Conkrite as a ‘fusillade’ then so what? They had lined up the ‘patsy’ Oswald in the TSBD and his undetected 'accomplices' could be assumed to be Communist sympathisers. He could hardly name them since he was earmarked for a swift execution. Good grounds for invading Cuba I would have thought.

The cover-up was required to save the reputation of the three investigating agencies: the DPD, the FBI and the CIA. At the very least their incompetence had seen two astonishing security lapses; more likely there were rogue elements within each agency who had helped engineer the two murders. The Lone Gunman theory at least removed the second of these problems. In addition, Oswald’s alleged left wing sympathies allowed Johnson leverage over the Warren Commission in respect of his threatening a nuclear Armageddon.

The conspiracy failed in respect of taking back control of Cuba which remains free of US dominance to this day. The cover-up failed in so far as the LG theory has never really been fully accepted by the wider public. But the regime change which further developed the US policy of military imperialism has remained fairly intact as we can see right up to this day.

Hi cobalt,

I might have considered your views, expressed more as statements of fact, if you had put Oswald at the heart of this conspiracy, either as an active participant in the shooting, or at the very least playing the role of a decoy, to take the eye and ear off the real gunman/men, if he didn't fire a shot himself. Presumably he'd have been led to believe that if he was arrested on suspicion he'd have no trouble proving his innocence, by which time the real culprit(s) would be long gone.

What I just can't accept is that he - or anyone else for that matter - could have been selected as an unwitting fall guy, when there was simply no way within the laws of physics for anyone other than Oswald to know, let alone control his movements and whereabouts on the day. There would have been countless ways for such a plan to fail, and only one way for it to succeed. I'm not buying that Oswald chose that way while the conspirators could only keep their fingers crossed and cast his fate - and theirs - to the wind.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

One final point. I have decades of experience as a hunter, and I can guarantee that a living entity that is shot does not react in any direction but away from the shooter.

Best regards, George

How many years experience do you have in shooting human beings in moving vehicles, George? On second thoughts, don't tell me!

My dad once told me a shaggy dog story about a man who asked an experienced hunter about the best way to shoot a tiger at night. The hunter told him to aim right between the eyes.

The poor man ended up mauled to death by two one-eyed tigers strolling arm in arm.

About as likely as Oswald being set up for the crime of taking his lunch to work.

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

What I don't get about the 'regime change' argument is that there were far easier ways for intelligence agencies to accomplish regime change than assassination. JFK was the ultimate womaniser. I think this would be a far easier way to destroy him than a assassination. Now, the media were a bit more reverential and discreet back in those days. However, you only have to add some sort of spy or national security angle for the story to become a real scandal As I understand it one of JFK's mistresses has been implicated as being a possible Soviet agent in recent years(no idea if she really was a Soviet agent). The agent story doesn't even have to be true. It does become a major scandal though. The intelligence agencies can screw a democratically elected politician over a dozen different ways without resorting to assassination.

Good point, Jason.

The Profumo affair, anyone? That was a genuine scandal, with tragic outcomes for some of those involved, but politicians in those days could be forced to resign in disgrace, if they wouldn't go quietly, for any sexual indiscretion or security breach. Today the worst of the scumbags can almost get away with murder themselves before they have to walk the plank, and they rarely jump before they are pushed.

Love,

Caz
X

[Herlock Sholmes]

The puff of smoke - whether real or imagined - would have appeared to confirm the evidence of his ears, which could easily have misled him.

I doubt he had anything to gain from lying, so for my money it would have been a common enough misperception in the heat of the moment. Once the first person was seen heading pointedly in any particular direction, others would automatically follow suit.

As a complete coward, and a contrary so-and-so, I'd have probably torn off in the opposite direction.

Not quite a case of the blind leading the blind, or the deaf leading the deaf, but you get the general idea...

Love,

Dagenham Dave
X

I’m still intrigued by Carl Desroe, Caz. Apologies for reposting a fairly lengthy post but I don’t know whether or not you saw my earlier one.

……

“Jim Towner, a former military man immediately recognised what his wife described as ‘firecrackers’ as gunshots. He heard three shots which he thought came from the Book Depository. He followed a crowd of spectators to the picket fence and spoke to a black man wearing a white uniform standing on the back of a Pullman dining car. It was Carl Desroe. Desroe responded to questions from the crowd asking if he had observed anyone in the vicinity. “No sir” Desroe said, “I haven’t seen anybody back here and I’ve been back here watching the whole thing.”


It’s always fair play to look at a person and to see if he might have lied or might have been an unreliable kind of person. That said, George posted this quote from the book The Kennedy Half Century in his scramble to denigrate an inconvenient witness:


“The porter, Carl Desroe, was not identified or interviewed by the Commission, and before his death, he shared his story only with his Pastor, Bishop Mark Herbener. Bishop Herbener was the first to identify Desroe in 2006. Desroe and his wife had been on the overpass before Kennedy’s motorcade approached, but had been ordered off by unknown “officials.” Desroe wife, Amelia, told Herbener, “I saw some things……I’m afraid to tell anybody. I’ll never tell anybody. I’m afraid for my life.” Herbener knew the couple well. Desroe was the personal porter to the president of Katy Railroad. As for Amelia, Herbener said, “What she saw or thinks she saw, I have no idea. She wasn’t a screwball. She was a pretty genuine person.” Both Desroe’s are long deceased.”


So nowhere in this statement is Desroe or his wife denigrated or even suggested as the kind of people to lie. Desroe said that they were ordered off the overpass by “officials.” I don’t know why the author stressed “officials” (disbelief/sarcasm?) because we know from Holland that there were officials up there checking who was or wasn’t authorised to be there or. What could she have been afraid of? I’ll hazard what I believe is a fair guess. By the time that she spoke about this, conspiracies were rife. All of them implicating the authorities (including police) and most of them involving the Grassy Knoll. Thinking back might she not just have thought “police officers behind the Knoll around the time of the assassination….where they up to something?” A bit of paranoia induced by conspiracy theorists perhaps?

We have no reason to suspect Desroe of dishonesty. He had been selected to a responsible job and a former military man actually saw him behind the fence. He had no reason to lie about being there and was right about the officers on the pass and what they were doing. And now we can go back to Towner and Deputy Sheriff Boone and what they saw.


Towner had - spoke to a black man wearing a white uniform standing on the back of a Pullman dining car.

Boone - He saw one person, a black guy working the pullmans. (that was precisely Desroe’sjob)


Surely Towner and Boone are describing the same man? The only thing missing is mention of his wife but hardly surprising in 1963. She might have moved slightly away from Desroe for a minute and if Towner, a man of his time, wanted information it’s a fair bet that he’d have honed straight in on the man and barely given his wife a second look so why mention her?


So we have no reason to doubt that Desroe was somewhere behind the fence at the time of the murder. His presence is confirmed by 2 people; a former military man and a Deputy Sheriff. And Desroe saw absolutely nothing. How could he have missed an assassin? Why is he ignored as a witness? If someone has proof that he wasn’t there I’m yet to see it.

[Herlock Sholmes]

You know something just occurred to me based on GB's posts. I have a horrible feeling the origin of the faked autopsy photos lies (at least partly) in the apparent difference between the diagrams, descriptions and photos.

Anyone with an IQ greater than a roast peanut can see the issue.

But there’s no such thing as an innocent error though Wulf, come on be fair Except of course when our conspirators left only 3 shells on the 6th floor. Oh, and when they left the wrong rifle there and then dimwittedly displayed it to the entire world. And when they completely forgot about an escape plan for Lee Patsy Oswald. Oh and when they forgot about a cover-up at Parkland….doh!! Fair’s fair though, they had a lot on their minds what getting Oswald a job at the TSBD, forging and faking everything in Dallas before rounding up and priming 100’s of corrupt officials. Easily done.

And people actually believe this stuff.

[cobalt]

HS has provided a comprehensive and convincing explanation to show that Oswald was in Mexico City. What he has not done is explain why, at the same time, the Head of the FBI believed that Oswald was also being impersonated. Hoover’s belief was based on photographs taken (or some would suggest photographs NOT taken ) outside the two embassies and also a tape recorded intercept which was of a person claiming to be Oswald but sounded nothing like him, speaking pidgin Russian.

This creates a massive problem for those who believe in the LG theory. For if Oswald was a disaffected US citizen seeking refuge, or perhaps even seeking support in his role as self-styled assassin, from countries viewed as hostile, why would it be necessary to impersonate him? Who was doing this and for what purpose?

In short there was a conspiracy of some sort being played out in Mexico City involving Oswald. Clearly the intention was to link him, prior to the assassination, with the USSR and Cuba. It was a clumsy part of the conspiracy and not very successful since the Soviets and the Cubans would have known of Oswald’s history as a fake defector and smelled a rat. Oswald hadn’t a hope in Hades of receiving any visas, hence I suppose the desperate phone call made impersonating him.

Oswald gunned down with a Cuban transit visa in his pocket was presumably the plan for 22 November, but all they got instead was a bus transfer ticket from near Dealey Plaza.

[FISHY1118]

FISHY also swallowed the dangerous nonsense that covid vaccinations caused more problems than the virus itself, which should have set off alarm bells in certain quarters.

But you can't reason someone out of a position they were not reasoned into. It's a waste of time.

All I can say is that I'm rather relieved, though not surprised, to find him on the far side of this debate!

Love,

Caz
X

If you cared to go back and read that topic caz ,what was being discussed wasn't the covid vaccinations that caused problems as you put it. But the spread of the virus itself.

The entire topic on my part was and still remains thus, the ability of the virus to spread and infect both vaccinated and unvaccinated people regardless .

Accepting the fact the vaccines offer more protection from severe illness and death for people who got vaccinated . That was it.

Don't make it out to be something it wasn't.

[cobalt]

'So maybe the best ear witness would have been a blind person close to the gunman, and the best eye witness would have been a deaf person close to the motorcade.'

Oops, I think that's what is called an own goal.
There was a deaf witness close to the motorcade. HS has referred to him on a number of occasions.

[caz]

In response to Caz's point:

'So if the 'before' group had no realistic way to guarantee that their chosen patsy would be in the right place at the right time on the right day,'

They knew he would be at the TSBD where he had been every day since being employed there. Back in the 1960s workers rarely pulled a 'sickie' since you needed a doctor's line (in the UK at least) In the USA I suspect you had your pay docked. He didn't have to be anywhere near the 'sniper's nest' so long as a gun found in the area could be traced back to him. As I suggested in a previous post 'the more the merrier.' Two or three communist gunmen killing the President in a hail of bullets was actually better than one. And there was a 'subversive' (according to DPD files) already working (as an accountant) at the TSBD.

It was the cover up that required the LG; not the conspiracy.

No cobalt, they didn't know. At best they would have been taking a punt and hoping for the best. Oswald could have been genuinely taken ill, or may have booked a week's leave, or a long weekend, for all the conspirators could have known. Or did they have spies at the TSBD, monitoring his attendance throughout that week, and checking for his arrival on the Friday?

It's not just a case of having two or three men on standby in the event that Oswald did not show up on the day for any reason. He not only showed up, but played his part perfectly throughout, with the conspirators in no position to know if he would even be alone when the shots were fired, and not surrounded by workmates. They wouldn't know how well or badly things had played out until after the event, and until they learned that Oswald had been sufficiently freaked out to behave suspiciously like the guilty man, despite being no more aware than anyone else around him of who might actually have been involved in what had just happened. Didn't JFK have many enemies in many camps? Why did Oswald react as if he knew there was a plan in motion to stitch him up for it? Nobody could have made him stick out like a sore thumb from everyone else in the vicinity. He did that all by himself. Heaven knows why, if he'd only taken his lunch into work, as any other worker might have done. He couldn't have predicted that a rifle would be planted for the sole purpose of incriminating him. So what was he so worried about?

Love,

Caz
X

[caz]

If you cared to go back and read that topic caz ,what was being discussed wasn't the covid vaccinations that caused problems as you put it. But the spread of the virus itself.

The entire topic on my part was and still remains thus, the ability of the virus to spread and infect both vaccinated and unvaccinated people regardless .

Accepting the fact the vaccines offer more protection from severe illness and death for people who got vaccinated . That was it.

Don't make it out to be something it wasn't.

Bollocks.

[caz]

‘If the conspirators had little interest in reports and autopsies then why did they allegedly fake them?’
I thought I had made clear the distinction between conspirators (before the act) and those involved in the cover-up (after the act.)

The conspirators had from the 6^th June 1963, the date JFK’s Texas visit was announced, to organise the assassination. On 25^th September Dallas was confirmed as a host city and the motorcade, which Kennedy wanted, confirmed on 4^th October. There would have been three main objectives: to organise a team of shooters; to select the best place from which to shoot; and to provide a suitable ‘patsy’ the assassination could be blamed on in order to draw public attention away from the real conspirators.

Arranging shooters was the easy part: the CIA had been training anti-Castro Cubans for a planned incursion into Cuba since at least 1961 and JFK was seen as a person who had betrayed them. Reconnaissance, spotters, arranging logistics such as transport, weapons and fake ID along with a team of four shooters would have required no more than a dozen personnel.

As for the ‘patsy,’ Oswald had been doing a good job of incriminating himself with his visits to Cuban and Russian embassies in Mexico and FPFC activities. The suspicion is that he embarked on these fool’s errands at the behest of elements within the CIA. For example his brief leafleting in New Orleans was covered by local media who must have been alerted. Oswald’s job at the TSBD began on October 16^th after the skeleton plan for JFK’s visit had been agreed upon.

The conspirators’ biggest problem was presumably selecting the site for the assassination. The first choice for Kennedy’s luncheon had been the Statler Hilton which is little over half a mile from the TSBD. However the Bottlers’ Convention of Carbonated Beverages had already booked that venue and were reluctant to give it up. As a result Richard Nixon, representing Pepsi as a lawyer, spent the evening before the assassination there before leaving early next morning.
The Trade Mart was considered a security risk and although it was mooted on 4^th November by the Dallas Chamber of Commerce as an alternative venue, it was not until 14^th November this was confirmed. This fateful decision allowed the turn into Elm Street past the TSBD although that possibility may have been anticipated by the conspirators some time beforehand or influenced by them at a later date. One DPD officer claimed the turn was unnecessary and that had the motorcade proceeded down Main Street then it would still have been possible to make a right turn on to the Stemmons Freeway towards the Trade Mart. No one has ever taken ownership of that Elm Street decision for obvious reasons in light of what occurred.

I think we can discount the notions of chauffeur William Greer or Lyndon Johnson being part of any conspiracy: they were in the firing line themselves and would have had to have great trust in the assassins’ accuracy. But Johnson must have worked out who was behind the assassination.

Once again, they could not have chosen Oswald as a likely patsy before 16th October, and not at all if he had not applied for that job at the TSBD of his own volition and been taken on. You can't line up a patsy who could be anywhere on the planet by the time JFK arrives in Dallas, and have any realistic expectation that the two paths might actually cross. The fact that they did cross was in the stars, and not in any conspirator's control.

Love,

Caz
X