Business as usual or meet the lone gunman(UA-66627984-1)



A few months ago I first noticed about his so called report, and was wondering what was going on inside. Well Google was not of much help, until I started to chat with Vince Palamara who kindly pointed me to Barry Krush’s book Impossible The Case Against Lee Harvey Oswald Appendices. Which had Patricia Lamberts’s article in full. So to make this valuable piece a bit more search friendly I decided to repost this.  In due time I will add some personal notes, I am too busy trying to finish the 2nd floor lunch room encounter essay, which just keeps getting delayed as I am finding little bits that need to be added. The constant search for additional material got me to ‘find’ this again, and it is a good read.

By Patricia Lambert.

On December 2, 1963, three agents from the Dallas field office of the U.S. Secret Service, Arthur Blake, William Carter and Elmer Moore, began a series of interviews with the employees of the Texas School Book Depository which ultimately influenced the Warren Commission’s reconstruction of events on November 22, 1963. The interviews were conducted over a four-day period and are summarized in a Secret Service Report designated “491.”[1]

Three of the witnesses interviewed, Harold Norman, Bonnie Ray Williams and Charles Givens gave totally new evidence to the Secret Service during these December interviews, evidence which conflicted dramatically with earlier statements made by each of them to the FBI. Harold Norman, who was directly beneath the alleged sniper’s nest during the shooting, claimed he heard the gunman working the bolt action of this rifle and that he also heard the ejected shells as they hit the floor overhead; Bonnie Ray Williams provided an explanation for the presence of chicken bones found on the sixth floor; and Charles Givens’ testimony linked “Oswald with the point from which the shots were fired.” These three stories, first garnered by the Secret Service, were later quoted in the Warren Report to support the Commission’s version of what occurred that Friday in Dallas. Some of the testimony has been challenged in the past by critics of the Warren Commission but no one has demonstrated how much these stories have in common, nor examined the implications of the extraordinary parallels. In each instance these witnesses first gave totally different testimony to the FBI; in each instance their testimony changed the first week in December; in each instance the new story surfaced during interviews conducted by the same three Secret Service agents; in each instance the story influenced the Warren Commission’s interpretation of the events of November 22; and finally, all three stories were important enough to be included in the Commission’s one-volume Report. And the parallels do not end there. None of these stories holds up under close scrutiny. A review of the evidence casts serious doubt on their credibility and suggests that all of them evolved days after the assassination in order to support a particular interpretation of certain evidence, an interpretation which is inconsistent with the real facts. If this view is correct, the fact that all these stories originated in Secret Service Report 491 casts doubt on the integrity of the investigation conducted by that agency’s Dallas field office. For if these stories are fabrications, the witnesses who supplied them had guidance from someone. Someone in a position to screen out and coordinate information at its source. The testimony of these three witnesses is important then not only because it supplies certain details about the events of that day, but because it suggests that basic evidence was falsified at a very early stage, evidence which influenced the direction of the investigation and, in time, affected the conclusions reached by the Warren Commission. HAROLD NORMAN — The Man Beneath the Sniper’s Nest On the day of the assassination, Harold Norman and two other employees of the Depository, Bonnie Ray Williams and James Jarman, watched the motorcade from windows on the fifth floor of their building, one floor below the alleged sniper’s nest. The three men positioned themselves at the pair of double windows in the southeast corner, each man at a different window, with Harold Norman directly beneath the window allegedly used by Oswald to kill the President. Harold Norman made no statement to anyone on the Friday the President was shot. He made no statement to anyone on the following Saturday, Sunday and Monday. Finally, on Tuesday, November 26, four days after the President was assassinated, Norman was interviewed by the FBI. (Both of his companions were interviewed much earlier. By Sunday, November 24, both Jarman and Williams had been interviewed twice, once by the Dallas Police and once by the FBI. This four-day gap between the shooting and Norman’s first interview has never been explained. It is difficult to understand Norman’s silence on the day of the assassination and the days immediately following, difficult to understand why he failed to tell anyone what he had heard. But even more inexplicable was his failure to tell the FBI about it when he was questioned by that agency on November 26. During that interview, Norman made no mention of hearing the shells and the bolt action of the rifle. He told the FBI that after the first shot: … he stuck his head from the window and looked upward toward the roof but could see nothing because small particles of dirt were falling from above him. He stated two additional shots were fired after he had pulled his head back in from the window.[2]

This is Norman’s earliest, most credible statement and there are no falling shells here only falling “particles of dirt” which struck Norman when he stuck his head out the window. This original version is buttressed by testimony from two other sources: Witnesses on the street below saw Norman with his head out the window. Four people present at Dealey Plaza during the shooting later testified that they saw two Negro men at windows on the fifth floor of the Depository below the alleged sniper’s nest who were looking up toward the top of the building.[3]

Two of these witnesses described the Negroes as “leaning out” of the windows at the time.[4]

(Norman was one of these men and the other was Bonnie Ray Williams, as indicated by his statement to the FBI on November 23.[5])

In addition, James Jarman told the FBI on November 24 that, when the shots were fired, Harold Norman said “something had fallen from above his head and that a piece of debris … had hit him in his face.[6]

This is entirely consistent with Norman’s own statement to the FBI. What Jarman called “debris,” Norman called “particles of dirt” but both statements obviously referred to the same thing. In his first interview, Norman did not mention the sounds which the gunman supposedly generated as he killed the President. Instead he gave the FBI an entirely different account of what happened when the shots were fired. Later before the Warren Commission, Norman repudiated this statement. And that body, anxious to accept his valuable testimony, did not pursue the matter. If they had, they would have been confronted with the unsettling fact that the testimony which Norman repudiated in March of 1964 had been corroborated four months earlier by the initial testimony of one of the men who was with him on the fifth floor during the shooting, and by the testimony of four witnesses who were present on the street below. Secret Service Interview (SS491) Norman’s allegation that he heard the shells hit the floor and the bolt action of the rifle surfaced in toto in SS491. Twelve days after the assassination and eight days after his interview by the FBI, Norman’s startling disclosure made its belated appearance. Norman’s sworn affidavit to the Secret Service states: I knew that the shots had come from directly above me, and I could hear the expended cartridges fall to the floor. I could also hear the bolt action of the rifle. I also saw some dust fall from the ceiling of the fifth floor and I felt sure that whoever had fired the shots was directly above me.[7]

Missing entirely from this new version is the description of Norman putting his head out the window and looking up toward the roof, a gesture which was witnessed by at least four people. Norman permanently eliminated this event from this testimony at this point. Also, the particles of dirt, which he told the FBI fell outside the building and prevented him from seeing anything when he looked up, are changed in this version to “some dust.” This dust fell “from the ceiling” inside the building and the intended implication appears to be that it was dislodged by the shells hitting the floor of the sniper’s nest. This then is Norman’s new story. Not only are the sounds of the gunman added for the first time, but one part of his earlier statement to the FBI is excised and another part altered to accommodate the new information. This new story transformed Norman from an inconsequential witness to one of major importance who provided first hand evidence linking the shots that were fired at 12:30 to the hulls that were found on the sixth floor 40 minutes later. This important information became the focus of his interview three months later before the Warren Commission. Warren Commission Interview On March 24, 1964, Norman told the Warren Commission what he heard on the fifth floor during the shooting: Well, I couldn’t see at all during the time, but I know I heard a third shot fired, and I could also hear something sounded like the shell hulls hitting the floor and the ejecting of the rifle. … I remember saying that I thought I could hear the shell hulls and the ejection of the rifle.[8]

The essential part of this statement, the description of what Norman heard, is the same as that first recounted in SS491. In other respects, certain changes appeared. The particles of dirt which fell outside the window in his original story to the FBI and which were converted to “some dust” which fell from the ceiling in his statement to the Secret Service, assumed still another form in this interview. In response to a question from Commission attorney George [sic – Joseph] Ball, Norman stated, “I didn’t see any falling [dust or dirt] but I saw some in Bonnie Ray Williams’ hair.” [9] Later, when Ball asked Norman about the head-out-the-window story in the FBI report and the falling dirt, Norman said that he did not “recall” telling that to the FBI, and he also said: “I don’t remember ever putting my head out the window.”[10]

In essence, Norman simply denied making his earlier statements to the FBI and which were converted to “some dust” which fell from the ceiling in his statement to the Secret Service version, except for the falling dust which he handed off to Bonnie Ray Williams. He also introduced one new item. He told the Commission, at the time he heard the shots overhead, he told his companions what he heard. This new fact enabled Jarman and Williams to corroborate Norman’s story insofar as what he said at the time. Unfortunately, for Norman’s credibility, this corroboration suffers from the same problems afflicting the story it is intended to support. It surfaced late, even later than Norman’s story, appearing for the first time during their Warren Commission interviews in March. Also, while Williams’ testimony supports Norman’s version, Jarman’s account of when and where Norman made his statement is substantially different.[11]

The net result of this late-blooming, conflicting “corroboration” is the creation of additional suspicious testimony. The Re-Enactment The Warren Commission gave Norman’s story great weight and went to some lengths in their efforts to verify the fact that Norman could have heard what he claimed he did. These efforts were only partially successful, but that fact is carefully disguised in the Warren Report. First, the Commission’s legal staff arranged a re-enactment of the audio effects allegedly heard by Norman on November 22. On March 20, 1964, Norman, Jarman and Williams took their places at the windows on the fifth floor and, the Report states: A Secret Service agent operated the bolt of a rifle directly above them at the southeast corner window of the sixth floor. At the same time, three cartridge shells were dropped to the floor at intervals of about 3 seconds.[12]

Norman told the Commission that the sounds he heard during this re-enactment were the same sounds he heard on November 22. The Report does not relate what, if anything, Jarman and Williams heard. Later, this same re-enactment was conducted for all seven members of the Warren Commission: The experiment with the shells and rifle was repeated for members of the Commission on May 9, 1964, on June 7, 1964, and again on September 6, 1964. All seven of the Commissioners clearly heard the shells drop to the floor.[13; emphasis added]

Notice that while the “experiment” included both “the shells and rifle,” the Report says only that the Commissioners “heard the shells drop to the floor,” omitting any reference to the bolt action. This can only mean that the Commissioners were not able to hear the bolt action as it was “operated” by the Secret Service agent. If the Commissioners could not hear the bolt action during the re-enactment, why should we believe that Norman heard it on the day of the shooting? But that is not the most important question raised by this experiment. If all seven Commissioners heard the shells, why didn’t either Williams or Jarman hear them on the day of the shooting? Since Jarman was in the far side of the second set of double windows, it might be argued that he was too far away, but that reasoning cannot apply to Williams, who was at the window right next to Norman’s. A strip of wood less than a foot wide separated the two men, but Norman alone heard the shells. Williams was obviously troubled by this anomaly, and attempted to explain it by offering the following curious explanation to the Warren Commission: “… But I did not hear the shell being ejected from the gun, probably because I wasn’t paying attention.”[14]

During Norman’s testimony it was pointed out that there were spaces between the boards in the ceiling separating the fifth and sixth floors which were wide enough to permit “daylight” to pass through in at least two places. Considering the condition of the ceiling, it is understandable that the Commissioners heard the shells during the re-enactment, and quite remarkable that Williams did not hear them on November 22. By proving that the ejected shells hitting the floor of the sniper’s nest would have been audible on the fifth floor, the Warren Commission’s re-enactment underscored the importance of Norman’s testimony. If the shots came from the sixth floor sniper’s nest, anyone directly beneath it surely would have heard the shells as they hit the floor, just as the seven Commissioners heard them months later. Yet Williams and Jarman admit they did not hear them on November 22 and the evidence strongly indicates that Norman did not hear them either, and that his belated claim that he did is simply not true. All of which points to the possibility that the shots which killed the President were not fired from the so-called sniper’s nest but from some other location, and that the shells found on the sixth floor of the Depository were merely planted there. Long after the shooting, the Commission’s re-enactment demonstrated that these men should have heard the shells as they landed overhead. Much earlier, someone else identified the problem: anyone familiar with the condition of the floor at the sniper’s nest, and aware of the early statements made by Norman, Williams and Jarman to the FBI, needed no re-enactment to realize that a gap existed in their testimony. That gap was, in effect, closed on December 4, 1963, when Harold Norman signed the affidavit included in SS491. The Dropped Carton A reasonable assessment of Norman’s testimony leads to the conclusion that the original statement he gave to the FBI was truthful and his later testimony a fabrication. When the shots were fired on November 22, Norman did not hear the shells hit the floor above him, nor did he hear the bolt action of the rifle. Something prompted him to lean out the window and look up. While doing so “particles of dirt” fell on him. The question is, what prompted him to lean out the window and what caused the dirt to fall? One possible answer to these questions is found in the testimony of Deputy Sheriff Luke Mooney, who was the first to see the sniper’s nest when he discovered the spent shells on the floor in front of the window. Mooney told the Commission that the box in the windows with the crease on it appeared to have been “tilted.” He said it “looked like he might have knocked it off,” referring to the gunman.[15]

In the picture which Mooney identified, this box (which contained books) is resting partially on the brickwork in front of the window and partially on the wooden sill.[16]

If Mooney was correct, and the person who arranged the boxes at the sniper’s nest “knocked” this particular one off, or if he accidentally dropped it onto the window sill, the resulting jolt may have prompted Norman to lean out the window below and look upward. If this is the case, the falling dirt was dislodged by the same jolt. Evidence that someone, other than Oswald, arranged the boxes at the sniper’s nest is found in the testimony of Lillian Mooneyham, a District Court clerk in Dallas. On November 22, Lillian Mooneyham was in the court house on Main Street and she watched the motorcade from a window facing toward the Depository. On December 31, 1963, Dallas attorney S.L. Johnson told the FBI that Mooneyham told him that she saw “some boxes moving” in the window from which the shots allegedly came.[17]

Interviewed by the FBI on January 8, 1964, Mooneyham stated that: 4½ to 5 minutes following the shots … she looked up towards the sixth floor of the TSBD and observed the figure of a man standing in a sixth floor window behind some cardboard boxes.[18]

The man she saw was standing back from the window and “looking out.” Since a Dallas policeman, M.L. Baker, encountered Oswald in the lunchroom on the second floor of the Depository only 90 seconds after the shots were fired, the man seen by Mooneyham “4½ to 5 minutes” after the shooting could not have been Oswald. He could, however, have been the person who arranged the boxes at the sniper’s nest and in the process dropped the carton, described by Deputy Mooney, onto the window ledge. He could also have planted the shells on the floor. Lillian Mooneyham was not called to testify before the commission, and her statement to the FBI was not pursued. Bonnie Ray Williams — The Chicken Bone Story Forty minutes after the shots were fired, Deputy Sheriff Luke Mooney discovered the so-called sniper’s nest on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository. Several tall stacks of boxes were arranged around the southeast corner window concealing it from view on three sides. Inside this enclosure, other boxes were stacked directly in front of the window. Presumably the gunman rested his rifle on this smaller pile of boxes. On the floor in front of the window, Mooney found three spent shell casings. And at the west end of the enclosure, on top of one of the tall stacks of boxes, Mooney saw a partially-eaten chicken bone and a lunch sack.[19]

Four other men were on the sixth floor when Mooney found the sniper’s nest: Police officers E.D. Brewer, G. Hill and CA.A. Haygood, and Deputy Sheriff Roger Craig. When Mooney saw the shell casings he yelled out, and the other men responded immediately by going to his location.[20]

All of them – Brewer, Hill, Haygood and Craig – later testified that they too saw some portion of the chicken lunch at the same window where the shells were found.[21]

In addition, Officer L.A. Montgomery, who arrived on the sixth floor after the shells were found and was one of the two men assigned to guard the scene, testified to seeing the lunch remnants at the sniper’s nest.[22]

There is a remarkable unanimity in the statements of these six men. The lunch remnants consisted of at least two chicken bones, an ordinary lunch sack, and a Dr. Pepper bottle. Not all six men saw all of these items, some saw more than others, but no one saw anything differently. They all described what they saw and where they saw it in similar terms. The similarity of language used to describe the bones is particularly striking. Three of these men gave almost identical descriptions. Mooney said he saw “one partially eaten piece of fried chicken,” while Brewer saw “a partially eaten piece of chicken,” and Montgomery saw “one piece … I believe it was partially eaten.”[23]

Obviously, these men were describing the same chicken bone. This is further supported by the fact that they all saw the bone at the same location: on top of a box. Mooney indicated that the bone and sack were on top of one of the larger stacks of boxes at the west side of the window. This corresponds with the testimony of Gerald Hill, who said the “chicken leg bone” and the sack were “on top of the larger stack of boxes that would have been used for concealment.” Montgomery, too, saw a piece of chicken “on a box” (he also noticed another piece on the floor). And Roger Craig, who remembered only the sack, saw it “on top of a box.”[24]

Three of these men – Haygood, Brewer and Montgomery – saw the Dr. Pepper bottle, but only Montgomery described its location in any detail. (Montgomery’s testimony regarding the location of the bottle as well as the second piece of chicken on the floor deserves great weight since he guarded the scene after the others left, and had greater opportunity to observe the area.) He said that the bottle was “over a little more to the west of that window … sitting over there by itself.”[25]

This means that the bottle was separated from the stack of boxes on which the bone and sack rested, that it was on the floor somewhat farther west of the sniper’s nest. This may explain why Mooney, Hill and Craig did not see the bottle. A precise and consistent picture emerges from the testimony of these six witnesses. On top of one of the tall stacks of cartons which formed the west end of the enclosure encircling the sniper’s nest was a partially eaten chicken bone and a paper sack; on the floor nearby was another bone; and outside the enclosure and farther to the west was a Dr. Pepper bottle. Exactly one hour after Deputy Sheriff Mooney discovered the sniper’s nest and saw the chicken bone and lunch sack there, Dallas Police Inspector J.H. Sawyer told the Associated Press about the chicken lunch and that wire service, quoting Sawyer, carried the story: Police found the remains of fried chicken and paper on the fifth floor. Apparently the person had been there quite a while.[26]

This first public reference to the chicken lunch (which incorrectly identified the sniper’s nest as being on the fifth floor) occurred one hour and 42 minutes after the assassination. In it, Inspector Sawyer linked the “fried chicken” to the assassin and word flashed around the world that the gunman had eaten fried chicken shortly before killing President Kennedy. United Press International actually photographed the “Dallas police technician” as he removed part of the lunch from the building. This photograph shows the “police technician” holding two sticks, one protruding into the mouth of a Dr. Pepper bottle and the other attached to a small lunch sack. The caption reads: A lunch bag and a pop bottle, held here by a Dallas police technician, and three spent shell casings were found by the sixth floor window. The sniper had dined on fried chicken and pop while waiting patiently to shoot the President.[27]

Many other stories appeared in the new media that day describing the gunman’s chicken lunch. On November 22, it was generally believed that the chicken lunch belonged to the assassin. The first five witnesses to see the sniper’s nest thought so, as did Inspector Sawyer, who first relayed the information to the press. Furthermore, the photograph of the “technician” carefully removing the sack and bottle from the building indicates that the Dallas Police regarded them as significant evidence. Nevertheless, when the Warren Report was published ten months later, the chicken lunch was dismissed as inconsequential. It was not found at the sniper’s nest, the commission decided, but 20 or 30 feet west at the third or fourth set of double windows. Furthermore, according to the Commission, it was left there not by the assassin, but by Bonnie Ray Williams, the same witness who later watched the motorcade from a windows on the fifth floor next to Harold Norman. Part II In arriving at its conclusions, the Warren Commission relied on two pieces of evidence: (1) the Dallas Police photographs of the sixth floor taken by R.L. Studebaker which show no sack, no bones, and no bottle at the sniper’s nest, but do show a sack and a bottle on the floor at the third set of double windows; and (2) the testimony of Bonnie Ray Williams, who claimed he left the sack and bottle on the floor as shown in the Studebaker picture. The Studebaker Picture Detective Studebaker testified before the Warren Commission that he took the picture of the chicken lunch “before anything was touched and before it was dusted.” The picture shows a Dr. Pepper bottle and a lunch sack on the floor near a two-wheel cart in front of the third set of windows.[28]

There are no chicken bones visible in this picture nor in any other picture taken that day. Studebaker explained why. The chicken bones, he told the Commission, “were all inside the sack, wrapped up and put right back in.”[29]

By the time Studebaker took this picture, the chicken bones seen at the sniper’s nest by Deputy Sheriff Mooney and police officers Brewer, Hill and Montgomery were no longer visible because they were “inside the sack.” Also, the sack and bones were no longer atop a box in the southeast corner, but now were on the floor in front of the third set of windows. Studebaker may have taken this picture “before [anything] was dusted,” but he certainly did not take it “before anything was touched.” The fact is, no one who saw the chicken lunch that day saw what Studebaker photographed. In addition to the six men who saw the lunch at the sniper’s nest, other witnesses arrived on the sixth floor later that afternoon. These later witnesses saw the lunch at various locations, but none of them saw the sack and bottle as photographed. Like Mooney and the others, these men also saw the chicken bones. But unlike the first group of witnesses, each of these men saw the lunch at a different place. Officer Marvin Johnson saw the sack, “remnants of fried chicken” and the bottle at the second set of double windows; Detective E.L. Boyd saw “some chicken bones” and a “lunch sack” on “top of some boxes” at the third set of double windows; and FBI agents Nat Pinkston and J. Doyle Williams, accompanied by an employee of the Depository, William Shelley, viewed the scene after the sack and bottle were removed from the building, and saw the bones along with some wax paper on the floor near the center (i.e., third) window.[30]

The wide variety of these later sightings and their chronology (that is the fact that they all occurred after the initial group saw the lunch at the sniper’s nest) suggest that the lunch was removed from its original position and moved about on the sixth floor before it was finally placed on the floor in front of the third set of double windows where it was photographed. Clearly, the Studebaker picture, supposedly taken before anything was touched on the sixth floor, suffers from a severe credibility problem. During his Warren Commission interview, Studebaker was asked if he saw any chicken bones at the sniper’s nest, and he replied that he did not recall any, and if there had been, “it ought to be in one of these pictures ….”[31]

There, Studebaker defined the problem. Not only did the deputies and officers who saw the lunch on November 22 fail to provide testimony that supported the picture, but the two of them who saw the picture unequivocally rejected it. When Deputy Sheriff Mooney and Officer Montgomery were shown the Studebaker picture, both of them told the Warren Commission that they did not remember the scene it depicted. And Montgomery, after looking at the picture, continued to insist that there were chicken bones “over here around where the hulls were found … I know there was one piece laying up on top of the box there.”[32]

[Dallas Police] Lieutenant J.C. Day, who also took photographs of the sixth floor that afternoon, arrived on the scene with Studebaker and was his immediate superior. Day is the only one of these later witnesses who provided any support for Studebaker’s picture. He is the only one of this group, except Studebaker, who did not see the chicken bones outside the sack. Also, he recalled seeing the lunch sack and pop bottle at the third set of windows. However, when he was shown the picture, he was unable to locate th sack and commented that it didn’t show in the picture. He then stated that he didn’t remember where the sack was located.[33]

Day’s failure to see the sack in the picture is understandable. As shown, the sack is practically hidden from sight. It is on the floor at the east end of of a two-wheel cart between the cart and a stack of boxes. A sack in that position would have been difficult to spot on November 22. Certainly no sack in that location could have been confused with one on top of a box in the southeast corner, 20 or 30 feet to the east. If the chicken bones were inside the sack as Studebaker claims and as his picture indicates, none of the people on the sixth floor that day would have seen them. But six of them did: three from the first group at the scene, and three who arrived later.[34]

The only explanation for this contradiction is that the bones were outside initially and were put inside the sack before the picture was taken. Since the bones were obviously moved from outside the sack to inside, it is hardly unreasonable to suggest that the entire lunch was then moved from one location to another, from the sniper’s nest to the third set of double windows before being photographed. The question that remains is why this was done. A police affidavit contained in the 26 volumes of Commission Hearings and Exhibits provides the motive. Sometime on November 22, Wesley Frazier, the man who drove Oswald to work that Friday morning, signed a sworn statement which included the following information: Lee (Oswald) did not carry his lunch today. He told me this morning he was going to buy his lunch today.[35]

This statement, made the day of the assassination, established that the remnants of a chicken lunch found at the sniper’s nest were not Oswald’s. This meant someone else ate his lunch there, and the bones, sack and bottle were evidence of that fact. Once it was known that Oswald did not bring his lunch to work that day, the chicken lunch became an impediment to the theory that Oswald, acting alone, fired the fatal shots from the southeast corner window of the sixth floor. Consequently, the chicken bones, lunch sack and Dr. Pepper bottle were moved away from the alleged sniper’s nest in order to disassociate them from the gunman. The Chicken “Sandwich” Two weeks after the assassination, the Secret Service found a witness to support the Studebaker picture. Bonnie Ray Williams was interviewed on November 23 by the FBI, but not until he was interviewed by the Secret Service in December did he lay claim to the chicken lunch found on the sixth floor. The day after the assassination, Williams was interviewed by the FBI and gave a detailed account of his movements on November 22: At approximately 12 noon, Williams went back upstairs … to the 6th floor with his lunch. He stayed on that floor only about three minutes, and seeing no one there, descended to the fifth floor ….[36]

Here Williams described a brief three-minute trip to the sixth floor. There is no suggestion in this FBI report (1) that he at his lunch on the sixth floor; (2) that his lunch contained chicken bones; or (3) that he left anything behind on the sixth floor. Williams’ entire chicken bone story materialized in December when he was interviewed by the Secret Service. SS491 summarizes Williams’ statement in part as follows: After Williams picked up his lunch on the first floor he returned to the sixth floor and sat near the windows in the centre of the building overlooking Elm Street and ate his lunch. Included in his lunch was a chicken sandwich and Williams’ claims that there were some chicken bones in the sandwich and he left them on the floor at the time he ate. He also left an empty Dr. Pepper bottle at the same location. He drank the Dr. Pepper with his lunch. Williams … went to the fifth floor … prior to 12:15 p.m.[37]

Williams’ three-minute trip to the sixth floor, which he described to the FBI the day after the assassination, expended here to 15 minutes during which he at his curious “chicken sandwich” and left the bones behind. Williams’ Secret Service story is not only late-blooming but, like Norman’s, it conflicts with his earlier statement to the FBI. This December testimony is the final solution to the problem posed by the chicken bones. It is an important solution, however, one that fails to explain the most credible evidence, the testimony of those who saw the chicken bones at the sniper’s nest. On the contrary, it is a story that corroborates the Studebaker picture, the only testimony to do so, and that alone is cause for skepticism. Three months later, when Williams testified before the Warren Commission, he improved his story somewhat. He included the two-wheel cart (shown in the Studebaker picture), claiming he sat on it while eating his “sandwich.” And he added a sack, saying he put the bones back inside before he “threw the sack down.” To his credit, Williams’ reluctance to associate himself with the chicken bones is apparent in his refusal to call his lunch “fried chicken.” He repeatedly referred to it as a “chicken sandwich.” This “sandwich” prompted the following exchange between Williams and Commission attorney

Ball: WILLIAMS: I had a chicken sandwich.

BALL: Describe the sandwich. What did it have in it besides chicken?

WILLIAMS: Well, it just had chicken in it. Chicken on the bone.

BALL: Chicken on the bone?


BALL: The chicken was not boned?

WILLIAMS: It was just chicken on the bone. Just plain old chicken.

BALL: Did it have bread around it?

WILLIAMS: Yes it did.[38]

Understandably, Ball had difficulty visualizing a chicken sandwich with bones in it. That was Williams’ story, however, and Ball resolved the problem by suggesting that Williams’ “chicken on the bone” had bread around it. This conjured up a strange culinary image but it permitted Williams to have his “sandwich” and the Commission to have an explanation for the bones found on the sixth floor. There is no doubt about the function of Williams’ testimony. As first outlined in the December report, the message imparted was clear: the bones found on the sixth floor which received so much early publicity were not found at the sniper’s nest as first reported, but at a totally different windows, well removed from the southeast corner, and they were not left there by the assassin, but by Bonnie Ray Williams. This story, secured by the Secret Service ten days after the assassination and passed on to the staff of the Warren Commission, determined the course of the inquiry regarding the chicken lunch. By providing this innocent explanation early in the investigation, the Secret Service precluded the exploration of other possibilities which might have yielded quite a different story. Certainly if someone other than Oswald ate his lunch at the sniper’s nest, and that person was there when the shots were fired or shortly before, that information would have had an impact on the Commission’s investigation. There is evidence that such a person was seen at the sniper’s nest. A witness outside the building, Arnold Rowland, testified that he saw an elderly Negro at the window of the sniper’s nest five or six minutes before the shooting. In addition, there is other evidence that another witness, Amos Euins, moments after the shooting, said the man at the sniper’s nest was black. (Euins later said he could not say whether the man was black or white.) The Warren Report explains that while Rowland was not regarded as a credible witness, his assertion about the elderly Negro at the sniper’s nest was investigated. This investigation consisted of interviews with certain employees of the Depository which determined that the only two men who might fit Rowland’s description were on the first floor “before and during the assassination.[39]

A more vigorous inquiry might have been conducted if the Commission, in addition to investigating Rowland’s clam, had been actively seeking an explanation for the presence of chicken bones found at the sniper’s nest. The chicken lunch would have given Rowland’s allegation more substance and additional steps might have been taken. For instance, the Commission could have made an effort for Rowland to identify the Negro he saw from among the employees of the building. Also, fingerprints on both the lunch sack and the bottle could have been checked against those of the employees. Since the chicken lunch was dismissed early in the Commission’s investigation, it was not associated with Rowland’s testimony, and only a superficial effort was made to identify the man Rowland claimed he saw at the sniper’s nest only minutes before the shooting. The Warren Commission’s attitude toward the lunch remnants was determined early in December when the Commission’s inquiry was just beginning. The testimony in SS491 indicated to the Commission staff that the lunch was totally unrelated to both the sniper’s nest and to the assassin. This position is challenged by the testimony of the Deputy Sheriff who found the shells, and four other law enforcement officers present on the sixth floor at the time, as well as by the testimony of the officer who guarded the sniper’s nest. Unfortunately, these men all testified late in the investigation, long after the Secret Service interview with Williams had steered the Commission’s inquiry away from the chicken lunch. Charles Givens – Oswald at the Crime Scene The day of the assassination, Givens told the FBI he saw Oswald three times that morning: 1. Working on the fifth floor during the morning filling orders; 2. Standing by the elevator in the building at 11:50 AM when givens went to the first floor; and 3. Reading a newspaper in the domino room where the employees eat lunch about 11:50 A.M.[40] The original version of when and where Givens saw Oswald during that day is totally different from his later statement to the Secret Service. In this first account given to the FBI on November 22, Givens last saw Oswald on the first floor in the room where the employees, including Oswald, normally ate lunch. At that time, roughly 40 minutes before he allegedly committed the crime of the century, Oswald was behaving quite normally, doing what he did at lunchtime: reading a newspaper. To some extent, this testimony by Givens corroborates Oswald’s own statement made that afternoon after his arrest. During his interrogation at Police headquarters, Oswald claimed he was on the first floor when the President’s motorcade passed the building. Two FBI agents heard Oswald make this statement: Oswald stated that he went to lunch at approximately noon and he claimed he ate his lunch on the first floor in the lunchroom…. Oswald claimed to be on the first floor when President John F. Kennedy passed this building.[41]

Oswald claimed he was in the first floor lunchroom “at approximately noon.” Givens’ statement to the FBI placed him there at 11:50, indicating that Oswald was telling the truth about his whereabouts at that time. Oswald also claimed he was still on the first floor when the motorcade passed the building, but it does not make Oswald’s assertion plausible. Givens’ November 22 statement lent credibility to Oswald’s alibi and this presented a problem for those intent on establishing Oswald’s guilt. This problem was solved two weeks later when Givens withdrew his original testimony and converted to a witness for the prosecution. Secret Service Interview (SS491) Sometime between December 2 and 5, 1963, Givens was interviewed by the Secret Service, and according to SS491: Givens stated that he saw Oswald on the sixth floor at about 11:45 A.M. … and that Oswald was carrying a clipboard that appeared to have some orders on it. Givens felt that Oswald was looking for some books to fill an order, which is his job, and did not give the matter further thought. Shortly thereafter, Givens and the other employees working on the floor-laying project quit for lunch and they took both elevators. They were racing the elevators to the first floor and Givens heard Oswald call to them to send one of the elevators back up.[42]

This account describes only one sighting of Oswald and it took place on the sixth floor at about 11:45. At this point, the picture of Oswald last seen reading a newspaper in the domino room is replaced by a totally new image. Now he is last seen on the sixth floor. The purpose of this new version is obvious: to incriminate Oswald. The Clipboard A new and important item was added to Givens’ story during this December interview: Oswald’s clipboard. SS491 contains the first mention of the clipboard Oswald was supposedly carrying when last seen on the sixth floor: “Oswald was carrying a clipboard that appeared to have some orders on it,” the report states. The Warren Report explains the importance of this item: The significance of Given’s observation that Oswald was carrying his clipboard became apparent on December 2, 1963, when an employee, Frankie Kaiser, found a clipboard hidden by book cartons in the northwest corner of the sixth floor at the west wall a few feet from where the rifle had been found … Kaiser identified it as the clipboard which Oswald had appropriated from him when Oswald came to work at the Depository.[43]

This narrative outlines the following sequence of events: once alone on the sixth floor, Oswald hid the clipboard near the spot where he later concealed his rifle; it went undetected for ten days; on or about December 2, Givens made his statement to the Secret Service, but the “significance” of his reference to the clipboard was not apparent until the clipboard was found by Kaiser on December 2. This interpretation raises numerous questions. First, why would Oswald bother to hide his clipboard? And if he did, why wasn’t it found during the search of the sixth floor on November 22? According to Kaiser’s description of its location, the clipboard wasn’t hidden at all, merely lying on the floor between some cartons and the wall. How then did it go unnoticed for ten days? The major question, however, relates to the timing of the clipboard’s discovery and Givens’ testimony about it. The Warren Report implies that Givens’ reference to the clipboard occurred prior to the clipboard’s discovery, but in fact, both arrived on the scene with the juxtaposition of Siamese twins. Givens’ statement to the Secret Service occurred between December 2 and December 5, which means his reference to the clipboard was made the same day it was “found” or within three days afterward. The true implication of this tardy, simultaneous appearance is ominous and far-reaching. It means that whoever was reshaping the testimony of witnesses also had access to certain items of physical evidence. The clipboard and Givens’ Secret Service testimony are virtually inseparable. They appeared at the same time, each supported the other, and together they provided the Warren Commission with evidence “linking Oswald with the point from which the shots were fired.” Yet in the first statement that Givens made on November 22, he stated that he last saw Oswald on the first floor, not the sixth, and that Oswald was reading a newspaper, not carrying a clipboard. Only one version can be true: Oswald was either in one place or the other, and the earliest most reliable evidence places him in the lunch room. There is no reason do doubt Givens’ first statement to the FBI, but there is abundant reason to doubt his later statement to the Secret Service. Givens had no motive to fabricate the first version. It served no purpose and helped no one, except Oswald, a fact Givens could not have known when he gave the statement on November 22. On the other hand, the later story served a valuable function. Coupled with the physical evidence provided by the clipboard, it contributed to the web of circumstantial evidence used to incriminate Oswald. Moreover, it effectively eliminated Givens’ earlier testimony which had raised the disquieting possibility that Oswald’s statements about his whereabouts during the assassination might be true. SS491 — What Does It Mean? In evaluating the significance of this document, it is useful to consider how different the record would be if the original statements made by Harold Norman, Bonnie Ray Williams and Charles Givens to the FBI had prevailed. There would be no audio evidence, raising the question of why the men below the sniper’s nest heard nothing overhead during the assassination. There would be no explanation for the remnants of a chicken lunch found on the sixth floor, necessitating further investigation in that area. And there would be no testimony placing Oswald on the sixth floor after everyone else went to lunch, instead there would be support for Oswald’s claim that he was on the first floor when the shots were fired. (It should be noted that the FBI reports detailing the initial statements of the three men were not published in the Commission’s 26 volumes but, instead, were placed in the Archives.) This report by the Secret Service suggests a certain pattern of activity. It is extremely unlikely that these three stories blossomed independently of each other and appeared for the first time in the same document either by accident or coincidence. On the contrary, a systematically coordinated effort appears to be be operating. One designed to steer the Warren Commission’s inquiry in a particular direction during its early stages and to prevent the Commission from pursuing certain areas where investigation might have yielded conclusions different from those finally reached. (It is possible, in fact likely, that similar efforts too place in other, more critical areas.) When viewed in this way, SS491 could be interpreted as circumstantial evidence implicating the Secret Service in an orchestrated effort to conceal the truth about the assassination. On the other hand, it could be argued that the Secret Service was merely an unwitting conduit for the new information supplied by these three witnesses.

That possibility prompts a number of questions:

* Who decided it was necessary to re-interview the employees of the TSBD en masse?

* Why was the Secret Service chosen to do the job, instead of the FBI?

* And what bureaucratic process was involved in these decisions; who set the process into motion; and why?

* Were these interviews really necessary, or were they only set up to allow Harold Norman, Bonnie Ray Williams and Charles Givens to revise their earlier testimony, and to put their new stories into the record?

The obvious implication of this line of thinking is that someone involved in manipulating the testimony of these three men was in a position to influence the actual mechanics of the Warren Commission’s field investigation. In the final analysis, the ultimate dimensions of SS491 cannot be adequately defined at this point; more information is needed. But what we know is grim enough: eyewitness testimony was falsified and physical evidence manipulated. Regardless of the role played by the Secret Service, whether that agency was the source of the revised testimony or merely a conduit for it, the implications are unpleasant in the extreme. For such a complex and calculated effort could not have succeeded without high level assistance from within the investigation itself.

For footnotes I refer to the original article.

Scroll to very bottom!

2nd floor lunchroom encounter talk

This coming Saturday I am giving an informal talk at the Dealey Plaza UK meeting. It will be about the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter that never was.

Venue The Flying Horse in London. 52 Wilson St, London EC2A 2ER

Start at about 13:30

In about a week the update to my essay will be published as well, an additional 30 pages/8,000 words extra stuff.


February 2017 links

“Fascism in America” – Alex Constantine talks about the research of Mae Brussell.


Jackie Kennedy rejected British suitor’s marriage proposal, letters reveal.



Alexandra Zapruder, Twenty-Six Seconds: A Personal History of the Zapruder Film (Part 1).

Even mandatory retirement couldn’t stop spymaster James Angleton’s influence.

Jacqueline Kennedy’s bodyguard relives that day in Dallas and hits out at Hollywood inaccuracy.

HSCA Sam Stern Interview.

Addendum to 2017 Documents Listing.

Billy Lovelady HSCA Interview

In part 1 of  Lovelady’s HSCA interview (originally posted by Richard Gilbride at the ROKC website) we skip to around the 24:50 mark where the talk is about the front steps of the TSBD, its occupants (he names Frazier, Shelley and Stanton and some ladies from the offices inside the building).

His position was the 2nd or 3rd step sitting and eating his lunch and having a coke (which he purchased in the second floor lunchroom).

He is asked whether he saw Oswald on those steps and he answers this with a “No.”.

The follow-up question whether it could have been possible that Oswald could have been on those steps and him not noticing is answered with: “Could have.”

Just after the 29:00 mark he talks about a lady who ran up to them (without any indication as to where “they” were-B.K.) and say that The President had been hit and  he identifies her as Gloria Calvery. He then says after  Gloria Calvery says that The President had been hit they leave for the rail road yard and then make their way back in through one of the side entrances of the TSBD.

Then he describes the situation inside the building after they got back in (31:20) wondering whether they should go back to work. And at 31:40  the  roll call is discussed.


In part 2 (better quality audio) Lovelady describes at first that Truly and the police officer (Baker) had run up the steps, and connects this with shots being fired from the 6th floor and those two on their way investigating this. He does declare that he did nit know the reason for their ascend at that time, only later. Then Secret Service and others come in and want to get up to the top floor so Lovelady takes about ten to fifteen of them up in one of the freight elevators.

After taking them the 7th and the 5th floor he takes them to the 6th floor and while he is standing near the freight elevator he states he was present when they found the shells. He did not see them, he also states that he saw the rifle being found from about a distance of 50 feet. It did have a sling attached to it. He times these finds at about 20-25 minutes after his arrival back inside the TSBD.

Around the 08:20 mark he states that the first time he spoke with a law enforcement official and had his primary statement taken was at 13:30, one hour after the assassination. The second time is in the evening and he confirms it’s him in Altgens6 when FBI agents show up at his house at 18:00.

After that he is shown a still of him on the front steps of the Martin film, with his 5 o’clock shadow and he confirms it is him. A voice in the background (Robert Groden.) says that this was shot between 8-15 minutes after the assassination. Lovelady sees this image for the first time. Lovelady’s wife is present as well and recognises him in that image. This part is interesting due to the interaction of the interviewer and Lovelady. Sean Murphy posts about Billy Lovelady at the Education Forum in 2013 (Prayer Man: Out of the Shadows and Into the Light, Chapter 9):

In the first part of his HSCA interview Billy Lovelady Lovelady is shown an image he has never seen before: a frame from the John Martin film showing him (Lovelady) standing over by the east side of the entrance some 15 minutes post-assassination. Lovelady identifies himself immediately.

HSCA: If a movie camera showed you farther in the center of the doorway than that person there [i.e. Lovelady in Altgens, who appears, due to the deceptive angle, to be well over to the left/west of the entrance] would you still identify that person as being yourself?

LOVELADY: Sure would. I would say the other picture was not taken at the split second as the one to the left is.

HSCA: Okay, alright. If it showed two figures in that doorway at the same time, and you could positively identify one as yourself, would that have any bearing on your identification of that other figure?

LOVELADY: No, that’s still me at the left [of the] doorway.

Whether knowingly (i.e., with knowledge of the Prayer Man figure in Wiegman) or unknowingly (i.e., by pure speculation), the HSCA interviewer noticed  Two Lovelady-resembling men caught on film at the time of the assassination, one over on the west (“left”) side of the entrance and the other more towards the center.

The interviewer could have been getting some information from Richard E. Sprague regarding this discovery, since he was already well informed on the sighting of that man on the west side of the TSBD steps in the shadow.


From thereon the convo steers into the shirt matter, when the FBI ask him to come so he can be photographed as a comparison to Altgens6. No one tells him to wear the same shirt so he does NOT wear it while his pix are taken.

Lovelady also mentions that Joseph Ball contacted him before he was to testify in front of the Warren Commission (27:10). Ball discusses that he will be interviewing him about the actions around the assassination about him around the building. He is also asked whether he was coached by Ball or if anyone else from any agency tried anything, and to both he replies “No.”

But the biggest revelation is saved to the very last, at 29:20 when he says that it took 20-25 minutes before he got back in the building, so while captured by Martin and Hughes he still had not regained entry back into the building, which makes you wonder how he got back in through the side of the TSBD along with Shelley?

ROKC Webs Forum Archive

While ROKC was housed at Webs for about just under two years, as you all know we went back the old place and at some point the webs archive became inaccesible due to the subscription expiring and the renewal being just too expensive.
I managed to d/l the majority of the stuff.
What you can do is browse through the first ten pages with posts and see all the pix that were inserted.
You cannot make posts, it is purely for browsing and reading through the threads.
The search function does not work either, but at some point Google will start indexing this stuff so it will make finding bits on it easier!
There is some wicked stuff there.
This copy is from Sept 1st or thereabout, so not the very latest but still with all the juice present!


January 2017 links

Jackie: behind the creation of JFK, America’s once and future king.


Was Lee Harvey Oswald’s killer Jack Ruby injected with cancer to stop him revealing who really shot JFK?

Afterwards – Ultra Right Part 1 by Larry Hancock.

50 Years from that fateful day in Dallas.

The Tippit shooting by Gary Murr.

The Law and Henry Wade.

Manhattan DA’s Office probing death of reporter with possible JFK ties.


The update to the Anatomy of the 2nd floor lunch room encounter, will be out some point in Feb. I have made some good progress and the article is 25 odd pages longer. The interrogations essay is making progress as well, it is about 100 pages already. I just keep finding stuff…..

However due to work commitments it means that everything is going to take longer. I have to spend my time more carefully so the first movie won’t be in the bag until April/May. Which is also the time the interrogations essay will be coming out.

I will be at the DPUK Conference in Canterbury end of April and will be involved in some shape or form, but will not give a talk, much to the surprise of the gathered bunch of members at the AGM in the Flying Horse pub on Jan 21st. I simply have too much going on and have to fight them battles more carefully…….


Marrion Baker in Hughes

A week or so ago Robin Unger posted a Hughes GIF with Marrion baker riding alongside Cam Car 3. Seen about halfway the footage, just after the splice in the video below of which the GIF has been repeated a few times.


Here is a still.

Marrion Baker in the Hughes film. Click to enlarge.


Here is a map of Dealey Plaza which marks Baker’s location on Houston captured by Hughes.

Baker in Hughes on Dealey Plaza Robert Cutler Map.


The reader ought to familiarise himself with the distance from the front of the TSBD and Baker’s position on the map.

From what I can see the shooting has yet to start or has just started as Baker looks passive nor does his head change as to looking upward and seeing those pigeons. Nothing looks out of the ordinary.

Then the camera men inside the cars. They are still looking backwards towards the corner of Main and Houston where a toss of film went hilariously wrong and ‘everyone had a good laugh’. This has been confirmed by several of the car’s occupants in Richard Trask’s book Pictures Of The Pain.

Baker’s testimony regarding this matter.

Will you take up your trip from there, please?
Mr. BAKER – As we approached the corner there of Main and Houston we were making a right turn, and as I came out behind that building there, which is the county courthouse, the sheriff building, well, there was a strong wind hit me and I almost lost my balance.

Mr. BELIN – How fast would you estimate the speed of your motorcycle as you turned the corner, if you know?
Mr. BAKER – I would say–it wasn’t very fast. I almost lost balance, we were just creeping along real slowly.
Mr. DULLES – That is turning from Main into Houston?
Mr. BAKER – That is right, sir.
Mr. BELIN – You turned-do you have any actual speed estimate as you turned that corner at all or just you would say very slow?
Mr. BAKER – I would say from around 5 to 6 or 7 miles an hour, because you can’t hardly travel under that and you know keep your balance.
Mr. BELIN – From what direction was the wind coming When it hit you?
Mr. BAKER – Due north.
Mr. BELIN – All right.
Now, tell us what happened after you turned on to Houston Street?
Mr. BAKER – AS I got myself straightened up there, I guess it took me some 20, 30 feet, something like that, and it was about that time that I heard these shots come out.
Mr. BELIN – All right.
Could you just tell us what you heard and what you saw and what you did?
Mr. BAKER – As I got, like I say as I got straightened up there, I was, I don’t know when these shots started coming off, I just–it seemed to me like they were high, and I just happened to look right straight up—
Mr. DULLES – I wonder if you would just tell us on that chart and I will try to follow with the record where you were at this time, you were coming down Houston.
Mr. BELIN – Sir, if you can–I plan to get that actual chart in a minute. If we could—-
Mr. DULLES – I want to see where he was vis-a-vis the building on the chart there.
Mr. BAKER – This is Main Street and this is Houston. This is the corner that I am speaking of; I made the right turn here. The motorcade and all, as I was here turning the front car was turning up here, and as I got somewhere about right here—-
Mr. DULLES – That is halfway down the first block.
Mr. BELIN – No, sir; can I interrupt you for a minute?
Mr. DULLES – Certainly.
Mr. BELIN – Officer Baker, when we were in Dallas on March 20, Friday, you walked over with me and showed me about the point you thought your motorcycle was when you heard the first shot, do you remember doing that?
Mr. BAKER – Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN – And then we paced this off measuring it from a distance which could be described as the north curbline of Main Street as extended?
Mr. BAKER – Yes, sir; that would be this one right across here.
Mr. BELIN – And we paced it off as to where you thought your motorcycle was when you heard the first shot and do you remember offhand about where you said this was as to what distance it was, north of the north curbline of Main Street?
Mr. BAKER – We approximated it was 60 to 80 feet there, north of the north curbline of Main on Houston.
Mr. DULLES – Thank you.
Mr. BELIN – Does that answer your question?
Mr. DULLES – That answers my question entirely.
Mr. BELIN – In any event you heard the first shot, or when you heard this noise did you believe it was a shot or did you believe it was something else?
Mr. BAKER – It hit me all at once that it was a rifle shot because I had just got back from deer hunting and I had heard them pop over there for about a week.
Mr. BELIN – What kind of a weapon did it sound like it was coming from?
Mr. BAKER – It sounded to me like it was a high-powered rifle.
Mr. BELIN – All right. When you heard the first shot or the first noise, what did you do and what did you see?
Mr. BAKER – Well, to me, it sounded high and I immediately kind of looked up, and I had a feeling that it came from the building, either right in front of me or of the one across to the right of it.
Mr. BELIN – What would the building right in front of you be?
Mr. BAKER – It would be this Book Depository Building.
Mr. BELIN – That would be the building located on what corner of Houston and Elm?
Mr. BAKER – That would be the northwest corner.
Mr. BELIN – All right. And you thought it was either from that building or the building located where?
Mr. BAKER – On the northeast corner.
Mr. BELIN – All right. Did you see or hear or do anything else after you heard the first noise?
Mr. BAKER – Yes, sir. As I was looking up, all these pigeons began to fly up to the top of the buildings here and I saw those come up and start flying around.
Mr. BELIN – From what building, if you know, do you think those pigeons came from?
Mr. BAKER – I wasn’t sure, but I am pretty sure they came from the building right on the northwest corner.
Mr. BELIN – Then what did you see or do?
Mr. BAKER – Well, I immediately revved that motorcycle up and was going up there to see if I could help anybody or see what was going on because I couldn’t see around this bend.
Mr. BELIN – Well, between the time you revved up the motorcycle had you heard any more shots?
Mr. BAKER – Yes, sir; I heard–now before I revved up this motorcycle, I heard the, you know, the two extra shots, the three shots.

And later.

Mr. BELIN – All right. After the third shot, then, what did you do?
Mr. BAKER – Well, I revved that motorcycle up and I went down to the corner which would be approximately 180 to 200 feet from the point where we had first stated, you know, that we heard the shots.
Mr. BELIN – What distance did you state? What we did on Friday afternoon, we paced off from the point you thought you heard the first shot to the point at which you parked the motorcycle, and this paced off to how much?
Mr. BAKER – From 180 to 200 feet.
Mr. BELIN – That is where you parked the motorcycle?
Mr. BAKER – Yes.
Mr. BELIN – All right.
I wonder if we could go on this plat, Officer Baker, and first if you could put on here with this pen, and I have turned it upside down.
With Exhibit 361, show us the spot at which you stopped your motorcycle approximately and put a “B” on it, if you would.
Mr. BAKER – Somewhere at this position here, which is approximately 10 feet from this signal light here on the northwest corner of Elm and Houston.
Mr. BELIN – All right.
You have put a dot on Exhibit 361 with the line going to “B” and the dot represents that signal light, is that correct?
Mr. BAKER – That is right, sir.
Mr. BELIN – You, on Friday, March 20, parked your motorcycle where you thought it was parked on November 22 and then we paced off the distance from the nearest point of the motorcycle to the stop light and it was 10 feet, is that correct?
Mr. BAKER – That is correct, sir.
Mr. BELIN – All right.
Now, I show you Exhibit 478 and ask you if you will, on this exhibit put an arrow with the letter “B” to this stoplight.
Mr. BAKER – Talking about this one here?
Mr. BELIN – The stoplight from which we measured the distance to the motorcycle. The arrow with the letter “B” points to the stoplight, is that correct?
Mr. BAKER – That is correct, sir.
Mr. BELIN – And you stopped your motorcycle 10 feet to the east of that stoplight, is that correct?
Mr. BAKER – That is correct, sir.
Mr. BELIN – We then paced off the distance as to approximately how far it was from the place your motorcycle was parked to the doorway of the School Book Depository Building, do you remember doing that, on March 20?
Mr. BAKER – Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN – And it appears on Exhibit 477 that that doorway is recessed, is that correct?
Mr. BAKER – That is correct, sir.
Mr. BELIN – Do you remember how far that was from the place your motorcycle was parked to the doorway?
Mr. BAKER – Approximately 45 feet.
Mr. BELIN – This same stoplight appears as you look at Exhibit 477 to the left of the entranceway to the building, is that correct?
Mr. BAKER – That is correct, sir.
Mr. BELIN – After you parked your motorcycle, did you notice anything that was going on in the area?
Mr. BAKER – Yes, sir. As I parked here
Mr. BELIN – You are pointing on Exhibit 361 to the place that you have marked with “B.”
Mr. BAKER – And I was looking westward which would be in this direction.
Mr. BELIN – By that, you are pointing down the entrance to the freeway and kind of what I will call the peninsula of the park there?
Mr. BAKER – Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN – Toward the triple underpass.
Representative BOGGS -Where is the underpass?
Mr. BAKER – The underpass is down here. This is really Elm Street, and this would be Main and Commerce and they all come together here, and there is a triple overpass.
Representative BOGGS -Right.
Mr. BAKER – At this point, I looked down here as I was parking my motorcycle and these people on this ground here, on the sidewalk, there were several of them falling, and they were rolling around down there, and all these people were rushing back, a lot of them were grabbing their children, and I noticed one, I didn’t know who he was, but there was a man ran out into the crowd and back.
Mr. BELIN – Did you notice anything else?
Mr. BAKER – Except there was a woman standing–well, all these people were running, and there was a woman screaming, “Oh, they have shot that man, they have shot that man.”
Mr. BELIN – All right.
Now, you are on Exhibit 361, and you are pointing to people along the area or bordering the entrance to that expressway and that bit of land lying to the west and north, as to where you describe these people, is that correct?
Mr. BAKER – That is correct, sir.
Mr. DULLES – Would you mark where the overpass would be, right at the end of those lines, just so we get oriented on it.
Mr. BELIN – I am trying to see down here.
Mr. DULLES – I just wanted to get a general idea.
Mr. BELIN – On Exhibit 361, sir, it wouldn’t show but it basically would be off in this direction coming down this way. The entrance to the freeway would go down here and the overpass would roughly be down here.
Mr. DULLES – As far as that?
Mr. BELIN – Yes, sir; I think Mr. Redlich is going to get a picture that will better describe it.
Mr. DULLES – All right.
Mr. BELIN – All right.
Is there anything else you saw there, Officer Baker, before you ran to the building?
Mr. BAKER – No, sir; not at that time.
Mr. BELIN – All right.
Then what did you do after surveying the situation?
Mr. BAKER – I had it in mind that the shots came from the top of this building here.
Mr. BELIN – By this building, you are referring to what?
Mr. BAKER – The Book Depository Building.
Mr. BELIN – Go on.
Representative BOGGS -You were parked right in front of the Building?
Mr. BAKER – Yes, sir; ran right straight to it.
Representative BOGGS -Right.

Now suspicious or not regarding Baker measuring out with Belin his distance after he heard the first shot.

What can be derived from this part of the episode is that from a distance p.o.v. there is not much to play with regarding observing pigeons coming over/of the roof of the TSBD and then the so called revving up to park the bike just on Elm near the side walk.

December 2017 Links

FBI Monitored W.C. critics.

FBI file offers insight into the CIA’s “gentlemanly planner of assassinations,” Richard Helms.

Richard Helms in the PBS Documentary Who Was LHO-BK

Declassified CIA report concluded director led ‘cover up’ of Kennedy assassination investigation.

Flawed Patriot: The Rise and Fall of CIA Legend Bill Harvey.

How I Came to Understand the CIA.

A Coup In Camelot Review.

The Two Oswalds.

History of Dealey Plaza forum thread. Very interesting. From 2013.

Bob Welch Has Died.

Secret Service Agent Paul Landis reviews the film Jacky.

The Rise of America’s Secret Government: The Deadly Legacy of Ex-CIA Director Allen Dulles. Interview with David Talbot from Oct 2015.

How I Came to Understand the CIA.

A plea to investigate the death of media icon Dorothy Kilgallen.

December updates


Work has taken over so time wise I did not manage to spend as much time on this as I would like to.

What is in the pipeline?

An update to the Anatomy Of The Second Floor Lunch Room Encounter. At this point about an extra 1,300 words, various pix, newspaper articles and documents have been added. I hope to have this finished within the next two weeks. At the DPUK one day seminar in London mid-Nov., I already showed a new presentation on the first chapter, but more content needs to be added before I can make the first interactive presentation. With a bit of luck in the next 4-6 weeks the first movie will be done and released on YouTube. Only six months after deadline ;)

Then there is Oswald’s Interrogations essay which I think will be ready in about a month. Like with the first one the totality has completely surprised me.  Again this will be a first draft which will be amended for the months to come after that.

I personally do not favour working on chapter three, the TSBD, as it will be as big as Essays 1 and 2 together. There is a ton when you research 30 odd individuals.

And No. 4 “The Films”, that is way off :-)

Just before year’s end I will post some Dec. links and until then I would like to extend my warmest wishes for the holidays. I hope everyone gets a bit of a break from it all.

Merry X-Mas!

Oswald seen at 12:45 in the TSBD?

Here are three newspaper articles from the 23rd and 24th of Nov, saying there are timing issues with Oswald’s sighting at Mrs. Roberts’ house visit and subsequent clothes change and the reports of Oswald being inside the TSBD at 12:45.

Eureka Humboldt Standard from Nov. 23rd 1963.

Eureka Humboldt Standard Nov 23 1963


And the Washington Post of Nov. 24th.



The Cuero Record November 24, 1963


Article No. 4 (added Feb 19th 2017)

Scottsdale Progress Nov 23rd 1963 Click to enlarge.


Then there is of course Roger Craig, his story has been told many many times before.

One of those ‘times’ is Gary Shaw. I shall post 5 pages of his fab book Cover Up. read and inspect the material for yourself. This book is hard to obtain and only at a serious price btw.

Earle V. Brown a patrolman with the DPD, while talking to the HSCA.

During the interview with the committee, Brown also added that soon after the Presidential motorcade passed, after the last shot was heard, Brown saw a man run down the stairs on the west side of the depository and then turn north away from the front of the building.(297) Brown estimated that this occurred approximately 15 minutes after the shots.(298) He said he was not able to follow the path taken by the man because of an obstructed view.(299)
Brown described the man to the committee as young, of medium size, fair complexion, and not having dark hair.(300) He said the man was dressed in light blue work pants and a shirt which was similar.(301) He did not see anything in the man’s hands.(302)
Brown was shown a picture of Dealey Plaza and the depository during the committee’s interview.(303) At that time, he noted that his view of the west door world have been obscured by an add-on shed section of the building.(304) Investigation by the committee indicated that the section was added to the building prior to 1956.(305) There is a door there at the west side of the building, but the door is hidden by uncut bushes and trees; no determination was made of the age of the bushes trees.(306) The doorway does face the trestle on which Brown was standing at the time of the assassination; the estimated distance to the trestle is approximately 500 yards.(307)
Brown told the investigators that he had not mentioned seeing the man leaving the building when he testified before the Warren commission because he had not been asked by the Commission counsel, and also because he was not able to identify the man as Lee Harvey Oswald, although the man was about Oswald’s size.(308) Brown said he thought he had mentioned the incident to his wife and to his partner at the time, Officer Lomax.(309)
Brown also mentioned that he had experienced an extrasensory perception premonition before the assassination about the President being shot by a rifle barrel protruding from a window in a brick wall.(310)

Then there are the news reports, such as the collection of Jack White’s “Escape” document.

11/24/63          Dallas – … Oswald stuck to his story that he left work early at the building from which the shots were fired because he thought it would close in honor of the President.  San Francisco Chronicle, UPI.

This by itself it worth further thinking about. If Oswald had left the TSBD in the three minutes as the Warren Commission stated, of which you can subtract 2 for the official version of Oswald’s escape down the stairs and his lunchroom encounter and the sighting by Mrs Robert Reid. It would be highly unlikely that anyone could leave the TSBD that quick

Stuart Reed

From ROKC with Love.

Very contrasty images by Stuart Reed. We got these from SouthEastern UNI. I have no idea how many generations deep this is. We were quite disappointed ourselves.

The quality is rubbish really, a privilege Ed Ledoux paid 90 bucks for.

Richard Bernabei

Richard Bernarbei (1933-1979) was a college professor at Queens University in Kingston, Ontario, Canada.

Richard Bernabei (1951). Thanks to Mati Bernabei.

About a year and a half ago I was wondering whether anyone else had noticed Prayer Man in the Wiegman and/or Darnell films before Sean Murphy started his quest less than ten years ago. I was already loosely checking out where this all originated from but I could not find anything from before the millennium until I came across Bernabei’s name  while trawling through Harold Weisberg’s archive. I read his correspondence from the late 60’s, between them and Richard Sprague and almost fell off my chair and made mention of this after I regained my composure  at ROKC. There is quite a bit of correspondence in this archive.

And by chance I came across his discovery of another person on those steps besides doorway man (a.k.a. Billy Lovelady). I shall post some of these pages of his correspondence below. These pages are the first signs of discovery of Prayer Man, although he was not named as such, that credit belongs to Sean Murphy.

Knowing that Richard Bernabei’s material was held at his workplace in Kingston  I emailed Queens University in June last year and was told that the archives were not indexed nor digitised, so a dead end for me unless I or one of my fellow ROKCers made their way over there.

I left the whole thing for what it was, as I had plenty to go on until I emailed roughly 6 months ago to see if I could get a local person to investigate for me instead. Little did I know that an individual by the name of Sean Adessky had gone through all of Bernabei’s  archive a few months before and had made an index. From that index one section jumped out to me.

Folder, “Man in the TSBD Doorway” 

–      Documents relating to the individuals seen in the doorway of the TSBD at the time of the shooting.

–      Photographs, commission documents, sketches, few pages of handwritten notes.

Totalling 35 pages I was dying to get hold of all of this material, which they promptly helped me with. The whole document is more focused on Doorway Man (Billy Lovelady) but by researching it from every possible angle he also deals with Prayer Man for  about 4-5 pages. These pages are very valuable since they contain sketches made by Richard Bernabei and  diagrams as well of the people on the front steps of the Texas School Book Depository. This material is the first hard evidence of someone actually recognising a person in that shadowy area of those front steps of the Texas School Book Depository when JFK was assassinated and also actively documenting it. How he did this is a bit of an enigma, since the material of Wiegman he had in his collection there is not much to see there. Check for yourselves in the picture gallery below.

Bear in mind that at that time no one had gotten hold of the Jimmy Darnell film where Prayer Man is seen a lot clearer than in the Dave Wiegman film. The other sources, regarding this particular segment of the case, Bernabei had were Altgens 6 and the Hughes film.

Great stuff indeed, not just from a find p.o.v. but also what else he wrote inside that document. He followed the same ‘tactic’ Sean Murphy and Richard Hocking used. Not only did he study the film and photo material but he also looked at all the available testimonies and brought Oswald’s interrogations and whereabouts and TSBD employees Carolyn Arnold and Victoria Adams into the fold. Furthermore I plaster some scans of the images he had during his research. Two copies of Altgens 6, Willis 4, 8 & 10, Wiegman, Towner and Bell.

The letter below is from Richard E. Sprague who writes in good detail about Wiegman and his film to Richard Bernarbei.

  • Sprague managed to buy a copy of the film on 35 mm, where this film is, is not known at this time. He also mentions that he has clipped some of the frames out of his film, therefor the possibility exists that the film was kept in a cut up state.
  • He explains the many generations of the film.
  • Wiegman had not seen his film at the time of their telephone interview.

The large format negatives Sprague is talking about are at the National Archives in Washington, we at ROKC managed to get copies of these.

And then the trail went dead, for almost 40 years………………..why?


Addendum Dec 30th 2016:

Mati Bernabei (Richard’s daughter) contacted me through Facebook and shared the following info with me, which she has allowed me to share:

She was 14 years old when he died in 1979. He was very unwell the last two years due to alcohol related deterioration of body and mind.

” I knew that he was deeply interested in JFK, I didn’t understand what he was working on. I was too young. Close to the time of his death (when he, and everyone, understood that his death was imminent), my mother and other friends of his convinced him to donate his JFK files to the Archives at Queen’s University. They didn’t want the work to be lost”

“. I’ve always imagined that his work would remain in dusty boxes in the Archives forever, so I am truly delighted that you found it useful . My father was an artist, heart and soul (before academia, he studied art), hence his drawings, and his understanding of visual perspective, light and shadow, etc. I’m sure he would be deeply gratified that his work is still of interest in some way. Very interesting for me to read your analysis too! Thank you!”

“When looking for the photo I reread a short bio of my father that my mom wrote in the 1990s when she doing a hobby genealogy project (for my sister and I). That mentions the donation to the archives, and I remembered more details. My father was a true mess in the last two years of his life. He had a heart murmur due to childhood rheumatic fever, thus the collapse of his body due to chain smoking and alcohol was accelerated. In June of 1979 my uncle (his brother) came to visit — by that time it was clear that there was no turning back – organ failure was occurring, and father would die soon (he died 2 months later). At that time my uncle and my mom convinced Pa to donate the JFK material. My father had already destroyed much of his artwork, in a fit of self loathing, I think. So, my mom and uncle rightly worried that he might do the same with his JFK documents.”

“My father’s struggles were obvious to people who knew him in the last few years, thus there was no need or purpose in in trying to create a facade. And, he talked and wrote about too. He was a kind, loving, tragically self-destructive person in those last years.”



Special thanks to Heather Home and Susan Office at Queens University.

Mati Bernabei for the portrait and the additional info.

And many thanks as well to Francesca Brzezicki for making the Bernabei correspondence and photo scans for me.

Wiegman scans by ROKC from the Richard E. Sprague archive at the National Archives in Wa.

Roy Truly interview 1964

This Roy Truly interview was done by Will Lang for Dolores Kraich and sent to Holland McCombs, who was bureau chief for TIME and LIFE magazine in Rio de Janeiro, Buenos Aires, Mexico City, and Dallas.

It deals with Truly’s recollections of Oswald’s job application, the day of the assassination, the second floor lunch room encounter, but also delves into the whole Doorway man matter.

Any nuggets?

A few:

  • Truly, on page 2 describes Oswald as an ‘undetected paranoiac’
  • Page 3,  he states that Oswald could not have known about the motorcade passing by the TSBD until 72 hrs beforehand. And starts to speculate about and eventually condemns Oswald heavily “But as I suppose we all now realize, he had to shoot somebody or do something big. He probably would have shot anybody who was big enough if he had the chance or could make the chance”.
  • Page 4 digs into the doorway-man Lovelady vs Oswald saga.
  • Page 5, he discusses the day JFK got shot. He mentions Lovelady and being outside on the steps, and himself standing in front of those steps near the curb of Elm.  What is downright rubbish is his description of a wave of people making their way back and that Baker had to push his way though the crowd. The Couch and Darnell films show that Baker had a clear run towards the TSBD building.
  • On page 8 he contradicts himself regarding this wave of people. “there were not so many people out there in front of this building when the President’s car passed here”
  • Page 9 shows that the author(s) forwarded a copy to Hugh Aynesworth in 1967.


Overall a well rehearsed interview, a puff piece by the looks of it, but Truly makes the same mistake again like he did with his statements, testimony and newspaper reports, he always adds info that makes one question his claims.



November 2016 Links

CIA’s Internal Investigation Of The Bay Of Pigs.

Marita Lorenz in Vanity Fair.

Lucien Haag’s Flawed Analysis of the First Shot Fired in the JFK Assassination.

Shaker Heights man guarding Kennedys witnessed JFK assassination (photos).

What Became of JFK’s Grave Digger.

The Zapruder family’s complicated history with the JFK assassination film.


Close but no cigar: how America failed to kill Fidel Castro.

RFK saw conspiracy in JFK’s assassination.

Jackie Kennedy’s Actual White House Tour Proves Natalie Portman’s Portrayal Is a Masterpiece.

Natalie Portman details horror Jackie Kennedy experienced during JFK assassination.

I have won the Mary Ferrell / JFK Lancer “New Frontier” award!



Mary Ferrel JFK Lancer 2016 New Frontier Award


Prayer Man on Dutch TV and Radio-1

Monday the 14th I joined Monique Sleiderink  of TV Oost (that’s the local Dutch TV channel for the East of the country) for an interview about Prayer Man. I had a great time, simple as that. Hope to join them again when the book is out. There is a nice page made up on RTV Oost’s website. In Chrome right click and choose translate. Here are some pictures taken during the TV show, one with Monique outside in the corridor and some screenshots of the video itself.

And on the 22nd I did an interview for KRO/NCRV’s Groot Op 5.  They had picked up on my TV oost appearance and wanted to do an interview the next day, but I was travelling back then, so we postponed until the 22nd. Again a short interview about 4 minutes which was great to do.

Both interviews have taught me a bit about trying to get the message across in a short amount of time, as if I were to put the evidence forward I would need at least 4 hours :-)

I have been given both recordings and I shall supply the videos with subtitles and upload to YouTube in due time.

The steps of the TSBD

Thanks to Brian Kelshaw  for the pix and Scott Reid, his willing assistant.


November updates

Hi all,

first this site and a few others got hacked and had a spam bot installed that sent millions of spam mails. Google blacklisted the site, but has all been rectified and given a clean state of health and is a lot more secure now.

Then there was the one day seminar in London, we had 15 souls downstairs at The Greene Man pub near Great Portland St. Dealey Plaza UK held a one day seminar where I did a talk about the 2nd floor encounter and also talked about Oswald’s interrogations, which is my next essay. I hope to have it finished before year’s end. Don’t hold me to it tho ;).

We followed with a screening of A Coup In Camelot. We managed to watch it on a 65″ 4K screen. Everyone enjoyed watching the documentary a lot. I myself enjoyed the Barry Ernest and Vince Palamara sections, even though I am well familiar with their work, it was good to see their research presented in this excellent documentary.


Barry Ernest in A Coup In Camelot. Click to enlarge.

Barry Keane did a fitting tribute to J.F.K. at the very end, like he always does every year. After which half of us went back into the pub since it had been such an enjoyable event. Talks about Canterbury have already started and we will try and get a killer line-up for this event. 2.5 days of constant yapping about all types of aspects of the JFK Assassination, what’s not to love :)


Out of the blue Stu Wexler told me that I was being presented with an award at the Mary Ferrell awards at the JFK Lancer conference in Dallas last weekend.

I have been given the Mary Ferrell New Frontier Award 2016 at the JFK Lancer Conference for my Anatomy essay. The Award is for new research in respect to my work on further exploring the official story of the Oswald encounter.  The Pioneer awards are intended to recognise and honour new research in a variety of fields. This year Bill Simpich, Malcolm Blunt and a few others received the awards along with me.

At first my reply to Stu was “yeah right”, but I was quickly convinced otherwise.

I am humbled by this Award and have to thank the JFK Lancer team, for the great honour of this accolade and since it is only the first piece of four, it is a major stimulant to continue.

Thank you!

The article is due a substantial update so watch this space.


October 2016 Links

Embalmer also connects area to the assassination. From Nov 2013.

The Truth About Dallas. June 2016.

Mystery of Flight 455: Forty years on questions remain about whether the CIA was behind the bombing of a Cuban passenger jet in which 73 people died.

The CMC Permindex Papers. And more HERE.

CIA Reviews “Devil’s Chessboard”.

David Talbot on Democracy Now. Part 1.  Part 2.

Free the Darnell film.

The video below of Congressman Neil Gallagher is a must watch, especially if you are interested about Hoover.

Howard Willens and The American Scholar.

The Gay Man Charged in the Assassination of JFK. This is actually a rubbish piece on Clay Shaw.

Middletown residents recall John F. Kennedy’s campaign visit.

Jean Kennedy Smith, the Last Living Kennedy Sibling, Shares Never-Before-Heard Stories.


The video below shows alternative angles of Oswald being escorted thru the DPD corridor. It is not clear who made this docu, could be CBS or NBC.

CIA Will Place Its CREST Database Online.

The Death Of Prayer Woman part-2

So the lads have been back at it again, this time using the Wiegman film. After being obliterated by my previous post Duncan MacRae, Carig Lamson and Brian Doyle aka as Ralph Yates on Amazon and Albert Doyle (the dead father’s account) thought they’d give their verbal excrement technique another go.

Let’s compare pix shall we? In this case size does matter!

The Chris Davidson GIF, from Dave Wiegman stills. Source: Death In Dealey Plaza. Resolution of this DVD 768 x 576 px.  Let’s take a look at a sample of this in a 1920 x 1080 px window. I am doing this for comparison reasons. This is not the exact same frame. This is a screen grab I managed to get myself from the DVD in question.


Click pic to enlarge.

The real source for this version of the Wiegman film is a theatrical newsreel version from 1964 from UCLA, the makers of the Death In Dealey Plaza would probably have a 5th generation copy to make their dupes from so that makes this a 6th or even a 7th generation, since their tapes were transferred to DVD and the screen shots used for the GIF are then  8th generation repros.
1st gen: Wiegman original
2nd gen enlargement to 35mm
3rd gen postive film sold on to other companies such as Hearst and UCLA
4th gen negative made from positive
5th gen makers of DIDP get a copy.
6th transfer to tape then the question is does it go from tape to DVD or from the dupe they got from UCLA. My guess is the former rather than the latter since there is not a huge difference in resolution and this happened more than ten years ago (the dvd rel. that is)
So the DVD would be the 7th gen.
The CD Gif the 8th
The Prayer Woman image the 9th!

Now we take the CD Gif and place it in the same window, yes that is how big the original is. Chris rotated the pic to make it line up with the other shot. It has had some post production as the contrast has been increased and the photo appears to be lighter. But size-wise it is pretty much the same as my copy.


Click pic to enlarge.

Now I post MacRae’s PW image next to the same GIF. And also inserted a 400 DPI version of the same CD GIF next to it.


Click pic. to enlarge.



So an 8th generations deep reproduction of an image, in its size as shown in the photograph above is being drastically cropped, “enhanced” and manipulated and becomes the actual 9th generation copy.

From this so called enhancement we can conclude the following:

  1. It’s size has been increased significantly even tho the resolution of the enlargement has been set back at 72 dpi.
  2. Increase of contrast and darkened overall
  3. The top of Prayer Man’s head has been cropped off.
  4. The appearance of wheel barrow man, if Prayer Man is Prayer Woman then surely MacRae, Lamson and Doyle can explain the sudden appearance of wheel barrow man. Not that anyone will believe this to be someone, but this points at things are being ‘made to appear’ inside that picture due to its excessive enlargement and post-production.
Wheel barrow man!. Click pic. to enlarge.

Wheel barrow man!. Click pic. to enlarge.


Now I place the Sprague neg. (No. 3) in there, the negs that we scanned in with a flatbed scanner have a much higher resolution than anything else publicly available and shown by any photographic researcher. This is not the exact frame as the one inside the CD GIF (No. 1) but it is very close. And the MacRae interpretation at No. 2.

The generations for this particular shot would be:

1st gen: Wiegman original.
2nd gen enlargement to 35mm.
3rd gen postive film sold on to other companies such as Hearst and UCLA.
4th gen negative made from positive.
5th gen is the positive made from that negative sold to Sprague.
6th gen are the Sprague negs.
7th gen the scans of which you see the one on the right (No. 3). They are also reproductions from large format negatives.
Source: letter from Richard E. Sprague.


Click pic. to enlarge

In all honesty the area that has been enlarged and manipulated by them is even smaller than shown with the No. 1 pic since they cropped the top of his head off.

I have left this image untouched besides drawing a marquee and applying auto levels to bring Prayer Man out a little more out of the darkness. The dust, even the hairs and scratches are visible on it and even that is enough to kill off the glasses, the bag, the teacup (nice touch Dunc’ but that’s stretching things a little too far….) and all the other make believe hooey advocated by Doyle and MacRae. But here it is at its best. Mind you that these are flatbed scans and we are in the process of getting these negs properly scanned in. And I for one cannot wait to show them!

MacRae and Lamson provide absolutely no evidence of how these images have come about, they are not able to reproduce any of it on any other Wiegman frame and they shroud their work in secrecy instead. Doyle just whimpers on like an unruly child, but it’s his crazy deluded headset that is most worrying, his Fetzerian remarks which are interlaced with Cinque style delusions are to be monitored closely.








Skillful photo experts, something Doyle keeps coming up with as support for his delusions, would not go along with his plan at all in the first place. They’d say GTFO and get me the best copy available, instead of messing about with 5th-9th generations down. So how about it Doyle? While you were taking a selfie in front of the TSBD did you bother to go inside and ask for the first generation copy of the Darnell film? Of course you did not……….

They can only debate fuzzy pictures, since they cannot refute the other mountain of evidence that places Oswald on the first floor and outside on the landing while JFK was blasted away.

Finally make up your own mind about this, but I know who my money is on and he ain’t a she.

By Stan Dane.

By Stan Dane.

Mixed batch Jim Murray

Some Parkland, Dallas streets, Dealey Plaza and The Trade Mart (of which there are more to come).

All pix by Jim Murray-Black Star. ROKC Scans from the Richard E. Sprague Archive at the National Archives.



Bill Shelley and Billy Lovelady in the Couch film

In a small section of the Couch film researcher Gerda Duncke found Lovelady and Shelley in the Couch film, which also partially captured Baker’s dash towards the TSBD.

Gerda Dunckel pointed them (Shelley and Lovelady) out in 2012.

Here are videos of her Gifs


There have been some doubts about the identity of them but I was sold on it back then and even more now.

This ROKC scan of a Couch print from the archives (Richard E. Sprague collection) at first sight did not offer much detail overall, but all the more with regards the two persons who we thought were Bill Shelley and Billy Lovelady.


Click pic for full size.

Well this shot and especially its close-ups seals it.And is also conform their initial statements. And this visual clincher shows that they both lied about their presence on the steps during their WC testimony.


Click pic for full size


Click pic for full size


Click pic for full size.

Jim Murray at Parkland and DPD 3rd floor

Jim Murray at Parkland and DPD 3rd floor

Jim Murray photos inside the DPD 3rd floor, near Captain Fritz’s office. Also two shots of Parkland at night.

Scanned by ROKC from the Richard E. Sprague Collection at the Archives.

September 2016 links

Woody Harrelson: My father, the contract killer.

New footage of JFK in Ireland is revealed in film archive.

Did Frank Sinatra Kill JFK?


Tom Alyea interview from 2013.

DPD police officers HSCA testimony by Denis Morissette.


JFK: The Events of November 22, 1963 video with Buell Frazier and others.

The Washington Post

I managed to buy a set of front sections of the Washington Post Nov 23rd up to and including Nov 29th.

Then had these sent to Terry Martin who scanned the pages in for me by making  scans of each quarter page, and from whereon I stitched them back together as the scans would allow me to. I think I did an alright job.

I am only showing mostly Oswald related stuff.

All ROKC scans by Terry Martin.

The large pages are fairly big, click on the image to see full size scan.


Nov 23rd.


Love that highlighted bit above!


Nov 24th

moorman-page9-wash-post-nov-24 ROKC Scan

washington-post-nov-24-1963-page-1-rokc-scanwashington-post-nov-24-1963-page-7-rokc-scanThe first bit refers to Molina, the second to the encounter. At 12:45?


Nov 25th.




Nov 26th.

washington-post-nov-26-1963-page-6-rokc-scan washinton-post-nov-26-1963-page-16-rokc-scan zapruder-rights-washingtpn-post-nov-26-1963-page-6-rokc-scan


Nov 27th.

spoof-arifle-ad-wash-post-nov-27-1963-rokc-scan washington-post-nov-27-1963 washington-post-nov-27-1963-2


Nov 28th.

washington-post-nov-28-1963-page-3-rokc-scan washington-post-nov-28-1963-page-4-rokc-scan

Nov 29th.



Debunking the 2nd floor lunchroom encounter with The Lone Gunman Podcast

Episode 124 of the Lone Gunman podcast, yours truly for two hours talking about the 2nd floor lunch room fugezi.

During the talk I make a mistake: I attributed exposing Oswald as a subversive to Jack Revill was Hosty and not Bookhout.

Thank you Rob Clark and the 1,425 people who have listened to it these past 48 hours already.


By: Stan Dane


August 2016 Links

Unpublished Gaeton Fonzi Essay.

New film explores Jacqueline Kennedy’s hand in JFK’s legacy.

Mysterious ‘vote JFK’ billboards are popping up in Texas.

Trained to Kill: The Inside Story of the CIA Plots against Castro, Kennedy, and Che. Hardcover – Antonio Veciana’s up and coming book to be released April 4, 2017

Interview with Cecil Stoughton – Nov. 2013.

Hammarskjold and Kennedy vs. The Power Elite.

Abe And Ruby’s Rabbi.

Betrayal: A JFK Honor Guard Speaks. Out on Nov. 1st 2016.

JFK Murder Suspects by Larry Hancock.

‘JFK assassination was an inside job’: Ex-government agent claimed ‘someone from his team’ killed the president in remarkable deathbed confession to director Oliver Stone.

Dinkin Intercept Names JFK Killers – including William Harvey.

Jim Murray in Dealey Plaza

More shots by Jim Murray of Black Star, scanned by ROKC from the Richard E. Sprague Collection at NARA.

More Jim Murray inside the DPD

Found another batch with some interesting shots taken by Jim Murray. We see Captain George Max Doughty with Oswald’s finger prints, also Buell Wesley Frazier captured from behind while moving through the corridor and we see Jesse Curry of course.  I like the shot with Oswald pleading his innocence to the press core while Elmer Boyd looks into Murray’s lens. I have to say that Murray had a real good sense where to be to get the shots.

I have more, but it looks like I am heading to busy times, so will have to find a slot to do some, whenever that may be. But for now enjoy this set and the previous ones.



Previous sets


Anatomy of the second floor lunch room encounter.

Anatomy of the second floor lunch room encounter.


Last updated Dec 6th 2016.

This essay got too big for its own good, more than 23,000 words which resulted in the blog software unable to cope and ended up crashing numerous times.

Thanks to Bernard Wilds webmaster of DPUK we now have a PDF of the Anatomy of the second floor lunch room encounter available, at 81 pages a light read ;)

Update Dec 6th 2016: this article has been awarded the Mary Ferrell and JFK Lancer New Frontier Award in late November.


Credit: Stan Dane.

Credit: Stan Dane.

Credit: Stan Dane.

July 2016 Links

The Story of David Atlee Phillips.

LBJ: The President Who Marked His Territory. From June 14, 2008.

Dan Hardway’s Declaration about the HSCA.

Rick Bauer Talks Dave Ferrie And The Murder Of JFK.

David Ferrie dead in his bed.

The Incubus of Intervention by Greg Poulgrain.

Longtime LBJ aide Mildred Stegall finally tells her story. From Feb 2013.

Oliver Stone links Pokémon Go to totalitarianism during privacy debate.



When Henry Wade Executed An Innocent Man.

The Bay Of Pigs and JM/WAVE Part 1. From Nov. 2014.


LBJ Poster

Here’s something cute…..

I have this from a Canadian researcher’s archive and don’t know anything else about it. Surely there is a record of this quote somewhere.

But to print it as a poster…..


Edit: Joseph Backes pointed me to two links regarding this quote.


20160629_115246 (1)


Last batch of the NARA documents till now. Courtesy of ROKC.

HSCA report Robert Morrow.

HSCA interview Robert J Jamison.



IMG_20160628_0039-1026 Beckley



HSCA Documents Buddy Walthers.


William James Lowery HSCA testimony.


William James Lowery is not known to many, but Joe Molina changed all that when he insisted on giving his testimony to the Warren Commission. In his W.C. testimony Molina states:

Mr. MOLINA. I just wanted to state in the record that I want to deny any accusations if there is any doubt in anybody’s mind.
Mr. BALL. No; there is nobody I ever heard has accused you of anything.
Mr. MOLINA. I know there’s a fella that I talk with that belongs to the or had worked with the FBI that knows my position in this thing.
Mr. BALL. I never heard anybody accuse you of any wrongdoing in connection with this matter.
Mr. MOLINA. In fact, Bill Lowery worked with the FBI.
Mr. BALL. You don’t have to worry about that: no one is accusing you of anything.
Mr. MOLINA. Except the local people here.

Lowery was working for the feds and he was infiltrating groups and attending meetings to inform on them to the FBI. I will write a piece on him later this year.

William James Lowery NBC News

The testimony below was supposedly ‘Postponed In Full’ but was released many many years ago. Very interesting read.


Joe Molina’s HSCA interview which was supposedly to be ‘postponed in full’ yet it was already released in 1998.

Some interesting titbits in Molina’s testimony, see for yourself.


I am working on redoing the page on Molina, but this will take some time since I have a few articles to do before I can dig into this matter.


All scans by ROKC.


Scott Malone


Amos Euins


Amos Euins HSCA


Pierce Allman.

Allman looked back at the TSBD and saw two Negros up in a window of the TSBD, so he looked that way almost straight after, as Bonnie Ray Williams, Harold Norman and James Jarman made their way to the other side of the building to get a better view of what had happened down Elm. Allman did not see a rifle being withdrawn.

From his observations it is highly uncertain he encountered Oswald, he is not able to describe the man he encountered, yet the man who asks him to keep his call short and then get off the phone, he describes the possible Military Intelligence man  in very good detail.


Jack Edwin Dougherty’s statements and notes from the HSCA all scans below by ROKC.

Jim Hosty files from the HSCA.

Hosty met with Jack Revill in the garage of the DPD and threw Oswald under a bus at about 3 PM on Nov 22nd. Revill made a report on instruction of Captain Gannaway describing the conversation that made Hosty look bad. Revill testified in front of the WC about the whole event as well. Made Hoover’s club look bad so Hosty got transferred to Kansas and docked on his pay.


HSCA interview Wes Wise.



More HSCA documents scanned in at NARA by ROKC.

Buell Frazier


ROKC has managed to get to NARA and get a few boxes shown with HSCA documents of some of the TSBD employees, and we found a few bits of interest. It was surprising to see that certain folders were kept in the CIA classified section. As of now I have no knowledge whether these are to be released next year.

Bill Shelley had a record for theft. The charges relate to 1960 and 1969. The one from 1960 refers to weapons theft. The other one is unclear and perhaps the Dallas County Records can solve that piece of the puzzle.

So Billy Lovelady had a weapons charge arrest record prior the assassination, and Ochus Campbell helped him out paying off his remainder of the outstanding fine. And now Bill Shelley. Yet Charles Douglas Givens who had a narcotics charge was literally hounded by the DPD. Or did Billy and Bill get ‘the treatment’ as well and is that why they lied during their WC testimony?

Criminal Record Bill Shelley

Criminal Record Bill Shelley, click pic. to enlarge.


Danny Garcia Arce in his HSCA statement: “Lee Oswald rode down in the elevator with us…..” which contradicts the whole elevator race story. They may have surely had some of these races, but not at that time.

IMG_20160628_0001-Danny Garcia Arce

Danny Garcia Arce statement HSCA 1978. Click pic. to enlarge.


Roy Truly’s and Marrion Baker’s FBI statements from Sept 23rd 1964 were rushed back to Washington, probably to be there to be included with the Warren Report which was printed already and to be handed to LBJ the next day. They wanted to make sure these statements were back in time. The timing of this is nothing short of amazing.

IMG_20160628_0047-Baker & Truly

Cover letter to have the FBI statements by Roy Truly and Marrion Baker being sent back to Washington a.s.a.p. Click pic. to enlarge.

June 2016 Links

Marina Oswald’s letter to the ARRB-1996.

FBI attacks Warren Commission Critics video.

Allen Dulles’ “Indonesian Strategy” and the Assassination of John F. Kennedy.

In Search Of The Third Man.

Lee Oswald in New Orleans-ROKC Scan-1


Bob Tanenbaum’s presentation on the HSCA.

JFK Conspiracy Author Wins a Big One Against City Hall’s Catch-22 Defense.

Congress passes FOIA improvement act.

Dan Hardway’s Declaration about the HSCA.


CIA document Lee Oswald’s activities Nov 22-24

Thanks to Malcolm Blunt for handing me this document from the HSCA while at the DPUK Canterbury seminar last April. This CIA document, sadly undated, shows Lee Oswald’s activities from Nov 22nd to the 24th.

The fact that the CIA went through all the witness statements and testimony and put them in chronological order is interesting by itself. There are even two pages with diagrams of who was were.

Interesting indeed.



May 2016 Links

‘Kick’ Kennedy: JFK’s forgotten sister.

Church Committee.

The Gunboat Cowboys: Roy Hargraves”, with Larry Hancock.

Five Presidents by Clint Hill with Lisa McCubbin: A Review By Vince Palamara.

Castro Figured Out The JFK Case in Five Days.

Exclusive: Former Secret Service Agent Clint Hill Reveals Why JFK Didn’t Want Jackie Kennedy Photographed in a Bikini.

Photo: Bettmann Contributor

Photo: Bettmann Contributor

In the Eye of History — Disclosures in the JFK Assassination Medical Evidence, by William Matson Law.

Hall of Fame profile: ‘The Game’ post-JFK in 1963 forever affected Linus Baer – Central Texas Football – Waco Trib

Rumour has it Lee Harvey Oswald was in Yellow Springs.

Missing Church Committee Transcripts.

Donald Trump, JFK, Oswald and the 2016 Presidential Election By James DiEugenio.

The Formation of the Clark Panel: More of the Secret Team at Work? By Lisa Pease. From 1998.

Concerned About Nuclear Weapons Potential, John F. Kennedy Pushed for Inspection of Israel Nuclear Facilities.

Why John F. Kennedy was assassinated.

When They Killed JFK They Killed America.

Body of William Colby Is Found on Riverbank. From 1996.


Former Kennedy Administration officials met at the Decatur House in Washington, D.C., to recount their White House experiences.


Billy Lovelady was not standing on the top of the steps

Lately a few individuals have tried to claim that Prayer Man was very short and they used ‘calculations’ and the ‘fact’ that Lovelady was standing on the landing when Dave Wiegman filmed the front of the TSBD. They  used Lovelady’s height to ‘prove’ that Prayer Man (read: Lee Harvey Oswald) was way shorter and could not possibly be Oswald.

Let’s debunk this shall we?

All types of faulty and/or made-up calculations and lines drawn on a picture were presented as analytical research, none of which was supported by any type of evidence. No one bothered to mention what camera Wiegman was using, nor could any one present an exact location as to where Wiegman was filming from, add on that all this happened while the vehicle he was standing in was moving which makes it even more difficult to ascertain Wiegman’s position.

In short: utter junk science that no one else than the believers Richard Gilbride and Albert Doyle seemed to subscribe to and they ended up trolling a few forums with their science.

While going through the photos of the Wiegman film I came across a neat little find two days ago, something that I was only able to do so as we managed to get a high resolution scan from the NARA archives in the Richard E. Sprague collection.

The find was Bill Shelley (underneath No.3), with Prayer Man being No. 1 and Billy Lovelady No. 2. This pic. is from the second segment Wiegman filmed of the front of the TSBD and it also shows that Lovelady has stepped down (compared to his position in the first segment) and it also shows that Shelley has moved slightly more to the left (he is now behind Otis Williams whereas he is more to the right of him in the first segment, see the 4th photograph below). This is a good indicator that while the shots were fired they already made a move to go down and check out what was going on. The two Gerda Dunckel GIFs show that Shelley and Lovelady had left the steps and made their way to the rail road yard further west of the building within seconds after. I go in great detail about this  HERE.

Shelly was standing on the top of the landing. Whereas Lovelady was not, I will get to that in a moment.

q Prayer Man, Billy Lovelady and Bill Shelley in the Wiegman film. Click pic to enlarge.

Lovelady had a very curious attitude as he is seen in much lower on the steps and to the left, behind Roy Lewis/Carl Edward Jones in the Hughes film. This is while the motorcade is turning on to Elm St.

Lovelady in the Robert Hughes film. Click pic. to enlarge.

Altgens 6 shows that Lovelady moved up and further to the right, his distance is further away from Lewis/Jones.

Billy Lovelady in Altgens 6, click pic. to enlarge


Albert Doyle and Richard Gilbride have been claiming, that Prayer Man is too short to be Oswald. This of course is not supported by anything but made-up calculations and picking up pseudo science from other peeps such as Drew Phipps and presenting pix with neat little lines and numbers that basically amount to nothing. Not one person at the forums this bunk was posted at supported any of it.


The kicker is that Lovelady was not standing on the top landing, because he is seen leaning against the railing in the first segment of the Wiegman film. Check his body posture compared to all other individuals on  those steps, they are all standing straight, even though Lovelady is following the events happening down Elm St and his body is turned into that direction his body posture shows he is leaning. Take a look at the 2nd segment photo and you see that Lovelady is standing straight on the steps, as he is making a move going downwards


Lovelady leaning in Wiegman, click pic. to enlarge.

Lovelady stepping down, click pic. to enlarge.

The issue with that is you cannot lean against the railing while standing on the top landing!

See for yourself in the photograph below. The railing is mounted flush on the vertical part of the last step leading to the landing, the bar of the railing would be slightly in front of the landing.  The deniers will claim that it is still possible, yet it would be so awkward and since Lovelady’s posture doesn’t ascribe to that it is safe to say that Lovelady from standing just behind Roy Lewis / Carl Edward Jones moved upward and to the right to the 5th or the 6th step of the TSBD stairs.



Front steps TSBD


The lens Wiegman used was a wide angle lens, this creates distortions and Lovelady while moving downward as in the 2nd segment would appear slightly taller than Prayer Man since he is, by that time, standing more forward.

But what is more important is that Prayer Man is of roughly the same height as Lovelady and THAT makes Prayer Man, besides the enormous amount of other evidence a prime candidate to be Lee Harvey Oswald.

No stranger

No woman

No other TSBD worker has been identified for that position.

Oswald himself said: ”Out with Bill Shelley, in front”.

No dwarf either.

Albert Doyle and Richard Gilbride should get back to the drawing board and come up with their next scheme as this one, like their previous ones is dead in the water.




Then there is another issue as to what Prayer Man was doing with the shiny object he is bring towards his face.

On my calibrated screen (and if you do not have one you may experience issues seeing this clearly as I do) the Wiegman film shows he using one hand (his right) to bring iot towards his mouth. This is not a camera! But more than likely the bottle that was photographed in Prayer Man’s position after the deed.

Close-ups of Robin Unger’s gif.


Sniper position in DalTex building by Shel Hershorn

Some Shel Hershorn shots, quite rare (not any more :) ) and show a possible sniper position, which has a way better view than the so called sniper’s nest on the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository.

I have no idea when and  why they went into the DalTex building to take these pix of a possible sniper’s position.

ROKC Exclusive scans from the Richard E. Sprague collection at NARA.


I asked Bob Prudhomme what rifle was being used in these shots and he replied the following:

“This is a sporterised 6.5mm Carcano, but not the short rifle model that Oswald allegedly used. This is a sporterized 6.5mm Carcano M91 (or M91/41) long rifle. Three things give it away.

1. The distinctive protruding Carcano magazine.

2. The very obvious split bridge on the receiver, requiring the bolt handle to be almost vertical when extracting a cartridge.

3. The M91 and M91/41 were made with straight bolt handles. If you look closely, you can actually see where a gunsmith has heated this handle up with a torch, and bent it downward, giving it a more sporty look.

I might also point out that, if this is a Carcano rife (and I believe it is one), there is no way a scope could be mounted directly above the receiver, as shown here. It would have to be offset to the left of the receiver, as can be seen on C2766.

There are two reasons for having to offset the scope to the left on a Carcano.

1. As I pointed out, the bolt handle stands straight up when extracting an empty cartridge, and would hit a scope directly above the receiver. Even the bent down handles will interfere with a scope.

2. As the Carcano must be loaded with a clip, there is no way a clip can be inserted into the magazine with a scope directly above the receiver.


Then there is the issue as to when these were taken, well….at the education forum the discussion pointed to an old thread started by Don Roberdeau about Mack White who was in Dealey Plaza as an eleven year old.

I quote: “At one point, my father pointed out the so-called “sniper” window to me. As I was looking up, my eye wandered away from the window to the fire escape on the building across the street–the Dal-Tex building-where I saw two men taking turns looking through the scope of a rifle mounted on a tripod.

I was alarmed. “What are they doing?” I asked.

“It’s part of the investigation,” said my father.

So the police were checking out an alternative sniper perch. Evidently, that morning, there was still something resembling a real investigation. The investigation, of course, would end the next day with Oswald’s death.”

More at Mack White’s website.


Bluntly Speaking With Bart Kamp

Lone Gunman Podcast 115 featuring yours truly and the Malcolm Blunt interview from the Dealey Plaza Uk seminar in Canterbury on April 24th.

Rob Clark and I talk about Prayer Man, Joe Molina, Pauline Sanders, Mrs Robert Reid, Otis Williams, Marrion Baker and of course Roy Truly.



More Jim Murray aftermath photos

I went through some of the contact sheets ROKC managed to snag from Richard E Sprague’s NARA collection.

Here is another batch.

All photos: Jim Murray.

Pauline Sanders, Mrs Robert Reid and O.V. Campbell

What are the odds that both of Truly’s secretaries have the same conversation with the TSBD’s vice president just after the shooting?

Pauline Sanders who stood on top of the steps of the Texas School Book Depository, and Mrs Robert Reid who stood with Truly and Campbell near Elm St. both discussed the trajectory of where the shots came from just after the shooting, but with a few neat little twists.

Reid makes mention of it in her handwritten statement of Nov 23rd 1963, but there is one important fact that seems to be overlooked by many:

In it she says “I remarked to Mr. Campbell who was standing near by that I thought that the shots had come from our building. But I heard someone else say no, I think it was further down the street

In the FBI affidavit of Nov. 26th 1963 there is no mention of this conversation at all. Nor is there any mention of this in the Secret Service Report of Dec 4th.

And when it is time for her testimony in front of the Warren Commission that ‘someone else’ who replied to her on Nov. 22nd has become O.V. Campbell instead!


Pauline Sanders makes mention of the O.V. Campbell conversation on Nov. 24th in her FBI statement, and she does not repeat it anywhere else nor does she get called up to testify so that’s that.

But Sanders does have a telephone conversation with Reid and a truckload of hearsay is being relayed (with regards Oswald’s so called encounter with Reid in the 2nd floor office). And the whole thing is jotted down in support of Reid’s and Sander’s testimony.



DPUK Canterbury Seminar 2016 Videos

DPUK Canterbury Seminar 2016 Videos.


DPUK Canterbury Seminar 2016 cake.


Here are the videos of the Dealey Plaza UK Canterbury 2016 Talks.

I have kept my 2 hour talk offline, as in about a month there will be a set of movies that will be very similar to this talk, you will have to do with my moderated talk with Malcolm Blunt.

This interview will also be screened at next week’s LoneGunmanPodcast where I will be talking about the Dealey Plaza UK seminar and a few bits about Prayer Man and the up and coming movies.


Saturday April 23rd.

Alaric Rosman – Confusion Over The Rifle.


Larry Hancock – National Security Response on Nov . 22nd v Other Major Events.


Paul Brown – Fingerprints Of Intelligence Part 2.


Sunday April 24th.

Barry Keane – Address in Memory of JFK.



Malcolm Blunt Q&A with Bart Kamp.



Greg Parker – Lee Harvey Oswald’s Cold War.


Bill Beadle – Presidential Assassinations


Jean Shields – Friends & Family.



April 2016 Links

Why CBS Covered Up the JFK Assassination (Part 1).

Why CBS Covered Up the JFK Assassination (Part 2).

In the show’s final episode, Jake follows through with his mission, but the results are disastrous.

Readers Guide To The JFK Assassination.

Was the father of presidential hopeful Cruz involved in the JFK assassination? It’s complete rubbish, but I thought I’d add this anyway.

Oliver Stone interview in Interview Magazine.

The CIA’s first grandmaster.

Oswald’s Wedding Suit For Sale.


JFK. A Motorcade. A Rifle. But this Wasn’t Dallas.

How the CIA Writes History.

Abraham Bolden discusses civil rights, JFK assassination, injustice on behalf of the US government and redemption.

The Criterion Collection Review | The Kennedy Films of Robert Drew & Associates.

The Complicated Sisterhood of Jackie Kennedy and Lee Radziwill.

Photo: AP

The Great White Case Officer by David Atlee Phillips.

Dealey Plaza UK Seminar in Canterbury

April 23rd and 24th the Dealey Plaza UK research group held their annual seminar in Canterbury. This was the 14th edition!

Location for its attendees to present their findings was Christchurch University right next to the center. Canterbury itself is a beacon of historic monuments, some of it is a feast for the human eye.



After Stuart Galloway bid everyone welcome it was up to Alaric Rosman to talk about the confusion regarding the rifle. The large projected screen proved to be a major asset for power point presentations.

I followed Alaric with the first half of my Prayer Man talk. In this one hour slot I discussed the films and the ongoing search to obtain better copies of them and also discussed some of the TSBD employees. One hour is not enough to discuss all the details of Lovelady, Shelley, Frazier and some of the others. I could easily fill two hours on them alone!

After that most of us headed for the pub nearby to scoff on fast food and plenty of beers for us to return and for me to discuss part 2 of my talk. This segment dealt with Lee Oswald’s interrogations and the second floor lunch room encounter which went from that to there was no 2nd floor lunchroom encounter to there never was a 2nd floor at the TSBD in the first place! This last remark is a joke obviously but the collection of statements and screw ups by all involved parties destroy this particular fairy tale of nailing Oswald for the assassination.

Straight after that Larry Hancock gave an excellent presentation on National Security Response on Nov 22nd vs other major events. Great talk but staring at just a few pages with text is demanding, a few pix alongside this would make it even more interesting. Sadly Ian Griggs did not feel well enough to hold his talk about the Dallas Police Department, a real shame and I hope he will be able to do this soon at one of the mini seminars this year, I for one look very much forward to this. The man is an authority on this subject and needs to be heard

Closing off was Paul Brown’s talk Fingerprints of Intelligence part 2 (the first installment being shown in 2015). Part 3 to follow next year, I very much look forward to that.

After that we all retreated to our rooms only for us to get together again at Pilgrim’s Hotel for a lush dinner. I had the pleasure to discuss things with Malcolm Blunt who is just a vault of information regarding this case. Everyone was quite tired and most of us went back to our rooms for a well  needed sleep (I got up at 5 and by 11 I was beat…).

The next day started with Barry Keane giving an excellent opening address in memory of JFK, accompanied with a nice set of slides. This was followed by the auction of various JFK related coins, books and films all handled by Mike Dworetsky and Allan Johnson.

Then Greg Parker came on, first with the movie he had prepared for us all to discuss his vols 1 & 2 of Lee Harvey Oswald’s Cold War, after which we got him on the telephone to ask him a few questions regarding Ferrie, CAP, Oswald etc.

Then we had a quick lunch thanks to a delivery of M&S and after that Malcolm Blunt and I sat down for an hour’s long Q&A. To me this was the highlight of the weekend to be confronted with such a wealth of knowledge.

Bill Beadle followed with his talk of presidential assassinations, barely a word about JFK, but no less interesting. Without visuals a bit hard to stay focused on the info being thrown at you but a very good talk nevertheless. Jean Shields ended the seminar with her talk about Friends and Family, a subject that proved to be a welcome distraction.

Overall a really impressive line -up and above all a very amicable atmosphere among attendees and such a ton of information made available regarding this case. I cannot wait for next year’s because I am definitely there!

Thanks to Stuart Galloway who did an amazing job in setting all this up!

Updated Oswald page