|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jun 2, 2020 10:15:08 GMT -5
Belongs to Mrs. PaineRoger Craig was troubled by the assassination for the rest of his short life. Some said it was brought upon himself by exaggerating stories. It makes it very difficult to grasp the significance of his role in the case. Was he just trying to rattle the cage of authority, to shake something out? It's a dangerous thing to do, giving at the least, the cost of credibility. But what is there to say of the "Man of the Year" as deputy, that was promoted 4 times by the Sheriffs Dept Was he confused on Nov. 22nd? Was he aware of proper procedures and protocols as this happened? He was astute and observant and proactive in his actions. Is there any indication of mental instability on Nov.22nd? His same day and next affidavit and reports bear much significance on this case, and need to be weighed as such. He was of sound mind on that day, and there is no reason to think he wasn't. Things he said he saw are confirmed by others. Craig testified by deposition, to Attorney Belin, on April 1, 1964. By 1971, he had written a manuscript for a book entitled "When They Kill a President". In his writings he addressed the unique process how he was interviewed, including the changing of his testimony. Craig accuses Belin of taking only specific information, and not allowing certain questions and answers in the record. Instructions not to elaborate, to answer only the question, then the ability to change or rewrite portions of the response. Yea, the Commission did those things. There are other instances of testimony being changed (Barbara Rowland), episodes of instructions not to elaborate (Phil Willis). Important witness not called, pertinent questions not asked and by all intentions evidence suppressed from the record. In this matter, the only source that can confirm "..belongs to Mrs. Paine.." are the interrogation notes that weekend. The fact that there is no mention, is no confirmation for either side, because of the limited scraps of notes that remain. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ "When They Kill A President" | Unpublished Manuscript" David Belin told me who he was as I entered the interrogation room (April 1964). He had me sit at the head of a long table. To my left was a female with a pencil and pen. Belin sat to my right. Between the girl and Belin was a tape recorder, which was turned off. Belin instructed the girl not to take notes until he (Belin) said to do so. He then told me that the investigation was being conducted to determine the truth as the evidence indicates. Well, I could take that several ways but I said nothing Then Belin said, “For instance, I will ask you where you were at a certain time. This will establish your physical location.” It was at this point that I began to feel that I was being led into something but still I said nothing. Then Belin said, “I will ask you about what you thought you heard or saw in regard.” Well, this was too much. I interrupted him and said, “Counselor, just ask me the questions and if I can answer them, I will.” This seemed to irritate Belin and he told the girl to start taking notes with the next question. At this point Belin turned the recorder on. The first questions were typical. Where were you born? Where did you go to school? When Belin would get to certain questions he would turn off the recorder and stop the girl from writing. Then he would ask me, for example,“Did you see anything unusual when you were behind the picket fence?” I said, “Yes” and he said, “Fine, just a minute.” He would then tell the girl to start writing with the next question and would again start the recorder. What was the next question? “Mr. Craig, did you go into the Texas School Book Depository?” It was clear to me that he wanted only to record part of the interrogation, as this happened many times." ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ The DPD had the accused assassin of the POTUS in interrogation. The FBI had sent their Oswald expert (Hosty), and there were a number of officers and agents taking notes. Capt. Fritz said he took no notes, and had no room to bring in a tape recorder. Whatever notes exist in the record, are scattered, contradicting and incomplete.
There is enough to know for sure. Roger Craig was in the vicinity of the Homicide Div. of DPD. Although Fritz would only admit Craig may have seen Lee thru the glass, it is close enough to know he told him. Craig had spoken to Fritz on the telephone, and told him what he had seen. Fritz called him down intent on asking him. It is unbelievable to think he would not call him to ask the question once he was there.
They said he took a bus because of a ticket the cops said they found, 2 hours after his arrest. It was during that 2nd search they found 5 loose bullets in his pockets, previously missed in the car. That bus ticket was supposed to be in one of his shirt pockets, it's size would fit to the brim. There are no pictures that demonstrate anything in either shirt pocket after his arrest.
Regardless, the interrogation notes do nothing to dispel or debunk the fact that Roger Craig saw this man get into a car and went to DPD to tell Capt. Fritz as soon as he could. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Roger Craig | Unpublished Manuscript(In Captain Fritz‘s office) I had said that Fritz had said to Oswald, “This man saw you leave” (indicating me). Oswald said, “I told you people I did.” Fritz then said, “Now take it easy, son, we‘re just trying to find out what happened”, and then (to Oswald), “What about the car?” to which Oswald replied, “That station wagon belongs to Mrs. Paine. Don‘t try to drag her into this.” Fritz said car—station wagon was not mentioned by anyone but Oswald." (I had told Fritz over the telephone that I saw a man get into a station wagon, before I went to the Dallas Police Department and I had also described the man. This is when Fritz asked me to come there.)
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jun 2, 2020 10:15:40 GMT -5
The Outer FritzCapt. Will Fritz was in charge of Homicide at the Dallas Police Dept. He was called to testify in April 1964, and again in July. These questions were asked in April about 2 weeks after Roger Craig One intention was to address the Nash Rambler and comments made at DPD. Fritz seemed very coy at first, like he was not sure to whom Ball was referring. Then almost immediately, knew exactly what was done, and what was said. But he never did say what he discussed with Craig in the hall. He just referred to his instructions for an officer to take an affidavit. If Craig saw Lee thru the glass, he knew who he saw. On the stand, and with no other support, it bore no significance. Yet there are 2 other FBI reports, from 3 other people that said the same thing. Marvin Robinson, Roy Cooper, Helen Forrest, all saw this man, get in to that car. Fritz lost credibility in this matter. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Will Fritz | WC TestimonyMr. BALL. Did you ever know a man named Roger Craig, a deputy sheriff? Mr. FRITZ. Roger Craig, I might if I knew which one he was. Do we have it here? Mr. BALL. He was a witness from whom you took a statement in your office or some of your men. Mr. FRITZ. Some of my officers. Mr. BALL. He is a deputy sheriff. Mr. FRITZ. One deputy sheriff who started to talk to me but he was telling me some things that I knew wouldn't help us and I didn't talk to him but someone else took an affidavit from him. His story that he was telling didn't fit with what we knew to be true. --------------------------------------------------------------- This is 5pm Friday. Craig went to the DPD with the intent of telling them what he had seen earlier. Fritz had told him to come down, then he realized this was the guy. He had to tell him.
For Fritz to say he only stepped out and spoke to this man briefly is completely unacceptable. We are expected to believe Craig said, "I saw that guy get in a car," and Fritz did nothing. And for Fritz to add at this early stage, that Craig was "telling me some things that I knew wouldn't help us" demonstrates the intentional neglect of key information confirmed by others in the investigation of this case.
Fritz said he probably saw Lee thru the glass. There are photographs. But this was more about the statement, "... belongs to Mrs. Paine..." It cannot be confirmed. Ball does not ask anything at all about any statement referring to a car belonging to Mrs. Paine. Lee is dead and the scraps of interrogation notes that remain, are contradicting and incomplete. ------------------------------------------------------- Mr. BALL. Roger Craig stated that about 15 minutes after the shooting he saw a man, a white man, leave the Texas State Book Depository Building, run across a lawn, and get into a white Rambler driven by a colored man. Mr. FRITZ. I don't think that is true. Mr. BALL. I am stating this. You remember the witness now? Mr. FRITZ. I remember the witness; yes, sir.Mr. BALL. Did that man ever come into your office and talk to you in the presence of Oswald? Mr. FRITZ. In the presence of Oswald? Mr. BALL. Yes. Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I am sure he did not. I believe that man did come to my office in that little hallway, you know outside my office, and I believe I stepped outside the door and talked to him for a minute and I let someone else take an affidavit from him. We should have that affidavit from him if it would help. Mr. BALL. Now this man states that, has stated, that he came to your office and Oswald was in your office, and you asked him to look at Oswald and tell you whether or not this was the man he saw, and he says that in your presence he identified Oswald as the man that he had seen run across this lawn and get into the white Rambler sedan. Do you remember that? Mr. FRITZ. I think it was taken, I think it was one of my officers, and I think if he saw him he looked through that glass and saw him from the outside because I am sure of one thing that I didn't bring him in the office with Oswald. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Lee Oswald did not get on a bus.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jun 9, 2020 10:24:44 GMT -5
Howard BrennanHoward Leslie Brennan was a pipe fitter, working in the plaza that day. He was sitting on the retaining wall at the corner of Elm and Houston as the President's car went by. His view of the 6th floor window is somewhat direct, but up to 125 feet up, in the noon day sun. He remained in that position throughout the assassination sequence. Because of his position, Brennan was the star witness in Dealey Plaza. Despite contradictions in his own words, or the different corroboration of witness that were ignored. The Commission remained satisfied with Brennan. They called him an accurate observer. He participated in the first line-up, but was unable to make a positive identification. This, in spite of having told the Sheriffs Dept. he could. It is unclear when Howard changed his mind about the man he saw. Later statements explained, he felt afraid for his life and safety if there was a conspiracy. Meaning, if there was a colluded attack on our government, he would rather not get involved. The group of cold blooded killers could roam free for fear of his own life. In his book "Eyewitness to History" he went further to say, he wouldn't identify him to DPD for fear of press leaks. He told Belin, Fritz was at the lineup. He was not. He told the FBI in Dec. 1963, that having seen Lee Oswald on television before the lineups, "..tended to cloud any identification..." When Belin asked him specifically about that in the hearings, he transposed it to, "...something I do not know."++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Warren Commission Report | Pages 145-146"Although the record indicates that Brennan was an accurate observer, he declined to make a positive identification of Oswald when he first saw him in the police lineup. The Commission, therefore, does not base its conclusion concerning the identity of the assassin on Brennan's subsequent certain identification of Lee Harvey Oswald as the man he saw fire the rifle. Immediately after the assassination, however, Brennan described to the police the man he saw in the window and then identified Oswald as the person who most nearly resembled the man he saw. The Commission is satisfied that, at the least, Brennan saw a man in the window who closely resembled Lee Harvey Oswald, and that Brennan believes the man he saw was in fact Lee Harvey Oswald." ----------------------------------------------------------- Sheriffs Dept. Affidavit | Nov. 22, 1963 "There was nothing unusual about him at all in appearance. I believe that I could identify this man if I ever saw him again."FBI Statement | Dec 18. 1963"He said that he felt that since he had seen Oswald on television before picking Oswald out of the line-up at the police station that it tended to "cloud" any identification he made of Oswald at the time."WC Testimony | March 24. 1964Mr. BELIN. What is the fact as to whether or not your having seen Oswald on television would have affected your identification of him one way or the other? Mr. BRENNAN. That is something I do not know.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jun 9, 2020 10:25:12 GMT -5
Left to the Right The position on the left (with a hat) indicates where Brennan told the Commission he sat. In color, was his actual position. He was several feet to the right of what he testified to. So much so, he had to turn his head significantly to watch the president The staff did not check or confirm his location against the recorded document on film. Or, it would be deceptive and misleading to create such an exhibit after checking the recorded images. He was facing more toward Houston St. It was not a two eyed view of Elm St without turning, and he doesn't look up at TSBD at any point while on camera. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Howard Brennan | WC TestimonyMr. BRENNAN. That is the retainer wall which I perched on. Mr. BELIN. All right. This is. the retaining wall on which you perched. I believe that this is actually you sitting on this retaining wall in a picture that we took in Dallas pursuant to your showing us where you were November 22; we took that picture on this past Friday. Mr. BRENNAN. That is correct. Mr. BELIN. Which would be the 20th of March. Is that correct? Mr. BRENNAN. That is correct. Mr. BELIN. All right. I hand you now what the reporter has marked as Commission Exhibit 478. (The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 478 for identification.)Mr. BELIN. I ask you to state, if you know, what this is. Mr. BRENNAN. Yes. That is the retaining wall and myself sitting on it at Houston and Elm. Mr. BELIN. You remember that the photographer was standing on the front steps of the Texas School Book Depository when that picture was taken On the 20th of March? Mr. BRENNAN. Yes, I do. Mr. BELIN. And the camera is pointed in what direction? Mr. BRENNAN. South. Representative Ford. Are those the positions where you were sitting on November 22? Mr. BRENNAN. Yes, sir. Representative FORD. At about 12 Mr. BRENNAN. From about 12:22 or 12:24 until the time of the assassination. Representative FORD. In both pictures, that is a true-- Mr. BRENNAN. True location. Representative FORD. True location of where you were sitting November 22d? Mr. BRENNAN. Yes, sir.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jun 9, 2020 10:25:39 GMT -5
What Brennan SawWhat Howard Brennan said, or may have seen, cannot be disregarded. The face of authority in this investigation, could convince a witness otherwise with little resistance. It is apparent his description differs from that of Lee, and was probably told, "we know who you saw."This comes into view when direct contradictions between statements and testimony are cast aside. He said he saw a man in a light colored or khaki shirt, not a white shirt. Not the dark shirt or pants Lee was wearing that day, and would not be seen if he was kneeling. If there was one point at which the shooter would stand it would be at the beginning (1st shot). Although the window opening would render such a shot unlikely, Brennan was able to describe the man's trousers. But pants lighter than the shirt contradicts the description of the actual clothes that Lee wore. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Howard Brennan | WC TestimonyMr. BELIN. Do you remember the specific color of any shirt that the man with the rifle was wearing? Mr. BRENNAN. No, other than light, and a khaki color--maybe in khaki. I mean other than light color--not a real white shirt, in other words. If it was a white shirt, it was on the dingy side. Mr. BELIN. All right. Could you see the man's trousers at all? Do you remember any color? Mr. BRENNAN. I remembered them at that time as being similar to the same color of the shirt or a little lighter. And that was another thing that I called their attention to at the lineup. Mr. BELIN. What do you mean by that? Mr. BRENNAN. That he was not dressed in the same clothes that I saw the man in the window. Mr. BELIN. You mean with reference to the trousers or the shirt? Mr. BRENNAN. Well, not particularly either. In other words, he just didn't have the same clothes on.Mr. BELIN. All right. Mr. BRENNAN. I don't know whether you have that in the record or not. I am sure you do. ...we do now.
[IMO Brennan means, he's not wearing his clothes in the manner he saw in the window. The way the man carried himself. AND Lee had a dark shirt and dark pants at the lineup. They wouldn't dare ask the questions to elaborate Watch Dulles, ix nay on the light color eh? and we're outta here.]Mr. DULLES. Any further questions? I guess there are no more questions, Mr. Belin. Mr. BELIN. Well, sir, we. want to thank you for your cooperation with the Commission. -------------------------------------------------------- The below video is from the Hughes film, about 8 seconds before the head shot. The CPTV broadcast that aired this, claimed it is movement in the sniper's nest. It does look like movement and a black stick or a shadow in the left corner of the window @ .06sec. But it also looks as though whatever figure is in that window, is standing with light colored clothing. Shirt and pants. If the small black square in the corner of the window is all that could be seen because of boxes, then he could not see Lee. If however, that brightness of a figure with his pants a lighter color than a yellowed shirt, was a man standing, that was the description Brennan gave to the Commission. Well then, what did Brennan see?
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jun 15, 2020 10:23:50 GMT -5
Getaway CarOne of the more interesting things Howard Brennan said, was in his book many years later. His memoir, "Eyewitness to History: The Kennedy Assassination as Seen by Howard L. Brennan", was written with J. Edward Cherryholmes, and was published in 1987, four years after his death. He briefly describes a "mystery car" parked along side of TSBD, in the same area Richard Carr saw one. But Brennan's car, was a 1955-1957 Oldsmobile, and he doesn't give anymore about style, or color. Yet is is parked along Houston St., by that back door at TSBD. That was the door Worrell saw a man come out of moving very quickly down on Houston St. The vehicle Carr saw was the Nash Rambler, it was parked facing the wrong way. The car Brennan saw was facing him, with it's front wheels turned outward. He said it was a single white man sitting, wheels turned sharply left for a quick U-turn and the door partially open. This was before the assassination. ----------------------------------------------------------- Brennan said all cars were cleared away from that area, and it was very odd it should be there, but then said nothing for 2 decades. The co author tried to qualify it: [Authors Note: Howard did not report the presence of the car beside the Book depository Building initially because he did not make an association. Subsequent to that time he had already made a formal statement and probably realized that to insert this new item might cast some doubt on his testimony.
He thus determined not to say anything he could not verify absolutely. In retrospect, he acknowledged he probably should have reported it, but he wanted to be sure his testimony would stand since it was critical.] +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ "Eyewitness to History: The Kennedy Assassination as Seen by Howard L. Brennan""While surveying the area, I glanced away to the side of the Depository Building and found something I could not understand. At that time there was a side entrance towards the rear of the building on Houston Street. At some point during the morning hours, the police had sealed off parking in that block and forced all cars to move. Saw horses were placed at Elm and Houston to block traffic. As I looked around I saw a lone car parked beside the Book Depository with a while male seated behind the wheel. The car was an Oldsmobile, a 1955–57 model. It is difficult to tell the exact year unless one is an expert because all those years looked nearly alike. I remember wondering why all the other cars had been made to move and this one had not. I didn’t have the chance to study the driver carefully but he was wearing civilian clothes and appeared to be middle aged. One thing that interested me about the car was the way it was parked. The left front wheel was pulled sharply away from the curb and the driver had the door partially open. Later I wondered if the reason for this was so the car could make a quick U-turn in a speedy departure. As I was watching the man in the car I saw a policeman who was on foot walk over towards the car and begin talking to the man in a friendly, laughing manner. So far as I could see, there was no attempt made to get the man to move his car and after chatting for a minute or so, the policeman walked back to his post. It was this fact that made me think the police should have made some report about the presence of the car, but I have never seen any other account of this “mystery car.” [after the shooting]"...As I approached the policemen he said, “What do you want?” I said, “The man you want is in the building!” He said, “Are you sure?” I responded, “I sure am.” He grabbed my arm and we both ran to the front of the School Book Depository. I glanced back towards the street to the side of the building. The car I had seen PARKED there before the motorcade passed WAS GONE. Although only a few moments had elapsed and all exits were blocked except one, the car had disappeared. The policeman who had been talking to the driver was gone, but I assumed he was looking for the gunman." ----------------------------------------------------------- It is deceitful to propose that Howard hadn't made the association upon later consideration of a speedy U-Turn departure. This was a critical perception left out by any authority, and is even more unbelievable that he hadn't mentioned it to ANY official person before or after his testimony. It is inconceivable that nobody asked about any further observations.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jun 15, 2020 10:24:15 GMT -5
Brennan by the BookThe above Zapruder frame, and subsequent pictures show Howard Brennan was not looking up in the first few seconds of the assassination. Yet, on page 5 of the report, the narration dictates otherwise, demonstrating his ability to estimate height, while looking up 120 feet. The report conveniently left out the estimated weight of 165-175 lbs Brennan gave in his original affidavit. "One eyewitness, Howard L. Brennan [...] promptly told a policeman that he had seen a slender man, about five feet ten inches, in his early thirties, take deliberate aim from the sixth floor corner window and fire a rifle in the direction of the President's car.“ [WC Report page 5] He denied that in testimony. John J. McCloy: "Did you see the rifle discharge, did you see the recoil or the flash?" A: "No." -------------------------------------------------------- "Although Brennan testified that the man in the window was standing when he fired the shots, most probably he was either sitting or kneeling. The half-open window, the arrangement of the boxes, and the angle of the shots virtually preclude a standing position. It is understandable, however, for Brennan to have believed that the man with the rifle was standing." (WC Report page 144)The report is careful to disqualify Brennan's ability to see the man standing while shooting. By doing so, the reader dismisses the inconsistent description of light colored clothing. It is in fact, while the man is standing that his pants are exposed to the street. Not to say the man was shooting while standing, but in his affidavit Brennan gave a description of stepping backPants lighter than his shirt. Either Brennan saw a man in light colored clothing, or he never saw the man stand up. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Double TalkMr. BELIN. Now, is there anything else you told the officers at the time of the lineup? Mr. BRENNAN. Well, I told them I could not make a positive identification. Howard Brennan, could not identify Lee Oswald, and then he suddenly did. He wavered back and forth on his decision, and told the FBI seeing the suspect on TV may have clouded his identification. It is a lie for the report to state on page 5 and again on page 250, that Howard Brennan made a positive identification. He did not. Not to the FBI, not to the Dallas Police, his identification came after some convincing from the authorities. His original description of height, weight, and color of clothing did not match Lee and were in direct opposition. In the difference of 100+ pages, the report contradicts itself, reading that Brennan made a positive ID, after stating he could not. During the evening of November 22, Brennan identified Oswald as the person in the lineup who bore the closest resemblance to the man in the window but he said he was unable to make a positive identification. Prior to the lineup, Brennan had seen Oswald's picture on television and he told the Commission that whether this affected his identification "is something I do not know." (WC Report Page 145) …Several witnesses outside the building claim to have seen a person in the southeast corner window of the sixth floor. As has already been indicated, some were able to offer better descriptions than others and one, Howard L. Brennan, made a positive identification of Oswald as being the person at the window… (WC Report Page 250)+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Sheriff Affidavit | 11/22/63I did not notice anything unusual about this man. He was a white man in his early 30's, slender, nice looking, slender and would weigh about 165 to 175 pounds. He had on light colored clothing but definitely not a suit.
I could see all of the barrel of the gun. I do not know if it had a scope on it or not. I was looking at the man in this windows at the time of the last explosion. Then this man let the gun down to his side and stepped down out of sight.
He did not seem to be in any hurry. I could see this man from about his belt up. There was nothing unusual about him at all in appearance. I believe that I could identify this man if I ever saw him again. -------------------------------------------------------- First day statements are fresh and tend to be more accurate. Notice the words, "light colored clothing, but definitely not a suit." In testimony the first time he answered the words, "light color", the subject was changed. It was brought up again briefly at the end with no additional followup or clarification. Key questions not asked, obviously, more description on the clothing with significant differences. He saw all of the barrel, but not the scope, that seems odd. 75-80% of the gun from a distance would certainly entail the scope He was not directly under the gun like Worrell. Mr. BELIN. How much of the gun do you believe that you saw? Mr. BRENNAN. I calculate 70 to 85 percent of the gun. "He did not seem to be in a hurry." - really? It seems Lee had a lunchroom to catch."I believe that I could identify this man if I ever saw him again." But he didn't. There is nothing from Brennan that points to Oswald brought by his own observations from his first day statements. Nothing.His original description s of light color clothing, 165-175 lbs, were convinced otherwise, when the authorities told him what he must've seen. Howard Brennan Revisited
|
|
|
Post by Tom Sorensen on Jun 17, 2020 3:29:34 GMT -5
Getaway CarOne of the more interesting things Howard Brennan said, was in his book many years later. His memoir, "Eyewitness to History: The Kennedy Assassination as Seen by Howard L. Brennan", was written with J. Edward Cherryholmes, and was published in 1987, four years after his death. He briefly describes a "mystery car" parked along side of TSBD, in the same area Richard Carr saw one. But Brennan's car, was a 1955-1957 Oldsmobile, and he doesn't give anymore about style, or color. Yet is is parked along Houston St., by that back door at TSBD. That was the door Worrell saw a man come out of moving very quickly down on Houston St. The vehicle Carr saw was the Nash Rambler, it was parked facing the wrong way. The car Brennan saw was facing him, with it's front wheels turned outward. He said it was a single white man sitting, wheels turned sharply left for a quick U-turn and the door partially open. This was before the assassination. -- snip -- Just a coincidence? Michael Paine owned an Oldsmobile of that vintage but parked it where Ruth Paine lived in Irving. The commission did not clear up the purpose of that purchase which didn't make much sense as he already owned a Citroën ID-19 (pretty high tech compared to the Olds) and Ruth Paine had her own Chevy station wagon. Further discussion of Oldsmobile sightings in this thread.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jun 17, 2020 10:25:56 GMT -5
Lee BowersLee Bowers was a 38 year old switch operator with Union Terminal Co in Dealey Plaza on 11/22 He was in the railroad tower at the back of the pergola about 14 feet off the ground. From this position he had a direct view of the back parking lot and some of the area behind the picket fence. He provided an affidavit for the vehicles he had seen in the minutes prior to the assassination. He told the Commission there were three cars that came through the back lot beginning around noon. Two of the cars had out of state plates, and he probably could identify license it if he saw a list. There is no record of any such list being provided. This out of state Oldsmobile, was not a car he had seen routinely, and could've been seen later by Brennan. The second car's description sounded more official, with the driver speaking into some sort of microphone. FBI or Secret Service perhaps. A third car with matching plates as the first, should have led to identifying the state. --at the very least+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Lee Bowers | WC TestimonyMr. BOWERS - Yes; there were three cars that came in during the time from around noon until the time of the shooting. First CarMr. BALL - What was the description of that car? Mr. BOWERS - The first car was a 1959 Oldsmobile, blue and white station wagon with out-of-State license. Mr. BALL - Do you know what State? Mr. BOWERS - No; I do not. I would know it, I could identify it, I think, if I looked at a list. Second Car Mr. BALL - And, did you see another car? Mr. BOWERS - Yes, some 15 minutes or so after this, at approximately 12 o'clock, 20 to 12--I guess 12:20 would be close to it, little time differential there-- but there was another car which was a 1957 black Ford, with one male in it that seemed to have a mic or telephone or something that gave the appearance of that at least. Mr. BALL - How could you tell that? Mr. BOWERS - He was holding something up to his mouth with one hand and he was driving with the other, and gave that appearance. He was very close to the tower. I could see him as he proceeded around the area. Mr. BALL - What kind of license did that have? Mr. BOWERS - Had a Texas license. Third CarMr. BALL - Did you see another car? Mr. BOWERS - Third car, which entered the area, which was some seven or nine minutes before the shooting, I believe was a 1961 or 1962 Chevrolet, four-door Impala, white, showed signs of being on the road. It was muddy up to the windows, bore a similar out-of-state license to the first car I observed, occupied also by one white male. Mr. BALL - What did it do? Mr. BOWERS - He spent a little more time in the area. He tried-he circled the area and probed one spot right at the tower in an attempt to get and was forced to back out some considerable distance, and slowly cruised down back towards the front of the School Depository Building.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Capasse on Jun 17, 2020 10:26:40 GMT -5
Back Lot Tower CommotionMr. BOWERS - "At the time of the shooting there seemed to be some commotion, and immediately following there was a motorcycle policeman who shot nearly all of the way to the top of the incline."In his deposition he called it a commotion, as he went further describe it, Ball cuts him off and changes the subject. A "milling about," "something out of the ordinary," , and that's as far as he got. He mentioned a view toward the mouth of the overpass, at no time did he say he saw that opening. It was a a reference of direction, the men had been milling about, in and out of his view at the two trees. He saw something in that area but he won't say it clearly. Even more frustrating is the attorney's intentional lack of time and inquiry on this important issue and critical moment. By the beginning of April '64, rumors were still circulating of additional shooters, most likely from the front. The grassy knoll and back lot were the areas from which these stories were indicated. Here, Ball has the witnesses with an elevated view to get pertinent details into this matter. He would not do it. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Lee Bowers | WC TestimonyMr. BALL - Now, were there any people standing on the high side---high ground between your tower and where Elm Street goes down under the underpass toward the mouth of the underpass? Mr. BOWERS - Directly in line, towards the mouth of the underpass, there were two men. One man, middle-aged, or slightly older, fairly heavy-set, in a white shirt, fairly dark trousers. Another younger man, about mid twenties, in either a plaid shirt or plaid coat or jacket. Mr. BALL - Were they standing together or standing separately? Mr. BOWERS - They were standing within 10 or 15 feet of each other, and gave no appearance of being together, as far as I knew. Mr. BALL - In what direction were they facing? Mr. BOWERS - They were facing and looking up towards Main and Houston, and following the caravan as it came down. ------------------------------------------------------ shots... then a motorcycle policemanMr. BOWERS - He came up into this area where there are some trees, and where I had described the two men were in the general vicinity of this. Mr. BALL - Were the two men there at the time? Mr. BOWERS - I--as far as I know, one of them was. The other I could not say. The darker dressed man was too hard to distinguish from the trees. The white shirt, yes; I think he was. Mr. BALL - When you said there was a commotion, what do you mean by that? What did it look like to you when you were looking at the commotion? Mr. BOWERS - I just am unable to describe rather than it was something out of the ordinary, a sort of milling around, but something occurred in this particular spot which was out of the ordinary, which attracted my eye for some reason, which I could not identify. Mr. BALL - You couldn't describe it? Mr. BOWERS - Nothing that I could pinpoint as having happened that--- Mr. BALL - Afterwards did a good many people come up there on this high ground at the tower? Mr. BOWERS - A large number of people came, more than one direction. One group converged from the corner of Elm and Houston, and came down the extension of Elm and came into the high ground, and another line another large group went across the triangular area between Houston and Elm and then across Elm and then up the incline. Some of them all the way up. Many of them did, as well as, of course, between 50 and a hundred policemen within a maximum of 5 minutes. Mr. BALL - In this area around your tower? Mr. BOWERS - That's right. Sealed off the area, and I held off the trains until they could be examined, and there was some transients taken on at least one train. Mr. BALL - I believe you have talked this over with me before your deposition was taken, haven't we? Mr. BOWERS - Yes. Mr. BALL - Is there anything that you told me that I haven't asked you about that you think of? Mr. BOWERS - Nothing that I can recall. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Anything Else?In his book Whitewash II, Harold Weisberg talked about Phil Willis being told not to elaborate, and only answer the question. Roger Craig, Vickie Adams, John Donovan, Kenneth O'Donnell and other witnesses were given the same instructions. When Ball asked at the end of this deposition, Is there anything that you told me that I haven't asked you about that you think of?That's going to include any questions or answers that were discussed in pre interview, like the transient arrests. But what else? Bowers doesn't know what will be used from any discussions he has had, and there is no demerit upon him for not volunteering anything. It's up to an authoritative investigation to ask the relevant questions, on the record. With a clear intent, Ball failed to complete that task. >>>>
|
|