The 1026 North Beckley Rooming House

new

Tom Sorensen
Administrator

The truth hurts.

Posts: 590

The 1026 North Beckley Rooming House Jul 15, 2021 7:28:38 GMT -5

Quote

Post by Tom Sorensen on Jul 15, 2021 7:28:38 GMT -5

--- The 1026 North Beckley Rooming House ---

The rooming house located at 1026 North Beckley in the Oak Cliff area of Dallas is commonly referred to as "Oswald's rooming house", but was it?

The Warren Commission stipulated as fact that Oswald lived there since being hired by Roy S. Truly as order filler at the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD). Also assumed as fact is that shortly after JFK was shot on November 22nd, Oswald "escaped" the TSBD. Oswald somehow made it to 1026 N. Beckley (by bus and/or cab) where he grabbed his .38 Smith & Wesson, put on a jacked and left. Within around 15 minutes he showed up at 10th & Patton where he was approached by patrolman Tippit. During a short exchange of words Tippit was shot from across the hood of his #10 squad car. Oswald allegedly also fled that crime scene and ended up in the Texas Theatre where he was arrested and taken into custody.

The only witness to observe Oswald's "appearance" on 1026 N. Beckley was housekeeper Earlene Roberts who was inside the house at the time fiddling with the TV set. Nobody outside saw Oswald enter or exit the property, at least they have not come forward, so his means of transportation, if he was not on foot, is unknown^*); this also goes for his alleged movements to reach 10th & Patton. A lot of effort over the years has gone into debunking Oswald killing Tippit by way of timeline analysis involving clocks not showing actual time but never questioning if he actually started out at 1026 N. Beckley which itself could be a huge rabbit hole!

What initially raised my suspicion regarding the Beckley address was the fake phone call covered in this thread: The Beckley Call Lie

Allegedly Ruth Paine called the rooming house but was informed that no Lee Oswald lived there because he had registered under a false name. In that thread I've argued why it would make absolutely no sense to Oswald doing so considering the huge risk of being disclosed. The only logic explanation for Ruth Paine to supply the commission with a fake call would be to support the commission's backstory of Oswald registering as O. H. Lee. Very sneaky, very Ruth Paine like, coming up with this kind of "supporting evidence".

In this thread I'll explore what the commission actually had in evidence to support the presumption that Oswald roomed at 1026 North Beckley.

______________________

*) The official narrative has cab driver Whaley dropping Oswald off in the 500 (later 700) block of North Beckley.

Last Edit: Oct 15, 2021 7:00:00 GMT -5 by Tom Sorensen

Tom Sorensen
Administrator

The truth hurts.

Posts: 590

The 1026 North Beckley Rooming House Jul 21, 2021 4:06:43 GMT -5 Michael Capasse likes this

Quote

Post by Tom Sorensen on Jul 21, 2021 4:06:43 GMT -5

Rooming with the Johnsons

(The Beckley Bunker)

I've provided a Google Map link to the 1026 North Beckley address which allows one to navigate the surroundings and get a sense of the street layout. The rooming house still stands and at least from the outside looks pretty much as it did back in the day. Based on how it was described by the owners when deposed by David Belin back in '64 the house must be sizeable. Below are some excerpts from their testimonies (10H 292-301, 301-309) describing the house^*).

First, Gladys J. Johnson:

Mr. BALL. You said you had lived at this place, 1026----
Mrs. JOHNSON. About 21 years.

Mr. BALL. North Beckley?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. You and your husband own that property?
Mrs. JOHNSON I do; I owned it before I married. I don't own it. I am paying for it but I had bought the property before I married Johnson.

So, what's going on here? She owns it, then doesn't actually own it but is paying for it, yet had bought it before marrying her husband. How is this supposed to make sense? BALL happily moves on!

Mr. BALL. What size house is that, how many rooms?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Well, it has about 20-odd--22 rooms.

Mr. BALL. 22 rooms?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes.

Mr. BALL. In October, last October, November, 1963, who lived there?
Mrs. JOHNSON. October?

Mr. BALL. Yes, October and November last year; you and your husband lived there?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; my husband and I; that's our home.

Mr. BALL. Anyone else live there with you?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I had a housekeeper.

Mr. BALL. What is her name?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Earlene Roberts.

Mr. BALL. Anyone else live there?
Mrs. JOHNSON. That's all except tenants.

Mr. BALL. Then you rented out rooms?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; I rent out bedrooms, don't give board, just bedroom and living room privileges.

Next, A. C. Johnson adds this piece of information:

Mr. BELIN. And you and your wife have this house at 1026 North Beckley and have people that room there by the week?

Mr. JOHNSON. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. About how many people do you have that room there?
Mr. JOHNSON. Well, when it's full, we have 17.

followed by

Mr. BELIN. Your wife was going to let them [the DP officers] see the rooms that you had--and you had a total of 17 roomers, I believe you said?
Mr. JOHNSON. Well, no. I don't know just how many roomers we had. We have 17 bedrooms--but I don't know just, at that time, how many roomers we had.
But, anyway, we had a couple of boys around his age that had moved in just a few days before, and, so, she was going to let them see their rooms.

Mr. BELIN. All right. And then what happened?
Mr. JOHNSON. Well, I saw his picture on television and I hollered at them and told them. They were out in the back, started around the house to the--uh--basement where these boys room. The bedrooms are all in the basement. And they were going back there.

What A.C. is describing here sounds to me like some kind of WW2 bunker complex! In a 'Preservation Document'^**) only a floor plan of the main house ground floor is available but there's a detailed description of the basement (my emphasis):

The basement can be accessed from the main floor through the closet in the southwest corner bedroom with a floor
hatch and from the exterior entrance on the east façade. The basement contains 5 rooms, No. 5-10, each with its
metal number and with the last city inspection notice taped to the door. The rooms are accessed off of a narrow
central hallway that contains two bedrooms beneath the rear addition and another three rooms and a bathroom
under the house. The rooms vary in size but each has a small window or two; those on the north side are raised by
one step giving them a ceiling height of less than 7 feet. The smallest of the rooms is approximately 6 feet wide x 8
feet deep.

That would actually be six rooms if the numbering is as stated. IMO, something does not add up when A.C. claims all bedrooms are in the basement (Oswald's wasn't) and note the numbering of rooms where the "Oswald room" is numbered "3" in the floor plan. I know this could well have changed since 1963 but in the alleged register copy that room was designated "Room 0"!

Gladys Johnson's weird explanation RE ownership warranted a background check of the couple on the spot; as I've read the 'Preservation Document' the house was passed down to the granddaughter so how is this supposed to work if Gladys didn't own the property?

In some places the document refers back to the WC hearings I've listed in the beginning (and quoted) so one can end up with some kind of closed-loop corroboration when verifying statements in the testimonies. Note the garage complex in the back of the property having access to the alley, most interesting! The living quarters on top may also have have been rented, otherwise I don't see how A.C. arrives at 17 bedrooms.

______________________

*) Due to tree growth it's hard to judge the actual size of the house, or house complex, based on aerial views. An alleyway running parallel to N. Beckley and N. Crawford behind the house offers no street view.

** ) I've later located this very detailed official document (Johnson Rooming House, Dallas), including floor plan, describing the house and how ownership of the house evolved. Unfortunately they are parroting most of the Warren Commission BS story in the historic context section.

Last Edit: Aug 26, 2021 3:09:10 GMT -5 by Tom Sorensen

Tom Sorensen
Administrator

The truth hurts.

Posts: 590

The 1026 North Beckley Rooming House Jul 23, 2021 2:03:16 GMT -5

Quote

Post by Tom Sorensen on Jul 23, 2021 2:03:16 GMT -5

Amateur Hour with Joe Ball

Before continuing with the evidence I'll show an example of how bad some of the depositions were conducted, have a look:

Vol. 10H 292

The testimony of Mrs. Arthur Carl (Gladys J.) Johnson was taken at 3:40 p.m., on April 1, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Joseph A. Ball, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.

Mr. BALL. Come in, Mr. and Mrs. Johnson, and sit down. My name is Joe Ball and Mrs. Johnson, I think we will start with you. Will you stand up, Mrs. Johnson, please, and hold up your right hand?

[Complying.]

later...

Vol. 10H 298

(At this point Mr. Johnson left the room.)

Nice, A.C. is allowed to listen to his wife being deposed; does make it easier to come up with the right answers later in the day! As the record shows he was present during the first half of Gladys' deposition. Isolating the witnesses prior to questioning them is Detective 101, so why did BALL totally screw up?

IMO, BALL had prepared for a feel good interview with the Johnsons where he could tick all the boxes on his sheet: False name, check. Odd duck, check. Dates confirmed, check. No big deal.

Unfortunately, Gladys stumbled and dropped the ball when she was supposed to just deliver a copy of the register showing the O.H. Lee signature; I'll cover this in an upcoming post!

Last Edit: Aug 20, 2021 2:25:07 GMT -5 by Tom Sorensen

Tom Sorensen
Administrator

The truth hurts.

Posts: 590

The 1026 North Beckley Rooming House Aug 29, 2021 3:33:15 GMT -5

Quote

Post by Tom Sorensen on Aug 29, 2021 3:33:15 GMT -5

A Room with a View

(aka "Room 0")

The room Oswald allegedly rented, denoted "Room 0" on a so-called document brought by Mrs. Johnson, was in the main house, not in the basement 'complex'. As explain by Mrs. Johnson the room had functioned as a library, then remodeled into a bedroom when her elderly father-in-law moved in. After his death it apparently was enrolled in the existing pool of bedrooms. The main house setup sounds a bit odd to me; I'll flag those oddities as they surface during her testimony.

Mr. BALL. In October, last October, November, 1963, who lived there [1026 North Beckley] ?

Mrs. JOHNSON. October?

Mr. BALL. Yes, October and November last year; you and your husband lived there?

Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; my husband and I; that's our home.

Mr. BALL. Anyone else live there with you?

Mrs. JOHNSON. I had a housekeeper.

Mr. BALL. What is her name?

Mrs. JOHNSON. Earlene Roberts.

Mr. BALL. Anyone else live there?

Mrs. JOHNSON. That's all except tenants.

Mr. BALL. Then you rented out rooms?

Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; I rent out bedrooms, don't give board, just bedroom and living room privileges.

Based on the floor plan all occupants of the main house shared the same bathroom. Living room, where the TV was located, was also shared. This means the only privacy the Johnsons had was in the master bedroom and, to some extent, the kitchen, as also Earlene Johnson and Oswald (enjoying refrigerator privileges!) were allowed there. It suggests the Johnson couple intended to squeeze every possible yield out of that house!

When BELIN talked to Mr. Johnson he was duly impressed with his entrepreneurship...

Mr. BELIN. Is Johnny's Cafe the one that you say you and your wife operate?
Mr. JOHNSON. Johnson's Cafe.

Mr. BELIN. Johnson's Cafe?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; 1029 Young Street.

Mr. BELIN. You own that? I mean, you operate it yourself as proprietor?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes.

Mr. BELIN. You're kind of a real business man here. You rent a roominghouse, and you have a cafe, and you have carpenters. Anything else, Mr. Johnson?
Mr. JOHNSON. Well, I have an apartment house and a little rental property.

Sounds to me they only came home to the North Beckley address to drop dead on the bed after a hard days work. Would you then also like to queue up outside the bath room? When discussing business or personal matters you would have to retreat to the bedroom; Is that what you would call "home"? One should be careful judging other people, and maybe their lives were all about business, but was 1026 N. Beckley their actual home?

Back to Mrs. Johnson...

Mr. BALL. How many tenants did you have in October last year?

Mrs. JOHNSON. You know, I'm sorry I didn't bring my register. I couldn't tell you exactly; I imagine I had about 10 or 12.

Hold it, Gladys, huge RED FLAG right there. Despite not having brought her register, as we will see shortly, she produces from her purse a one page document showing the O.H. Lee signature because she expected to be asked about it!

Mr. BALL. Was it full?

Mrs. JOHNSON. No; I don't--I most always have vacancies.

Mr. BALL. You do?

Mrs. JOHNSON. I have had more even since this happened.

Mr. BALL. Oh, you have?

Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; I have; people are funny about things like that, you know----

Mr. BALL. Well, now, you knew Lee Oswald, didn't you?

Mrs. JOHNSON. Well, I just knew him when I seen him. I knew him as a renter, that's all.

Mr. BALL. Where was he when you first met him, at what place?

Mrs. JOHNSON. At my home--I was between serving hours and I come home for relaxation and to kind of help out. I cooperate in keeping the house and seeing after it, too, and I had returned home that afternoon and he seen the room for rent sign--the first time that he came by, I happened to have just rented the last room that one time. Occasionally, I will have them full and then they just go vacant; people just come in and out, stay a week and then are gone, anyway, at that time, I didn't have a room.

Strange wording, "cooperate in keeping the house", "seeing after it" if you own the property. Why the need to cut herself off to justify her presence if it was totally legit? Unless there was a need to remove Earlene Roberts, who managed the rooms, from the equation.

Mr. BALL. The first time he came to see you?
Mrs. JOHNSON. about 3 weeks before he came back.

Slight problem here as he rented a room the second time around on Monday, October 14. Backing up 3 weeks we arrive at September 23 when Oswald, according to the official timeline (CE 1963), was still in New Orleans! He was not supposed to be back in Dallas until October 3. She's off by well over a week. BTW, September 23 is the same day Ruth Paine and Marina leave New Orleans, arrive in Dallas on the 24th. Something's not right, I'll put another RED FLAG on that first visit for sure, underlined by no register to verify if she was out of rooms.

Mr. BALL. This was 1026 North Beckley?

Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes.

Note that BALL immediately seeks confirmation of Beckley address because he knows Oswald shouldn't be in Dallas at the time!

Mr. BALL. He talked to you?

Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; the first time and the last time; the first time, he told me he wanted a room and I told him I was very sorry, I just rented the last room and he said he was very sorry, he wanted to get near his work and he didn't have a car and it being on the bus line, he was sorry he missed it. I said, "You noticed the sign." I hadn't had time to take the sign up and I told him, "I will take the sign up and if you notice the sign up again, you might stop by and I will have a room" and sure enough, he came by this second time and so this tiny, little room--it was at one time my library; that's what it was built for, and he came by and I said I only have this small room at the present time. I run an ad, it seems like, at that time, and I said I only have the small room and he looked at it and said, "I will take this room with the understanding I can have a larger room at the time you have one go vacant" and I said to him that's agreeable, so, at the time, I had other vacancies which in just 2 or 3 days I had two or three more accommodations go vacant, so I told him I had other accommodations that are larger and he said, "I find this room to be light and comfortable." It was four windows on the outside wall; it was all light. He said, "I find it to be light and comfortable and worth the money, you don't mind, I will remain in this room," so he didn't even look at the other rooms. He just remained in that room, what I call my library. When I utilized it into a bedroom, my father-in-law lived with a family of people on a farm and they went to Arkansas to live and he was getting old and he didn't want to be that far away from his son, so he wanted to come and make his home with us and I fixed this little library room--it was off and private from the other roomers--for "Pappy" to sleep in and the living room for him to sit in and he was---that's about 9 years before he was deceased.

Interesting how this "yes" expands into a whole narrative with quotes, an almost Ruth Paine like eagerness to deliver the story. A few things caught my eye: The first/last time suggests there was some interaction in between although she does say "second time" a little later. Being near his work for the reasons mentioned makes sense except...OOPS...Oswald didn't have a job, not even on his second call; maybe O.H. Lee had, that's a solid RED FLAG.

As mentioned earlier, the tiny room was once the library...sounds plausible. Now, why would she mention an ad (in present tense, bad sign) when the obvious reason he approached her was the sign in the front yard? Something's not quite right here...he got burned once, so why not call when he had her phone number in his notebook?! Again, given that the library story is at least plausible, why the need to go into the whole "Pappy" deal to justify she had this tiny room for rent?

Further, the tiny room was initially a purpose built library, her library, so what happened to all her books? Moved to the bedroom or to the apartment house owned by her husband or....? If she only occasionally ran out of rooms and the tiny room was her cheapest room and since she offered Oswald to immediately move to the next room to become vacant soon, that tiny room would have given her a ridiculously small revenue. Does it make any sense that she would not have restored the room to it's original purpose? Or, her "library" was in fact where she actually lived and that's why she left "Pappy"-room as it was. All this explaining smells phony to me; an ORANGE FLAG is warranted.

Also note that she has two competing accounts of the renting process: "I will take this room...", indicating he knows what he's getting but has the option of getting a better room when one goes vacant. Then, all of a sudden, he does a 180 and denounces this opportunity with out even seeing the rooms in question. The quotes make no sense unless he later was shown the rooms and declined the offer although who would call a room without even a chair "comfortable"? Again, she's dead set on keeping Oswald in that room from October 14 until November 22, why?

Mr. BALL. Do you remember the date Oswald rented the room?

Mrs. JOHNSON. October 14.

Mr. BALL. What time of day did he come by?

Mrs. JOHNSON. It was between 4 and 5 o'clock, I do know that because I was home that day when he came back by and I said, when he came by, I said, "You did come back by."

Mr. BALL. Was your sign out at that time?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; it was; he seen the sign.

Take note of time, important when checked against Earlene Roberts' (the house keeper's) testimony. As mentioned earlier, chance visit doesn't sound like Oswald, I'll call BS on this one^*).

Mr. BALL. How much did you charge him?

Mrs. JOHNSON. $8 a week, refrigerator and living room privileges.

Hmm, up until now the rule was only bedroom and living room privileges; why did Oswald get a special deal?

Mr. BALL. The refrigerator was located where?

Mrs. JOHNSON. In my kitchen--he wanted to know if he could put milk and lunch meat in my refrigerator and I told him he could.

Mr. BALL. Did he tell you what his name was?

Mrs. JOHNSON. O.H. L-e-e [spelling].

Mr. BALL. Did he sign anything with that name?

Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; I have it in my purse.

Mr. BALL. May I see it?

Mrs. JOHNSON. I will be glad to--I don't want you to keep it. I want you to--I brought it for your information. I knew you was going to ask that.

So, she did not bring her register but brought something with a signature on it...

Mr. BALL. Now, is this in his handwriting?

Mrs. JOHNSON. This "O. H. Lee" is in his handwriting and this other is in the housekeeper's handwriting--Mrs. Roberts.

Mr. BALL. And these are the rates you gave him?

Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes.

Mr. BALL. I would like this marked as an exhibit to this deposition, mark this Exhibit A.
[Exhibit so marked.]

When offered solid evidence Oswald signed under a false name you want that in evidence for like handwriting analysis etc., you don't COPY it and hand it back, RED FLAG!

Mr. BALL. Could we make a copy of this and return this to you, Mrs. Johnson?

Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; I have been told that I could sell this and I haven't gotten any money. I think about $30 is what I have received, all the trouble and all I've had and I've had to take the rugs up once or twice. People like to have driven us crazy before we asked for any information what to do. I hated to be rude to people, I didn't know what to do but they got so----

Well, Oswald memorabilia^**) was hot at the time!

Mr. BALL. We will make a picture of this and give it back to you.
Mrs. JOHNSON. May I have something to erase this November 13, 15--I got that wrong, anyway. I was looking at the calendar and this, I was thinking it was November 13 that he left he left my place on a Wednesday before this assassination on Friday.

Again, a disaster from an investigative point of view, but note the bombshell Gladys drops concerning the dates, WTF is she talking about?

There are only two plausible explanations: She's either referring to the exhibit she pulled out of her purse or she's quoting notes in front of her she also brought along. Based on Exhibit A, she must suddenly have realized that her notes are off by a week since O.H. Lee paid for the week starting Monday, November 18. However, if Exhibit A was in her possession when she prepared herself for the interview, looking at the calendar, how could she possibly get the dates wrong when they imply a final payment on November 11?

Mr. BALL. That was the last time you saw him?

Mrs. JOHNSON. Yeah; the last time I saw him was on a Wednesday but my housekeeper seen him on a Friday morning right after this assassination, he came by the house hurriedly.

He would actually have left Thursday morning, November 21.

Mr. BALL. Were you at home at the time?
Mrs. JOHNSON. No; I wasn't. I was at my restaurant, so I got this copied wrong. It was November 20; the assassination was on the 22d and he left my house on the 20th and then didn't return until right after this assassination.

Once again, he didn't, allegedly. He got a ride to Erving on the November 21.

Mr. BALL. By this, you mean the last time you saw him was Wednesday, the 20th?

Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. He did not come home on Thursday night?

Mrs. JOHNSON. He did not; no, sir.

BALL knows he didn't leave until Thursday morning (officially) that's why he doesn't probe her about Thursday morning.

Mr. BALL. The 21st?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Friday, the 22d you did not see him, either?
Mrs. JOHNSON. No I didn't. The housekeeper did.

Mr. BALL. We will make a copy of this and give the original back to you and we will mark this "A." Did he sign that "O. H. Lee" in your presence?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes sir.

Mr. BALL. On that day?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; the day he rented the room, they sign the register--they sign the register before I accept any money.

Mr. BALL. I'm talking about this "O. H. Lee" signature on this document; he signed that on that date?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.

Nice, Mr. BALL! We now have on record there should be one signature in the register that should match the one on this unnamed document that Mrs. Johnson brought with her. Note BALL beating around the bush by not asking Mrs. Johnson if this "document" she brought is from the register or if it's some kind of copy from say a ledger. One more RED FLAG earned!

Mr. Ball. Did he give you the money?
Mrs. Johnson. Yes.

Mr. Ball. $8?

Mrs. Johnson. Yes.

Now, concerning his clothes:

Mr. BALL. Were you there when Oswald brought his clothes into the room?
Mrs. JOHNSON. No; what do you mean?

Mr. BALL. Now, you rented the room to him on the 14th?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes.

Mr. BALL. Did he move in on that same day?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; and he had his clothes with him.

Well, two sentences back you weren't there! Obviously Gladys had not anticipated this question so now she's winging it big time!

Mr. BALL. He had his clothes with him?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; he just had a little old bag of clothes, these little bags you get when you are in the service.

Mr. BALL. A duffelbag?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes.

Mr. BALL. That's all he had?
Mrs. JOHNSON. That's all he had.

Mr. BALL. He was there only--you say he rented it on the 14th of October?
Mrs. JOHNSON. He rented the 14th of October.

How could Gladys possibly know what he had in the bag, that he only brought that bag and didn't bring more stuff later? Good signs of fabrication. Note BALL cutting himself off, he knows it's unlikely Oswald would bring everything he had to the rooming house without knowing if there actually were vacant rooms.

Coming up, some cross-checking...

______________________

*) Ruth Paine has a detailed account of what happened on November 14, I'll cover this in another post.

**) Notice that the copy was stamped TOP SECRET although Gladys Johnson was allowed to keep the scrap of paper to be sold to the highest bidder -- Comedy Central!

Last Edit: Jan 26, 2022 4:56:54 GMT -5 by Tom Sorensen

Tom Sorensen
Administrator

The truth hurts.

Posts: 590

The 1026 North Beckley Rooming House Sept 11, 2021 5:00:20 GMT -5

Quote

Post by Tom Sorensen on Sept 11, 2021 5:00:20 GMT -5

X-Checking Gladys vs. A.C. Johnson

(Wife vs. Husband)

I'll now take a look at husband A.C. Johnson's and (next post) housekeeper Earlene Roberts' testimonies to look for corroboration or discrepancies in relation to what I've noted in my previous post. In general, A.C.'s attitude is that (since) he was not dealing with 1026 N. Beckley and the tenants he remembers very little of what was going on at the time Oswald (or O.H. Lee) was living there. On the contrary, Earlene Roberts want's to give the impression the she's the one calling the shots when rooms are rented, in fact, in some FBI reports she's referrer to as 'manager'!

At bit of background info...

Mr. BELIN. Has it been full within the past 6 months at all, or not?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, no, It hasn't.

Mr. BELIN. By the way, how long have you been married, Mr. Johnson?
Mr. JOHNSON. Seventeen years.

Mr. BELIN. You've been married 17 years?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.

So they should be mostly in sync as to what has happened to the property. Since A.C. is a carpenter I would assume he did most of the maintenance work on the house to keep the running costs down. There must have been a good deal of wear and tear with, as stated earlier, 17 rooms and roomers constantly coming and going.

Mr. BELIN. Now, sometime last fall, a person came to your house to rent a room who you knew by the name of O. H. Lee. Is that correct?
Mr. JOHNSON. That's right.

Mr. BELIN. When he first came, were you all full at that time or not--or don't you know?
Mr. JOHNSON. I believe that--uh--the little room he took was the only room available at that time.

Hmm, A.C. does not answer the question asked, BELIN tries again...

Mr. BELIN. Had he come any earlier to try and find a room earlier--or not?
Mr. JOHNSON. Uh--Mrs. Roberts said he had been by once before.

So, he refers to Earlene Roberts, the house keeper, and not his wife who claimed to have dealt with O.H. Lee his first time around.

Mr. BELIN. And was that little room available then, or not--or don't you remember?
Mr. JOHNSON. I don't remember exactly, I believe, though, that--uh--I believe he looked at it and decided he'd wait awhile. But the next time he came back, why he decided he'd take it.

My wife told him that--uh--if he wanted to take that room, why he could, you know, when we had a larger room and more convenient for him, why he could have it. And so he just--after he got this little room, why he just decided he'd stay in it.

Now we have (as we'll see) a first variation of the story. The ex-library was actually for rent the first time around but Mr. Lee declined. The second time he decided to take the little room, but note A.C.'s odd use of the word "why". It's like he's almost saying "that's why" but he's on the fence, like because he should move to a larger room when one became available he could rent the small room. But when he could have another room he chose to stay in the little room. However, his "explanation" is totally bungled. Note "you know", the use of "just" twice, classic signs of diversion, there's surely something else going on as "just" isn't needed if he later simply decided to stay in the little room -- RED FLAG confirmed!

I'm pretty sure they end up with a bungled story to make him stay in the little room because the actual deal was that he insisted on staying in the main house even if other (basement) rooms became available. So twice within 3 weeks they were actually full (plus/minus ex-library) although his wife had told BALL they "most always have vacancies", sure!

A discussion about how O.H. Lee's room looked followed, ending with this brief exchange:

Mr. BELIN. Do you know who he got his room from--from you or from your wife or from your housekeeper?
Mr. JOHNSON. I don't know.

I find it quite strange that he couldn't rule out himself as the rooming house and his detailed account of how the deal was struck must have come from either his wife or their housekeeper as they were dealing with the tenants. Finally, at bit later, we have confirmation "O.H. Lee" is recorded in the register when the DP officers arrive:

Mr. BELIN. What did they say?

Mr. JOHNSON. Well, they wanted to see the records, and we showed them--the register, I mean--and we showed them the register. And then they searched his room.

Mr. BELIN. You showed them the register with this name of O. H. Lee?
Mr. JOHNSON. That's right.

As usual, A.C. has these sleight hesitations, "we showed them--", "I mean--", as if he's just about to correct himself but sticks to "register". I'll get back to the DP showing up but note that in this version they search his room without a search warrant.

Coming up, Earlene Roberts...

Last Edit: Sept 15, 2021 14:35:19 GMT -5 by Tom Sorensen

Tom Sorensen
Administrator

The truth hurts.

Posts: 590

The 1026 North Beckley Rooming House Sept 15, 2021 14:42:06 GMT -5

Quote

Post by Tom Sorensen on Sept 15, 2021 14:42:06 GMT -5

X-Checking Gladys vs. Earlene Roberts

(Wife vs. Landlady)

At the beginning of the interview, when the formalities have been dealt with, Earlene throws out some interesting numbers:

Mr. BALL. Now, you know Mrs. Johnson, don't you?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes; I knew her very muchly so.

Mr. BALL. How long did you work for her?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, this last time I was there around 13 months--that was the third time I had went back.

Mr. BALL. When did you start working for her?
Mrs. ROBERTS. I started working for her in 1949 the first time.

Mr. BALL. You did?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL And you worked for her three times altogether?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes; I got sick the first time---I'm a diabetic and wasn't able to do the work and one day she called me again and wanted to know if I would do it and I went back and stayed again and I went in a coma and had to leave, and the reason why I left this time, she cut me down so low and the work was too heavy--I wasn't able to do the work.

So, she has been acquainted with Gladys, actually working for her, since 1949 which equals about 15 years in '64. Gladys said she lived at 1026 N. Beckley for about 21 years which would be since around 1943. All fine except....(quote not in a previous post):

Mr. BALL. Miss Earlene Roberts was your housekeeper at this time [October '63]?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, she was.

Mr. BALL. How long have you known her?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I have known Mrs. Roberts, oh, I guess it was 6 years, something like that, 6 years.

BOOM -- what's going on here?

Mr. BALL. Where did you first meet her?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I hired her as a housekeeper.

Mr. BALL. At 1026 North Beckley?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Has she been working for you for that period of time?
Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir; I let Mrs. Roberts go a time or two, then I would hire her back.

There's no room for ambiguity. Her interaction with Earlene started 6 years ago and she was hired as a housekeeper. Clearly one of them is lying but why? Mr. Johnson confirms Earlene's last stint at the rooming house to be around one year:

Mr. BELIN. How long had she been a housekeeper for you?
Mr. JOHNSON. Well, that's something around a year--this past--the last time, I mean.

Mr. BELIN. She was a housekeeper for you prior to that time?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes; about a year or a little better.

Worth noting that A.C. had left the room when Gladys mentioned the 6 years. But again, notice the squishy language ("past" vs. "last") and he gets away with his answer without being challenged about the past although BELIN's follow-up question indicates anything prior to her last year with them. Regardless, the discrepancy of 6 years vs. 15 years is real and should be flagged.

Then BALL moves on to Room 0 being rented, a lengthy exchange:

Mr. BALL. And you were working there in October and November of last fall--- 1963?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes; to my sorrows.

Mr. BALL. Why to your sorrows?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, he was registered as O. H. Lee and I come to find out he was Oswald and I wish I had never known it.

Mr. BALL. Why?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, they put me through the third degree.

Mr. BALL. Who did?
Mrs. ROBERTS. The FBI, Secret Service, Mr. Will Fritz' men and Bill Decker's.

Mr. BALL. They did?

Mrs. ROBERTS. Every time I would walk out on the front perch somebody was standing with a camera on me they had me scared to death.

Familiar pattern with the witnesses, can’t wait to deliver their story -- now on to the meat-and-potatoes:

Mr. BALL. When is the first time you ever saw Lee Oswald?
Mrs. ROBERTS. The day he came in and rented the room--the 14th of October.

Mr. BALL. Had you ever heard of the man before?
Mrs. ROBERTS. No, and he didn't register as Oswald---he registered as O. H. Lee.

Double whammy! This means that she was not involved when Oswald came three weeks prior, although A.C. said he got that information from her, and she was involved (as we'll se) with renting the room to O.H. Lee although Gladys Johnson took ownership of that transaction.

Mr. BALL. Did he sign his name?
Mrs. ROBERTS. O. H. Lee.

Mr. BALL. Did he sign his own name that way ?
Mrs. ROBERTS. O. H. Lee---that's what he was registered as.

Mr. BALL. Did you rent it to him, or did Mrs. Johnson?
Mrs. ROBERTS. I rented the room to him.

BOOM -- we're now seeing the beginning of the third variation of the story.

Mr. BALL. You did?
Mrs. ROBERTS. She talked to him, and she had to go back to the work and that was what I was supposed to do---I rented the rooms---she didn't know what vacancies she had.

Nasty surprise, Mr. BALL!

Mr. BALL. Did you have "room for rent" sign out in the front?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes.

Mr. BALL. What time of day did he come in there?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Oh, it was in the early afternoon---I imagine between 1 and 2 o'clock when he came in and looked at the room; and he rented it and paid for it; and then left, and went and got his things and I don't know---it must have been around 5 or 6 o'clock when he come back in.

OOPS -- suddenly things went from bad to worse for BALL. Contrary to what Gladys said the room was rented prior to her being home and at the time she was home, supposedly renting the room to Mr. Lee, he just returned with his stuff. RED FLAG indeed!

Mr. BALL. You say he went and got his things---what did he have with him at first when he came there?

Mrs. ROBERTS. Just a little satchel bag and some clothes on a hanger.

Mr. BALL. What kind of a satchel bag?
Mrs. ROBERTS. One of them little zip kinds.

Mr. BALL. What color was it?
Mrs. ROBERTS. It was just---don't ask me that for I can't answer that. It was just a dark bag is all I know.

Mr. BALL. How long did he stay that first time?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Oswald?

So, the zip bag and some clothes on a hanger (not mentioned by Mrs. Johnson). Odd why Earlene asks BALL if he means Oswald, context should be clear.

Mr. BALL. I mean before he went away to get his clothes, when he first came in-you say he rented a room?
Mrs. ROBERTS. He rented the room and paid me $8 for it and he said, "I'll go get my things and I will be back."

Mr. BALL. Did he say where he was going to get them?
Mrs. ROBERTS. No, he didn't.

Mr. BALL., Did he leave?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes; he left.

Mr. BALL. Did he have a car he was riding in ?
Mrs. ROBERTS. I don't know---I didn't see it.

Mr. BALL. Did he take a bus?
Mrs. ROBERTS. I don't know.

Mr. BALL. You don't know?
Mrs. ROBERTS. No, I don't. I don't remember---you know in a place like that---when you rent a room---I didn't pay no attention.

BALL probing about transportation but gets nothing, probably right but did she remember the deal about clothing without paying attention?

Mr. BALL. And he came back about what time?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Oh, I imagine around 5 o'clock, maybe.

Mr. BALL. What did he have with him at that time?
Mrs. ROBERTS. That little zipper satchel bag and some clothes on a hanger.

Mr. BALL. The first time he came to see you he had a zipper satchel bag?
Mrs. ROBERTS. No; he didn't have nothing when he first come in and rented the room.

Hmm, maybe she really didn't pay attention...

Mr. BALL. He didn't have anything?
Mrs. ROBERTS. No---he just came in.

Mr. BALL. Oh, when he came back he had the zipper satchel and the clothes on the hanger, is that right?
Mrs. ROBERTS. No---he rented the room and paid for it and said, "I'll go get my things." That's when he went and come back with his little satchel bag and some clothes on a hanger, which was a very few.

Earlene was doing just fine and she then starts flip-flopping, why? Last exchange, when BALL just seeks confirmation, she answers No instead of Yes to confirm BALL is right, WTF? I'll bet Earlene gets this easy-peasy renting process wrong because it's not coming from actual memory, RED FLAG (look out for Ruth Paine coming up later in this thread).

Mr. BALL. Now, did he have anything to say when he came back?
Mrs. ROBERTS. No.

Mr. BALL. Did he tell you where he had been?
Mrs. ROBERTS. No.

Mr. BALL. Did he stay there that night?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes.

BALL resigns, has no interest in pursuing the bungled clothes story.

As for the register, we have this exchange:

Mr. BALL. What did they [the DP] say?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, they asked him [A.C. Johnson] if there was a Harvey Lee Oswald there.

Mr. BALL. What did he say?
Mrs. ROBERTS. And he says, "I don't know, I'll have to call the housekeeper," and he called me and I went and got the books and I said, "No; there's no one here by that name," and they tried to make me remember and I couldn't, and Mrs. Johnson come in in the meantime and there wasn't nobody there by that name, and Mrs. Johnson said, "Mrs. Roberts, don't you have him?" And, I said, "No; we don't, for here is my book and there is nobody there by that name." We checked it back a year.

Mr. BALL. And you didn't have that name you didn't ever know his name was Lee Oswald?
Mrs. ROBERTS. No---he registered as O. H. Lee and they were asking for Harvey Lee Oswald.

There should be no doubt that the chronology of tenants should go back at least a year.

Coming up, summary of findings so far....

Last Edit: Sept 15, 2021 14:43:00 GMT -5 by Tom Sorensen

Tom Sorensen
Administrator

The truth hurts.

Posts: 590

The 1026 North Beckley Rooming House Oct 7, 2021 4:28:19 GMT -5

Quote

Post by Tom Sorensen on Oct 7, 2021 4:28:19 GMT -5

A Quick Summary

(Plus: Yet To Come)

In this post I will go though, in order of severity, the red flags I've planted so far related to statements by Mr. & Mrs. Johnson and Earlene Roberts. This includes the investigative initiatives, or lack of same, by BALL & BELIN based on their findings related to the 1026 N. Beckley rooming house.

The missing register

It should be self evident that a commission investigating a possible plot behind the murder of the POTUS would not hesitate to seize the register of the rooming house where the accused lived under a false name. Missing an opportunity like this is straight up hilarious since they had three witnesses at the 1026 Beckley address confirming the books exist, even going back at least one year. Writing off leads of co-conspirators possibly rooming with Oswald is in itself proof that the Warren Commission actively avoided threats against the lone gunman presumption but may not have been the only reason why they did not pick up the register. The tenants listed might have contradicted the story of Oswald living in Room 0.

The register copy, Johnson Exhibit A

Instead of the actual register Mrs. Johnson brought a sheet of paper of unknown origin. As I've already pointed out it was not established during testimony if this page originated from the register or was some sort of record that the housekeeper kept. Again, Mrs. Johnson is allowed to keep this paper and we're left with a photograph in evidence -- unbelievable!

In her testimony Mrs. Johnson claims that except from the O.H. Lee signature^*) the "document" is in Earlene Roberts handwriting. I've found an exhibit, CE 1125, " Statement dated June 8, 1964, of Mrs. Earlene Roberts.", which has her signature on the bottom of the page. I've inserted just that part in the Johnson Exhibit A picture to see if it's at least plausible that the register "copy" is written by her. You'll notice her digits eight and four look like in the date of the statement as well as the capital "R" in Roberts and Room (green arrows).

To me it seems plausible the "register copy" is in Earlene Roberts hand. However, the question not answered is when it was written and even worse: The Commission did not show this alleged copy to Earlene Roberts when she testified on April 8, 1964, to verify it's authenticity although it became known to them on April 1, 1964, when Mrs. Johnson testified; as if we didn't have enough red flags already!!!

The bungled rental dates

Wow, how could Mrs. Johnson, when consulting her calendar and having the register copy in front of her, be a week off in her assessment of when Oswald was last seen by her? Asking to correct the dates in front of BALL is almost unreal. Imagine the WC staff reading that transcript! A.C. Johnson confirmed that they had discussed the case (what else would you expect?) so confusing those dates simply does not fly. I could understand that five months after the fact there could have been some confusion about a Wednesday and a Friday, but given every date the rent is due, which was always a Monday, how could you possibly go wrong? Without getting into speculation whether this copy is a complete hoax or just being "touched up", it's safe to conclude that it's dubious as hell.

The three variants of tiny room rental

We have three different versions of how Oswald ended up renting the tiny room in the main house; that should get the attention of any investigator:

Mrs. Johnson -- Oswald comes by 3 weeks before October 14, 5pm-6pm no vacancies, on October 14 only tiny room (Room 0) available which he rents. Mrs. Johnson is in charge.
Mr. Johnson -- Oswald comes by prior (no date) to October 14, only tiny room available. October 14, again tiny room only is available which he rents. Unknown who's in charge.

Mrs. Roberts -- Oswald comes by October 14, 1pm-2pm, Mrs Johnson talks to him briefly, he then rents room. Comes back around 5pm-6pm with rest of clothes.

I'm willing to give Mr. Johnson a break as he's not dealing with the rooming house as such so all he's got is hear-say. However, in the two version given by Gladys Johnson and Earlene Roberts nothing lines up. From a WC point of view the worst story is coming from Gladys Johnson as Oswald was not supposed to be in Dallas 3 weeks prior to October 14 -- the whole Mexico City trip falls apart. On both occasions supposedly Mrs. Johnson is dealing with Oswald but the register "copy" shows Earlene Roberts doing the paperwork. Due to Earlene's health problems she rarely went anywhere so where was she late in the afternoon when Gladys dealt with Oswald, on the can?

Earlene Roberts' version sounds more coherent except for the bungled story about the clothes. Also notice that she has no details about an option to move out of the tiny room later. I'll get back to this in the next section.

The ex-library story -- Room 0

One will notice that none of the key players refer to "Room 0" in their testimonies or mention anything about room numbers, why? If Earlene Roberts was employed by Mrs. Johnson for more than a decade she would have known the story of the room but does not once refer to the room as tiny (or being the ex-library room) when the subject is Oswald renting the room. On the contrary, Gladys Johnson has a longwinded story about her former library and it feels like she needs to explain why anyone would pay $8 a week for this ridiculously tiny room. Is this because she never actually rented out this room?

Earlene Robert's only reference to a tiny room is in a comment where she mentions it being ajacent to her own room, which is even smaller according to the floor plan! In fact, the rooms are connected by a door covered by a curtain as can be seen in photos shown in the preservation document. There can be no doubt Earlene would know who occupied that room! This whole "Room 0" deal doesn't sit right with me and I'll get back to it in a later post.

The Johnsons, presence at 1026

I don't see direct evidence that they didn't live there but how would they expect any kind of privacy in the main house exept for their bedroom? The disagrement regarding the duration of Earlene Robert's employment indicates to me something is not quite right in this department.

The Johnson business empire

Adding to what we already know, according to the preservation document, Mr. Johnson also ran a gas station across the street from the rooming house: "Across Beckley from the house is a triangular site on which sits a gas and service station, originally Humble Oil, which Mr. Johnson reportedly owned and ran with a business partner as a Mobile Oil station in 1963". If true, he forgot to mention this when interviewed by BELIN. To my knowledge none of the properties owned by A.C. was further investigated and their locations were not disclosed.

The 1026 property layout

No floor plan or pictures of 1026 North Beckley were provided during the WC interviews and there was no mention of the garage complex at the rear of the property. The bizarre comment alone by A.C. Johnson about 11 bedrooms all located in the basement should have warrented further investigation into this rooming house. Again, was the tiny room actually numbered "0" or was it an invention used only for extraordinary circumstances when all other bedrooms were rented out?

So, what's up next in this thread?

The Earline Roberts bashing. Mrs. Johnson is doing some obvious trash talking when addressing housekeeper Earlene Roberts. I'll look into why that would be and point out another mystery roomer who would have been a target for any resonable investigation.

A player I haven't mentioned yet is FBI special agent James Hosty. During October and November of 1963 he was supposedly tracking the Oswalds. The request was by the New Orleans office. Based on Hosty's testimony before the WC we're led to believe that he managed not to trace Lee Oswald to 1026 North Beckley where he resided, allegedly. I will show that the Beckley rooming house address (or any other address) not being documented shows that evidence was faked and that Hosty must have been lying about his method of obtaining said address or adresses.

And I'll do a post on Lee's notebook and Ruth Paine's address book along with other odds and ends related to the tiny room tenant...

______________________

*) The yellow arrows point to the signature script "e" that was also used on the Klein's coupon signed Hidell. It's not seen on the envelope or on the money order written in longhand. My gut feeling is that the O.H. Lee signature is fake and intended to mirror the Hidell signature, implying that since Hidell was a fake signature so was O.H. Lee.

Last Edit: Oct 7, 2021 10:35:18 GMT -5 by Tom Sorensen: Typos

Tom Sorensen
Administrator

The truth hurts.

Posts: 590

The 1026 North Beckley Rooming House Oct 14, 2021 13:56:13 GMT -5

Quote

Post by Tom Sorensen on Oct 14, 2021 13:56:13 GMT -5

The Grudge -- Gladys vs. Earlene

(Plus: Lady Roomer)

During Mrs. Johnson's interview with BALL there's no doubt that she is eager to put down her former housekeeper Earlene Roberts. Former, since Earlene Robert's left without notice (allegedly) a few weeks before the interview with the Johnsons took place. I'll go though the part of the interview concerning former housekeeper Earlene Roberts to see what can be learned and why Gladys Johnson might have a grudge with Earlene Roberts.

Mr. BALL. Miss Earlene Roberts was your housekeeper at this time?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, she was.

Mr. BALL. How long have you known her?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I have known Mrs. Roberts, oh, I guess it was 6 years, something like that, 6 years.

Mr. BALL. Where did you first meet her?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I hired her as a housekeeper.

Mr. BALL. At 1026 North Beckley?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. Has she been working for you for that period of time?
Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir; I let Mrs. Roberts go a time or two, then I would hire her back.

Mr. BALL. there some reason why you let her go?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Well, she would just get to being disagreeable with renters and I don't know, she has a lot of handicaps. She has an overweight problem and she has some habits that some people have to understand to tolerate.

As noted earlier, either of them is not telling the truth about when they initially got acquainted, why is that?

Mr. BALL. What are they?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Talking just sitting down and making up tales, you know, have you ever seen people like that? Just have a creative mind, there's nothing to it, and just make up and keep talking until she just makes a lie out of it. Listen, I'm telling you the truth and this isn't to go any further, understand that? You have to know these things because you are going to question this lady. I will tell you, she's just as intelligent--I think she is a person that doesn't mean to do that but she just does it automatically. It seems as though that she, oh, I don't know, wants to be attractive or something at times. I just don't know; I don't understand it myself. I only wish I did.

Well, telling tales, making stuff up, as intelligent as....what? Just so BALL et al. are warned when they're talking to her.

Mr. BALL. She was working for you in October and November while Oswald was a renter with you?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, she was. This Saturday night will be 3 weeks she left.

Mr. BALL. She quit 3 weeks ago?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; I didn't know she was going.

Mr. BALL. Where did she go?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I do not know. I called her sister to try to find out. I don't think she knows.

Mr. BALL. Who is her sister?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Mrs. Bertha Cheek.
Mr. BALL She lives here in Dallas?

Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; on Swiss, I think.
Mr. BALL. Have you talked to her within the last few days?

Let's take a look at what's going on here. Note that Mrs. Cheek is not spelled out; would you know how to spell her name correctly just from hearing it? Well, Mrs. Cheek was already known to the WC. The FBI quickly took an interest in Bertha Cheek as we have two early FBI reports (Cheek deposition exhibits 5353 and 5354) discussing her connection with Jack Ruby. She's deposed on April 14, 1964, when she comes up with a convoluted story about possibly buying a share of Ruby's nightclub. Mrs. Cheek is interviewed in length by Burt Griffin who shows a keen interest in her properties and their addresses -- she buys and sells property and rents out apartments -- but he does not really probe her on any connections to the Beckley residence^**). She deserves a thread of her own considering her activities and how she got involved with Jack Ruby.

Mrs. JOHNSON. A number of times. I talked to her trying to find Earlene. I thought it was important we did come to this Commission and I wanted to ask Earlene just why she did leave because I didn't know there was a thing in the world wrong. Well, I carried her to Pleasant Grove to a doctor and spent a half day that I should have been even with my brother that had had a heart attack, been assisting my sister-in-law and her chores that day.

Mr. BALL. When was this?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Three weeks ago Saturday.

Mr. BALL. That's the day you took her to the doctor?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; I took her every 2 weeks just as regular.

Mr. BALL. She quit that day?
Mrs. JOHNSON. That night, and everything was just as agreeable; I went and shopped for vegetables and her special meats for her diet. She is a diabetic, too, while she was in the doctor's office, and I had everything for another week for her diet.

Mr. BALL. Did she come to you and tell you she was going to quit?
Mrs. JOHNSON. No; she never mentioned such a thing. I thought everything was just agreeable.

Mr. BALL. What did she do, move out?
Mrs. JOHNSON. After midnight, after everyone was in bed.

Mr. BALL. She didn't tell you she was going?
Mrs. JOHNSON. She didn't tell me she was going.

Mr. BALL. You haven't see her since?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I haven't seen her since.

Mr. BALL. Did a letter come to your house to Earlene Roberts from the Commission?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes.

Mr. BALL. What did you do with it?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I held it until the last minute and returned it to you.

Mr. BALL. Your letter and your husband's letter came to the house?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes.

Mr. BALL. You called Mrs. Cheek?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes I did.

Mr. BALL. To find out where Earlene was?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes.

Mr. BALL. What did she tell you?
Mrs. JOHNSON. She told me she had called her and told her she had left my house and she said. "I just proceeded to tell her what I thought about it because you are so good and so nice to her. She should never have quit you like that." She said. "You know how she is, she hasn't called back. She might swell up and pout and it will be months before she calls me again."

From the context, "She [Bertha] told me she [Earlene] had called her [Bertha] and told her [Bertha] she [Earlene] had left my [Mrs. Johnson's] house...", it's clear that Earlene called her sister. Given her (Earlene's) financial situation, what are the chances she would just walk out with nowhere to go? Let me tell you: zero! This means she had been planning this for some time, not necessarily telling her sister, in order to find a place where she could do "practical nursing" and stay as she told BALL. When she called her sister what are the chances Mrs. Cheek was not told her new address? I'll tell you: zero! But likely asked it not being disclosed. If Gladys Johnson cut back on her salary, and that it was the actual cause of her leaving, this must have been discussed between the two and everything wouldn't have been "just agreeable".

Mr. BALL. Do you know any reason why she should have left you?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Mrs. Cheek, the sister, says when she was talking to her she brought up a little old lady that does room with me and she is a retired woman who is drawing her social security and she was a housekeeper previous to this last time Mrs. Roberts was there--Katy Gage, a precious woman, gets along with everybody. She's got children but doesn't want to live with them. She prefers living with my husband and I, renting a room and lives with us. She tells--and Mrs. Cheek says first thing she brought up was Katy. She says she's jealous of Katy and I don't know why she is. There is no reason to be.

Actually, at the time of the interview Mrs. Cheek no longer lived on Swiss Avenue as she moved out in January of 1964^*). Mrs. Johnson would have known of Mrs. Cheek prior to her moving out, which makes sense, considering Earlene's various ailments and Mrs. Cheek being next of kin. But, does it make any sense that Mrs. Cheek didn't know Earlene Robert's current address? I'll call BS on that one. These people live basically within a 15-30 minute drive of each others so it would have been a nobrainer for Mrs. Cheek to pick up the Commission's letter at Beckley and drop it off at Earlene Robert's current address which was 5000 Tremont St.

So, the former housekeeper, Katy Gage, lives in the main house, I assume, with the Johnsons. I'll bet she would be in room no. 1 or 2 as indicated on the floor plan. Certainly looks like (although hear-say) there was some rivalry going on between Earlene Roberts and Katy Gage. Regardless, when Mrs. Gage retired, Gladys must have hired back Earlene although she would have been fully aware of her issues and habits. Was Gladys Johnson actually having trouble hiring staff or was there a deeper connection between the two?

As for Mrs. Gage (spelling, again), there goes another lost opportunity to gain insider info on the tiny room renter as she wasn't called to testify!

A short inquiry about Oswald's (or Mr. Lee's) habits...

Mr. BALL. Did Earlene Roberts ever talk to Oswald in your presence; did you ever see them talk to each other?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Listen here, no; I don't believe that Lee talked to anybody. I just really don't.

Mr. BALL. Did Earlene ever talk to you about Oswald?
Mrs. JOHNSON. No.

Mr. BALL. Say she thought he was a peculiar one?
Mrs. JOHNSON. No.

Mr. BALL. She never mentioned him?
Mrs. JOHNSON. No; she just didn't like him because he wouldn't speak but that's all.

Mr. BALL. She told you she did not like him?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yeah, she would say "I would like to know if he thinks he is too good to speak to me when he comes through the kitchen." I said, "If you speak to him, he will speak," I said, "I will speak to him" and he says, "Good morning" but he didn't speak if I didn't speak.

...which didn't bring out anything remarkable. Speaking of telling tales and making stuff up, enjoy this exchange with BALL:

Mr. BALL. Was he gone almost every weekend?

Mrs. JOHNSON. Every weekend but one and that was the weekend previous to the assassination.

Mr. BALL. What did he do that weekend?

Mrs. JOHNSON. Well, I actually didn't see him leave the house but I know he did because I heard some of the renters say they seen him leave and I also heard--remember something that he went to the rifle range--I read he was at the rifle range.

Mr. BALL You say you did not see him leave. Were you there over the weekend?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I surely was.

Mr. BALL. But you did not see him leave?
Mrs. JOHNSON. That's right.

Mr. BALL. You say you heard some people say that; who said that?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I have read.

Mr. BALL. Don't tell me what you read.
Mrs. JOHNSON. I actually read it in the newspaper; I just don't remember.

Mr. BALL. Is there anybody that you know of at your house that you say saw Oswald leave the house the weekend before the assassination?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I'm trying to think. I just don't believe that I remember anyone who said definitely that they seen him leave.

Mr. BALL. Did anybody tell you that lived in your house there?
Mrs. JOHNSON. They could come in and out that door and we never would notice it because the house is large and we stayed a lot in the back of the house.

Not answering the questions, now backpedaling. So anybody could enter or leave the main house (living room privileges), which would include Oswald, with nobody noticing.

Mr. BALL. You mentioned rifle range. Where did you get information that Oswald went to a rifle range?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I read it in the paper.

Mr. BALL. Did anybody in your house tell you he went to a rifle range?
Mrs. JOHNSON. No.

Mr. BALL. Did you ever see him go to a rifle range?
Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir.

Mr. BALL. Did he ever tell you he went to a rifle range?
Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir; that man never talked; that was the only peculiarity about him. He would never speak. If we would speak to him and some of the men renters he would speak to the housekeeper and I every time we would speak and we would speak to him just most every time we would meet him and, of course, he would speak after we would speak, but he would come in and watch television maybe 30, 40 minutes at a time and never speak to a man.

Yada-yada, nice final deflection, all BS she picked up from the newspaper. What else did she make up?

______________________

*) Current address was 5901 Hillcrest Ave. (or Road?), this address was also found in Jack Ruby's notebook but she did move between apartments owned by herself.

**) It was being the sister of Earlene Roberts and knowing Ruby that initially made her a person of interest. But why would that make her so interesting? Interesting!

Last Edit: Jan 17, 2022 14:39:13 GMT -5 by Tom Sorensen: Wording

Tom Sorensen
Administrator

The truth hurts.

Posts: 590

The 1026 North Beckley Rooming House Jan 21, 2022 11:58:35 GMT -5

Quote

Post by Tom Sorensen on Jan 21, 2022 11:58:35 GMT -5

Earlene on Gladys

(Animosity Clues)

Frankly, there's not much to go by. First one I found was this exchange with BALL:

Mr. BALL And you worked for her three times altogether?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes; I got sick the first time---I'm a diabetic and wasn't able to do the work and one day she called me again and wanted to know if I would do it and I went back and stayed again and I went in a coma and had to leave, and the reason why I left this time, she cut me down so low and the work was too heavy--I wasn't able to do the work.

Mr. BALL. You mean she cut you down on your money?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Oh, yes; and I can't pay my doctor bill and buy my medicine at that price.

Mr. BALL. You mean, she didn't pay you enough--that's the reason you quit?
Mrs. ROBERTS. That's the reason why I quit--the work was too heavy and I wasn't able to do it and not enough pay.

Gladys Johnson took her to the doctor every two weeks for checkup, and likely also picked up her medicine, so there's no way Gladys would not know her financial status. If Earlene Roberts is truthful, cutting back her salary would have been a straight up provocation and GJ claiming everything was honky-dory would be flat out lying.

But there might be something else going on: if Earlene Roberts suddenly quit (allegedly) 3 weeks prior to the rooming house residents being called to testify before The Commission, this might have resulted in a dispute over certain parts of the narrative that needed "editing".

BTW, notice that BALL does not ask Earlene Roberts any questions about receiving a letter from the commission. Gladys returned the letter to the commission (I covered this earlier in the thread) at the very last minute, so how did BALL get hold of her? Both women suddenly realizing they would be called to testify could well have triggered panic regarding "Mr. Lee" and the events surrounding his rental history, signing the register etc. which might not have been entirely kosher!

The other example where Earlene Roberts shows animosity towards her boss is this one:

Mr. BALL. Did you rent it to him, or did Mrs. Johnson?
Mrs. ROBERTS. I rented the room to him.

Mr. BALL. You did?
Mrs. ROBERTS. She talked to him, and she had to go back to the work and that was what I was supposed to do---I rented the rooms---she didn't know what vacancies she had.

No doubt about the message conveyed to BALL! Never the less, Gladys Jonson's effort to put down her house keeper seems disproportional compared to the animosity displayed by Earlene Roberts. Likely an attempt by Gladys Johnson to get the upper hand as she was the first to testify. As we've seen so far, the testimonies didn't pan out well for The Commission.

Next I'll go through a video presenting the recollections of a grand daughter of Gladys Johnson who "relives" the six weeks "Mr. Lee" resided at 1026 North Beckley.

Tom Sorensen
Administrator

The truth hurts.

Posts: 590

The 1026 North Beckley Rooming House Jan 22, 2022 14:41:13 GMT -5

Quote

Post by Tom Sorensen on Jan 22, 2022 14:41:13 GMT -5

Patricia Puckett-Hall's recollections

(Gladys Johnson's grand daughter)

It's time to look at a video I've had bookmarked for a while concerning the memories of the current^*) owner of 1026 North Beckley, a descendant of the Johnsons.

It's a prime example of how lies of the Warren Commission are still passed on as fact and how memories and hear-say from an 11-year-old shouldn't be considered facts.

Below are my comments referring the minutes of the video; if you've been following this thread you should have no problems understanding my comments/objections.

00:20

"LHO was a roomer of this house..." -- highly questionable.

00:40

"...where he would grab the bus every morning to go to work..." -- sorry, there isn't a shred of evidence that LHO ever took the Beckley bus, or any other bus, to work.

01:20

Actually a fair objection by TM considering, as Buell Frazier has repeatedly told, his car was unreliable...

03:20

11 years old in 1963.

03:40

"During the school year it was required that we came here so that my grand mother could make sure that we got out homework done..." -- So, hung out after school and doing homework; picked up by mother later. BUT, how does Pat's grand mother, who manages her restaurant, check on them when she's not at the rooming house? (hint: housekeeper)

04:00

Mother's studio (photographer) was on Jefferson Ave, across from the Texas Theatre!

04:20

The southern style "Mr. Lee" thing...I seriously doubt she ever saw anything signed by "Mr. Lee", but her story makes it even more unbelievable that Roberts/Johnson checked a year back for a Lee Harvey Oswald, likely at the dining table or in the sofa, having a "Mr Lee" currently occupying a room next to them, physically, and nobody makes the O. H. Lee vs. Lee Harvey Oswald connection? Add to this that Earlene Roberts no more that one hour earlier saw "Mr Lee" rush into his room and leaving within 2-3 minutes, something she never before experienced!

05:15

Living in the house, "Llots of men...!" -- Interesting, that was the first thing that came to her mind. But her routine apparently didn't change after Oswald officially was appointed assassin of JFK (and a cop killer) who registered under a false name. No worries!

05:20

Rooming house vs. boarding house...

05:35

So, rooming house with no kitchen privileges -- OOPS! Except for Mr. Lee, according to Gladys Johnson herself!

05:43

How big was the house in 1963, "in 1963 my grand mother had 18 bedrooms to this house" -- Mr. Johnson's count was 17 and managed to fit 11 of them in the basement(!); Gladys Johnson arrived at 22 in total, meaning that some 6 rooms were not for rent. If all were supposed to be in the main house something doesn't add up according to the floor plan...

05:53

How many of them were filled? "All of them...it was rare for, um, there to be a single room for more that a week". -- So, let's compare this to Gladys Johnson's estimate:

Mr. BALL. How many tenants did you have in October last year?
Mrs. JOHNSON. You know, I'm sorry I didn't bring my register. I couldn't tell you exactly; I imagine I had about 10 or 12.

Mr. BALL. Was it full?
Mrs. JOHNSON. No; I don't--I most always have vacancies.

Mr. BALL. You do?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I have had more even since this happened.

Do you believe a 50-year-old memory of an 11-year-old girl or the fresh memory of the 60-year-old homeowner, although Earlene Roberts claimed Gladys didn't know what vacancies she had? It's your call!

06:15

Only one room vacant when Mr. Lee showed up, the smallest one.

06:50

Details concerning Mr. Lee...

07:20

She had two brothers, 10 and 6, mostly interacting with Mr. Lee, her not so much.

07:45

Details RE mother working three jobs (interesting) so the kids often stayed into the evenings.

08:00

Mr. Lee in the evenings...loosely the routine told by Earlene Roberts, except he spent time with Pat's brothers! (see below).

08:10

Come out and watch a little T.V. Unfortunately, TM throws a lot of stuff at her she can just latch on to as she pleases. Roberts/Johnson are all over the place RE Mr. Lee's T.V. habits:

Mr. BALL. Did he watch television?

Mrs. ROBERTS. No---in a way---but all he did ever watch the television was if someone in the other rooms had it on, maybe he would come and stand at the back of the couch---not over 5 minutes and go to his room and shut the door and never say a word.

Mr. BALL. Did he ever tell you he went to a rifle range?
Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir; that man never talked; that was the only peculiarity about him. He would never speak. If we would speak to him and some of the men renters he would speak to the housekeeper and I every time we would speak and we would speak to him just most every time we would meet him and, of course, he would speak after we would speak, but he would come in and watch television maybe 30, 40 minutes at a time and never speak to a man.

08:30

Roomers out in the back, so who was in the basement?

08:45

"...and then there's a front bedroom that's just right across from us so these two had the most accessible, um, rooms to the front door." -- Makes sense if she's referring to the #1 room on the floor plan also having french door. I'll bet Mrs. Gage occupied the #2 bedroom having a proper door and a smallish storage room accessible from within the bedroom.

09:00

"But any time my brothers and I and Mr. Lee was here on the same time, he would stop anything he was doing and would play with my brothers..." -- Well, doesn't sound exactly like the antisocial Mr. Lee described by Earlene Roberts and the Johnsons!

09:30

The anecdote about Lee giving the brothers a lecture...about two weeks before the assassination.

11:20

The day of the assassination the kids were at school so no first hand account of what happened at the rooming house.

11:50

Pat's mother actually witnessed "them" arresting Lee...

12:00

Q: "She recognized him as beeing Lee from the rooming house?"

A: "She recognized him as being a roomer...she didn't put a name to him"

LHO being rushed out of the TT into a car gave the mother how many seconds to recognize him? I'll call BS on that one.

12:30

The continuation becomes pretty interesting...the mother allegedly calls Gladys and is told the police and the FBI are there...Gladys, to the effect: "Well, the police and the FBI are here and they're in Mr. Lee's room!" --Actually lines up with the timeline provided by Roberts/Johnsons which is devastating to the WC as the 1026 address wasn't supposed to be known prior to LHO's arrest.

13:10

Mother closes studio, picks up kids from school and goes home.

14:10

Pat et al. usually not at the rooming house on Saturdays.

15:00

The shooting of LHO on TV at Pat's home. One of the brothers recognizes Mr. Lee. -- Really?

16:30

Pat's assessment of Mr. Lee...good with kids etc., doesn't fit a killer.

18:05

"So there were absolutely no red flags".

18:10

Saw him every day, except weekends, for six weeks. -- Well, did she really? He wouldn't arrive home until 5:00 to 5:30 p.m. so unless the mother worked late hours she would have picked up the kids before Mr. Lee was back. Also, kids don't count weeks and she would have had no reason to take notes of when he showed up.

18:30

Being around roomers coming and going, but, again, not a single word about being around the housekeeper who was there 24/7.

21:10

Mr. Lee chilling on the front porch in the evenings...totally in conflict with the Roberts/Johnsons account!

21:30

One more go at the lecture anecdote...

CONCERNS & CONCLUSIONS

A number of things raises my concerns as to the credibility of Oswald being the Room Zero Guy as she insists, and the whole setup in general.

What bothers me most is what she does not tell: why is the housekeeper not mentioned with a single word? If her grand mother ran a restaurant it had to be the housekeeper who kept an eye on Pat and her brothers when they returned from school. Up until the assassination, for approximately one year, it would have been Earlene Roberts and prior to that Mrs. Gage. Since Pat usually didn't fool around with her brothers she most likely would have engaged in more girly activities with the housekeeper. Earlene Roberts was super talkative and never had kids herself (to her sorrow) so she would likely have been interested in the grand daughter coming over after school. Even if ER wasn't the sharpest tool, she must have assisted with homework etc. and left some kind of impression. There would have been ongoing tensions between her grand mother and Earlene Roberts, eventually resulting in her dismissal. All we hear is the one-happy-family thing, I'm not buying it.

Pat claimed her mother rarely had vacancies, which supports the official story of Oswald got the last vacant room, whereas Gladys Johnson claims she rarely DIDN'T have vacancies, which would make it the exception that Oswald was offered Room Zero. Gladys not bringing the register to back up her story defies belief. There's no way of knowing which of the stories is fake.

Pat would have a strong economical interest in keeping the myth alive when selling the house. Imagine the price tag of a kind of run down rooming house on a random street in Dallas with no provenience vs. an important historic building.

I have no doubt that Pat was heavily groomed to believe that Room Zero Dude was Oswald as it was in everyone's interest to just move on and forget about the whole deal. IMO, nothing in her story can negate the red flags I've raised so far concerning "Oswald's" rooming house -- and there will be more as the thread develops.

______________________

*) Possibly, the house was up for sale in 2013.

Last Edit: Jan 26, 2022 4:40:01 GMT -5 by Tom Sorensen