Post by Rob Caprio on Oct 29, 2018 9:20:39 GMT -5
All portions are ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2024
i.pinimg.com/736x/cb/8c/01/cb8c0178eee7f5d3d85b0b69672bd8b8--warren-commission-earl-warren.jpg
news.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/GettyImages-515492366.jpg
So far this series has contained twenty-five questions that only have conspiratorial answers. Let’s look at six more now.
*********************************************
1)Why did the Dallas Police Department (DPD) NOT try to dissuade anyone from attacking Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO)?
Is this normal police procedure for a prisoner? I don’t think so. If we go to Earl Ruby Exhibit 1, we will see on page 332 this quote.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/pages/WH_Vol21_0178b.gif
Everyone was outraged against Oswald. The police made little effort to dissuade anyone from attacking Oswald. (Earl Ruby Exhibit 1, p. 332, p. 12 in original)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0178b.htm
Quote off
This is in the twenty-six volumes, so we have to think it is accurate. Why would the DPD make little effort to protect their own prisoner? Was it because it made their life easier if LHO was gone? Especially when we consider the fact that they had NO evidence showing that that he was guilty?
This shows the DPD had NO plans for protecting LHO, thus, the Sheriff's Department should have handled the transfer since they did this ninety-nine percent of the time anyway.
2) Why was a DPD officer telling Ruby 36 hours before he would kill LHO that LHO should be killed?
It is true. If we go to Ruby’s testimony, we will see this.
Mr. RUBY. …As I was driving toward the Times Herald with the intention of doing these things, I heard someone honk a horn very loudly, and I stopped. There was a police officer sitting in a car. He was sitting with this young lady that works in my club, Kathy Kay, and they were very much carried away.
And I was carried away; and he had a few beers, and it is so bad about those places open, and I was a great guy to close; and I remained with them--did I tell you this part of it?
Mr. MOORE .I don't recall this part; no.
Mr. RUBY. I didn't tell you this part because at the time I thought a lot of Harry Carlson as a police officer, and either it slipped my mind in telling this, or it was more or less a reason for leaving it out, because I felt I didn't want to involve them in anything, because it was supposed to be a secret that he was going with this young lady. He had marital problems. I don't know if that is why I didn't tell you that. Anyway, I did leave it out. His name is Harry Carlson. Her name is Kathy Kay. And they talked and they carried on, and they thought I was the greatest guy in the world, and he stated they should cut this guy inch by inch into ribbons, and so on.
And she said, "Well, if he was in England, they would drag him through the streets and would have hung him." I forget what she said. I left them after a long delay. They kept me from leaving. They were constantly talking and were in a pretty dramatic mood. They were crying and carrying on.
This caused Joe Tonahill, Ruby’s lawyer to say this a little bit later in his testimony.
Mr. RUBY. "This is the thing that started Jack in the shooting."
Mr. TONAHILL. Kathy Kay was talking about Oswald.
Ruby’s attorney felt this led his client to action, but of course Ruby could NOT let him say this as that meant the act was premeditated and carried a much larger penalty so he claimed Tonahill was lying.
3) Since when are court-martials and self-inflicted wounds NOT derogatory?
In November 1959 J. E. Hoover (JEH) checked with the USMC when LHO’s defection became known to get more details about him. He said in a reply to questions by the WC the following;
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pages/WH_Vol17_0408a.jpg
No derogatory information was contained in the USMC files concerning Oswald, and ONI advised that no action against him was contemplated in this matter. (CE 833, page 789)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0408a.htm
Quote off
LHO was court-martialed twice within a 7-month period, how did his file show NO “derogatory information?” He also had a case of shooting himself against him. What was JEH looking at? Or was it that these were all covers for his work with intelligence?
4) Why did the Dallas police want LHO at least thirty minutes BEFORE J. D. Tippit (JDT) was shot?
Here is the simple background that is straight from the WC's own assertions.
1) 12:45 P.M. - 15 minutes after the assassination the DPD put out a general description of the shooter.
2) 1:15/16 P.M. - WC claims JDT is shot and killed at this time.
3) 1:50 P.M. – LHO is arrested at Texas Theater.
4) The DPD arrested LHO based on the 12:45 P.M. general description per the WC. They would charge him with the murder of JDT on 11/22/63, but NOT for President John F. Kennedy's (JFK).
Why did the DPD arrest LHO for the murder of JDT when the general description they were given was for the murderer of JFK? IOWs, they arrested him for a murder that was NOT yet committed with a description of the assailant that was intended for a DIFFERENT case!!!
The WC claimed the police sent out his description (really it belonged to thousands of men in the area) at a time before the crime was committed they would initially arrest him for! This sums up their whole case perfectly. And yet some want us to believe they told the truth in this case.
5) Why would LHO list a HIT MAN as a reference for his application to Mason Marble & Granite Company?
It is true. This is a good source of information too. IF we go to CE 1905 and review the FBI report we will see some gems. Like this blurb.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/pages/WH_Vol23_0370a.gif
Manson advised that Oswald was not hired in view of the fact that he made several errors on his application such as listing his age as 25 when he APPEARED MUCH YOUNGER and listing a telephone number Hunter 8-4326 which was supposed to be his residence number. Manson stated that when he called this number, he was advised that while Oswald was known at that number he did not reside there. (CE 1905, p. 55) (emphasis mine)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/html/WH_Vol23_0370a.htm
Quote off
Notice the part I capitalized. Numerous claims used by the WC said the person seen was THIRTY years old (shooter of JFK and JDT in some cases), but it seemed to Manson LHO didn’t even look twenty-five! Who can miss the irony of the phone number he gave to Manson too—HUNTER 8-4326 as in “HUNTER OF THE FASCISTS”! Finally on the second page we see under references:
Quote on
John Murret, 801 Florida Av.
CHARLES HARRELSON, Tulane Un.
WM. Oswald
Quote off
Wasn’t Charles Harrelson (Woody’s dad) arrested for killing a judge? Hasn’t it been claimed that he was a shooter in the JFK murder? Haven’t many thought he was the tall tramp in the photos taken of the three men arrested in the box car behind the Grassy Knoll? I think so, so why is he a REFERENCE for LHO?
Just wondering.
6) IF Jack Ruby was so torn up by JFK’s murder that he had to close his business over the weekend why was he so busy doing these things?
The night of the assassination, Ruby, along with George Senator, was directed to meet his employee, Larry Crafard at 5 a.m. in the Dallas garage. The three men talked for about an hour (as witnessed by the people working there) and then they drove Crafard to the Carousel. Later that morning, Crafard, left Dallas suddenly and mysteriously. He hitchhiked to a remote part of Michigan with just $7 dollars on him, and eventually was picked up by the FBI a few days after Ruby shot LHO. Crafard never reported what he might know to the authorities when hearing of the shooting.
Ruby went home after dropping Crafard off and got some sleep. A few hours later Ruby drove back to downtown Dallas and returned to the same garage he had met Crafard in earlier in the morning. The general manager and the attendant heard Ruby making phone calls. The attendant, Tom Brown, told the FBI that "he overheard Ruby inform the other party to the conversation as to the whereabouts of Chief of Police Curry."[/b
Subsequently, the general manager, Garnett C. Hallmark, heard Ruby discuss the transfer of LHO and tell the recipient of the call, "You know I will be there." (XV, 488-489,491-492)
He then went to Dealey Plaza around 3 p.m. where he surveyed the assassination site. A Dallas television reporter there told the FBI that he had observed Ruby approaching him, "from the rear of the TSBD." The WC failed to call this reporter and showed no curiosity as to why Ruby might have been behind the building, where the railroad yards are located. Instead the WC said Ruby had inspected memorial wreaths and became "filled with emotions." (XXVI, 346)
On Saturday evening, November 23, a witness, Wenda Helmick, overheard a telephone conversation between Ruby and his business associate, Ralph Paul. The WC will make it very hard to find her testimony, because when you look up Wenda Helmick in the index, you find "See Sweat, Wanda", which does not exist. Here is her testimony before the WC:
Q. Was Ralph Paul there at the booth with you?
Helmick: No, he was behind the counter, and Rose (the cashier) got up and went back there to do something, and she started talking to him, and the telephone rang, and she said, "It is for you. It is Jack." So he took the phone and he had been talking quite awhile, and he said something. He said, "Are you crazy? A gun?" or something like that or he said something about a gun. Then he said, "Are you crazy?" But he did say something about a gun, and he asked him if he was crazy. (XV, 399)
The major reason I give this any credence is BECAUSE the WC tried to bury it. Helmick went on to say, that Paul left shortly after this call and the next day after the shooting, Paul was "popping off about this telephone call he had that night, and he told us he had talked with Jack and that they had talked about a gun, and that he had it in a dresser drawer or something like that, and that he didn't tell what he was going to do with it." (XXI, 431; XIV, 245, 253, 303)
The WC would eventually find that Ruby was too "moody and unstable" to have "encouraged the confidence of persons involved in a conspiracy." (XIV, 253) As Mark Lane pointed out in "Rush to Judgment", this was "absurd to suggest that Ruby's personality exonerated him from conspiracy - as if the Commission would accept only a more responsible and qualified person for the role." (page 271)
Throw in all the "stalking" Ruby did of LHO over the weekend and one can see this was not act of emotion. Also, as pointed out earlier, Ruby did make calls to the DPD warning them LHO would be shot if they moved him, as the cop who took the call later said the voice was familiar, and after the shooting, he matched it to Ruby's. Senator is useless as a witness when you consider that the other three people in Ruby's apartment that day prior to the shooting wound up dead (Bill Hunter, Jim Keothe, and Tom Howard), so it is obvious to me to assume one of two things, either Senator was involved in some small way or he was scared so much he lied through his teeth.
We again see evidence that disputes the claims of the WC, thus, their conclusion is sunk again.
i.pinimg.com/736x/cb/8c/01/cb8c0178eee7f5d3d85b0b69672bd8b8--warren-commission-earl-warren.jpg
news.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/GettyImages-515492366.jpg
So far this series has contained twenty-five questions that only have conspiratorial answers. Let’s look at six more now.
*********************************************
1)Why did the Dallas Police Department (DPD) NOT try to dissuade anyone from attacking Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO)?
Is this normal police procedure for a prisoner? I don’t think so. If we go to Earl Ruby Exhibit 1, we will see on page 332 this quote.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/pages/WH_Vol21_0178b.gif
Everyone was outraged against Oswald. The police made little effort to dissuade anyone from attacking Oswald. (Earl Ruby Exhibit 1, p. 332, p. 12 in original)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0178b.htm
Quote off
This is in the twenty-six volumes, so we have to think it is accurate. Why would the DPD make little effort to protect their own prisoner? Was it because it made their life easier if LHO was gone? Especially when we consider the fact that they had NO evidence showing that that he was guilty?
This shows the DPD had NO plans for protecting LHO, thus, the Sheriff's Department should have handled the transfer since they did this ninety-nine percent of the time anyway.
2) Why was a DPD officer telling Ruby 36 hours before he would kill LHO that LHO should be killed?
It is true. If we go to Ruby’s testimony, we will see this.
Mr. RUBY. …As I was driving toward the Times Herald with the intention of doing these things, I heard someone honk a horn very loudly, and I stopped. There was a police officer sitting in a car. He was sitting with this young lady that works in my club, Kathy Kay, and they were very much carried away.
And I was carried away; and he had a few beers, and it is so bad about those places open, and I was a great guy to close; and I remained with them--did I tell you this part of it?
Mr. MOORE .I don't recall this part; no.
Mr. RUBY. I didn't tell you this part because at the time I thought a lot of Harry Carlson as a police officer, and either it slipped my mind in telling this, or it was more or less a reason for leaving it out, because I felt I didn't want to involve them in anything, because it was supposed to be a secret that he was going with this young lady. He had marital problems. I don't know if that is why I didn't tell you that. Anyway, I did leave it out. His name is Harry Carlson. Her name is Kathy Kay. And they talked and they carried on, and they thought I was the greatest guy in the world, and he stated they should cut this guy inch by inch into ribbons, and so on.
And she said, "Well, if he was in England, they would drag him through the streets and would have hung him." I forget what she said. I left them after a long delay. They kept me from leaving. They were constantly talking and were in a pretty dramatic mood. They were crying and carrying on.
This caused Joe Tonahill, Ruby’s lawyer to say this a little bit later in his testimony.
Mr. RUBY. "This is the thing that started Jack in the shooting."
Mr. TONAHILL. Kathy Kay was talking about Oswald.
Ruby’s attorney felt this led his client to action, but of course Ruby could NOT let him say this as that meant the act was premeditated and carried a much larger penalty so he claimed Tonahill was lying.
3) Since when are court-martials and self-inflicted wounds NOT derogatory?
In November 1959 J. E. Hoover (JEH) checked with the USMC when LHO’s defection became known to get more details about him. He said in a reply to questions by the WC the following;
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pages/WH_Vol17_0408a.jpg
No derogatory information was contained in the USMC files concerning Oswald, and ONI advised that no action against him was contemplated in this matter. (CE 833, page 789)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0408a.htm
Quote off
LHO was court-martialed twice within a 7-month period, how did his file show NO “derogatory information?” He also had a case of shooting himself against him. What was JEH looking at? Or was it that these were all covers for his work with intelligence?
4) Why did the Dallas police want LHO at least thirty minutes BEFORE J. D. Tippit (JDT) was shot?
Here is the simple background that is straight from the WC's own assertions.
1) 12:45 P.M. - 15 minutes after the assassination the DPD put out a general description of the shooter.
2) 1:15/16 P.M. - WC claims JDT is shot and killed at this time.
3) 1:50 P.M. – LHO is arrested at Texas Theater.
4) The DPD arrested LHO based on the 12:45 P.M. general description per the WC. They would charge him with the murder of JDT on 11/22/63, but NOT for President John F. Kennedy's (JFK).
Why did the DPD arrest LHO for the murder of JDT when the general description they were given was for the murderer of JFK? IOWs, they arrested him for a murder that was NOT yet committed with a description of the assailant that was intended for a DIFFERENT case!!!
The WC claimed the police sent out his description (really it belonged to thousands of men in the area) at a time before the crime was committed they would initially arrest him for! This sums up their whole case perfectly. And yet some want us to believe they told the truth in this case.
5) Why would LHO list a HIT MAN as a reference for his application to Mason Marble & Granite Company?
It is true. This is a good source of information too. IF we go to CE 1905 and review the FBI report we will see some gems. Like this blurb.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/pages/WH_Vol23_0370a.gif
Manson advised that Oswald was not hired in view of the fact that he made several errors on his application such as listing his age as 25 when he APPEARED MUCH YOUNGER and listing a telephone number Hunter 8-4326 which was supposed to be his residence number. Manson stated that when he called this number, he was advised that while Oswald was known at that number he did not reside there. (CE 1905, p. 55) (emphasis mine)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/html/WH_Vol23_0370a.htm
Quote off
Notice the part I capitalized. Numerous claims used by the WC said the person seen was THIRTY years old (shooter of JFK and JDT in some cases), but it seemed to Manson LHO didn’t even look twenty-five! Who can miss the irony of the phone number he gave to Manson too—HUNTER 8-4326 as in “HUNTER OF THE FASCISTS”! Finally on the second page we see under references:
Quote on
John Murret, 801 Florida Av.
CHARLES HARRELSON, Tulane Un.
WM. Oswald
Quote off
Wasn’t Charles Harrelson (Woody’s dad) arrested for killing a judge? Hasn’t it been claimed that he was a shooter in the JFK murder? Haven’t many thought he was the tall tramp in the photos taken of the three men arrested in the box car behind the Grassy Knoll? I think so, so why is he a REFERENCE for LHO?
Just wondering.
6) IF Jack Ruby was so torn up by JFK’s murder that he had to close his business over the weekend why was he so busy doing these things?
The night of the assassination, Ruby, along with George Senator, was directed to meet his employee, Larry Crafard at 5 a.m. in the Dallas garage. The three men talked for about an hour (as witnessed by the people working there) and then they drove Crafard to the Carousel. Later that morning, Crafard, left Dallas suddenly and mysteriously. He hitchhiked to a remote part of Michigan with just $7 dollars on him, and eventually was picked up by the FBI a few days after Ruby shot LHO. Crafard never reported what he might know to the authorities when hearing of the shooting.
Ruby went home after dropping Crafard off and got some sleep. A few hours later Ruby drove back to downtown Dallas and returned to the same garage he had met Crafard in earlier in the morning. The general manager and the attendant heard Ruby making phone calls. The attendant, Tom Brown, told the FBI that "he overheard Ruby inform the other party to the conversation as to the whereabouts of Chief of Police Curry."[/b
Subsequently, the general manager, Garnett C. Hallmark, heard Ruby discuss the transfer of LHO and tell the recipient of the call, "You know I will be there." (XV, 488-489,491-492)
He then went to Dealey Plaza around 3 p.m. where he surveyed the assassination site. A Dallas television reporter there told the FBI that he had observed Ruby approaching him, "from the rear of the TSBD." The WC failed to call this reporter and showed no curiosity as to why Ruby might have been behind the building, where the railroad yards are located. Instead the WC said Ruby had inspected memorial wreaths and became "filled with emotions." (XXVI, 346)
On Saturday evening, November 23, a witness, Wenda Helmick, overheard a telephone conversation between Ruby and his business associate, Ralph Paul. The WC will make it very hard to find her testimony, because when you look up Wenda Helmick in the index, you find "See Sweat, Wanda", which does not exist. Here is her testimony before the WC:
Q. Was Ralph Paul there at the booth with you?
Helmick: No, he was behind the counter, and Rose (the cashier) got up and went back there to do something, and she started talking to him, and the telephone rang, and she said, "It is for you. It is Jack." So he took the phone and he had been talking quite awhile, and he said something. He said, "Are you crazy? A gun?" or something like that or he said something about a gun. Then he said, "Are you crazy?" But he did say something about a gun, and he asked him if he was crazy. (XV, 399)
The major reason I give this any credence is BECAUSE the WC tried to bury it. Helmick went on to say, that Paul left shortly after this call and the next day after the shooting, Paul was "popping off about this telephone call he had that night, and he told us he had talked with Jack and that they had talked about a gun, and that he had it in a dresser drawer or something like that, and that he didn't tell what he was going to do with it." (XXI, 431; XIV, 245, 253, 303)
The WC would eventually find that Ruby was too "moody and unstable" to have "encouraged the confidence of persons involved in a conspiracy." (XIV, 253) As Mark Lane pointed out in "Rush to Judgment", this was "absurd to suggest that Ruby's personality exonerated him from conspiracy - as if the Commission would accept only a more responsible and qualified person for the role." (page 271)
Throw in all the "stalking" Ruby did of LHO over the weekend and one can see this was not act of emotion. Also, as pointed out earlier, Ruby did make calls to the DPD warning them LHO would be shot if they moved him, as the cop who took the call later said the voice was familiar, and after the shooting, he matched it to Ruby's. Senator is useless as a witness when you consider that the other three people in Ruby's apartment that day prior to the shooting wound up dead (Bill Hunter, Jim Keothe, and Tom Howard), so it is obvious to me to assume one of two things, either Senator was involved in some small way or he was scared so much he lied through his teeth.
We again see evidence that disputes the claims of the WC, thus, their conclusion is sunk again.