Post by Rob Caprio on May 29, 2022 17:02:08 GMT -5
All portions are ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2024
2.bp.blogspot.com/-QD-HwFg3LPQ/VuZRG8SgwbI/AAAAAAAAXA4/Z_AqBtq07dwkKeIUaWLbOZ81CYJpQX03A/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/Jack-Ruby-conspiracies.jpg
The Warren Commission (WC) claimed that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO), a lone assassin, assassinated President John F. Kennedy (JFK), on November 22, 1963. Then on November 24, 1963, Jack Ruby, again, a lone killer, stepped forward and killed the alleged assassin of JFK.
**************************************************
Ruby had a key part in all of the happenings of that terrible weekend, therefore, what he had to say is important to the understanding of what happened to JFK and who might have been behind it.
Any one that has studied this case for a period of time has read about Jack Ruby’s comments to WC member Gerald Ford and Chief Justice (CJ) Earl Warren in Dallas when they went there to visit him in Dallas while he was in jail. If you scan the testimony you will see that the word “conspiracy” appears five times. CJ Warren and Ruby show us that the context is about Ruby not being involved in a conspiracy to kill JFK.
Mr. RUBY. No; I am as innocent regarding any conspiracy as any of you gentlemen in the room...
Chief Justice WARREN. … I think I can say to you that there has been no witness before this Commission out of the hundreds we have questioned who has claimed to have any personal knowledge that you were a party to any conspiracy to kill our President.
CJ Warren’s comment is understandable as the WC was clearly not looking to find any witnesses that could say that Ruby, or LHO, were involved in a conspiracy to kill JFK. Based on other comments by Ruby to the media we would have to think that he was just playing along for his own safety and perhaps for a lenient sentence.
Here are some of the comments he made to the media regarding the JFK assassination that do not jive with his comments to the WC.
Quote on
“I know there is a terrible conspiracy going on in the world right now…I’m speaking the truth…The world has the right to hear the truth…”
“…everything pertaining to what’s happened has never come to the surface. The world will never know the true facts of what occurred –my motive in other words. I am the only person in the background to know the truth pertaining to everything relating to my circumstances.”
When asked by a reporter if the truth would ever come out, Ruby replied: “No. Because unfortunately these people, who so much to gain and have such an ulterior motive to put me into the position I’m in, will never let the true facts come aboveboard to the world.” The interviewer asks if these people are in high places and he replied “Yes.”
Quote off
Despite these comments, and other similar ones directly to Ford and Warren, General Counse J. Lee Rankin wanted us to believe that they felt that Ruby just wanted a trip to Washington, D.C.!
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol3/pages/HSCA_Vol3_0311b.gif
Mr. SAWYER. Another thing that I was interested in was that in the conference or interview or interrogation, whichever, that President Ford and the Chief Justice and some staff members had with Mr. Ruby while he was incarcerated in Dallas, he said, according to the transcript, substantially that he would like to tell the whole truth but he cannot tell them the whole truth while he is in Dallas, and if they would transport him to Washington, he would tell the whole truth.
Was any follow-up ever done on that at all by the staff or otherwise?
Mr. RANKIN. No, there was not. We were all convinced that Ruby was interested in a trip to Washington rather than how much he could enlighten the Commission. It seemed quite apparent when you observed him and his approach to the whole suggestion.
Mr. SAWYER. Were you there at the time?
Mr. RANKIN. Yes.
Mr. SAWYER. Is that the impression you got individually?
Mr. RANKIN. Yes, I thought that he was quite enamored with the idea of coming to Washington and he even wanted to see the President. It was easy to imagine what that would all develop into if you got started on it.
Mr. SAWYER. There were no followup attempts, though, to try to elucidate that situation?
Mr. RANKIN. No, there were not. (HSCA III, p. 618)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol3/html/HSCA_Vol3_0311b.htm
So the reason they didn’t follow-up on Ruby’s comments was because he really just wanted a free trip to beautiful Washington, D.C. Sure. If he was saying things that supported the notion of LHO acting alone they would have probably driven him up themselves most likely.
This is simply a ludicrous statement by Rankin. No matter what you thought of Ruby, his comments needed to be checked out, but once again the WC avoided something that did not point to LHO. This was a consistent pattern with them.
Here is what Ruby told CJ Warren during his June 7, 1964, testimony.
Chief Justice WARREN. I think it is powerful, yes I do. Of course, I don't have all the information that you feel you have on that subject.
Mr. RUBY. Unfortunately, you don't have, because it is too late. And I wish that our beloved President, Lyndon Johnson, would have delved deeper into the situation, hear me, not to accept just circumstantial facts about my guilt or innocence, and would have questioned to find out the truth about me before he relinquished certain powers to these certain people.
Chief Justice WARREN. Well, I am afraid I don't know what power you believe he relinquished to them. I think that it is difficult to understand what you have to say.
Mr. RUBY. I want to say this to you. The Jewish people are being exterminated at this moment. Consequently, a whole new form of government is going to take over our country, and I know I won't live to see you another time. Do I sound sort of screwy--in telling you these things?
Chief Justice WARREN. No; I think that is what you believe, or you wouldn't tell it under your oath.
Mr. RUBY. But it is a very serious situation. I guess it is too late to stop it, isn't it?
These comments alone should have caused action by the WC, but they did nothing. The mere fact that LHO was gunned down while in Dallas Police custody should have shown them that Ruby was perhaps not safe in jail there as he said.
The House Select Committee On Assassinations (HSCA) would ask an interesting question about this sojourn by CJ Warren and Congressman Gerald Ford.
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol3/pages/HSCA_Vol3_0318a.gif
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol3/pages/HSCA_Vol3_0318b.gif
Mr. McKINNEY. Was it true that the counsels Hubert and Griffin were essentially assigned to the investigation of Jack Ruby?
Mr. RANKIN. Yes.
Mr. McKINNEY. Why under those conditions and whose decision was it, that they then did not go to Dallas to interview Jack Ruby when the Chief Justice and Congressman Ford went?
Mr. RANKIN. I think it was in a discussion by myself with the Chief Justice and former President Ford and they said this matter is of sufficient importance we want you to supervise the examination.
Mr. MCKINNEY. But in essence you were required to have a generalized knowledge of everything that was happening, rather, than the specifics of Jack Ruby?
Mr. RANKIN. Well, I was watching it in detail in every area, too. I had to.
Mr. McKINNEY. One of the criticisms of the Commission report has been the depth of the Ruby investigation, and there have been many critics who questioned why the two counsels who were charged with investigating Jack Ruby were not present at the time he was questioned extensively in Dallas.
Mr. RANKIN. Well, I don't think the criticism relates itself to the examination of Ruby. The criticism is whether or not the various leads were followed to the extent that they should have been. That was a function that they both had. (HSCA III, pp. 631-632)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol3/html/HSCA_Vol3_0318a.htm
Furthermore, Ruby demanded, and was given, a lie detector that he passed . Because passing, i.e. showing that he was truthful, did not serve the cause of the WC they trotted out J. Edgar Hoover (JEH) to minimize this result. Keep in mind, this is the same JEH who lied on multiple occasions himself.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0420a.gif
It should be pointed out that a polygraph often referred to as “lie detector” is not in fact such a device…The FBI feels that the polygraph technique is not sufficiently precise to permit absolute judgments of deception or truth without qualifications. The polygraph technique has a number of limitations, one of which relates to the mental fitness and condition of the examinee to be tested. (WCR, p. 815)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0420a.htm
Quote off
So if this was the truth, why did the FBI and other law enforcement agencies even bother administering them?
To further attempt to dilute Ruby passing the lie detector they called Dr. William Beavers to testify since he had examined Ruby in April 1964.
Mr. SPECTER. And what did you observe with respect to Mr. Ruby's mental condition during the course of those examinations?
Dr. BEAVERS. I saw him first-can I get somebody to help me with a date?
Mr. TONAHILL. April the 27th, the 28th, or 29th of this year.
Dr. BEAVERS. Right, and at that time he had briefly what I call a psychotic depression, that is, he had evidences of auditory hallucinations and a poorly defined but definite delusional system which waxed and waned during the time of the interview, and he had evidence of a severe degree of depression.
Because of the combined symptoms of the hallucinatory activity, the delusions in which, and I should spell them out, that he felt that both members of his family, his close family, were being harmed, mutilated and/or destroyed because of his crime, and further, that there was a pogrom concerning Jews generally because of his crime.
These symptoms plus the depression which was evident, caused me to diagnose a psychotic depressive reaction.
Mr. SPECTER. Have you now stated your conclusion regarding his mental state?
Dr. BEAVERS. At that time.
So at the time of his initial evaluation – April 1964 – Beavers diagnosed him as “psychotic depressive”, but what does that mean? If Ruby was a regular patient it may mean a good bit, but Ruby was in jail for homicide and was facing the death penalty. Who wouldn’t be psychotic depressive under those circumstances? Still, Beavers said that by the time of his testimony, July 18, 1964, he had revised his diagnosis.
Mr. SPECTER. Do you have any different conclusion as to his mental state today?
Dr. BEAVERS. Yes, I do. I think that as I have seen him, the depressive element has diminished, and that the delusional system has become much less open and obvious, and that it has become more fixed and it seems to--and this I'm not sure of---whether it waxes and wanes depending on the time in the weeks or whether it waxes and wanes depending on the closeness of the people that he sees.
This shows that Ruby was improving as the situation went on and by July when he took the polygraph test he was in a better state of mind, therefore, this excuse cannot be used to try and discredit this polygraph examination.
Not long before Ruby died, according to an article in the London Sunday Times, he told psychiatrist Werner Teuter the following:
Quote on
...the assassination was "an act of overthrowing the government" and that he knew "who had President Kennedy killed." He added: "I am doomed. I do not want to die. But I am not insane. I was framed to kill Oswald." (The Sunday Times, August 25, 1974; Associated Press, December 20, 1966. "Ruby Asks World to Take His Word". New York Times. p. 36.)
Quote off
Instead of investigating these comments by Ruby they instead avoided him beyond that one interview and refused to bring him to Washington, D.C. If they were searching for the truth, why would they do this?
2.bp.blogspot.com/-QD-HwFg3LPQ/VuZRG8SgwbI/AAAAAAAAXA4/Z_AqBtq07dwkKeIUaWLbOZ81CYJpQX03A/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/Jack-Ruby-conspiracies.jpg
The Warren Commission (WC) claimed that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO), a lone assassin, assassinated President John F. Kennedy (JFK), on November 22, 1963. Then on November 24, 1963, Jack Ruby, again, a lone killer, stepped forward and killed the alleged assassin of JFK.
**************************************************
Ruby had a key part in all of the happenings of that terrible weekend, therefore, what he had to say is important to the understanding of what happened to JFK and who might have been behind it.
Any one that has studied this case for a period of time has read about Jack Ruby’s comments to WC member Gerald Ford and Chief Justice (CJ) Earl Warren in Dallas when they went there to visit him in Dallas while he was in jail. If you scan the testimony you will see that the word “conspiracy” appears five times. CJ Warren and Ruby show us that the context is about Ruby not being involved in a conspiracy to kill JFK.
Mr. RUBY. No; I am as innocent regarding any conspiracy as any of you gentlemen in the room...
Chief Justice WARREN. … I think I can say to you that there has been no witness before this Commission out of the hundreds we have questioned who has claimed to have any personal knowledge that you were a party to any conspiracy to kill our President.
CJ Warren’s comment is understandable as the WC was clearly not looking to find any witnesses that could say that Ruby, or LHO, were involved in a conspiracy to kill JFK. Based on other comments by Ruby to the media we would have to think that he was just playing along for his own safety and perhaps for a lenient sentence.
Here are some of the comments he made to the media regarding the JFK assassination that do not jive with his comments to the WC.
Quote on
“I know there is a terrible conspiracy going on in the world right now…I’m speaking the truth…The world has the right to hear the truth…”
“…everything pertaining to what’s happened has never come to the surface. The world will never know the true facts of what occurred –my motive in other words. I am the only person in the background to know the truth pertaining to everything relating to my circumstances.”
When asked by a reporter if the truth would ever come out, Ruby replied: “No. Because unfortunately these people, who so much to gain and have such an ulterior motive to put me into the position I’m in, will never let the true facts come aboveboard to the world.” The interviewer asks if these people are in high places and he replied “Yes.”
Quote off
Despite these comments, and other similar ones directly to Ford and Warren, General Counse J. Lee Rankin wanted us to believe that they felt that Ruby just wanted a trip to Washington, D.C.!
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol3/pages/HSCA_Vol3_0311b.gif
Mr. SAWYER. Another thing that I was interested in was that in the conference or interview or interrogation, whichever, that President Ford and the Chief Justice and some staff members had with Mr. Ruby while he was incarcerated in Dallas, he said, according to the transcript, substantially that he would like to tell the whole truth but he cannot tell them the whole truth while he is in Dallas, and if they would transport him to Washington, he would tell the whole truth.
Was any follow-up ever done on that at all by the staff or otherwise?
Mr. RANKIN. No, there was not. We were all convinced that Ruby was interested in a trip to Washington rather than how much he could enlighten the Commission. It seemed quite apparent when you observed him and his approach to the whole suggestion.
Mr. SAWYER. Were you there at the time?
Mr. RANKIN. Yes.
Mr. SAWYER. Is that the impression you got individually?
Mr. RANKIN. Yes, I thought that he was quite enamored with the idea of coming to Washington and he even wanted to see the President. It was easy to imagine what that would all develop into if you got started on it.
Mr. SAWYER. There were no followup attempts, though, to try to elucidate that situation?
Mr. RANKIN. No, there were not. (HSCA III, p. 618)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol3/html/HSCA_Vol3_0311b.htm
So the reason they didn’t follow-up on Ruby’s comments was because he really just wanted a free trip to beautiful Washington, D.C. Sure. If he was saying things that supported the notion of LHO acting alone they would have probably driven him up themselves most likely.
This is simply a ludicrous statement by Rankin. No matter what you thought of Ruby, his comments needed to be checked out, but once again the WC avoided something that did not point to LHO. This was a consistent pattern with them.
Here is what Ruby told CJ Warren during his June 7, 1964, testimony.
Chief Justice WARREN. I think it is powerful, yes I do. Of course, I don't have all the information that you feel you have on that subject.
Mr. RUBY. Unfortunately, you don't have, because it is too late. And I wish that our beloved President, Lyndon Johnson, would have delved deeper into the situation, hear me, not to accept just circumstantial facts about my guilt or innocence, and would have questioned to find out the truth about me before he relinquished certain powers to these certain people.
Chief Justice WARREN. Well, I am afraid I don't know what power you believe he relinquished to them. I think that it is difficult to understand what you have to say.
Mr. RUBY. I want to say this to you. The Jewish people are being exterminated at this moment. Consequently, a whole new form of government is going to take over our country, and I know I won't live to see you another time. Do I sound sort of screwy--in telling you these things?
Chief Justice WARREN. No; I think that is what you believe, or you wouldn't tell it under your oath.
Mr. RUBY. But it is a very serious situation. I guess it is too late to stop it, isn't it?
These comments alone should have caused action by the WC, but they did nothing. The mere fact that LHO was gunned down while in Dallas Police custody should have shown them that Ruby was perhaps not safe in jail there as he said.
The House Select Committee On Assassinations (HSCA) would ask an interesting question about this sojourn by CJ Warren and Congressman Gerald Ford.
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol3/pages/HSCA_Vol3_0318a.gif
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol3/pages/HSCA_Vol3_0318b.gif
Mr. McKINNEY. Was it true that the counsels Hubert and Griffin were essentially assigned to the investigation of Jack Ruby?
Mr. RANKIN. Yes.
Mr. McKINNEY. Why under those conditions and whose decision was it, that they then did not go to Dallas to interview Jack Ruby when the Chief Justice and Congressman Ford went?
Mr. RANKIN. I think it was in a discussion by myself with the Chief Justice and former President Ford and they said this matter is of sufficient importance we want you to supervise the examination.
Mr. MCKINNEY. But in essence you were required to have a generalized knowledge of everything that was happening, rather, than the specifics of Jack Ruby?
Mr. RANKIN. Well, I was watching it in detail in every area, too. I had to.
Mr. McKINNEY. One of the criticisms of the Commission report has been the depth of the Ruby investigation, and there have been many critics who questioned why the two counsels who were charged with investigating Jack Ruby were not present at the time he was questioned extensively in Dallas.
Mr. RANKIN. Well, I don't think the criticism relates itself to the examination of Ruby. The criticism is whether or not the various leads were followed to the extent that they should have been. That was a function that they both had. (HSCA III, pp. 631-632)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol3/html/HSCA_Vol3_0318a.htm
Furthermore, Ruby demanded, and was given, a lie detector that he passed . Because passing, i.e. showing that he was truthful, did not serve the cause of the WC they trotted out J. Edgar Hoover (JEH) to minimize this result. Keep in mind, this is the same JEH who lied on multiple occasions himself.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0420a.gif
It should be pointed out that a polygraph often referred to as “lie detector” is not in fact such a device…The FBI feels that the polygraph technique is not sufficiently precise to permit absolute judgments of deception or truth without qualifications. The polygraph technique has a number of limitations, one of which relates to the mental fitness and condition of the examinee to be tested. (WCR, p. 815)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0420a.htm
Quote off
So if this was the truth, why did the FBI and other law enforcement agencies even bother administering them?
To further attempt to dilute Ruby passing the lie detector they called Dr. William Beavers to testify since he had examined Ruby in April 1964.
Mr. SPECTER. And what did you observe with respect to Mr. Ruby's mental condition during the course of those examinations?
Dr. BEAVERS. I saw him first-can I get somebody to help me with a date?
Mr. TONAHILL. April the 27th, the 28th, or 29th of this year.
Dr. BEAVERS. Right, and at that time he had briefly what I call a psychotic depression, that is, he had evidences of auditory hallucinations and a poorly defined but definite delusional system which waxed and waned during the time of the interview, and he had evidence of a severe degree of depression.
Because of the combined symptoms of the hallucinatory activity, the delusions in which, and I should spell them out, that he felt that both members of his family, his close family, were being harmed, mutilated and/or destroyed because of his crime, and further, that there was a pogrom concerning Jews generally because of his crime.
These symptoms plus the depression which was evident, caused me to diagnose a psychotic depressive reaction.
Mr. SPECTER. Have you now stated your conclusion regarding his mental state?
Dr. BEAVERS. At that time.
So at the time of his initial evaluation – April 1964 – Beavers diagnosed him as “psychotic depressive”, but what does that mean? If Ruby was a regular patient it may mean a good bit, but Ruby was in jail for homicide and was facing the death penalty. Who wouldn’t be psychotic depressive under those circumstances? Still, Beavers said that by the time of his testimony, July 18, 1964, he had revised his diagnosis.
Mr. SPECTER. Do you have any different conclusion as to his mental state today?
Dr. BEAVERS. Yes, I do. I think that as I have seen him, the depressive element has diminished, and that the delusional system has become much less open and obvious, and that it has become more fixed and it seems to--and this I'm not sure of---whether it waxes and wanes depending on the time in the weeks or whether it waxes and wanes depending on the closeness of the people that he sees.
This shows that Ruby was improving as the situation went on and by July when he took the polygraph test he was in a better state of mind, therefore, this excuse cannot be used to try and discredit this polygraph examination.
Not long before Ruby died, according to an article in the London Sunday Times, he told psychiatrist Werner Teuter the following:
Quote on
...the assassination was "an act of overthrowing the government" and that he knew "who had President Kennedy killed." He added: "I am doomed. I do not want to die. But I am not insane. I was framed to kill Oswald." (The Sunday Times, August 25, 1974; Associated Press, December 20, 1966. "Ruby Asks World to Take His Word". New York Times. p. 36.)
Quote off
Instead of investigating these comments by Ruby they instead avoided him beyond that one interview and refused to bring him to Washington, D.C. If they were searching for the truth, why would they do this?