Post by Rob Caprio on Oct 30, 2023 19:57:53 GMT -5
All portions are ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2024
static.wixstatic.com/media/325b1c_239dbf3a829d4f568e3af83f665a27cc~mv2.jpg/v1/fit/w_532%2Ch_678%2Cal_c%2Cq_80/file.jpg
i.ytimg.com/vi/0fvh6_5W3GI/hqdefault.jpg
An Example of A 1962 Nash Rambler Station Wagon:
barnfinds.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/052516-Barn-Finds-1962-AMC-Rambler-Classic-Wagon-1.jpg
The Warren Commission (WC) was formed following the assassination of President John F. Kennedy (JFK) on November 22, 1963. This was unfortunate for the American people and the deceased president as there were two other groups looking to investigate the assassination and they most likely would have done a better job (it is almost impossible to have done a worse job) than the WC. These two groups were the United States Congress and the Attorney General, Waggoner Carr, of Texas.
It took President Lyndon B. Johnson (LBJ) to intervene and issue an Executive Order (11130) to stop these independent (somewhat) investigations that he would have more trouble controlling possibly. The head of the President's Commission was to be the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Earl Warren. This sounded good but was actually a disaster. The Supreme Court, and judges in general, are not proficient in investigating anything. Their expertise is learning the laws and applying them in accordance with the constitution of the United States and the state constitution where they may be presiding.
Warren's lack of investigative experience was not a concern since the WC did NOT investigate anything anyway. What he was supposed to bring to the Commission was the knowledge of our laws and the constitution and to make sure they were applied to the accused in this case -- Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO). In this duty he failed miserably. LHO's constitutional rights were totally brushed aside, and he was treated in the same fashion a prisoner in some third-world country would have been treated. LHO was given no rights whatsoever and since he was the Chief Justice this was his fault the most.
In addition to depriving LHO of his rights, Warren also failed to make sure basic legal tenants were followed as not one witness was exposed to cross-examination since LHO was denied any form of legal representation even after he was dead. All rules of witness examination, evidence handling, and investigation rules were thrown out the window by the WC and its Chief Justice leader. The WC was literally a kangaroo court and the DPD were literally the "Keystone Cops" in the most important murder case in modern American history.
The WC was totally reliant on the FBI, the Secret Service (SS) and the CIA for performing the "investigation" aspect and these groups were not used to being very open and honest about their work. It was stated early on in WC Executive Sessions that the FBI and CIA had already reached their conclusion of LHO being solely responsible and that they both may have had things to hide. This was BEFORE the WC even began their "investigation" into the assassination.
Needless to say, many things were ignored, omitted or totally altered to make them fit the pre-conceived official narrative. Their final report (the WCR) must have made Walt Disney jealous as it encompassed fantasy, cartoonishness and a totally made-up story that only could have come from "Fantasy Island." We were given an invisible bag, a magic bullet, a disappearing clip, a bag that could morph into different sizes, boxes that moved on their own, etc... Come to think of it -- was Walt Disney the writer of the WCR?
***************************************************************
This post will look at something that is very interesting, but unfortunately has very little stuff to go on. It again involves a Nash Rambler vehicle which seems to keep popping up in this case. I have covered this topic before in other posts because it is important. According to those that defend the WC's silly conclusion Roger Craig was a liar. After years and years of me asking them to prove this claim, they have failed to do so. Yes, Craig saw a Nash Rambler, but he was NOT alone in seeing it. This part the WC defenders ignore. Here is a list of other witnesses who saw a Rambler after the assassination.
James Worrell
Richard Carr
Roger Craig
Helen Forrest
James Pennington
Marvin Robinson
Roy Cooper
There are seven witnesses who saw a Rambler in Dealey Plaza (DP) after the assassination, and yet, the only one that the WC defenders focus on is Roger Craig. They do the same thing with the Mauser as they just say that Craig lied and ignore the other witnesses who also saw a Mauser in the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD) Building. Only people trying to keep a false story going would behave like this.
We saw in "Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions #476" that a 1957 Rambler was involved in a shooting in DP a week prior to the assassination as a bullet went through its window and how the Dallas Police Department (DPD) covered this incident up. Here is another story involving a Rambler that is possibly tied to Clay Shaw. Shaw was the man indicted for being involved in the conspiracy to kill JFK by New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison. Here is a letter dated March 24, 1964, that discusses this topic.
Quote on
manuscriptservice.com/DPQ/womacklet.jpg
T.G. Womack, Jr., a Hammond, Louisiana, insurance agent, sends a letter to Clay L. Shaw, 1313 Dauphine Street, New Orleans, Louisiana. The letter is in reference to Marquette no. 105628, and “Marquette Casualty Company” is the imprint on the bottom of the Womack Insurance Agency letterhead. It reads, “Dear Clay: Your dad was in my office this morning and returned the above policy covering liability on the 1962 Rambler Station Wagon. I agreed to hold up cancellation of this policy until I had word from you that you had arranged for coverage with your New Orleans agent. Just for your records the automobile is described as being a 1962 Rambler Ambassador M#H171787 (4-Dr. Sta. Wagon).”
Quote off
What is odd about this is that at the time of this writing Clay Shaw was 51-years-old so why was his dad handling things like this for him? I looked but cannot find any information on Shaw's father to see IF he was dead or alive in 1964. Another odd thing is at the bottom of the letter Womack says, "Enjoyed seeing you last Sunday." IF Shaw had just seen Womack within the last week, why would his father need to take care of this for him?
It is not out of the realm of possibility to think that this 1962 Rambler was owned by Clay Shaw. Further evidence for this line of thinking came from his former secretary before the New Orleans Grand Jury during Garrison's prosecution of Shaw. I have covered this before, but here it is again.
Quote on
Q. Did you ever see Mr. Shaw driving a car other than black Thunderbird?
A. I don't know -- it was in 1963 -- he had driven a stationwagon.
Q. A stationwagon -- who would that belong to?
A. His father, I think. (New Orleans Grand Jury Testimony, 8/23/67)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1197#relPageId=5
Quote off
So, according to this, the station wagon belonged to his father. So, perhaps the 1962 Nash Rambler did belong to him, but this does not preclude his son from borrowing it. Was it used in DP? Who knows for sure. The point of this post is to show yet another lead that was never explored by the WC.
Another possibility comes from researcher Walt Brown as he has suggested that “‘Clay Shaw’ was the dad. He purchased the car in question and then insured it through an out-of-town agency, and allowed his “son,” a person possibly known to us, or, equally possible, someone not known to us to use it, but it was his vehicle, and it was insured in his name. When, by March 24, 1964, it had served its purpose, most likely on the 22nd of November the previous year, “Shaw” himself went to the Womack Agency and informed them he was canceling the policy on his “son’s” automobile -- especially since he would not have wanted it tied to him on the odd chance that someone would believe Roger Craig, Price, or anyone else who might have come forward and provided reports about a suspicious Rambler at the time -- and place -- of the assassination.”
This is another scenario that could have happened. Clay Shaw was from Hammond, Louisiana, so he could have used this agency despite the fact that he lived in New Orleans as it would have been harder to trace to him. David Ferrie, who has been tied to Shaw, also spent time in Hammond on the evening and night of November 24, 1963, following the assassination. This was supposedly on the advice of attorney G. Wray Gill who Ferrie did work for. Ferrie spent the night at Southeastern Louisiana University, visiting a friend who is conducting research in narcotics addiction.
Was this just another coincidence or was Ferrie in Hammond to meet with Shaw? That has to be a possibility. Perhaps Shaw was bringing the Rambler back to Hammond. Who knows for sure? That is the point though. We do NOT know so much because the WC didn't bother to have anyone look into this kind of stuff.
For more information on the Nash Rambler witnesses you can read this post.
jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1289/nash-rambler-witnesses
The WC did not investigate this lead, which was available during their time in session, therefore, their conclusion is questionable as they did not seek the full picture of what happened. This means that it is sunk once more.
For a little more detail on this topic, you can go here.
manuscriptservice.com/DPQ/shaw-rambler.htm
static.wixstatic.com/media/325b1c_239dbf3a829d4f568e3af83f665a27cc~mv2.jpg/v1/fit/w_532%2Ch_678%2Cal_c%2Cq_80/file.jpg
i.ytimg.com/vi/0fvh6_5W3GI/hqdefault.jpg
An Example of A 1962 Nash Rambler Station Wagon:
barnfinds.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/052516-Barn-Finds-1962-AMC-Rambler-Classic-Wagon-1.jpg
The Warren Commission (WC) was formed following the assassination of President John F. Kennedy (JFK) on November 22, 1963. This was unfortunate for the American people and the deceased president as there were two other groups looking to investigate the assassination and they most likely would have done a better job (it is almost impossible to have done a worse job) than the WC. These two groups were the United States Congress and the Attorney General, Waggoner Carr, of Texas.
It took President Lyndon B. Johnson (LBJ) to intervene and issue an Executive Order (11130) to stop these independent (somewhat) investigations that he would have more trouble controlling possibly. The head of the President's Commission was to be the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Earl Warren. This sounded good but was actually a disaster. The Supreme Court, and judges in general, are not proficient in investigating anything. Their expertise is learning the laws and applying them in accordance with the constitution of the United States and the state constitution where they may be presiding.
Warren's lack of investigative experience was not a concern since the WC did NOT investigate anything anyway. What he was supposed to bring to the Commission was the knowledge of our laws and the constitution and to make sure they were applied to the accused in this case -- Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO). In this duty he failed miserably. LHO's constitutional rights were totally brushed aside, and he was treated in the same fashion a prisoner in some third-world country would have been treated. LHO was given no rights whatsoever and since he was the Chief Justice this was his fault the most.
In addition to depriving LHO of his rights, Warren also failed to make sure basic legal tenants were followed as not one witness was exposed to cross-examination since LHO was denied any form of legal representation even after he was dead. All rules of witness examination, evidence handling, and investigation rules were thrown out the window by the WC and its Chief Justice leader. The WC was literally a kangaroo court and the DPD were literally the "Keystone Cops" in the most important murder case in modern American history.
The WC was totally reliant on the FBI, the Secret Service (SS) and the CIA for performing the "investigation" aspect and these groups were not used to being very open and honest about their work. It was stated early on in WC Executive Sessions that the FBI and CIA had already reached their conclusion of LHO being solely responsible and that they both may have had things to hide. This was BEFORE the WC even began their "investigation" into the assassination.
Needless to say, many things were ignored, omitted or totally altered to make them fit the pre-conceived official narrative. Their final report (the WCR) must have made Walt Disney jealous as it encompassed fantasy, cartoonishness and a totally made-up story that only could have come from "Fantasy Island." We were given an invisible bag, a magic bullet, a disappearing clip, a bag that could morph into different sizes, boxes that moved on their own, etc... Come to think of it -- was Walt Disney the writer of the WCR?
***************************************************************
This post will look at something that is very interesting, but unfortunately has very little stuff to go on. It again involves a Nash Rambler vehicle which seems to keep popping up in this case. I have covered this topic before in other posts because it is important. According to those that defend the WC's silly conclusion Roger Craig was a liar. After years and years of me asking them to prove this claim, they have failed to do so. Yes, Craig saw a Nash Rambler, but he was NOT alone in seeing it. This part the WC defenders ignore. Here is a list of other witnesses who saw a Rambler after the assassination.
James Worrell
Richard Carr
Roger Craig
Helen Forrest
James Pennington
Marvin Robinson
Roy Cooper
There are seven witnesses who saw a Rambler in Dealey Plaza (DP) after the assassination, and yet, the only one that the WC defenders focus on is Roger Craig. They do the same thing with the Mauser as they just say that Craig lied and ignore the other witnesses who also saw a Mauser in the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD) Building. Only people trying to keep a false story going would behave like this.
We saw in "Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions #476" that a 1957 Rambler was involved in a shooting in DP a week prior to the assassination as a bullet went through its window and how the Dallas Police Department (DPD) covered this incident up. Here is another story involving a Rambler that is possibly tied to Clay Shaw. Shaw was the man indicted for being involved in the conspiracy to kill JFK by New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison. Here is a letter dated March 24, 1964, that discusses this topic.
Quote on
manuscriptservice.com/DPQ/womacklet.jpg
T.G. Womack, Jr., a Hammond, Louisiana, insurance agent, sends a letter to Clay L. Shaw, 1313 Dauphine Street, New Orleans, Louisiana. The letter is in reference to Marquette no. 105628, and “Marquette Casualty Company” is the imprint on the bottom of the Womack Insurance Agency letterhead. It reads, “Dear Clay: Your dad was in my office this morning and returned the above policy covering liability on the 1962 Rambler Station Wagon. I agreed to hold up cancellation of this policy until I had word from you that you had arranged for coverage with your New Orleans agent. Just for your records the automobile is described as being a 1962 Rambler Ambassador M#H171787 (4-Dr. Sta. Wagon).”
Quote off
What is odd about this is that at the time of this writing Clay Shaw was 51-years-old so why was his dad handling things like this for him? I looked but cannot find any information on Shaw's father to see IF he was dead or alive in 1964. Another odd thing is at the bottom of the letter Womack says, "Enjoyed seeing you last Sunday." IF Shaw had just seen Womack within the last week, why would his father need to take care of this for him?
It is not out of the realm of possibility to think that this 1962 Rambler was owned by Clay Shaw. Further evidence for this line of thinking came from his former secretary before the New Orleans Grand Jury during Garrison's prosecution of Shaw. I have covered this before, but here it is again.
Quote on
Q. Did you ever see Mr. Shaw driving a car other than black Thunderbird?
A. I don't know -- it was in 1963 -- he had driven a stationwagon.
Q. A stationwagon -- who would that belong to?
A. His father, I think. (New Orleans Grand Jury Testimony, 8/23/67)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1197#relPageId=5
Quote off
So, according to this, the station wagon belonged to his father. So, perhaps the 1962 Nash Rambler did belong to him, but this does not preclude his son from borrowing it. Was it used in DP? Who knows for sure. The point of this post is to show yet another lead that was never explored by the WC.
Another possibility comes from researcher Walt Brown as he has suggested that “‘Clay Shaw’ was the dad. He purchased the car in question and then insured it through an out-of-town agency, and allowed his “son,” a person possibly known to us, or, equally possible, someone not known to us to use it, but it was his vehicle, and it was insured in his name. When, by March 24, 1964, it had served its purpose, most likely on the 22nd of November the previous year, “Shaw” himself went to the Womack Agency and informed them he was canceling the policy on his “son’s” automobile -- especially since he would not have wanted it tied to him on the odd chance that someone would believe Roger Craig, Price, or anyone else who might have come forward and provided reports about a suspicious Rambler at the time -- and place -- of the assassination.”
This is another scenario that could have happened. Clay Shaw was from Hammond, Louisiana, so he could have used this agency despite the fact that he lived in New Orleans as it would have been harder to trace to him. David Ferrie, who has been tied to Shaw, also spent time in Hammond on the evening and night of November 24, 1963, following the assassination. This was supposedly on the advice of attorney G. Wray Gill who Ferrie did work for. Ferrie spent the night at Southeastern Louisiana University, visiting a friend who is conducting research in narcotics addiction.
Was this just another coincidence or was Ferrie in Hammond to meet with Shaw? That has to be a possibility. Perhaps Shaw was bringing the Rambler back to Hammond. Who knows for sure? That is the point though. We do NOT know so much because the WC didn't bother to have anyone look into this kind of stuff.
For more information on the Nash Rambler witnesses you can read this post.
jfkconspiracyforum.freeforums.net/thread/1289/nash-rambler-witnesses
The WC did not investigate this lead, which was available during their time in session, therefore, their conclusion is questionable as they did not seek the full picture of what happened. This means that it is sunk once more.
For a little more detail on this topic, you can go here.
manuscriptservice.com/DPQ/shaw-rambler.htm