Post by Rob Caprio on Dec 25, 2023 21:14:57 GMT -5
All portions are ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2025
cbsnews1.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/r/2013/11/15/2abe2ab2-3eca-4c35-b716-48701d9dfff7/resize/1240x930/2d991a8c8b2cb685e0cb0e5bd92d46bf/LHO_slide_vert_crop.jpg
static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2013/11/21/22/RTX15K7U.jpg
static.politico.com/dims4/default/c201221/2147483647/resize/1160x%3E/quality/90/?url=https:%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2F75%2F80%2F6d4b362c4e78954d361b78da333b%2F17802-shenon-gun-ap.jpg
The Warren Commission (WC) would claim, with no supporting evidence, that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) assassinated President John F. Kennedy (JFK) all alone on November 22, 1963. They further claimed that he would murder Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit (JDT) forty-five minutes later all by himself as well.
The weapons he used to commit these crimes, the WC claimed, were ordered from mail-order houses and shipped to his Post Office (P.O.) box in Dallas, Texas. Needless to say, they never provided any evidence for this claim either.
We will look at their claim about LHO receiving the murder weapon of JFK in this post.
*************************************************
The WC had to make a number of false statements to get the alleged murder weapon into LHO's hands. The first one is this lie that was proven to be a lie by their OWN evidence.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0073a.gif
It is not known whether the application for post office box 2915 listed "A. Hidell" as a person entitled to receive mail at this box. In accordance with postal regulations, the portion of the application which lists names of persons, other than the applicant, entitled to receive mail was thrown away after the box was closed on May 14, 1963. (WC Report (WCR), p. 121)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0073a.htm
Quote off
This states that there is no way to know if LHO listed "A. Hidell" or not since postal regulations required part III (the area of the application where you list others that can receive mail at your P.O. box) to be thrown out after the box was closed. This is a lie as the FBI showed this was not true and included it in the WC's own twenty-six volumes.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/pages/WC_Vol25_0445a.gif
12. CLAIM: The Post Office Box in Dallas to which Oswald had the rifle mailed was kept under both his name and “A. Hidell.” Page 111.
INVESTIGATION: Our investigation has revealed that Oswald did NOT indicate on his application that others, INCLUDING “A. HIDELL,” would receive mail through the box in question, which was Post Office Box 2915 in Dallas. This box was obtained by Oswald on October 9, 1962, and relinquished by him on May 14, 1963. (CE 2585, p. 859-page 4 in original document.) (Emphasis mine)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0445a.htm
Quote off
This shows that the WC flat-out lied or did NOT read their own evidence! Both are good possibilities as their mission was to get LHO. If they lied about this issue, what else would they lie about? A good bit it seems.
We have looked at the alleged ordering of the alleged murder weapon (40" Mannlicher-Carcano (M-C)) before in this series and see that there is no evidence supporting this claim either. The best the WC could do is show us an alleged order form that depicts a 36" Carcano carbine being ordered. How did LHO wind up with a 40" short-rifle model IF he ordered a 36" carbine? Well, the WC claimed it was a mistake at Klein's Sporting Goods (KSG) and we are supposed to just take their word for it because they provided absolutely NO evidence to support this claim.
They also presented absolutely NO evidence for how LHO would have received the rifle via his P.O. box either. At least they were consistent, consistently bad. Since a 40" rifle is NOT going to fit into a postal box, there had to be a slip left in LHO's slot to notify him that he had a package that was being held by the postal staff. This slip was never produced by the WC to show that a) LHO received one, and b) he took it to redeem his package with a signature. Why not?
To cover this big problem they used their trusty FBI informant/Postal Inspector Harry Holmes to cover for this lack of procedure. They wrote this in their WCR about this issue.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0073a.gif
Postal Inspector Harry Holmes of the Dallas Post Office testified, however, that when a package is received for a certain box, a notice is placed in that box regardless of whether the name on the package is listed on the application as a person entitled to receive mail through that box. The person having access to the box then takes the notice to the window and is given the package. Ordinarily, Inspector Holmes testified, identification is not requested because it is assumed that the person with the notice is entitled to the package. (Ibid.)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0073a.htm
Quote off
Is this not the most ridiculous thing you have read recently? So, according to Holmes, a notice is put in LHO's box even though the name on the package is allegedly "A. Hidell" and he took that notice to the window, showed NO identification and was given the alleged package containing the alleged 40" M-C that LHO never ordered and the rest is history. Who in their right mind would believe this nonsense?
First of all, how would they know a package addressed to "A. Hidell" would require a notice for LHO's box? What was the connection for the postal workers? There wasn't one as even the FBI admitted this since LHO listed NO ONE on part III to receive mail besides himself at box 2915. In New Orleans he had listed Marina, but he didn't even list her on the Dallas application.
Secondly, once LHO gets a notice for a package for a "A. Hidell", what made him think this package was for him? Why would he go retrieve it? Was he expecting a package?
Thirdly, when was the last time you went to the post office to get a package that you weren't required to show some form of identification before they gave it to you? I can't think of a time. WC defenders like to claim that "things were different back in 1963" without providing any evidence that they were. The post office is responsible for that package so they are not going to give it to someone without checking to make sure it is theirs. Imagine if a witness saying LHO was innocent was taken at face value like Holmes. He just claims something and then there is no demand for support at all by the WC, but hey, that is what the WC did, too.
Finally, not one postal worker was called to say, "Yes, I gave the package to LHO." Not one postal worker was called to say, "I had LHO sign the notice for the package." Not one postal worker was called to say, "Yes, I saw LHO leave with a long package." In fact, not one witness period was called to say they saw this. It seems when we are talking about packages and LHO they are all INVISIBLE! No one saw him with one at the post office; no one saw one on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD) Building so they used a dotted line instead; no one saw him carry a package into the TSBD beyond one suspicious witness who even said that he wasn't paying attention to LHO as he was watching the trains instead when this was a couple of blocks in length; no one saw him carrying a package around the TSBD to get it to his hiding place; no one saw him bring the bag to the Paine's residence on November 21, and, no one saw him with a bag in the Paine's residence the evening before and the morning of the assassination. Amazing.
I have done numerous installments in this series on the whole "A. Hidell" alleged alias as well. The WC again never showed in the least that he used it at any time. The ONLY alias the Dallas Police Department (DPD) listed on November 22, 1963, as an alias was "O.H. Lee." There is NO mention of "A. Hidell" at all. They claimed it was on his Selective Service card and it had this alias on it, but guess what? There is no proof that the card is genuine as it contains a photograph, and those cards had NO photographs on them in 1963! Furthermore, and we have covered this too many times, if we go to Commission Exhibit (CE) 1148 you will see that NO wallet is listed as an item taken from LHO at the time of his arrest. Of course, WC defenders say that it was taken from him in the police car on the way to headquarters, but even if that was true it should still be listed on CE 1148 and it isn't. Why? Because they did NOT take the "Aladdin's Cave" wallet off of him is why. The wallet, along with the Paine's garage were gifts that kept giving. All kinds of evidence would be claimed to be found in both.
Without "A. Hidell" there is NO rifle order. Period. That is why they had to lie and claim evidence was found in his wallet linking him to that name. The rifle is the key piece to this whole case. IF you cannot show that CE 139 was ordered, received and used by LHO there is NO case against him. And the WC did NOT show this so they are sunk for this reason alone. So, they lied instead.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0073a.gif
Oswald's use of the name "Hidell" to purchase the assassination weapon was one of the several instances in which he used this name as an alias. (Ibid.)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0073a.htm
Quote off
How many lies can you fit into one sentence? Let's see. The WC failed to show that LHO ordered CE 139. Lie #1. The WC failed to show that CE 139 was the "assassination weapon." Lie #2 The WC failed to show that LHO ever used the name "A. Hidell" as an alias. Lie #3. Since they failed to show that he ever used the alias of "A. Hidell" there is no way they could show that he used it several times. Lie #4. The only person who claimed that LHO ever used it was his wife Marina. The WC failed to show beyond the supposed rifle order when he used it before. For his rooming house he used the name "O.H. Lee" and this was the ONLY alias the DPD listed for him on November 22, 1963. There was no mention of "A. Hidell" at all.
The same circumstances that apply to the rifle apply to the alleged pistol order. The claimed order form lists a pistol DIFFERENT from the alleged murder weapon of JDT -- CE 143. It seems, if we believe the WC, that LHO habitually ordered "A" and received "B" instead. Needless to say, the WC never provided evidence showing LHO had been shipped the wrong weapons. They just claimed it instead.
They would write this about CE 143 (what they referred to as "Oswald's revolver") in their report.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0073a.gif
When arrested on the day of the assassination, he had in his possession a Smith & Wesson .38 caliber revolver purchased by mail-order coupon from Seaport-Traders, Inc.,...the mail-order coupon listed the purchaser as "A.J. Hidell Age 28" with the address of post office box 2915 in Dallas. Handwriting experts from the FBI and the Treasury Department testified that the writing on the mail-order form was that of Lee Harvey Oswald. (Ibid.)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0073a.htm
Quote off
Again, we have seen in numerous articles in this series there is absolutely no evidence or chain of custody showing that CE 143 was removed from LHO when he was arrested. They couldn't show that LHO actually ordered CE 143 or received it, so, how could they show it was on him at Texas Theater (TT) when he was illegally arrested? All we received were the claims of members of the DPD that they took it from LHO. This is not proper police procedure and would have failed miserably in court.
When I used to frequent boards, I would even get on the nerves of conspiracy believers as so many CTers actually believe parts of this fairy tale. They would get angry with me more than the LNers did most times, but that didn't stop me from bursting their bubbles. So many CTers need parts of the official fairy tale to be true to make their theories work, but I don't have to worry about that since I have no theory other than pure logic -- the real power wanted JFK gone. How they made that happen is beyond us average people to figure out for the most part so why drive yourself nuts attempting to do it?
I have done over 500 of these articles for this series so believe me when I say, none of the claims the WC made regarding LHO are true or supportable. It is all made up. He did not order a rifle. He did not order a pistol. He did not receive either at his post office box. He did not use the alias "A. Hidell." He did not kill JFK or JDT and he did not shoot at retired General Edwin A. Walker (EAW). He did not go to Mexico City (at least in the way the WC claimed). He was not a defector. He was a patsy.
This does not mean he could not have been involved in the conspiracy in some way however. I personally don't think he was, but I am open to the possibility that he was. I am NOT a defender of LHO as the LNers claimed for decades, but rather a defender of the truth and our constitutional rights.
It was even claimed that when LHO received his rifle he took it to work at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall Co. and showed it to a fellow employee named Jack Bowen. The FBI would look into this and on February 25, 1964, an airtel was sent to Director J. Edgar Hoover (JEH) about this issue. Here are the relevant parts.
Quote on
Interviews with known associates of JACK LESLIE BOWEN, aka John Caesar Grossi, Jack Louis Bowen, have established that BOWEN is not known to have discussed any import-export business with LEE HARVEY OSWALD.
In view of the foregoing, no additional will be made by the Dallas office to interview JOHN LESLIE BOWEN... (FBI 105-82555, Section 90, p. 49)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=57779#relPageId=49
Quote off
So the full extent of the FBI's efforts were to discuss this with "known associates" of Bowen's and determine that he and LHO never discussed "import-export business." What? I thought this was about LHO showing Bowen his supposed 6.5 M-C rifle? And because no one knew that they discussed a topic like this the FBI was not going to look into this anymore. Again, amazing.
It seems Mr. Bowen was actually a man with a record and may have had ties with the Mafia. We get more information on Bowen from a 1973 interview that was done with a Mr. Harold Servis as he knew Bowen.
Quote on
He stated he is...familiar...with an individual by the name of JACK BOWEN. He advised that he met Mr. BOWEN at the La Tuna Federal Correctional Institution in Anthony, Texas. SERVIS advised that he teaches classes at the La Tuna for television writing and production. He stated that at one time BOWEN was in one of his classes and he got to know BOWEN fairly well. He advised that BOWEN was an inmate at La Tuna, Texas, and was released during the early summer of 1972. He believed JACK BOWEN was in La Tuna for bank robbery. Mr. SERVIS checked his records and they show that JACK BOWEN's real name was JOHN CAESAR GROSSI. Mr. SERVIS advised that JACK BOWEN told him that operated on the fringes of the Mafia and Mr. SERVIS believes that BOWEN was incarcerated at La Tuna, Texas, under the name of JACK BOWEN. (NARA 124-10208-10266, p. 23)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=137435#relPageId=23
Quote off
This tells us why the FBI backed off and wanted nothing to do with Bowen as it could lead to places they did NOT want to go. Why was he working at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall Co. anyway? Was it a coincidence that he was there at the same time LHO was? Why did LHO use Bowen's name on his library card?
Quote on
...[Eddie] REDDELL admitted in discussing in great detail with BOWEN his plan to set up an import-export business dealing with leasing of heavy equipment in Mexico, and in view of the fact BOWEN was a former fellow employee with LEE HARVEY OSWALD at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall in Dallas, and due to the fact that BOWEN's name was used on OSWALD's library card... (Lee H. Oswald, Post-Russian Period-3.1-Trip to Mexico, Feb 1 - Mar 3, 1964, p. 59)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=233265#relPageId=59
Quote off
Why would LHO have Bowen's name on his library card? Why did LHO have David Ferrie's library card? What was the significance of these library cards? We will never know for sure because the WC and HSCA didn't explore this issue along with hundreds of others.
This post again shows that the WC let so many things go unexplored and stuck with their made-up story instead, therefore, their conclusion is sunk again.
cbsnews1.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/r/2013/11/15/2abe2ab2-3eca-4c35-b716-48701d9dfff7/resize/1240x930/2d991a8c8b2cb685e0cb0e5bd92d46bf/LHO_slide_vert_crop.jpg
static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2013/11/21/22/RTX15K7U.jpg
static.politico.com/dims4/default/c201221/2147483647/resize/1160x%3E/quality/90/?url=https:%2F%2Fstatic.politico.com%2F75%2F80%2F6d4b362c4e78954d361b78da333b%2F17802-shenon-gun-ap.jpg
The Warren Commission (WC) would claim, with no supporting evidence, that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) assassinated President John F. Kennedy (JFK) all alone on November 22, 1963. They further claimed that he would murder Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit (JDT) forty-five minutes later all by himself as well.
The weapons he used to commit these crimes, the WC claimed, were ordered from mail-order houses and shipped to his Post Office (P.O.) box in Dallas, Texas. Needless to say, they never provided any evidence for this claim either.
We will look at their claim about LHO receiving the murder weapon of JFK in this post.
*************************************************
The WC had to make a number of false statements to get the alleged murder weapon into LHO's hands. The first one is this lie that was proven to be a lie by their OWN evidence.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0073a.gif
It is not known whether the application for post office box 2915 listed "A. Hidell" as a person entitled to receive mail at this box. In accordance with postal regulations, the portion of the application which lists names of persons, other than the applicant, entitled to receive mail was thrown away after the box was closed on May 14, 1963. (WC Report (WCR), p. 121)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0073a.htm
Quote off
This states that there is no way to know if LHO listed "A. Hidell" or not since postal regulations required part III (the area of the application where you list others that can receive mail at your P.O. box) to be thrown out after the box was closed. This is a lie as the FBI showed this was not true and included it in the WC's own twenty-six volumes.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/pages/WC_Vol25_0445a.gif
12. CLAIM: The Post Office Box in Dallas to which Oswald had the rifle mailed was kept under both his name and “A. Hidell.” Page 111.
INVESTIGATION: Our investigation has revealed that Oswald did NOT indicate on his application that others, INCLUDING “A. HIDELL,” would receive mail through the box in question, which was Post Office Box 2915 in Dallas. This box was obtained by Oswald on October 9, 1962, and relinquished by him on May 14, 1963. (CE 2585, p. 859-page 4 in original document.) (Emphasis mine)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0445a.htm
Quote off
This shows that the WC flat-out lied or did NOT read their own evidence! Both are good possibilities as their mission was to get LHO. If they lied about this issue, what else would they lie about? A good bit it seems.
We have looked at the alleged ordering of the alleged murder weapon (40" Mannlicher-Carcano (M-C)) before in this series and see that there is no evidence supporting this claim either. The best the WC could do is show us an alleged order form that depicts a 36" Carcano carbine being ordered. How did LHO wind up with a 40" short-rifle model IF he ordered a 36" carbine? Well, the WC claimed it was a mistake at Klein's Sporting Goods (KSG) and we are supposed to just take their word for it because they provided absolutely NO evidence to support this claim.
They also presented absolutely NO evidence for how LHO would have received the rifle via his P.O. box either. At least they were consistent, consistently bad. Since a 40" rifle is NOT going to fit into a postal box, there had to be a slip left in LHO's slot to notify him that he had a package that was being held by the postal staff. This slip was never produced by the WC to show that a) LHO received one, and b) he took it to redeem his package with a signature. Why not?
To cover this big problem they used their trusty FBI informant/Postal Inspector Harry Holmes to cover for this lack of procedure. They wrote this in their WCR about this issue.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0073a.gif
Postal Inspector Harry Holmes of the Dallas Post Office testified, however, that when a package is received for a certain box, a notice is placed in that box regardless of whether the name on the package is listed on the application as a person entitled to receive mail through that box. The person having access to the box then takes the notice to the window and is given the package. Ordinarily, Inspector Holmes testified, identification is not requested because it is assumed that the person with the notice is entitled to the package. (Ibid.)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0073a.htm
Quote off
Is this not the most ridiculous thing you have read recently? So, according to Holmes, a notice is put in LHO's box even though the name on the package is allegedly "A. Hidell" and he took that notice to the window, showed NO identification and was given the alleged package containing the alleged 40" M-C that LHO never ordered and the rest is history. Who in their right mind would believe this nonsense?
First of all, how would they know a package addressed to "A. Hidell" would require a notice for LHO's box? What was the connection for the postal workers? There wasn't one as even the FBI admitted this since LHO listed NO ONE on part III to receive mail besides himself at box 2915. In New Orleans he had listed Marina, but he didn't even list her on the Dallas application.
Secondly, once LHO gets a notice for a package for a "A. Hidell", what made him think this package was for him? Why would he go retrieve it? Was he expecting a package?
Thirdly, when was the last time you went to the post office to get a package that you weren't required to show some form of identification before they gave it to you? I can't think of a time. WC defenders like to claim that "things were different back in 1963" without providing any evidence that they were. The post office is responsible for that package so they are not going to give it to someone without checking to make sure it is theirs. Imagine if a witness saying LHO was innocent was taken at face value like Holmes. He just claims something and then there is no demand for support at all by the WC, but hey, that is what the WC did, too.
Finally, not one postal worker was called to say, "Yes, I gave the package to LHO." Not one postal worker was called to say, "I had LHO sign the notice for the package." Not one postal worker was called to say, "Yes, I saw LHO leave with a long package." In fact, not one witness period was called to say they saw this. It seems when we are talking about packages and LHO they are all INVISIBLE! No one saw him with one at the post office; no one saw one on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD) Building so they used a dotted line instead; no one saw him carry a package into the TSBD beyond one suspicious witness who even said that he wasn't paying attention to LHO as he was watching the trains instead when this was a couple of blocks in length; no one saw him carrying a package around the TSBD to get it to his hiding place; no one saw him bring the bag to the Paine's residence on November 21, and, no one saw him with a bag in the Paine's residence the evening before and the morning of the assassination. Amazing.
I have done numerous installments in this series on the whole "A. Hidell" alleged alias as well. The WC again never showed in the least that he used it at any time. The ONLY alias the Dallas Police Department (DPD) listed on November 22, 1963, as an alias was "O.H. Lee." There is NO mention of "A. Hidell" at all. They claimed it was on his Selective Service card and it had this alias on it, but guess what? There is no proof that the card is genuine as it contains a photograph, and those cards had NO photographs on them in 1963! Furthermore, and we have covered this too many times, if we go to Commission Exhibit (CE) 1148 you will see that NO wallet is listed as an item taken from LHO at the time of his arrest. Of course, WC defenders say that it was taken from him in the police car on the way to headquarters, but even if that was true it should still be listed on CE 1148 and it isn't. Why? Because they did NOT take the "Aladdin's Cave" wallet off of him is why. The wallet, along with the Paine's garage were gifts that kept giving. All kinds of evidence would be claimed to be found in both.
Without "A. Hidell" there is NO rifle order. Period. That is why they had to lie and claim evidence was found in his wallet linking him to that name. The rifle is the key piece to this whole case. IF you cannot show that CE 139 was ordered, received and used by LHO there is NO case against him. And the WC did NOT show this so they are sunk for this reason alone. So, they lied instead.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0073a.gif
Oswald's use of the name "Hidell" to purchase the assassination weapon was one of the several instances in which he used this name as an alias. (Ibid.)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0073a.htm
Quote off
How many lies can you fit into one sentence? Let's see. The WC failed to show that LHO ordered CE 139. Lie #1. The WC failed to show that CE 139 was the "assassination weapon." Lie #2 The WC failed to show that LHO ever used the name "A. Hidell" as an alias. Lie #3. Since they failed to show that he ever used the alias of "A. Hidell" there is no way they could show that he used it several times. Lie #4. The only person who claimed that LHO ever used it was his wife Marina. The WC failed to show beyond the supposed rifle order when he used it before. For his rooming house he used the name "O.H. Lee" and this was the ONLY alias the DPD listed for him on November 22, 1963. There was no mention of "A. Hidell" at all.
The same circumstances that apply to the rifle apply to the alleged pistol order. The claimed order form lists a pistol DIFFERENT from the alleged murder weapon of JDT -- CE 143. It seems, if we believe the WC, that LHO habitually ordered "A" and received "B" instead. Needless to say, the WC never provided evidence showing LHO had been shipped the wrong weapons. They just claimed it instead.
They would write this about CE 143 (what they referred to as "Oswald's revolver") in their report.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0073a.gif
When arrested on the day of the assassination, he had in his possession a Smith & Wesson .38 caliber revolver purchased by mail-order coupon from Seaport-Traders, Inc.,...the mail-order coupon listed the purchaser as "A.J. Hidell Age 28" with the address of post office box 2915 in Dallas. Handwriting experts from the FBI and the Treasury Department testified that the writing on the mail-order form was that of Lee Harvey Oswald. (Ibid.)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0073a.htm
Quote off
Again, we have seen in numerous articles in this series there is absolutely no evidence or chain of custody showing that CE 143 was removed from LHO when he was arrested. They couldn't show that LHO actually ordered CE 143 or received it, so, how could they show it was on him at Texas Theater (TT) when he was illegally arrested? All we received were the claims of members of the DPD that they took it from LHO. This is not proper police procedure and would have failed miserably in court.
When I used to frequent boards, I would even get on the nerves of conspiracy believers as so many CTers actually believe parts of this fairy tale. They would get angry with me more than the LNers did most times, but that didn't stop me from bursting their bubbles. So many CTers need parts of the official fairy tale to be true to make their theories work, but I don't have to worry about that since I have no theory other than pure logic -- the real power wanted JFK gone. How they made that happen is beyond us average people to figure out for the most part so why drive yourself nuts attempting to do it?
I have done over 500 of these articles for this series so believe me when I say, none of the claims the WC made regarding LHO are true or supportable. It is all made up. He did not order a rifle. He did not order a pistol. He did not receive either at his post office box. He did not use the alias "A. Hidell." He did not kill JFK or JDT and he did not shoot at retired General Edwin A. Walker (EAW). He did not go to Mexico City (at least in the way the WC claimed). He was not a defector. He was a patsy.
This does not mean he could not have been involved in the conspiracy in some way however. I personally don't think he was, but I am open to the possibility that he was. I am NOT a defender of LHO as the LNers claimed for decades, but rather a defender of the truth and our constitutional rights.
It was even claimed that when LHO received his rifle he took it to work at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall Co. and showed it to a fellow employee named Jack Bowen. The FBI would look into this and on February 25, 1964, an airtel was sent to Director J. Edgar Hoover (JEH) about this issue. Here are the relevant parts.
Quote on
Interviews with known associates of JACK LESLIE BOWEN, aka John Caesar Grossi, Jack Louis Bowen, have established that BOWEN is not known to have discussed any import-export business with LEE HARVEY OSWALD.
In view of the foregoing, no additional will be made by the Dallas office to interview JOHN LESLIE BOWEN... (FBI 105-82555, Section 90, p. 49)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=57779#relPageId=49
Quote off
So the full extent of the FBI's efforts were to discuss this with "known associates" of Bowen's and determine that he and LHO never discussed "import-export business." What? I thought this was about LHO showing Bowen his supposed 6.5 M-C rifle? And because no one knew that they discussed a topic like this the FBI was not going to look into this anymore. Again, amazing.
It seems Mr. Bowen was actually a man with a record and may have had ties with the Mafia. We get more information on Bowen from a 1973 interview that was done with a Mr. Harold Servis as he knew Bowen.
Quote on
He stated he is...familiar...with an individual by the name of JACK BOWEN. He advised that he met Mr. BOWEN at the La Tuna Federal Correctional Institution in Anthony, Texas. SERVIS advised that he teaches classes at the La Tuna for television writing and production. He stated that at one time BOWEN was in one of his classes and he got to know BOWEN fairly well. He advised that BOWEN was an inmate at La Tuna, Texas, and was released during the early summer of 1972. He believed JACK BOWEN was in La Tuna for bank robbery. Mr. SERVIS checked his records and they show that JACK BOWEN's real name was JOHN CAESAR GROSSI. Mr. SERVIS advised that JACK BOWEN told him that operated on the fringes of the Mafia and Mr. SERVIS believes that BOWEN was incarcerated at La Tuna, Texas, under the name of JACK BOWEN. (NARA 124-10208-10266, p. 23)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=137435#relPageId=23
Quote off
This tells us why the FBI backed off and wanted nothing to do with Bowen as it could lead to places they did NOT want to go. Why was he working at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall Co. anyway? Was it a coincidence that he was there at the same time LHO was? Why did LHO use Bowen's name on his library card?
Quote on
...[Eddie] REDDELL admitted in discussing in great detail with BOWEN his plan to set up an import-export business dealing with leasing of heavy equipment in Mexico, and in view of the fact BOWEN was a former fellow employee with LEE HARVEY OSWALD at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall in Dallas, and due to the fact that BOWEN's name was used on OSWALD's library card... (Lee H. Oswald, Post-Russian Period-3.1-Trip to Mexico, Feb 1 - Mar 3, 1964, p. 59)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=233265#relPageId=59
Quote off
Why would LHO have Bowen's name on his library card? Why did LHO have David Ferrie's library card? What was the significance of these library cards? We will never know for sure because the WC and HSCA didn't explore this issue along with hundreds of others.
This post again shows that the WC let so many things go unexplored and stuck with their made-up story instead, therefore, their conclusion is sunk again.