Post by Rob Caprio on Jun 27, 2019 20:40:36 GMT -5
All portions are ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2024
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/ba/Garrison_Jim.jpg
static.wixstatic.com/media/325b1c_299e6259ce024e30891cfac9348c6d60~mv2.jpg/v1/fit/w_565%2Ch_787%2Cal_c%2Cq_80/file.jpg
static.wixstatic.com/media/325b1c_73fa4c76478f484db8a0b704d793e7f2~mv2.jpg/v1/fit/w_570%2Ch_381%2Cal_c%2Cq_80/file.jpg
www.jfk-assassination.net/Litwin_garrison_files/image003.jpg
Why did both Lee Harvey Oswald’s (LHO) notebook and Clay Shaw’s notebook contain the term “P.O. 19106” in them?
New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison found this during his investigation into the murder of President John F. Kennedy (JFK) in the latter part of the 1960s. He would write this in his book On The Trail Of The Assassins.
Quote on
…this odd term was revealed publicly when Shaw’s attorneys sought to have the address book returned to him. Our office opposed this move, and in our written opposition we called attention to an interesting fact: The citation of “P.O. 19106” appeared in Lee Oswald’s address book as well as Shaw’s.
After several days of silence, Shaw’s attorneys produced a man named Lee Odom, who at that time rented post office box number 174 in Irving, a suburb of Dallas. He stated that he was from Dallas and that, while P.O. Box 19106 had never been in his name, it had been used for several months by a barbeque company with which he was once associated.
Shaw’s attorneys,…picked it up from there and explained that Odom had once met Clay Shaw to discuss the possibility of promoting a bullfight in New Orleans. (Jim Garrison, On The Trail Of The Assassins, p. 170)
Quote off
Here is the notation in LHO’s notebook (Commission Exhibit (CE) 18).
CE 18: www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0041b.htm
I will not get into Garrison’s claim that the P.O. Box number (19106) could be decoded as Ruby’s telephone number either as that is not the point of this question. Why did LHO and Clay Shaw have the same P.O. box number listed in their notebooks? Garrison said the Post Office had told him that that number was not in use in 1963 either as they had not gotten that high in the number system. Again, whether this is valid or not is not the point, the point is why did LHO and Clay Shaw have the SAME P.O. Box listed in their notebooks? Was this a code of some kind?
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/ba/Garrison_Jim.jpg
static.wixstatic.com/media/325b1c_299e6259ce024e30891cfac9348c6d60~mv2.jpg/v1/fit/w_565%2Ch_787%2Cal_c%2Cq_80/file.jpg
static.wixstatic.com/media/325b1c_73fa4c76478f484db8a0b704d793e7f2~mv2.jpg/v1/fit/w_570%2Ch_381%2Cal_c%2Cq_80/file.jpg
www.jfk-assassination.net/Litwin_garrison_files/image003.jpg
Why did both Lee Harvey Oswald’s (LHO) notebook and Clay Shaw’s notebook contain the term “P.O. 19106” in them?
New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison found this during his investigation into the murder of President John F. Kennedy (JFK) in the latter part of the 1960s. He would write this in his book On The Trail Of The Assassins.
Quote on
…this odd term was revealed publicly when Shaw’s attorneys sought to have the address book returned to him. Our office opposed this move, and in our written opposition we called attention to an interesting fact: The citation of “P.O. 19106” appeared in Lee Oswald’s address book as well as Shaw’s.
After several days of silence, Shaw’s attorneys produced a man named Lee Odom, who at that time rented post office box number 174 in Irving, a suburb of Dallas. He stated that he was from Dallas and that, while P.O. Box 19106 had never been in his name, it had been used for several months by a barbeque company with which he was once associated.
Shaw’s attorneys,…picked it up from there and explained that Odom had once met Clay Shaw to discuss the possibility of promoting a bullfight in New Orleans. (Jim Garrison, On The Trail Of The Assassins, p. 170)
Quote off
Here is the notation in LHO’s notebook (Commission Exhibit (CE) 18).
CE 18: www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0041b.htm
I will not get into Garrison’s claim that the P.O. Box number (19106) could be decoded as Ruby’s telephone number either as that is not the point of this question. Why did LHO and Clay Shaw have the same P.O. box number listed in their notebooks? Garrison said the Post Office had told him that that number was not in use in 1963 either as they had not gotten that high in the number system. Again, whether this is valid or not is not the point, the point is why did LHO and Clay Shaw have the SAME P.O. Box listed in their notebooks? Was this a code of some kind?