Post by Rob Caprio on Jun 29, 2020 20:50:32 GMT -5
All portions ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2024
library.uta.edu/digitalgallery/sites/library.uta.edu.digitalgallery-beta/files/styles/maxthumbnail/public/10000000-10009999new/10009388.jpg
He was a key person in regard to Jack Ruby. He was a roommate of Ruby’s and was a defense witness called in Ruby’s trial for shooting Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO). He was also a part of a meeting that took place in Ruby’s apartment after Ruby shot LHO. Senator would be the only one of the four besides Ruby to survive this meeting in the next few years.
The HSCA Says…George Senator
****************************
George Senator began working for Smoler Brothers of Chicago in 1954 selling dresses. This job caused him to move to Dallas, Texas, in that year. He also worked other odd jobs in Dallas including Jack Ruby’s Carousel Club from 1962 to 1964. Senator said that he met Jack Ruby in 1954 when he was operating the Vegas Club. Supposedly Ruby was only a casual acquaintance until 1962.
The House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) wrote about Senator and organized crime.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol9/pages/HSCA_Vol9_0496a.gif
(1307) There was no indication that Senator had any associations with organized crime, either business or social. A committee consultant who reviewed FBI files on telephone recordings of Senator said there was no indication of a relationship between Senator and any criminal element. (HSCA IX, p. 983)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol9/html/HSCA_Vol9_0496a.htm
Quote off
If this is true then it means that Ruby kept him away from his mob affairs and contacts. Senator said that he had no information that Ruby had ties to the “hoodlum element” in Chicago. (Ibid.) The interesting part is there is no mention of such knowledge for Dallas.
In March or April 1962 Senator was out of work and money so Ruby invited him to stay at his apartment. Senator would stay for about 5 or 6 months, and paid for it by cashiering and taking tickets at the Carousel Club (Ibid.). The HSCA noted a discrepancy in this claim by Senator however.
Quote on
(1310) This statement to the FBI contradicted a prior statement. During an interview on November 24, 1963, Senator claimed he had not lived with Ruby until November 1, 1963, although he stated that he occasionally was low on funds and would be asked by Ruby to come and stay a day or two until he got back on his feet.(2149) The FBI report of December 20 was consistent with testimony given by Senator during Ruby's trial and the Warren Commission. (Ibid.)
Quote off
Why the confusion? Early 1962 and November 1963 is a big difference. Was it meant to hide something? Clearly Senator stayed with Ruby in November 1963, but why was he forgetting the longer stay in 1962? Perhaps it was just a bad memory, but in this case nothing can be taken for granted.
The HSCA noted that Senator was vague in his recollections. One such area was how and when he heard of Ruby’s shooting of LHO.
On page 372 of the WCR we read the following summation of this event.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0198b.gif
Senator’s general response to the shooting was not like that of a person seeking to conceal his guilt. Shortly before it was known that Ruby was the slayer of Oswald, Senator visited the Eatwell Restaurant in downtown Dallas. Upon being informed that Ruby was the attacker, Senator exclaimed, “My God”, in what appeared to be a genuinely surprised tone. He then ran to a telephone, returned to gulp down his coffee, and quickly departed. He drove promptly to the home of James Martin, an attorney and friend. (WCR, p. 372)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0198b.htm
Quote off
This shows that after being informed that Ruby was the slayer of LHO he quickly went to the telephone and then quickly departed for the home of James Martin. Let’s see what Senator’s testimony says.
Mr. HUBERT. All right, then take it from there. Tell us what happened.
Mr. SENATOR. So I went in there. I sat down there. Now, this is the place that I go every morning, you know, rather Sunday or Monday because I don't like to sit indoors. So I went there and had a cup of coffee. Then the first thing--then I had another cup of coffee. Now, on my second cup of coffee I heard the girl, the waitress--now where she got her information from I don't know. It had to be either telephone or radio, I don't know which. Maybe they had the radio on.
Mr. HUBERT. Did you notice any kind of a radio of any type in the restaurant?
Mr. SENATOR. No.
Mr. HUBERT. Did they usually have any?
Mr. SENATOR. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. HUBERT. All right, what happened?
Mr. SENATOR. Not to my knowledge. The first time she said she heard that somebody shot Oswald.
Mr. HUBERT. Was she speaking to you?
Mr. SENATOR. No; no, it was loud; but it happened to be she was near me.
Mr. HUBERT. There were other people in the place?
Mr. SENATOR. Not a lot. There were others you know, the usual morning Sunday business in the restaurant is sort of minute. So what I did when I heard that, I called up the lawyer. I was going to give him the news. I figured he would probably be sitting home, you know, Jim Martin, who happens to be a friend of mine. But when I called him I spoke to his daughter and she told me her dad and mother were in church. Dad would be home in half an hour. I said all right, maybe I'll call him back.
A short while later, the same girl, the same waitress hollered out that the man--she wasn't pronouncing the name right, the Carousel Club, but I sort of got the drift of the name and she hollered Jack Ruby killed Oswald. This is what she come up with later.
Mr. HUBERT. How much later?
Mr. SENATOR. I would probably say about 5 minutes.
Mr. HUBERT. But it was after you had called Martin?
Mr. SENATOR. Yes; after I called Martin.
Mr. HUBERT. You called Martin right away?
Mr. SENATOR, Yes; I was going to tell him that. I didn't think he would be--of course, I didn't know he was going to church or anything.
Mr. HUBERT. He is a close friend of yours?
Mr. SENATOR. Yes. He is an attorney there; yes.
Mr. HUBERT. All right, then?
Mr. SENATOR. Then when I heard that again, then I went up to see him. Of course, I froze in that chair there. I said my God, I didn't know what in the world to think. Then I went up there and I no sooner got there, he had just got there, I don't know, I think a moment or two before me. His wife and daughter had just come out of church.
Mr. HUBERT. You went to his home, you mean?
Mr. SENATOR. Yes; I went to his house. I told Jim and he said, "I heard already. I saw it on TV."
Mr. HUBERT. He was already at his house, you said?
Mr. SENATOR. Yes; he was home already.
Mr. HUBERT. How long after your phone call to him do you suppose you got to his house?
Mr. SENATOR. Well, he lived quite a ways. I would probably say it was about a 20-minute ride.
Mr. HUBERT. You left the Eatwell just as soon as the girl announced that the man who had shot Oswald was Jack Ruby?
Mr. SENATOR. I finished my coffee. I had about a half a cup left, something like that.
Mr. HUBERT. You did not attempt to call Martin again?
Mr. SENATOR. No; I didn't call him. I just went direct. I figured if he wasn't home I'd wait for him.
Senator’s testimony shows something different from what the WC wrote in its Report. This testimony clearly shows that Senator called Martin BEFORE he was told that his roommate Ruby had shot LHO. Why would Senator be calling an attorney upon hearing that LHO had been shot, but before he was told that the attacker had been Ruby? Based on what the WC has told us there is no reason.
There is only a reason if we accept the idea that Senator already knew that Ruby was going to shoot LHO. And he did according to Ruby’s testimony.
Mr. SPECTER. Well, the point we got to was the question of getting the substantive information out before going on with the test. Did you tell anyone that you intended to shoot Oswald?
Mr. HERNDON. You mean--before?
Mr. SPECTER. Well, I don't know if we're going to get an answer to it or not.
Mr. FOWLER. Jack, now the question that is being directed to you at this time---well, go right ahead.
Mr. RUBY. Yes; Sunday morning.
Mr. SPECTER. And whom did you tell?
Mr. RUBY. George Senator.
Mr. SPECTER. And where were you at the time you discussed it with him?
Mr. RUBY. In my apartment.
Mr. SPECTER. And state in as precise words as you can remember, just what you said to him and he said to you at that time?
Mr. RUBY. Well, he didn't say anything--the funny part--he was reading the paper and I doubt if he even recalled me saying it. I have to elaborate on it, but I was so carried away emotionally that I said--I don't know how I said it---I didn't say it in any vulgar manner---I said, "If something happened to this person, that then Mrs. Kennedy won't have to come back for the trial." That's all I said. Now, would you mind asking me on that particular point? That happened Sunday morning. That's the only time any thought ever came to my mind, because that morning I read some articles in the newspaper that she would have to come back to trial.
Mr. SPECTER. Did you ever say to anybody, "I am going to shoot Oswald," or anything to the effect that, "I am going to shoot or kill him"?
Mr. RUBY. No; I just made the statement--that's the only thing I said.
Mr. SPECTER. That statement you made to George Senator, that's the only thing that's the closest you came to saying it?
Mr. RUBY. That Sunday morning before I left my apartment.
Notice how Arlen Specter initially asked if he told anyone that he intended to shoot LHO and Ruby said yes, and then named George Senator. Then the game began as Ruby said that he just made “a comment” about saving Jacqueline Kennedy a trip back to Texas for a trial. Specter goes along with this and again asks if he told anyone that he planned on shooting LHO and this time Ruby says no as he only made a statement Sunday morning.
No matter what they said Senator’s actions show us the truth. There was no reason to call Martin upon hearing that LHO had been shot unless you thought or knew that Ruby had done the shooting. There is only one reason why he would think this too – because Ruby had told him that he planned on doing this.
The question is, why didn’t the WC report this truth to us? Instead they wrote this about Senator’s actions.
Quote on
The Commission has concluded, on the basis of its investigation into the Senator’s background, activities, and reaction to the shooting, that Senator did not aid or conspire with Jack Ruby in the killing of Oswald. (WCR, p. 372)
Quote off
Senator’s actions show that he had foreknowledge of LHO’s shooting and he did not warn the police, therefore, by definition he was a conspirator, and thus, he was guilty. Further proof of his guilt comes in the form of Tom Howard, Bill Hunter and Jim Koethe. All three attended a meeting with Senator on the evening of November 24, 1963, and all three would be dead within six months’ time. Other than learning something they shouldn’t have, how do we explain this?
The HSCA wrote this about this issue regarding Senator.
Quote on
(1322) The primary area of questioning of Senator by the FBI, Secret Service, Warren Commission and counsel during Ruby's trial concerned the sequence of events between November 22, 1963 and November 24 1963. Senator was not consistent in his answers. In his first statements, made on November 24, Senator was extremely vague regarding the events of the 2 previous days. (Ibid.)
Quote off
Why was he allowed to be vague? Any witness that didn’t agree with the official narrative sure wasn’t allowed to be. He was in a key position to hear and see things regarding Ruby’s actions leading up to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy (JFK) and his shooting of LHO. Why wasn’t he grilled until this was conveyed in a clear fashion? Remember, three other men heard what he heard and wound up dead. Remember also that he was a regular at the Eat Well restaurant and that is where witness Helen Markham worked.
Sadly, the WC and HSCA treated Senator as an ancillary type of witness instead of the key witness he really was. Was this on purpose or were they just short on time and resources? What do you think?
library.uta.edu/digitalgallery/sites/library.uta.edu.digitalgallery-beta/files/styles/maxthumbnail/public/10000000-10009999new/10009388.jpg
He was a key person in regard to Jack Ruby. He was a roommate of Ruby’s and was a defense witness called in Ruby’s trial for shooting Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO). He was also a part of a meeting that took place in Ruby’s apartment after Ruby shot LHO. Senator would be the only one of the four besides Ruby to survive this meeting in the next few years.
The HSCA Says…George Senator
****************************
George Senator began working for Smoler Brothers of Chicago in 1954 selling dresses. This job caused him to move to Dallas, Texas, in that year. He also worked other odd jobs in Dallas including Jack Ruby’s Carousel Club from 1962 to 1964. Senator said that he met Jack Ruby in 1954 when he was operating the Vegas Club. Supposedly Ruby was only a casual acquaintance until 1962.
The House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) wrote about Senator and organized crime.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol9/pages/HSCA_Vol9_0496a.gif
(1307) There was no indication that Senator had any associations with organized crime, either business or social. A committee consultant who reviewed FBI files on telephone recordings of Senator said there was no indication of a relationship between Senator and any criminal element. (HSCA IX, p. 983)
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol9/html/HSCA_Vol9_0496a.htm
Quote off
If this is true then it means that Ruby kept him away from his mob affairs and contacts. Senator said that he had no information that Ruby had ties to the “hoodlum element” in Chicago. (Ibid.) The interesting part is there is no mention of such knowledge for Dallas.
In March or April 1962 Senator was out of work and money so Ruby invited him to stay at his apartment. Senator would stay for about 5 or 6 months, and paid for it by cashiering and taking tickets at the Carousel Club (Ibid.). The HSCA noted a discrepancy in this claim by Senator however.
Quote on
(1310) This statement to the FBI contradicted a prior statement. During an interview on November 24, 1963, Senator claimed he had not lived with Ruby until November 1, 1963, although he stated that he occasionally was low on funds and would be asked by Ruby to come and stay a day or two until he got back on his feet.(2149) The FBI report of December 20 was consistent with testimony given by Senator during Ruby's trial and the Warren Commission. (Ibid.)
Quote off
Why the confusion? Early 1962 and November 1963 is a big difference. Was it meant to hide something? Clearly Senator stayed with Ruby in November 1963, but why was he forgetting the longer stay in 1962? Perhaps it was just a bad memory, but in this case nothing can be taken for granted.
The HSCA noted that Senator was vague in his recollections. One such area was how and when he heard of Ruby’s shooting of LHO.
On page 372 of the WCR we read the following summation of this event.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0198b.gif
Senator’s general response to the shooting was not like that of a person seeking to conceal his guilt. Shortly before it was known that Ruby was the slayer of Oswald, Senator visited the Eatwell Restaurant in downtown Dallas. Upon being informed that Ruby was the attacker, Senator exclaimed, “My God”, in what appeared to be a genuinely surprised tone. He then ran to a telephone, returned to gulp down his coffee, and quickly departed. He drove promptly to the home of James Martin, an attorney and friend. (WCR, p. 372)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0198b.htm
Quote off
This shows that after being informed that Ruby was the slayer of LHO he quickly went to the telephone and then quickly departed for the home of James Martin. Let’s see what Senator’s testimony says.
Mr. HUBERT. All right, then take it from there. Tell us what happened.
Mr. SENATOR. So I went in there. I sat down there. Now, this is the place that I go every morning, you know, rather Sunday or Monday because I don't like to sit indoors. So I went there and had a cup of coffee. Then the first thing--then I had another cup of coffee. Now, on my second cup of coffee I heard the girl, the waitress--now where she got her information from I don't know. It had to be either telephone or radio, I don't know which. Maybe they had the radio on.
Mr. HUBERT. Did you notice any kind of a radio of any type in the restaurant?
Mr. SENATOR. No.
Mr. HUBERT. Did they usually have any?
Mr. SENATOR. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. HUBERT. All right, what happened?
Mr. SENATOR. Not to my knowledge. The first time she said she heard that somebody shot Oswald.
Mr. HUBERT. Was she speaking to you?
Mr. SENATOR. No; no, it was loud; but it happened to be she was near me.
Mr. HUBERT. There were other people in the place?
Mr. SENATOR. Not a lot. There were others you know, the usual morning Sunday business in the restaurant is sort of minute. So what I did when I heard that, I called up the lawyer. I was going to give him the news. I figured he would probably be sitting home, you know, Jim Martin, who happens to be a friend of mine. But when I called him I spoke to his daughter and she told me her dad and mother were in church. Dad would be home in half an hour. I said all right, maybe I'll call him back.
A short while later, the same girl, the same waitress hollered out that the man--she wasn't pronouncing the name right, the Carousel Club, but I sort of got the drift of the name and she hollered Jack Ruby killed Oswald. This is what she come up with later.
Mr. HUBERT. How much later?
Mr. SENATOR. I would probably say about 5 minutes.
Mr. HUBERT. But it was after you had called Martin?
Mr. SENATOR. Yes; after I called Martin.
Mr. HUBERT. You called Martin right away?
Mr. SENATOR, Yes; I was going to tell him that. I didn't think he would be--of course, I didn't know he was going to church or anything.
Mr. HUBERT. He is a close friend of yours?
Mr. SENATOR. Yes. He is an attorney there; yes.
Mr. HUBERT. All right, then?
Mr. SENATOR. Then when I heard that again, then I went up to see him. Of course, I froze in that chair there. I said my God, I didn't know what in the world to think. Then I went up there and I no sooner got there, he had just got there, I don't know, I think a moment or two before me. His wife and daughter had just come out of church.
Mr. HUBERT. You went to his home, you mean?
Mr. SENATOR. Yes; I went to his house. I told Jim and he said, "I heard already. I saw it on TV."
Mr. HUBERT. He was already at his house, you said?
Mr. SENATOR. Yes; he was home already.
Mr. HUBERT. How long after your phone call to him do you suppose you got to his house?
Mr. SENATOR. Well, he lived quite a ways. I would probably say it was about a 20-minute ride.
Mr. HUBERT. You left the Eatwell just as soon as the girl announced that the man who had shot Oswald was Jack Ruby?
Mr. SENATOR. I finished my coffee. I had about a half a cup left, something like that.
Mr. HUBERT. You did not attempt to call Martin again?
Mr. SENATOR. No; I didn't call him. I just went direct. I figured if he wasn't home I'd wait for him.
Senator’s testimony shows something different from what the WC wrote in its Report. This testimony clearly shows that Senator called Martin BEFORE he was told that his roommate Ruby had shot LHO. Why would Senator be calling an attorney upon hearing that LHO had been shot, but before he was told that the attacker had been Ruby? Based on what the WC has told us there is no reason.
There is only a reason if we accept the idea that Senator already knew that Ruby was going to shoot LHO. And he did according to Ruby’s testimony.
Mr. SPECTER. Well, the point we got to was the question of getting the substantive information out before going on with the test. Did you tell anyone that you intended to shoot Oswald?
Mr. HERNDON. You mean--before?
Mr. SPECTER. Well, I don't know if we're going to get an answer to it or not.
Mr. FOWLER. Jack, now the question that is being directed to you at this time---well, go right ahead.
Mr. RUBY. Yes; Sunday morning.
Mr. SPECTER. And whom did you tell?
Mr. RUBY. George Senator.
Mr. SPECTER. And where were you at the time you discussed it with him?
Mr. RUBY. In my apartment.
Mr. SPECTER. And state in as precise words as you can remember, just what you said to him and he said to you at that time?
Mr. RUBY. Well, he didn't say anything--the funny part--he was reading the paper and I doubt if he even recalled me saying it. I have to elaborate on it, but I was so carried away emotionally that I said--I don't know how I said it---I didn't say it in any vulgar manner---I said, "If something happened to this person, that then Mrs. Kennedy won't have to come back for the trial." That's all I said. Now, would you mind asking me on that particular point? That happened Sunday morning. That's the only time any thought ever came to my mind, because that morning I read some articles in the newspaper that she would have to come back to trial.
Mr. SPECTER. Did you ever say to anybody, "I am going to shoot Oswald," or anything to the effect that, "I am going to shoot or kill him"?
Mr. RUBY. No; I just made the statement--that's the only thing I said.
Mr. SPECTER. That statement you made to George Senator, that's the only thing that's the closest you came to saying it?
Mr. RUBY. That Sunday morning before I left my apartment.
Notice how Arlen Specter initially asked if he told anyone that he intended to shoot LHO and Ruby said yes, and then named George Senator. Then the game began as Ruby said that he just made “a comment” about saving Jacqueline Kennedy a trip back to Texas for a trial. Specter goes along with this and again asks if he told anyone that he planned on shooting LHO and this time Ruby says no as he only made a statement Sunday morning.
No matter what they said Senator’s actions show us the truth. There was no reason to call Martin upon hearing that LHO had been shot unless you thought or knew that Ruby had done the shooting. There is only one reason why he would think this too – because Ruby had told him that he planned on doing this.
The question is, why didn’t the WC report this truth to us? Instead they wrote this about Senator’s actions.
Quote on
The Commission has concluded, on the basis of its investigation into the Senator’s background, activities, and reaction to the shooting, that Senator did not aid or conspire with Jack Ruby in the killing of Oswald. (WCR, p. 372)
Quote off
Senator’s actions show that he had foreknowledge of LHO’s shooting and he did not warn the police, therefore, by definition he was a conspirator, and thus, he was guilty. Further proof of his guilt comes in the form of Tom Howard, Bill Hunter and Jim Koethe. All three attended a meeting with Senator on the evening of November 24, 1963, and all three would be dead within six months’ time. Other than learning something they shouldn’t have, how do we explain this?
The HSCA wrote this about this issue regarding Senator.
Quote on
(1322) The primary area of questioning of Senator by the FBI, Secret Service, Warren Commission and counsel during Ruby's trial concerned the sequence of events between November 22, 1963 and November 24 1963. Senator was not consistent in his answers. In his first statements, made on November 24, Senator was extremely vague regarding the events of the 2 previous days. (Ibid.)
Quote off
Why was he allowed to be vague? Any witness that didn’t agree with the official narrative sure wasn’t allowed to be. He was in a key position to hear and see things regarding Ruby’s actions leading up to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy (JFK) and his shooting of LHO. Why wasn’t he grilled until this was conveyed in a clear fashion? Remember, three other men heard what he heard and wound up dead. Remember also that he was a regular at the Eat Well restaurant and that is where witness Helen Markham worked.
Sadly, the WC and HSCA treated Senator as an ancillary type of witness instead of the key witness he really was. Was this on purpose or were they just short on time and resources? What do you think?