Wednesday, October 26, 2016

This is a further analysis of Professor James Norwood's substance-less review by our friend, XXX.

Norwood also makes a cheeky reference to the witness evidence, citing the fact that some Dallas cops ID-ed Jack Ruby, but police complicity is part of our theory. Given that we were proffering an FBI agent as the shooter, it is disappointing that the professor did not discern the law enforcement complicity element of the accusation.

(RC: That's why I asked the absentminded professor if he knew of any reporters who claimed to recognize Ruby in the garage.)

Other cops would have seen Ruby post-arrest.

Most of the reporters were clamoring to get the killer's name out of Sergeant Patrick Dean, who would not tell them. 

He also cites James Turner of WBAP-TV who claimed to have seen Ruby on the Main Street ramp, but he also said that he was 'assigned after the assassination to NBC', Fred Rheinstein's suspicious operation to cover the Oswald transfer 'live'.

Turner's testimony shows that he did not know Ruby before this and he indicates a heavier man than Ruby:

(RC: The testimony that follows is interesting, but let me point out first that Jack Ruby definitely went there. We see him there soon afterwards, so somehow, he had to make his way there. This is the first image of him post-fracas.

The shooter went through his fracas with his jacket on, so for his shirt to get torn open seems rather far-fetched.)

Mr. TURNER. I saw Mr. Ruby coming in.
Mr. HUBERT. Now, had you ever seen him before?
Mr. TURNER. No, sir; I certainly hadn't. Let me mark "10" as the point where I actually saw Mr. Ruby.
Mr. HUBERT. Now, in order to get it right, would you look at the mockup first, and then place it.
Mr. TURNER. I was right here [indicating], and he was somewhere in this locality when--it is beyond the second column.
Mr. HUBERT. Will you mark a line, and mark it "A" and "B" straight across at the beginning on the right?
Mr. TURNER. All right.
Mr. HUBERT. Now, you have marked a line, having compared it with the mockup, and you have marked it "A-B".
Mr. TURNER. That is the beginning of the----
Mr. HUBERT. Of the rise?
Mr. TURNER. That's right. I might be a little off there.
Mr. HUBERT. Now you say you saw Jack Ruby. You had not known him to be Jack Ruby at that time?
Mr. TURNER. No; what set him off from other men was the hat he was wearing.

Mr. HUBERT. What sort of hat was it?
Mr. TURNER. I don't know the technical name. Could you help me out? It was a felt hat, had a pretty large brim on it, and it was a--round on top, which you seldom see.
Mr. HUBERT. Snap brim?
Mr. TURNER. No; it wasn't snap brim. It was just a wide brim, and like you say, I didn't go that far.
Mr. HUBERT. Do you know what color it was?
Mr. TURNER. It seemed to be grey.

Mr. HUBERT. Could you describe any other clothing?
Mr. TURNER. Yes; he was, to my knowledge he was dressed in an overcoat, or long--it could have been a suit coat, but I didn't notice.
Mr. HUBERT. Did you have a fair look at his face?
Mr. TURNER. At an angle that I do not recognize him now. He seemed to be much heavier then than when I saw him in the Ruby trial.

Mr. TURNER. No, sir; I did not. I did not come in contact with the man until he was in the position--he was nearly in the center of it when I came in contact, and the man--the hat was the most obvious facial--I mean just glancing at a man you take something that you can pick a man out by and remember his name by it. That is the way I remember people is something they ordinarily wear, and he had the hat on, but I thought he was a--much larger than--by just glancing at him.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.