Wednesday, March 8, 2017

Wait a second. Wait a doggone second. We know this frame wasn't taken at the time of Oswald's arrival at the PD because he didn't have his shirt on like that at that time, and he wasn't put in any small interrogation room; he was put in Fritz' office.


Remember that he entered the building shackled with his hands behind his back, and that wasn't altered until after Fritz arrived. From Bookhout's testimony:

Mr. BOOKHOUT - No, he didn't complain about the interview. He made a complaint or two, as I recall, that one of the interviews that has been reported, in fact, I believe it was in this first interview he complained about his hands being handcuffed behind his back, and asked Captain Fritz to remove the handcuffs. Captain Fritz had one of his officers uncuff his hands from behind his back and recuff them in front and asked him if that was more satisfactory and he stated that it was. 

So, when was this taken? And was it ever taken? All of the interrogations were conducted in Fritz' office. After the first one, the pattern stuck, and that is where they happened. He was never interrogated in a small interrogation room. And it's understandable because there were two many people involved. They wouldn't have fit, and there wouldn't have been enough oxygen for them. So, did this ever happen? Let's look at it closely.

 Be aware that I added a little bit of light to that, just so that we could get a better look. Notice that the t-shirt doesn't look like a t-shirt but rather like a pullover sport shirt with a couple buttons. That's the impression I get.  But, there is no making sense of it because he didn't wear such a shirt. And, what about his outer shirt? It doesn't look right either. It has none of the form that we see in other images. 

Even though it's dark, we should still see that same form faintly, but we don't. 

And look at his hair; it was never high and bushy like that. And look at his neck; it was never as thick as that.  

This is one massive neck:

So, with so much wrong with this image, I have to wonder if there is anything real about it. Is the whole thing concocted? But wait: We know that "Lee" the other Oswald had a massive, tubular neck. So was this him? Did they create this image using him at another time? I am not claiming to know that; I am just thinking out loud. Again: Oswald was not placed in a small interrogation room; he was placed in Fritz' office.

Mr. STERN - Were you present when Oswald was brought in? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Yes. 
Mr. STERN - Can you describe his physical condition? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - I can recall one of the officers that brought him in was Paul Bentley. He is a polygraph operator in the identification division of the Dallas Police Department, and Bentley was limping, and Oswald had one eye that was swollen and a scratch mark on his forehead. 
Mr. STERN - Did you observe any other bruises? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - None. 
Mr. STERN - Was he handcuffed? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Yes. 
Mr. STERN - Was he walking by himself, or being held by police officers? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - To my recollection there was an officer on each side of him that had a hold of his arms. 
Mr. STERN - Was he struggling? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - No; just walking in a normal fashion. 

Note that I was right, that Bookhout was there when Oswald was brought in. So, they probably did things to obscure him in the film, since we don't see him. Was Bookhout's presence the reason they did all that splicing of disparate clips? I suspect so.  

Mr. STERN - Then what occurred, that you observed? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - I believe he was taken directly into Captain Fritz' office, and the interview started at that time with Captain Fritz, and two homicide officers. 

Notice the absence of any mention of putting Oswald into a small interrogation room.

Mr. STERN - Were you present? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - I was not in the office at that time. I called our office, advised them he had been brought in, and that the interview was starting and shortly thereafter Mr. Shanklin, our SAC called back and said the Bureau wanted the agents present in the interview and that meant Hosty, James P. Hosty, and I were,to sit in on the interview. I was to also be present with Hosty. So, at that time, we asked Captain Fritz to sit in on the interview, and that was approximately 3:15 p.m. 
Mr. STERN - How long had the interview gone on before you were present? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Very shortly. I would give a rough estimate of not more than 5 to 10 minutes at the most. 

Who knows how much of the above is true. Bookhout may have been spewing crap here. It may have been all worked out in advance. 

Mr. STERN - How long did that first interview last? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - A little under an hour. 
Mr. STERN - Was it interrupted at any point, if you remember? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Well, what I am thinking, we have got several interviews here. I know from time to time I can't recall whether it was this interview, or subsequent interviews Captain Fritz would have to leave the office for a second or two. By "office," I mean the immediate office that the interview was being conducted in, but still within the homicide and robbery bureau. 
Mr. STERN - Did the interviewing continue when he was out of the room, or did you wait for his return? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - No; it would continue. 
Mr. STERN - By whom was the interview conducted? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Primarily it was conducted by Captain Fritz and then before he would leave from one point to another he would ask if there was anything we wanted to ask Oswald particularly on that point. 
Mr. STERN - By "we," you mean Agent Hosty and yourself? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Right. 

This is evasive and elusive. As far as I know, Hosty only attended the first interview. Fritz wrote down the attendees each time, and we only see Hosty's name the one time, the first time. And Hosty only made the one report for the first interrogation. There is no evidence that Hosty attended any other.

Mr. STERN - What was Oswald's demeanor in the course of this interview? Did he seem in control of himself, excited, or calm? Can you describe his conduct? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - He was very arrogant and argumentative.  
Mr. STERN - Is this as to you and Hosty, or also to Captain Fritz? Did he differentiate in his conduct between Captain Fritz and the two of you? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - No; that would apply to everyone present. 
Mr. STERN - Did he answer all questions put to him or did he refuse to answer the questions? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - No; there would be certain questions that he refused to comment about. 
Mr. STERN - What sort of question would he refuse to answer? Was there any pattern to his refusing? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Well, now, I am not certain whether this would apply then to this particular interview, the first interview or not, in answering this, but I recall specifically one of the interviews asking him about the Selective Service card which he had in the name of Hidell, and he admitted that he was carrying the card, but that he would not admit that he wrote the signature of Hidell on the card, and at that point stated that he refused to discuss the matter further. I think generally you might say anytime that you asked a question that would be pertinent to the investigation, that would be the type of question he would refuse to discuss.

Again, we have no way of confirming this, and Bookhout may have been making sausage here. How sweet it is when you are recalling a conversation with a dead guy who can't make a peep.

Mr. STERN - Would you say he had a pretty good idea of what might be incriminating and what not incriminating? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Well, I think that would call for an opinion, and I can only report the facts to you, and based on the example of the type of questions that I had commented on that he refused to answer, you will have to draw your own conclusion on that. 
Mr. STERN - Fine. I am just trying to get at whether he seemed in command of himself and alert, and whether he handled himself responsibly from his own viewpoint, but if you don't want to venture an opinion, that's fine.
When you first joined the interview, did you advise him that you were an agent of the FBI, and did you say anything about warning him that evidence--that anything he said might be used? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Yes; that was done by Agent Hosty. 
Mr. STERN - Did he, at that point, or later say anything specifically regarding the FBI? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Yes. 
Mr. STERN - Tell us what that was. 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - He accused the FBI of, generally, unfair tactics in interviewing his wife on some previous occasion. 
Mr. STERN - Was this directed specifically at either you or Hosty, or to the general---- 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - It was directed against Hosty. 
Mr. STERN - Oswald did not indicate that he knew Hosty himself, did he? 

Again, we just don't know about this. They certainly would not have wanted to admit it if Oswald knew Hosty. He had Hosty's contact information in his address book. 
Mr. STERN - But, there was a complaint about an interview, or interrogation of Marina Oswald? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Right. 
Mr. STERN - Did he say anything about FBI interviews of him that had occurred in the past, any complaint about those interviews? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - I don't know that that would be in this particular interview, but in one of the interviews which has been reported he stated that he had been interviewed at Fort Worth, Tex., by agents upon his return to the United States from Russia, and he felt that they had used unfair means of interviewing him, or something. Those are not his exact words, but that is the impression he conveyed. 
Mr. STERN - Unfair in what respect? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - I don't know. 
Mr. STERN - Did he say? 
Mr. STERN - Tell us the nature of his complaint. 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - I think he probably used the expression, "Unfair tactics," or something in their interviews. 

Notice how evasive and non-specific Bookhout was above.

Mr. STERN - I see. Did he indicate that he felt that the current interview was unfair in any way? Did he complain about that? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - No, he didn't complain about the interview. He made a complaint or two, as I recall, that one of the interviews that has been reported, in fact, I believe it was in this first interview he complained about his hands being handcuffed behind his back, and asked Captain Fritz to remove the handcuffs. Captain Fritz had one of his officers uncuff his hands from behind his back and recuff them in front and asked him if that was more satisfactory and he stated that it was. 

Again, I want to highlight that because of its relevance to that other image. 

Mr. STERN - Any other aspect of his treatment that he complained of? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - I recall one of the interviews that he complained about the lineup that he was in, that he wasn't allowed to wear a jacket similar to jackets worn by others in the lineup. 
Mr. STERN - Did this occur at the lineup or subsequently? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - This was in one of the interviews in Captain Fritz' office. 
Mr. STERN - Referring to a lineup that had---- 
Mr. BOOKHOUT ---previously been held. 
Mr. STERN - During the first interview was he asked whether he had ever been in Mexico, and if so, by whom? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Yes; I recall Hosty asking him if He had ever been in Mexico. 
Mr. STERN - What did he say? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - He said he had not. I believe he mentioned he had been in Tijuana, Mexico, I believe, but I believe the question was whether he had ever been in Mexico City. 

Again, highly important; Oswald denied going to Mexico City. Now why would he lie? He wasn't being accused of committing a crime in Mexico City, and he wasn't inclined to hide his interest in Russia and Cuba. 

Mr. STERN - Was he asked about an organization called the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, and if so, by whom? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Yes, he was asked if he belonged to that. I don't recall specifically who raised the question. 
Mr. STERN - What did he say? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - He said he was a member of it, and was secretary of the New Orleans branch. I believe he said the headquarters was in New York City. 
Mr. STERN - Was there much discussion of this, or just the identification? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Well, now, that is another instance where he balked on answering a question. He was asked who the officers were, and at that point he said he refused to discuss the matter further. 
Mr. STERN - Was he asked his residence address in Dallas and did he give it? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Yes; he furnished the address of 1026 North Beckley. 
Mr. STERN - Did he say that he was living there under another name, or was another name and particularly the name O. H. Lee mentioned at all in this connection? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - He was asked why he was using the name Lee at this address, and he attempted to pass it off by stating that the landlord was an old lady, and his first name was Lee and she just had gotten it in her head that he was Mr. Lee. He never did explain about the initials O. H. 

Once again, I am inclined to believe Oswald about that.

Mr. STERN - Was he asked whether he had shot the President, or Officer Tippit? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Yes; he was asked that, and denied shooting either one of them, or knowing anything about it. 

Bingo. Bingo. Bingo. 

Mr. STERN - Was he asked whether he was carrying a pistol at the time he was in the Texas Theatre? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Yes; that was brought up. He admitted that he was carrying a pistol at the time he was arrested. He claimed that he had bought this some time ago in Fort Worth. 
Mr. STERN - He said he had gotten it in Fort Worth? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - That is my recollection, and there again, in trying to follow through on that line of thought, he refused to answer any further questions as to whereabouts in Fort Worth he had bought it. 
Mr. STERN - Did he talk about his arrest and his resistance of arrest at the Texas Theatre? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - He admitted fighting with the officer at the time of the arrest, but I don't recall any explanation as to why he was doing it. 
Mr. STERN - Did he admit that he might have been wrong in doing that, or say anything to that effect? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Seemed to me like he made the comment that the only thing he was guilty of, or the only thing he could be charged with would be the carrying of a concealed weapon, and of resisting the arrest.

God, they should have recorded that interview. What exactly did Oswald say about that? It's not like we can believe Bookhout. Why would Oswald admit to resisting arrest when we know very well that at the theater he exclaimed repeatedly that he was NOT resisting arrest? 

Mr. STERN - When he was asked about involvement in the assassination of President Kennedy, or the shooting of Officer Tippit, how would you describe his denials? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Well, I don't know exactly how to describe it, but as I recall, he spoke very loudly. In other words, he was--he gave an emphatic denial, that is about all I can recall on it. 
Mr. STERN - I believe that in the report you filed on this first interview, you or Agent Hosty, who joined in the report with you, used the adverb "frantically" to describe his denial of an involvement. Does that refresh your recollection as to that? Would you use that word now, or was that your word? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - No; that was written by Hosty, and that would be his expression of describing it. 
Mr. STERN - Do you think "emphatically," is perhaps the more descriptive word now? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Well, that would be the way I would describe it. As I said, he spoke---- 
Mr. STERN - I am not trying to put words into your mouth. 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - He spoke loudly. 
Mr. STERN - I am most interested in getting the tone of this interrogation and his state, the way he conducted himself, and that is why I ask this question, and there is something of a difference between saying a man is acting frantically as opposed to his acting emphatically. 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Well, I suppose the word, "frantically," would probably describe it. In other words, I said that he spoke loudly. There just wasn't a normal type of denial. He was--it was more than that. That is the reason I say that probably "frantically," might be a descriptive word. 
Mr. STERN - Did that occur only in connection with questions about whether he had shot the President, or was the general tone of this interrogation, as far as he was concerned, at that level? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - No; he wouldn't use the same expression of speech in answering all questions. He would have certain kinds there, and certain types of questions that he would apparently have stronger feelings on.

Wow. So, Bookhout admitted that Oswald denied murdering anyone "loudly" "emphatically" and "frantically". Those are three powerful adverbs. Way to go, Bookhout. I assume he was being truthful there.

Mr. STERN - Do you recall at any time his pounding on the desk, or making any other physical gestures of that kind? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - I don't recall him pounding on the desk; no, sir. 
Mr. STERN - Now, this interview, as I understand, took approximately an hour? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - That's correct. 
Mr. STERN - According to this report, you and Agent Hosty entered the interviewing around about 3:15 p.m., and it ended at 4:05. 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - That would be correct. 

We should doubt whether Hosty and Bookhout missed any of the interview because 3:15 is the time that Fritz wrote down, and he listed the names of Bookhout and Hosty before he wrote anything else. 

Mr. STERN - Were these times that you or Hosty would have recorded at that moment in the ordinary course of your participation? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - That's correct. There was no log made of it, as such, but those were the times recorded for that particular interview. 
Mr. STERN - Your normal practice is to get times down pretty accurately in matter of this---- 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - Try to. 
Mr. STERN - And did you make the record of these times, or did Agent Hosty? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - I Can say that I did. Whether he did or not, I don't know. 
Mr. STERN - Incidentally, normally, do you preserve those notes or destroy them when you make a formal report? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - They will be, normally, destroyed at the time you make your--what we refer to as an interview report. 
Mr. STERN - And in this case, did you destroy your notes? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - That's correct. 
Mr. STERN - So, you have no notes respecting this whole matter? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - No, other than the reported interviewing report. 
Mr. STERN - Yes; when the first interview was concluded, it was, as I understand it, to take Oswald before a lineup? 
Mr. BOOKHOUT - That's correct. 

So, getting back to this image:

It could not have been taken BEFORE the first interview. And there is no basis to assume that it was taken AFTER the first interview because Oswald was NEVER put in a small interrogation room. So, odds are great that it is a completely bogus image. 

No comments:

Post a Comment

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