Tuesday, October 10, 2017

Interesting and very astute analysis by Amy Joyce:

Some of the reports aren't clear about what they actually saw, so it can be difficult to ascertain who of the DPD were in it and knew about it beforehand.  The following said specifically that they saw Ruby shoot Oswald or if just afterward they helped bring Ruby to the jail office.  There are more than I thought.  

1) Archer, Don Ray
2) Beaty, Buford*
3) Combest  
4) Dean*
5) Dhority
6) Graves,  L C
7) Harrison, W. J. 
8) Jones, O. A.* 
9) Leavelle, James R.
10) Lowery, R. L.  
11) McCoy, Ben C.
12) Montgomery, Leslie D
13) Ramsey, James K

Those with an * didn't say they actually saw Ruby do the shooting, however they did say they saw him during the scuffle or being brought into the jail office. Claiming that they actually saw Ruby at the time indicates they were lying, because he couldn't have been seen if his head was covered.   Of those three I think it's possible that only Beaty didn't know beforehand.  His report and interview were inconsistent and only in the latter did he claim to see Ruby.

Those not on that list but that I think were in on it are:

Batchelor
Fritz
Miller

I'm suspicious of several from the press for different reasons, but not so much cameramen (film) or assistants (lighting and sound) because like some others, their position would have kept them from seeing anything damning.  Anything they have accidentally seen could get corrected by a firm reminder or a push by other designated witnesses.  

I'm more concerned with those in charge of the news film (for example, Eddie Barker - even though he wasn't on site).  Like photographers (Jackson, Beers, Johnston, Smith, and Sassa), they would have been very protective of their work and their professional right to keep and publish it.  I'm unfamiliar with CIA tactics but read once how they have a lot of agents that also hold positions in the press (UPI specifically). That's smart and makes sense, but I know nothing specific about anyone particular. 

I mentioned this in the forum and it's something I think about often.  How did all but one photographer (supposedly Beers) take just 1-2 photos during that entire gig?  It seems incredulous to me.  They had been waiting around for hours (understandable in itself) but each only got ONE snapshot during the incident and the following melee!  That is not believable.  Their results had to have been controlled by other powers.

I used to not doubt them but now I think that Beers and Jackson were at least designated witnesses, as was a couple of the reporters.  The former had already been privy to aspects of JFK's assassination: Jackson out of film at the opportune moment, but able to witness a rifle protruding out of the 6th floor TSBD window; and Beers' presence to photograph both the Tippit scene as well as scene of the sniper's nest.  That they were fortunate to also be present at Oswald's murder and snap two amazing photographs (but no others) is too coincidental.  Unfortunately, Bob Jackson is either guilty of photo tampering or some kind of conspiracy (perhaps both - if he indeed was the one that snapped the photo).  It had to have been taken during re-takes of a stage scene, precisely when the newsreel was filmed. The photo matches the other screenshot too well, and that couldn't have been a bi-product of the film.  There's no chance! Thoughts or disagreements?

Reporters:

Pelou just freaked me out in that hallway scene from Gary Mack's documentary - I literally got shivers seeing his scowl!  He also repeatedly claim to see the gun flash, which I don't think even occurred (not even a blank, or one of the films would have caught the flash or the smoke).  In my previous email I mentioned that he couldn't have seen a flash on Oswald's sweater from his position, and I think that is why it wasn't mentioned in his police interview and he didn't offer it in testimony.  Pelou also pointed out where the shooter came from - a prearranged position, even though I don't think that's where he actually came from.  I mentioned before that there were two officer's being right behind Harrison who insisted the shooter didn't come from there, so Ruby's cartoon lookalike (as seen in the NBC footage) must have been falsified.  It obviously looks fake and Arnett was very confused when the WC showed him pictures, because it was himself actually standing behind Harrison.  I'm getting off topic a bit, so I'll get back to it.

Pappas is questionable because he didn't claim to see Ruby or know specifics of the incident.  However, he was close and could have seen - so I doubt those collaborating would have risked letting just anyone stand there (or maybe because the taller Graves' was in front of him they figured Pappas wouldn't have been able to see?).  Pettit is also a question mark.  He wasn't interviewed by police, didn't offer testimony, and he seemed clueless during the aftermath when questioning the witnesses.  Then again he was in the Newsreel but can't be seen in Jackson. Thoughts on him?  

I listened to an hour long q@a audio piece with Bob Huffaker and he was a piece of work.  Neither modest or humble, he damned conspiracy believers and investigators. Jim Leavelle and he were good friends and remained so in the years to come. Very loyal to the story Perhaps that's a link that will become revealing Perhaps I was disappointed because he seemed so cute and innocent in the films

I count a minimum of 20 present that was likely in on it or knew an incident was going to occur.  It's rather high and stretches among numerous groups but at the same time, many of these were key players earlier in the weekend.  Now that I've learned of Boyd and Sims (names?) and their affiliation with LB, there's another two that had to be involved in the garage shooting in some capacity.  Could they have been babysitting Ruby?  

I carried on I know, but a lot was to get it straightened out in my own mind and take note of it.  I'm really curious of what you both think.

AJ

No comments:

Post a Comment

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