Then, Bart Kamp, of Dealey Plaza UK, claimed to go to the National Archives asking for an image of James Bookhout, and they gave him this image, designating the pipe smoker as Bookhout.
I maintain that Pipe Man wasn't there at all, that he was pasted into the picture. Notice that his reflection is not showing in the glass, unlike the other two men, standing and seated. The weirdness of his hair, his right hand, and his glasses also make the image of him suspect. And the behavioral disconnection to the scene is glaring. I think he was added.
I wrote to the National Archives: their director, their lawyer, their top archivist, and others, pointing out that this image is bogus, that the man with the pipe is not engaged with anyone in the picture or with the situation of the picture. Will Fritz is talking to officers, and notice that everyone is paying rapt attention, even the man seated at the desk with a phone at his ear. Yet, we are supposed to believe that James Bookhout was fiddling with a pipe at a time like that? It was November 22, 1963!
I have heard back from the National Archives, the Director of the Special Access and FOIA Program, Rebecca Calgano. They passed it on to her. She said that the National Archives "misidentified" (her word) the pipe smoker as James Bookhout. She said that that photo was part of a set that was a gift from Western New England College in 1999, and it was done through the auspices of the ARRB. She said that that picture did not come with a caption, and that the "finding aid" contains no descriptor. No individuals are identified on the image or in the finding aid. She does not know how or why the pipe smoker was identified as James Bookhout, but the National Archives disavows that claim.
I have put a call to Dennis Moricet. He is the one who claimed that Bart Kamp went to the National Archives and was given that picture and told that it was James Bookhout. Now, he knows better. I demanded that he stop saying that it's James Bookhout and to remove the image from the Find-a-Grave page for James Bookhout, since he is the one who submitted it.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.