GET YOUR AUTOGRAPHED ME & LEE FOR THE 50TH ANNIVERSARY!

ME & LEE- AUTOGRAPHED
BUY ME & LEE IN MANY WAYS!
Shipping Included.MANY THANKS!

DAVID FERRIE: MAFIA PILOT The premiere book about the Kennedy assassination suspect

DAVID FERRIE: MAFIA PILOT PAPERBACK, AUTOGRAPHED
Showing posts with label OSWALD. Show all posts
Showing posts with label OSWALD. Show all posts

Sunday, January 6, 2013

Lee Harvey Oswald Was an American Hero!

Lee Harvey Oswald was a HERO.
Hard to believe, if you look at the government versions of things.
After all, he gave a "Communist salute" and carried a smirk on the day kennedy died.
That's what the media wants you to believe.
In fact, I've seen "Oswald smirks" showing up that aren't even smiles, but it's being labeled that way!
Look at this, for example:
At http://www.flickr.com/photos/monado/5345583186/?reg=1&src=comment, you will see an arrest photo of Lee Harvey Oswald that was taken August 9, 1963, more than three months before the Kennedy assassination.  Lee Oswald isn't smirking in this photo, but that not how it's captioned.

"Assassin's smirk: Lee Harvey Oswald

Lee Harvey Oswald assassinated President John Kennedy in 1963 and looked very smug about it in every picture afterwards."
Oh, really?
The so-called "smirk" has been used as just one of a host of ways to influence public opinion about Oswald from the very first photos that reached the newspapers.  
Back then, TV films couldn't be retouched quickly, so we find a definite contrast between the retouched photos used to besmirch Oswald in the newspapers and those that were taken at the same time by TV cameras, or by independent photographers.
Note that you'll see no "Oswald smirks" in live camera footage shown on TV.
However, we the people could look again and again at photos in the newspapers, and there, Lee Oswald was presented as an evil man gloating over the murder of the president.


Note that lines were drawn upward at the ends of Oswald's mouth,
covering up the downturn of his mouth.















This photo is shown constantly to the people, complete with a retouched "smirk" guaranteed to create dislike for Oswald.



And here is another one: 


Now look at a photo of Lee Oswald that flooded the newspapers, when he has been asked by a reporter if he is in handcuffs. 
(Oswald is in pain from his recent beating by the police, which included their slamming his head violently against the police car as they thrust him inside the vehicle, causing the large cut on his forehead. Both his hands are in fists, as he deals with his pain.)
 When Oswald quickly raised his handcuffed wrists to show that he is indeed handcuffed --the only one brought into the police station who was manacled-- photographers snapped the photo.  Oswald's quick gesture (as can be seen on film) was immediately called a "Communist salute" in the newspapers, and the 'smirk' was added at the same time, through retouching, as can be seen here:.

Though Lee's mouth can be seen downturned,  shading upward created the effect of a smirk. A drop of what may be white-out appears in the blow-up of the retouched photo above. Contrast that photo with the rare one below, which was not promoted in the newspapers and which was not retouched. It was taken the same moment, from a different camera.  But there is no trace of a smirk in this photo:
There is no trace of a smirk in this rare photo that did not reach the nation's newspapers.



HERE IS WHAT A "COMMUNIST SALUTE" LOOKS LIKE. 

BUT HERE IS WHAT LEE OSWALD ACTUALLY DID THAT MOMENT-- GO TO 4:10 -- AND SEE FOR YOURSELF THAT LEE JUST RAISED HIS HANDCUFFS A MOMENT--THAT WAS ALL--AS HE WAS BEING WHISKED THROUGH THE HALLWAY:




At 4:10 -4:11 There was no "Communist salute."  Those who tell you that it was, or that they are "not sure" should not to be trusted in other statements they make about Oswald. They haven't done their homework, or they are perpetrating the lie on purpose.
When Jesse Ventura met me, recently, at the Drake Hotel in Chicago, he and I discussed, among other things, Lee's heroic refusal to say, "I was hired by the CIA!" In the YouTube video below, Marrs explains that Lee carried some very interesting items with him the day he was arrested.  One was a list of all the schools he had attended, and a list of all the Marine bases he had served at.  Lee also had a boxtop in his pocket. Just the kind of information  one would give to a contact whom you'd never seen, to prove who you were.  For Lee didn't stay nailed to a seat in the Texas theater where he was arrested.  In the fine book about the Kennedy assassination, JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters, author James Douglass describes how Lee moved from seat to seat seeking someone-- not the actions of someone who had just shot the President and would not want to draw attention to himself.
   
In the video clip below, you can see that Lee Oswald has no trace of a smirk on his face.  Look at him and listen to him. Then listen to what Jim Marrs has to say about who the REAL LEE OSWALD was:



I spent the end of the year in America, for the first time since 2007, on a tour dedicated to telling the people the truth about Lee Oswald. 


As the 50th anniversary of the Kennedy assassination approaches, I am challenging those who know that Lee Oswald was innocent to join those who know that Lee Oswald actually tried to save Kennedy's life, at the ROSE HILL CEMETERY OUTSIDE DALLAS, where Lee is buried.  We will be taking photos there on November 22, 2013, of the flowers placed on Lee's grave.



Learn the full truth about Lee Harvey Oswald in ME & LEE: HOW I CAME TO KNOW, LOVE AND LOSE LEE HARVEY OSWALD. You can purchase an autographed copy by special arrangement by donating $50 for the book, which includes the cost of shipping and handling from Europe, at this website.  Thank you for your interest and support!



JFK Researcher Phil Singer, Judyth Vary Baker (author of ME & LEE), and Gov. Jesse Ventura met in Chicago recently

Tuesday, September 27, 2011

The Framing of Lee Harvey Oswald on the Internet: an Introduction

by Judyth Vary Baker

A timeline (“Interactive Timeline of the Life of Lee Harvey Oswald”) written by Tracy Parnell, and sponsored by John McAdams, the Warren Commission apologist, asserts “facts” about Oswald that are unproven or have been disproven. In addition, “facts” are presented as determined by the Warren Commission as if they are true and proven when they are merely speculative. For example, the timeline asserts as “fact” that Oswald shot at General Walker. Though Lee Oswald never told the author anything about the Walker incident itself, as to his participation, he did tell me that he feared for his safety due to the incident, when he was ordered to pass out pro-Castro flyers soon after the incident took place. His undated note to Marina about his possible arrest or being killed is supposed to be ‘evidence’ that he participated in the Walker shooting incident, but Lee told me he had advised Marina on what to do if he should be arrested or killed because he feared what Dallas police might do to him by creating a pro-Castro scene only five days after the Walker incident.the kennedy assassination,JFK,Kennedy,oswald

The undated note for Marina tells her how to get help, etc. if Lee happened to get arrested or killed in Dallas (Lee told this writer that he feared being arrested or shot by riled-up Police after the Walker incident occurred). Lee was ordered to conduct a pro-Castro demonstration on the streets of Dallas five days after the Walker incident. This event is on record:




The note…(undated) used to damn Oswald.




















In the chronology given to me by Mary Ferrell, a date has been falsely ascribed to this note because Marina said she got it before Oswald shot at Walker, even though she also said she was horrified to learn of the event after it happened:

In his April 10 note to Marina, Oswald says, "...the money from work will probably be coming. The money will be

sent to our post office box." (WC Vol 16, p. 1)


This is a very important statement. When did Lee Oswald get his very last check from Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall? Its date, and the date it was cashed, can tell us a lot about when the note itself was actually written.


And here –shockingly –or maybe not, since this is often the case concerning evidence and Oswald--we find that the check has been tampered with, as explained by author-researcher Harrison E. Livingstone on p. 12 in his book

The Radical Right and the Murder of John F. Kennedy: Stunning Evidence

in the Assassination of the President (Trafford, 2004):


“Oswald’s last check at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall, #5811, issued on April 10,

1963, shows possible tampering…there are two “paid” stamps on the face,

One dated April 12, and one dated March, 1963…”













(photoshot from computer screen)


Oswald’s last check was stamped as cashed on April 12 AND in March. That’s not possible, so we can’t conclude that Oswald’s signature is on the check or that check #5811 was ever issued to Oswald. What if Oswald had been issued a check at a later date?

If Oswald’s check was actually cashed after April 15, when Oswald made the pro-Castro demonstration, it might have noticed that the note actually referred to the dangers Oswald feared due to being ordered to put on the Pro-Castro demonstration so close to the Walker incident. That would wipe out the value of the “Walker note.” As it is, two stamps are on this “Oswald check”-- once for March (!) and once for April:















Note two “cashed” stamps (left & center)


Note “April 12” stamp—meaning the check was cashed April 12, as well as a stamp for March 1? on Oswald’s so-called April 10 paycheck. Somebody boo-boo’d.


The HSCA used Marina’s testimony to conclude Oswald shot at Walker, largely based on the undated note:

http://www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/pdf/HSCA_Report_1A_LHO.pdf (p 61)

“This undated note, although it did not mention General Walker, clearly indicated that Oswald was about to attempt an act during the course of which he

might be killed or taken into custody.” But there’s the report of Oswald’s pro-Castro demonstration that he told me he faithfully performed, despite danger to himself, only 5 days after Walker was shot at, which was ignored:

April 15, 1963 (Monday) - Oswald passes out Fair Play for Cuba Committee literature on Main Street in Dallas. Oswald had a 'Viva Castro' sign around his neck. The police report (5/15/64) says this happened in late spring or early summer at Main and Ervay in front of H. L. Green store entrance. (WC Vol 22, p. 796; WC 23, p. 477; WC Vol 25, p. 681; Dallas Times Herald, 12/9/63; Life, 2/21/64, p. 76) “ (Ref: Ferrell Chronology)

These revelations are ignored by the Oswald-did-it folks, even though Lee’s note was not dated and Marina’s information cannot be relied upon for accuracy concerning the Walker incident. For example, Marina claimed Lee hid the rifle under his raincoat as he walked (one version) or rode (another version) a bus to Walker’s house—though Lee never did own a raincoat. She said he buried the rifle (one version) or hid the rifle in bushes (another version) before (in one version) and after using it.

This writer, a witness who knew Oswald in New Orleans, never saw a rifle in Lee’s possession, and there has been no believable explanation of how “Lee’s” rifle made it unseen to Dallas from New Orleans. Nosy neighbors in New Orleans never reported seeing any rifle, though Marina said Lee dry-fired it for hours on their very visible screened porch at 4905 Magazine Street, which at the time had no bushes hiding the porch from full view. Neighbors instead reported seeing Lee reading for hours on the porch, even when they had unkind things to say about the accused assassin.


The Interactive Timeline Revisited

With these considerations in mind, it is time to look at the “Interactive Timeline” which is (unfortunately) quoted so frequently by students, teachers, researchers and others, straight from the internet.

The “Interactive Timeline” comes up immediately when seeking Lee’s biography. Not only does it assert that Lee shot at Walker: it also offers as “fact” that Lee ordered a rifle and a revolver, despite massive evidence we now know exists that decry such statements.

One portion of this carelessly assembled timeline, concerning the ordering of a rifle and a revolver, as if by Oswald, offers dates between January 28, 1962 (sic) and March 25, 1963 for these events. It is an excellent example of how the Timeline is being used to frame Oswald to this very day. Here are the entries:


January 28, 1962 (sic): LHO orders a .38 caliber Smith and Wesson revolver by mail.

February 13, 1963: The Oswalds attend a dinner party at the home of the De

Mohrenschildts.

February 22, 1963: The Oswalds attend a dinner party at the home of Everett Glover, where they meet Ruth Paine.

March 2, 1963: The Oswalds move to 214 West Neely Street.

March 9-10, 1963: LHO takes photographs of the home of General Edwin Walker, a right-wing activist.

March 11, 1963: The Militant, a prominent left-wing publication, publishes a letter signed L.H., probably written by LHO.

March 12, 1963: Ruth Paine visits Marina at the new apartment. Also that day, LHO orders a rifle from Klein's Sporting Goods in Chicago.

March 20, 1963: The rifle and the revolver are shipped.

March 25, 1963: LHO picks up the weapons

First of all, before even looking at evidence that casts serious doubts on Oswald’s having ordered a revolver and a rifle, let’s use some common sense.

According to the Timeline, Oswald ordered a revolver on January 28, 1962. This is a typo. Parnell means 1963. Right away, we should question Parnell’s (and McAdams’) dedication to accuracy and detail about the Timeline. The typo ‘1962’ has been on this site since at least 2002, when I first copied it. As of Sept. 26, 2011, the typo has remained as ‘1962.’

Setting that aside, we assume Parnell means ‘1963.’ Now we get to the gist of the matter. According to the Warren Commission, Lee Harvey Oswald ordered a revolver on January 28, 1963. He ordered a rifle on March 12, 1963. The Warren Commission tells us that both of Oswald’s weapons were shipped on March 20, 1963 and that he picked up both weapons 5 days later, on March 25, 1963.

Let’s use some common sense and logic.

The revolver was supposedly ordered January 28. It was shipped on March 20. That’s 4 days for January, 28 days for February, and 20 days for March = 52 days. It took 52 days to fill the order.

The rifle was supposedly ordered March 12. It was shipped on March 20. It took 8 days to fill the order.

We are supposed to blindly believe that both weapons, though they were ordered 44 days apart from each other, nevertheless were shipped the same day, both arrived on the same day and both were picked up on the same day.

Seems that people mean and low enough to plant evidence against Oswald were also not very bright. For more information on how Oswald was framed, on just THIS issue, please see these essays at SCRIBD:

1) The Framing of Lee Harvey Oswald: Oswald’s Handwriting Examined on Rifle/Revolver Order Forms

http://www.scribd.com/doc/40814330/The-Framing-of-Lee-Harvey-Oswald-Oswald-s-Handwriting-Examined-on-Rifle-Revolver-Order-forms

2) The Framing of Lee Harvey Oswald: Oswald’s Handwriting,

The Sloppy Order Form, and Suggestions of Forgery

http://www.scribd.com/doc/41200551/The-Framing-of-Lee-Harvey-Oswald-Envelope-of-Oswald-s-Order-Form-for-a-Rifle-Suggests-Forgery

3) The Framing of Lee Harvey Oswald: Envelope of Oswald’s order form for a rifle Suggests Forgery

http://www.scribd.com/doc/41200551/The-Framing-of-Lee-Harvey-Oswald-Envelope-of-Oswald-s-Order-Form-for-a-Rifle-Suggests-Forgery

4) Lee Harvey Oswald and the Italian Rifle

http://www.scribd.com/doc/39479174/Lee-Harvey-Oswald-and-the-Italian-Rifle

To view only a few more examples of the many errors and evidence of overt prejudice in the Parnell timeline for Lee Harvey Oswald, which are read daily by trusting (we hope not) students, teachers and citizens of the world, presented, as it is, as a reference tool, please read this:

Interactive Timeline of Lee Harvey Oswald: an Analysis

http://www.scribd.com/doc/52670400/Interactive-Timeline-of-Lee-Harvey-Oswald-an-Analysis

Why It’s Important to Clear Oswald’s Name

Lee Harvey Oswald was accused of killing President John F. Kennedy. The media and Internet have been keeping that old lie alive. Evidence to the contrary is ignored, minimalized, declared unimportant. But it IS important. Clearing Oswald’s name means that these old lies will be seen for what they are, and that those who actually killed Kennedy, protected by the government and the media, will then be recognized. Since these people illegally and violently took over America, uncounted millions have suffered wars and financial disasters worldwide that can be traced to the radical changes in US policies and monetary practices.

It is our obligation to trace the handoffs of power. It is our obligation to stand tall on November, 2013, and fight the “official story” that is still being used to hide the taking of America from the people.

Friday, October 23, 2009

OSWALD FRAMED: THE MAGIC BULLET LIES!


OSWALD:FRAMED!

THE MAGIC BULLET: LIES THE FBI TOLD TO THE PEOPLE!
Look at the bold face portions of the article below for a quick review, then read it and weep: Lee Harvey Oswald was framed. AN INNOCENT MAN TOO THE BLAME. Oswald did not shoot Kennedy, we learn once again, and was framed -- we learn once again. Anyone who tells you there is no evidence available that refutes the accusation that Oswald killed Kennedy doesn't read, is stupid, or is being paid, as was V. Bugliosi (a million dollars) to write fancy stuff and create elaborate documentaries to perpetrate the old lies.

IF OSWALD IS INNOCENT, THAT MEANS OUR GOVERNMENT WAS NOT! THERE WAS A COUP.
EVERYBODY IN EUROPE SEEMS TO KNOW THIS. THEY GOT UNFILTERED NEWS. THEY GOT MORE OF THE TRUTH. THEY WONDER HOW WE CAN BE SO BLIND. THEY'RE USED TO COVER-UPS ON COUPS. AMERICANS TRUSTED THE NEW PRESIDENT NOT TO LIE TO THEM. WHAT A MISTAKE! LBJ WAS THE SAME FELLOW WHO LIFTED BEAGLES BY THEIR EARS AND HUMILIATED HIS WIFE REGULARLY IN PUBLIC. LBJ'S MISTRESS, MADELEINE BROWN, CAN BE SEEN ON YOUTUBE TELLING YOU ALL ABOUT THAT WONDERFUL MAN WHO LED US INTO THE VIETNAM WAR AND MADE HIS TEXAS OIL FRIENDS AND CONSTRUCTION FRIENDS RICH. TEXAS BASICALLY RAN ALL OUR WARS EVER SINCE.

NOW PLEASE READ THE TRUTH ABOUT "THE MAGIC BULLET" -- AND ASK YOURSELF IF THE SAME BULLET SHOWN SO PRISTINE AND SCARCELY HARMED COULD HAVE CREATED ALL THOSE WOUNDS AND BROKEN BONES. THE PHOTO SHOWS THE 'PRUSTINE' BLLET WITH OTHE R'PRISTINE ' BULLETS THAT WERE SHOT THROUGH COTTON. THE MASHED BULLET HIT 'ONE' BONE. NOT SEVERAL, AS IN THE JFK ASSASSINATION.

WHY ARE 'CONSPIRACY THEORISTS' CONSISTENTLY PUT DOWN, WHILE THOSE WHO PUSH THE GOVERNMENT'S OFFICIAL VERDICT ARE SUPPORTED IN THE MEDIA? WHY DO I HAVE TO LIVE IN EXILE?

GET THE BOOK "ME & LEE: HOW I CAME TO KNOW, LOVE AND LOSE LEE HARVEY OSWALD" BY JUDYTH VARY BAKER, THE BOOK "DR. MARY'S MONKEY" BY EDWARD T. HASLAM, AND THE BOOK "CROSSFIRE-- THE PLOT THAT KILLED KENNEDY" AND YOU DON;T NEED ANY OTHER BOOKS TO SETTLE THE QUESTIONS ONCE AND FOR ALL ABOUT OSWALD'S INNOCENCE AND THE GOVERNMENT'S GUILT. GO TO TRINE DAY: HTTP://WWW.TRINEDAY.COM TO SEE OTHER BOOKS ABOUT WHO'S RUNNING OUR GOVERNMENT. KNOWLEDGE IS POWER. LET'S GET OUR COUNTRY BACK! JVB
------


===THE MAGIC BULLET LIES: THE ARTICLE THAT PROVES OSWALD WAS FRAMED=====

This is part of an article written by Gary L. Aguilar and Josiah Thompson. The full article, with illustrations, can be found here:

http://www.history-matters.com/essays/fram...MoreMagical.htm

Among the myriad JFK assassination controversies, none more cleanly divides Warren Commission supporter from skeptic than the “Single Bullet Theory.” The brainchild of a former Warren Commission lawyer, Mr. Arlen Specter, now the senior Senator from Pennsylvania, the theory is the sine qua non of the Warren Commission’s case that with but three shots, including one that missed, Lee Harvey Oswald had single handedly altered the course of history.

Mr. Specter’s hypothesis was not one that immediately leapt to mind from the original evidence and the circumstances of the shooting. It was, rather, born of necessity, if one sees as a necessity the keeping of Oswald standing alone in the dock. The theory had to contend with the considerable evidence there was suggesting that more than one shooter was involved.

For example, because the two victims in Dealey Plaza, President Kennedy and Governor John Connally, had suffered so many wounds – eight in all, it had originally seemed as if more than two slugs from the supposed “sniper’s nest” would have been necessary to explain all the damage. In addition, a home movie taken by a bystander, Abraham Zapruder, showed that too little time had elapsed between the apparent shots that hit both men in the back for Oswald to have fired, reacquired his target, and fired again. The Single Bullet Theory neatly solved both problems. It posited that a single, nearly whole bullet that was later recovered had caused all seven of the non-fatal wounds sustained by both men. [1]

But the bullet that was recovered had one strikingly peculiar feature: it had survived all the damage it had apparently caused virtually unscathed itself. The shell’s near-pristine appearance, which prompted some to call it the “magic bullet,” left many skeptics wondering whether the bullet in evidence had really done what the Commission had said it had done. Additional skepticism was generated by the fact the bullet was not found in or around either victim. It was found instead on a stretcher at the hospital where the victims were treated.
Mr. Specter’s idea was that, after passing completely through JFK and Governor Connally, the bullet had fallen out of the Governor’s clothes and onto a stretcher at Parkland Hospital. But it was never unequivocally established that either victim had ever lain on the stretcher where the bullet was discovered. [2] Nevertheless, studies done at the FBI Laboratory seemed to unquestionably link the missile to Oswald’s rifle, and the FBI sent the Warren Commission a memo on July 7, 1964 detailing how it had run down the bullet’s chain of possession, which looked pretty solid. According to the FBI, the two hospital employees who discovered the bullet originally identified it as the same bullet six months later in an FBI interview

That a bullet, fired from Oswald’s weapon and later identified by hospital witnesses, had immediately turned up on a stretcher in the hospital where the victims were treated struck some as perhaps a little too convenient. Suspicions it had been planted ensued. But apart from its peculiar provenance, there was little reason in 1964 to doubt the bullet’s bona fides. But then in 1967, one of the authors reported that one of the two hospital employees who had found the bullet, Parkland personnel director O.P. Wright, had told him that the bullet he saw and held on the day of the assassination did not look like the bullet that later turned up in FBI evidence. That claim was in direct conflict with an FBI memo of July 7, 1964, which said that Wright had told an FBI agent that the bullet did look like the shell he’d held on the day of the murder.

For thirty years, the conflict lay undisturbed and unresolved. Finally, in the mid 1990s, the authors brought this conflict to the attention of the Assassinations Records Review Board, a federal body charged with opening the abundant, still-secret files concerning the Kennedy assassination. A search through newly declassified files led to the discovery of new information on this question. It turns out that the FBI’s own, once-secret files tend to undermine the position the FBI took publicly in its July, 1964 memo to the Warren Commission, and they tend to support co-author Josiah Thompson. Thompson got a further boost when a retired FBI agent, in a recorded telephone interview and in a face-to-face meeting, flatly denied what the FBI had written about him to the Warren Commission in 1964.

The story begins in a ground floor elevator lobby at the Dallas hospital where JFK and John Connelly were taken immediately after being shot. According to the Warren Commission, Parkland Hospital senior engineer, Mr. Darrell C. Tomlinson, was moving some wheeled stretchers when he bumped a stretcher “against the wall and a bullet rolled out.” [3] He called for help and was joined by Mr. O.P. Wright, Parkland’s personnel director. After examining the bullet together, Mr. Wright passed it along to one of the U.S. Secret Service agents who were prowling the hospital, Special Agent Richard Johnsen. [4]

Johnsen then carried the bullet back to Washington, D. C. and handed it to James Rowley, the chief of the Secret Service. Rowley, in turn, gave the bullet to FBI agent Elmer Lee Todd, [5] who carried it to agent Robert Frazier in the FBI’s Crime Lab. [6] Without exploring the fact that the HSCA discovered that there may have been another witness who was apparently with Tomlinson when the bullet was found, what concerns us here is whether the bullet currently in evidence, Commission Exhibit #399, is the same bullet Tomlinson found originally.
The early history of the bullet, Commission Exhibit #399, is laid out in Warren Commission Exhibit #2011. This exhibit consists of a 3-page, July 7, 1964 FBI letterhead memorandum that was written to the Warren Commission in response to a Commission request that the Bureau trace “various items of physical evidence,” among them #399. #2011 relates that, in chasing down the bullet’s chain of possession, FBI agent Bardwell Odum took #399 to Darrell Tomlinson and O.P. Wright on June 12, 1964. The memo asserts that both men told Agent Odum that the bullet “appears to be the same one” they found on the day of the assassination, but that neither could “positively identify” it.
Positive identification” of a piece of evidence by a witness means that the witness is certain that an object later presented in evidence is the same one that was originally found. The most common way to establish positive identification is for a witness to place his initials on a piece of evidence upon first finding it. The presence of such initials is of great help later when investigators try to prove a link through an unbroken chain of possession between the object in evidence and a crime.

Understandably, neither Tomlinson nor Wright inscribed his initials on the stretcher bullet. But that both witnesses told FBI Agent Odum, so soon after the murder, that CE 399 looked like the bullet they had found on a stretcher was compelling reason to suppose that it was indeed the same one.
However, CE #2011 included other information that raised questions about the bullet. As first noted by author Ray Marcus, [7] it also states that on June 24, 1964, FBI agent Todd, who received the bullet from Rowley, the head of the Secret Service, returned with presumably the same bullet to get Secret Service agents Johnsen and Rowley to identify it. #2011 reports that both Johnsen and Rowley advised Todd that they “could not identify this bullet as the one” they saw on the day of the assassination. # 2011 contains no comment about the failure being merely one of not “positively identifying” the shell that, otherwise, “appeared to be the same” bullet they had originally handled.

Thus, in #2011 the FBI reported that both Tomlinson and Wright said #399 resembled the Parkland bullet, but that neither of the Secret Service Agents could identify it. FBI Agent Todd originally received the bullet from Rowley on 11/22/63 and it was he who then returned on 6/24/64 with supposedly the same bullet for Rowley and Johnsen to identify. Given the importance of this case, one imagines that by the time Todd returned, they would have had at least a passing acquaintance. Had it truly been the same bullet, one might have expected one or both agents to tell Todd it looked like the same bullet, even if neither could “positively identify” it by an inscribed initial. After all, neither Tomlinson nor Wright had inscribed their initials on the bullet, and yet #2011 says that they said they saw a resemblance.

And there the conflicted story sat, until one of the current authors published a book in 1967.Two Different Accounts from One Witness
Six Seconds in Dallas reported on an interview with O.P. Wright in November 1966. Before any photos were shown or he was asked for any description of #399, Wright said: “That bullet had a pointed tip.”
“Pointed tip?” Thompson asked.Yeah, I’ll show you. It was like this one here,” he said, reaching into his desk and pulling out the .30 caliber bullet pictured in Six Seconds.”[8]
As Thompson described it in 1967, “I then showed him photographs of CE’s 399, 572 (the two ballistics comparison rounds from Oswald’s rifle) (sic), and 606 (revolver bullets) (sic), and he rejected all of these as resembling the bullet Tomlinson found on the stretcher. Half an hour later in the presence of two witnesses, he once again rejected the picture of 399 as resembling the bullet found on the stretcher.”[9]
Thus in 1964 the Warren Commission, or rather the FBI, claimed that Wright believed the original bullet resembled #399. In 1967, Wright denied there was a resemblance. Recent FBI releases prompted by the JFK Review Board support author Thompson’s 1967 report.

A declassified 6/20/64 FBI AIRTEL memorandum from the FBI office in Dallas (“SAC, Dallas” – i.e., Special Agent in Charge, Gordon Shanklin) to J. Edgar Hoover contains the statement, “For information WFO (FBI Washington Field Office), neither DARRELL C. TOMLINSON [sic], who found bullet at Parkland Hospital, Dallas, nor O. P. WRIGHT, Personnel Officer, Parkland Hospital, who obtained bullet from TOMLINSON and gave to Special Service, at Dallas 11/22/63, can identify bullet … .” Whereas the FBI had claimed in CE #2011 that Tomlinson and Wright had told Agent Odum on June 12, 1964 that CE #399 “appears to be the same” bullet they found on the day of the assassination, nowhere in this previously classified memo, which was written before CE #2011, is there any corroboration that either of the Parkland employees saw a resemblance. Nor is FBI agent Odum’s name mentioned anywhere in the once-secret file, whether in connection with #399, or with Tomlinson or with Wright.

A declassified record, however, offers some corroboration for what CE 2011 reported about Secret Service Agents Johnsen and Rowley. A memo from the FBI’s Dallas field office dated 6/24/64 reported that, “ON JUNE TWENTYFOUR INSTANT RICHARD E. JOHNSEN, AND JAMES ROWLEY, CHIEF … ADVISED SA ELMER LEE TODD, WFO, THAT THEY WERE UNABLE TO INDENTIFY RIFLE BULLET C ONE (# 399, which, before the Warren Commission had logged in as #399, was called “C ONE”), BY INSPECTION (capitals in original).

Convinced that we had overlooked some relevant files, we cast about for additional corroboration of what was in CE # 2011. There should, for example, have been some original “302s ” – the raw FBI field reports from the Agent Odum’s interviews with Tomlinson and Wright on June 12, 1964. There should also have been one from Agent Todd’s interviews with Secret Service Agents Johnsen and Rowley on June 24, 1964. Perhaps somewhere in those, we thought, we would find Agent Odum reporting that Wright had detected a resemblance between the bullets. And perhaps we’d also find out whether Tomlinson, Wright, Johnsen or Rowley had supplied the Bureau with any additional descriptive details about the bullet.

In early 1998, we asked a research associate, Ms. Cathy Cunningham, to scour the National Archives for any additional files that might shed light on this story. She looked but found none. We contacted the JFK Review Board’s T. Jeremy Gunn for help. [Fig. 7] On May 18, 1998, the Review Board’s Eileen Sullivan, writing on Gunn’s behalf, answered, saying: “[W]e have attempted, unsuccessfully, to find any additional records that would account for the problem you suggest.”[10] [Fig. 8] Undaunted, one of us wrote the FBI directly, and was referred to the National Archives, and so then wrote Mr. Steve Tilley at the National Archives.

On Mr. Tilley’s behalf, Mr. Stuart Culy, an archivist at the National Archives, made a search. On July 16, 1999, Mr. Culy wrote that he searched for the FBI records within the HSCA files as well as in the FBI records, all without success. He was able to determine, however, that the serial numbers on the FBI documents ran “concurrently, with no gaps, which indicated that no material is missing from these files.”[11] [Fig. 10] In other words, the earliest and apparently the only FBI report said nothing about either Tomlinson or Wright seeing a similarity between the bullet found at the hospital and the bullet later in evidence, CE #399. Nor did agent Bardwell Odum’s name show up in any of the files.[editor's note: Dr. Aguilar followed up in 2005 with the National Archives, asking them in letters dated March 2 and March 7 to search for any FBI "302" reports that would have been generated from CE399 being shown to those who handled it. On March 17, 2005 David Mengel of NARA wrote back reporting that additional searches had not uncovered any such reports.]

Stymied, author Aguilar turned to his co-author. “What does Odum have to say about it?” Thompson asked.
“Odum? How the hell do I know? Is he still alive?”

“I’ll find out,” he promised.

Less than an hour later, Thompson had located Mr. Bardwell Odum’s home address and phone number. Aguilar phoned him on September 12, 2002. He was still alive and well and living in a suburb of Dallas. The 82-year old was alert and quick-witted on the phone and he regaled Aguilar with fond memories of his service in the Bureau. Finally, the Kennedy case came up and Odum agreed to help interpret some of the conflicts in the records. Two weeks after mailing Odum the relevant files – CE # 2011, the three-page FBI memo dated July 7, 1964, and the “FBI AIRTEL” memo dated June 12, 1964, Aguilar called him back.
Mr. Odum told Aguilar, “I didn’t show it [#399] to anybody at Parkland. I didn’t have any bullet … I don’t think I ever saw it even.” [Fig. 11] Unwilling to leave it at that, both authors paid Mr. Odum a visit in his Dallas home on November 21, 2002. The same alert, friendly man on the phone greeted us warmly and led us to a comfortable family room. To ensure no misunderstanding, we laid out before Mr. Odum all the relevant documents and read aloud from them.

Again, Mr. Odum said that he had never had any bullet related to the Kennedy assassination in his possession, whether during the FBI’s investigation in 1964 or at any other time. Asked whether he might have forgotten the episode, Mr. Odum remarked that he doubted he would have ever forgotten investigating so important a piece of evidence. But even if he had done the work, and later forgotten about it, he said he would certainly have turned in a “302” report covering something that important. Odum’s sensible comment had the ring of truth. For not only was Odum’s name absent from the FBI’s once secret files, it was also it difficult to imagine a motive for him to besmirch the reputation of the agency he had worked for and admired.

Thus, the July 1964 FBI memo that became Commission Exhibit #2011 claims that Tomlinson and Wright said they saw a resemblance between #399 and the bullet they picked up on the day JFK died. However, the FBI agent who is supposed to have gotten that admission, Bardwell Odum, and the Bureau’s own once-secret records, don’t back up #2011. Those records say only that neither Tomlinson nor Wright was able to identify the bullet in question, a comment that leaves the impression they saw no resemblance. That impression is strengthened by the fact that Wright told one of the authors in 1966 the bullets were dissimilar. Thus, Thompson’s surprising discovery about Wright, which might have been dismissed in favor of the earlier FBI evidence in #2011, now finds at least some support in an even earlier, suppressed FBI memo, and the living memory of a key, former FBI agent provides further, indirect corroboration.
But the newly declassified FBI memos from June 1964 lead to another unexplained mystery. Neither are the 302 reports that would have been written by the agents who investigated #399’s chain of possession in both Dallas and Washington. The authors were tempted to wonder if the June memos were but expedient fabrications, with absolutely no 302s whatsoever backing them up.

But a declassified routing slip turned up by John Hunt seems to prove that the FBI did in fact act on the Commission’s formal request, as outlined in # 2011, to run down #399s chain of possession. The routing slip discloses that the bullet was sent from Washington to Dallas on 6/2/64 and returned to Washington on 6/22/64. Then on 6/24/64, it was checked out to FBI Agent Todd. What transpired during these episodes? If the Bureau went to these lengths, it seems quite likely that Bardwell Odum, or some other agent in Dallas, would have submitted one or more 302s on what was found, and so would Agent Elmer Todd in Washington. But there are none in the files. The trail ends here with an unexplained, and perhaps important, gap left in the record.
Besides this unexplained gap, another interesting question remains: If the FBI did in fact adjust Tomlinson and Wright’s testimonies with a bogus claim of bullet similarity, why didn’t it also adjust Johnsen and Rowley’s? While it is unlikely a certain answer to this question will ever be found, it is not unreasonable to suppose that the FBI authors of #2011 would have been more reluctant to embroider the official statements of the head of the Secret Service in Washington than they would the comments of a couple of hospital employees in Dallas.

In a memo to the Warren Commission [C. E. #2011] concerning its investigation of the chain of possession of C.E. #399, the FBI reported that two Parkland Hospital eyewitnesses, Darrell Tomlinson and O. P. Wright, said C.E. #399 resembled the bullet they discovered on the day JFK died. But the FBI agent who is supposed to have interviewed both men and the Bureau’s own suppressed records contradict the FBI’s public memo. Agent Odum denied his role, and the FBI’s earliest, suppressed files say only that neither Tomlinson nor Wright was able to identify the bullet in question. This suppressed file implies the hospital witnesses saw no resemblance, which is precisely what Wright told one of the authors in 1967.
What we are left with is the FBI having reported a solid chain of possession for #399 to the Warren Commission. But the links in the FBI’s chain appear to be anything but solid. Bardwell Odum, one of the key links, says he was never in the chain at all and the FBI’s own, suppressed records tend to back him up. Inexplicably, the chain also lacks other important links: FBI 302s, reports from the agents in the field who, there is ample reason to suppose, did actually trace #399 in Dallas and in Washington. Suppressed FBI records and recent investigations thus suggest that not only is the FBI’s file incomplete, but also that one of the authors may have been right when he reported in 1967 that the bullet found in Dallas did not look like a bullet that could have come from Oswald’s rifle.

Notes

[1] The eighth wound, JFK’s head wound, accounted for one of the bullets. And evidence from the scene and from a home movie taken of the murder by a bystander, Abraham Zapruder, suggests that a third bullet had missed entirely.

[2] Josiah Thompson. Six Seconds in Dallas. Bernard Geis Associates for Random House, 1967, p. 161 – 164.

[3] The President’s Commission on the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy – Report. Washington, D.C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1964, p. 81. See also 6H130 – 131.

[4] 18H800. See also: Thompson, J. Six Seconds in Dallas. New York: Bernard Geis Associates for Random House, 1967, p. 155.

[5] 24H412.

[6] 3H428; 24H412.

[7] See Ray Marcus monograph, The Bastard Bullet.

[8] Text of email message from Josiah Thompson to Aguilar, 12/10/99.

[9] Thompson, Josiah. Six Seconds in Dallas. New York: Bernard Geis Associates for Random House, 1967, p. 175.

[10] 5/11/98 email message from Eileen Sullivan re: “Your letter to Jeremy Gunn, April 4, 1998.”

[11] Personal letter from Stuart Culy, archivist, National Archives, July 16, 1999.



FOURTEEN WITNESSES WHO WERE DOCTORS AND NURSES AT PARKLAND HOSPITAL SHOWED THAT A BULLET HIT KENNEDY FROM THE FRONT, NOT BACK, AS CLAIMED BY THE WARREN COMMISSION--AND EXITED IN THE BACK OF KENNEDY'S HEAD, CREATING A GAPING WOUND. EACH WITNESS POINTED TO WHERE THEY SAID THE SKULL WAS BLOWN OUT. NONE OF THE WITNESSES AT PARKLAND WERE INTERVIEWED. ONLY GOVERNMENT DOCTORS WHERE THE AUTOPSY (REDESIGNING OF THE WOUNDS) WAS CONDUCTED WERE INTERVIEWED. THE AUTOPSY DRAWINGS AND FAKED AUTOPSY PHOTOS SHOW A SMALL HOLE IN THE BACK OF KENNEDY'S HEAD, TO INDICATE OSWALD SHOT KENNEDY. GO TO http://www.JFKMURDERSOLVED.COM AND CLICK ON "JFK II" TO SEE MORE SHOCKING INFORMATION. THANKS FOR VISITING MY WEBSITE http://www.JUDYTHVARYBAKER.COM. Also check out http://www.judyth.freehomepage.com to see my works of art.