A Better Sequence (TM DVP)

[Jack Nessan]

Williams' lunch remnants were originally discovered in the SN.

Mooney WC testimony

Mr. MOONEY - Saw the chicken bone was laying here. The poke was laying about a foot away from it.
Mr. BALL - On the same carton?
Mr. MOONEY - Yes, sir. In close relation to each other. But as to what was in the sack--it was kind of together, and I didn't open it. I didn't put my hands on it to open it. I only saw one piece of chicken.
Senator COOPER - How far was the chicken, the piece of chicken you saw, and the paper bag from the boxes near the window, and particularly the box that had the crease in it?

Mr. MOONEY - I would say they might have been 5 feet or something like that. He wouldn't have had to leave the location. He could just maybe take one step and lay it over there, if he was the one that put it there.

Mr. MOONEY - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - And you did not see that two-wheel truck?
Mr. MOONEY - No, sir.
Mr. BALL - You did not see the Dr. Pepper bottle?
Mr. MOONEY - No, sir.

Gerald Hill WC Testimony

Mr. HILL. We hadn't been there but a minute until someone yelled, "Here it is," or words to that effect.
I moved over and found they had found an area where the boxes had been stacked in sort of a triangle shape with three sides over near the window.
Mr. BELIN. What did you see over there?
Mr. HILL. There was the boxes. The boxes were stacked in sort of a three-sided shield.
That would have concealed from general view, unless somebody specifically walked up and looked over them, anyone who was in a sitting or crouched position between them and the window. In front of this window and to the left or east corner of the window, there were two boxes, cardboard boxes that had the words "Roller books," on them.
On top of the larger stack of boxes that would have been used for concealment, there was a chicken leg bone and a paper sack which appeared to have been about the size normally used for a lunch sack. I wouldn't know what the sizes were. It was a sack, I would say extended, it would probably be 12 inches high, 10 inches long, and about 4 inches thick.

Roger Craig WC testimony

Mr. CRAIG - I went over there and--uh--didn't get too close because the shells were laying on the ground and there was--uh--oh, a sack and a bunch of things laying over there. So, you know, not to bother the area, I just went back across.
Mr. BELIN - Now, you say there was a sack laying there?
Mr. CRAIG - Yes; I believe it was laying on top of a box, if I'm not mistaken.
Mr. BELIN - How big a sack was that?
Mr. CRAIG - It was a paper bag (indicating with hands)--a small paper bag.

Officer A. D. McCurley (Statement 11/22/63)

Officer Jack Faulkner and I, together with several other City officers went to the building and started checking the floors. We were searching the 6th floor when Deputy Sheriff Mooney, who was also on the 6th floor, hollered that he had found the place where the assassin had fired from. I went over and saw 3 expended shells laying by the window that faced onto Elm Street, along with a half-eaten piece of chicken that was laying on a cardboard carton. It appeared as if the assassin had piled up a bunch of boxes to hide from the view of anyone who happened to come up on that floor and had arranged 3 other cartons of books next to the window as though to make a rifle rest. This area was roped off and guarded until Captain Will Fritz of Dallas Police Department Homicide Bureau arrived. It was about this same time that Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone yelled that he had found the rifle which had been placed between some rows of cardboard boxes near the staircase which leads down to the 5th floor.

Harry Weatherford (11-23-63 report)

"I came down to the 6th floor, and while searching this floor, Deputy Luke Mooney said "here are some shells." I went over to where he was and saw 3 expended rifle shells, a sack on the floor and a partially eaten piece of chicken on top of one of the cartons which was used as a sort of barricade."

All these officers observed the SN prior to the arrival of Will Fritz, Sims and Boyd. Montgomery and Johnson arrived shortly after them and were told by Fritz to "guard the SN while the rifle was being examined by Day and Studebaker.

Fritz's WC testimony

Mr. McCLOY. Did you see any signs of a lunch there, a chicken there?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I will tell you where that story about the chicken comes from. At the other window above there, where people in days past, you know had eaten their lunches, they left chicken bones and pieces of bread, all kinds of things up and down there. That isn't where he was at all. He was in a different window, so I don't think those things have anything to do with it. Someone wrote a story about it in the papers, and we have got all kinds of bad publicity from it and they wrote in telling us how to check those chicken bones and how to get them from the stomach and everything.

Not surprisingly Fritz was clueless as the lunch was moved prior to his arrival. He spent only a few minutes near the SN before he was drawn to the rifle....never to return to the SE corner that afternoon.

Boyd WC testimony

Mr. BALL. When you heard that they found some hulls, just tell us what you did.
Mr. BOYD. We went down to the sixth floor and found the hulls over on the southeast corner of the building and they had some books, I suppose it was books--boxes of books stacked up back over there that way.
Mr. BALL. Did you see the hulls on the floor?
Mr. BOYD. Yes.
Mr. BALL Did you see anything else around there where the hulls were on the floor?
Mr. BOYD. Well, over to the west there was some paper sacks, and I think some chicken bones up on top of some boxes.
Mr. BALL. That was west?
Mr. BOYD. Right; yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Near the windows?
Mr. BOYD. Yes, sir; they were near the windows.
Mr. BALL. How far west from where the hulls were located?
Mr. BOYD. Oh, I would say roughly between 30 and 40 feet, probably.

Boyd now describes the lunch remnants now to the west of the hulls.

Montgomery WC testimony

Mr. BALL. Did you see anything else over in the southeast corner of that sixth floor?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Well, sir, as I say, there was a lot of boxes and there was a sack and there was this pieces of chicken.
Mr. BALL. Was there a piece of chicken over there?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes, sir--there was chicken bones and what not--it looked like somebody had been eating chicken there.
Mr. BALL. Where was that?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. It was right there with the boxes---right there on the floor.
Mr. BALL On the floor?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. All right.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Well, let me see, there was one piece of chicken on a box and there was a piece on the floor--just kind of scattered around right there.
Mr. BALL. Where was the paper sack?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Let's see--the paper sack--I don't recall for sure if it was on the floor or on the box, but I know it was just there----one of those pictures might show exactly where it was.
Mr. BALL. I don't have a picture of the paper sack.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. You don't? Well, it was there--I can't recall for sure if it was on one of the boxes or on the floor there.
Mr. BALL. It was over in what corner?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. It would be the southeast corner of the building there where the shooting was.

Mr. BALL. Now, where was the Dr. Pepper bottle?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. It was over a little more to the west of that window.
Mr. BALL. There was a sack of chicken bones with that--near that Dr. Pepper bottle?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. No; the Dr. Pepper bottle, the best I can recall, was sitting over there by itself.
Mr. BALL. Where was the sack with the chicken in it?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. It was right around where the boxes were--where the hulls there were.

Mr. BALL. Here are two pictures, which are Exhibits H and I in the Studebaker depositions, which show the paper sack and the Dr. Pepper bottle and a two-wheel truck, and that is in Exhibit H, and Exhibit I shows the Dr. Pepper bottle and a two-wheel truck.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Is this the sack right here, now?
Mr. BALL. That's right--do you remember that?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. I don't remember the sack being right there--I remember it was there somewhere, but exactly--I don't.

Ball had shown Montgomery the photo of the two wheeler taken by Studebaker. It was not where he remembered it.

Mr. BALL. Now, was there some more chicken some place there also?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes--there would be some more chicken over here around where the hulls were found.
Mr. BALL. Now, I will show you a picture of----
Mr. MONTGOMERY. I know there was one piece laying up on top of the box there.
Mr. BALL. I show you a picture which is Exhibit J, which shows some boxes in the picture that's in the southeast corner there.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Can you tell me where the chicken was?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. I believe it was right up on these boxes right along in there. There's some boxes coming along in there.
Mr. BALL. Coming along in there you mean it's outside of the view of the pictures?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes, sir; right along in here.
Mr. BALL. And that would be to the north, of that point?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. And what did you see on top of those boxes?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. There was one piece of chicken there.
Mr. BALL. Partially eaten?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes; I believe it was partially eaten---on that picture right there I was just looking at.


Ball suggests to Montgomery there was "more chicken". The photo had contained "the chicken" placed in the bag. They were talking about the same piece in different places. Montgomery states again the chicken piece was around the SN and not near the two wheeler.

Johnson WC testimony

Mr. BELIN. Now there was a sack and a pop bottle. Was there anything else other than the sack and the pop bottle?
Mr. JOHNSON. And the remnants of fried chicken.
Mr. BELIN. The remnants of fried chicken, was that right by that window, or was it by another set of windows?
Mr. JOHNSON. That was by some other window.
Mr. BELIN. Now there are, I believe, on the south side of the building, seven pairs of windows?
Mr. JOHNSON. I didn't count them. I couldn't say.
Mr. BELIN. Would you say it was toward the east, or the west, or the center?
Mr. JOHNSON. Where the sack was?
Mr. BELIN. Yes.
Mr. JOHNSON. It would be toward the west. I believe the next set of windows to my--I am pretty sure it was.
Mr. BELIN. You said it would be in the second pair of windows counting from the east wall?
Mr. JOHNSON. To the west.
Mr. BELIN. Is where you found it, was it between the second and the third set of windows or between the first and the second, or right by the second?
Mr. JOHNSON. Right by the second pair of windows.
Mr. BELIN. Now you stayed over there?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.

Still no one reporting the lunch remnants near the two wheeler. The unfinished chicken piece was outside the bag.

Studebaker WC testimony - note that Studebaker moved back to the SE corner to continue processing after Day left the TSBD with the rifle about 2pm.

Mr. BALL. Now, did you find a two-wheeled truck up there?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. And did you take a picture of it?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Let me see that one.
Mr. STUDEBAKER. All right - it has the Dr. Pepper bottle and the paper sack that was sitting there in the picture.
Mr. BALL. Let me see that one.
Mr. STUDEBAKER. (Handed instrument to Counsel Ball)
There are two different views of it - there's one and here's one. That was before anything was touched and before it was dusted. This is a shot - I believe that's in the third aisle and let's see what it is marked - it's the sixth floor of 411 Elm Street looking south and the third aisle from Houston Street on the south side of the building. That was taken looking directly into that - this is the sack with those chicken bones and all that mess was in there too.
Mr. BALL. Is the sack shown there?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes; it's a little ole brown sack - yes; it's right there.
Mr. BALL. We will mark this as "Exhibit H," which is your No. 6.
Mr. BALL. That's the sack, is that right?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.
Mr. BALL. And it shows - it has some chicken bones in it?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Any chicken bones in any other place?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. No.
Mr. BALL. None outside the sack?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. No; they were all inside the sack, wrapped up and put right back in. It had a little piece of Fritos in the sack, too.
 
Mr. BALL. Then, we will have the next picture marked Exhibit I, which shows the Dr. Pepper bottle with the two - wheeler, is that right?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. And that's your No. 7.
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. That's the third row over?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. That's the third aisle from Houston Street.
Mr. BALL. That would be the third set of windows?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. That would be the third set of windows - it would be - one, two, three.
Mr. BALL. The third set of windows from Houston Street - you mark it.
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Now, did you see a chicken bone over near the boxes in the south-east corner, over near where you found the cartridges and the paper sack?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. I don't believe there was one there.
Mr. BALL. You didn't see any. One witness, a deputy sheriff named Luke Mooney said he found a piece of chicken partly eaten up on top of one of the boxes; did you see anything like that?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. No.

It is apparent from the above corroborated evidence that at some time prior to the arrival of Studebaker back to the SE corner after 2 pm, the chicken bone(s) were "cleaned up" and placed into the bag. Some Fritos as well other bones may well have been in the bag all along and it was finally positioned on the floor near the two wheeler close to the pop bottle. Someone did this after the rifle was discovered and after the chicken piece and sack were originally moved originally westward by one set of windows.

To me the evidence shows the lunch was originally positioned in the SN. The position and timing fits with Rowland's WC testimony.

BRW was never in the SN. BRW ate his lunch by the third set of windows and left his lunch and pop bottle where it was photographed. No other mention of a pop bottle or lunch sack was noted by the detectives. 


Fritz states the same sentiment that Alyea stated. Media influence.

Also, Fritz states exactly what Montgomery and Shelley stated:

Mr. McCLOY. Did you see any signs of a lunch there, a chicken there?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I will tell you where that story about the chicken comes from. At the other window above there, where people in days past, you know had eaten their lunches, they left chicken bones and pieces of bread, all kinds of things up and down there. That isn't where he was at all. He was in a different window, so I don't think those things have anything to do with it. Someone wrote a story about it in the papers, and we have got all kinds of bad publicity from it and they wrote in telling us how to check those chicken bones and how to get them from the stomach and everything.


Montgomery and Shelley explain multiple locations of chicken pieces,

Mooney no sack: Mr. BALL - You didn't see a paper sack anywhere near a two-wheel truck or a Dr. Pepper bottle?
Mr. MOONEY - No, sir; in my running around up there, I didn't observe it. Possibly it was there. I am sure it was But I didn't check it.

McCurley-- no sack
Weatherford the rifle --sack was CE 142
Boyd saw multiple sacks. --"some paper sacks," 30 to 40 feet to the west
Montgomery --sack was somewhere

None of these detectives mention the pop bottle.


Rowland started his testimony by telling the WC his eyesight was better than perfect, and after getting caught repeatedly fabricating the details of his testimony, ends the testimony weeping because he knows they caught him. Rowland's description of a person in the SN did not match a single person known to the other employees of the TSBD as evidenced by your posting of Shelley's affidavit.

[Alan Ford]

Rowland started his testimony by telling the WC his eyesight was better than perfect, and after getting caught repeatedly fabricating the details of his testimony, ends the testimony weeping because he knows they caught him. Rowland's description of a person in the SN did not match a single person known to the other employees of the TSBD as evidenced by your posting of Shelley's affidavit.

 

What an utter distortion! Mr Rowland broke down because of the memory of not having alerted police to the presence of the man at the window, whom he took for part of the security detail.

As for Mr Rowland's description of the 'elderly negro' in the SN not matching 'a single person known to the other employees of the TSBD', that is simply not true--it sounds very like Mr Eddie Piper. And if it is not Mr Piper, then it is an individual not known to TSBD employees. How exactly would this undermine Mr Rowland's credibility?

[Martin Weidmann]

BRW was never in the SN. BRW ate his lunch by the third set of windows and left his lunch and pop bottle where it was photographed. No other mention of a pop bottle or lunch sack was noted by the detectives. 


Fritz states the same sentiment that Alyea stated. Media influence.

Also, Fritz states exactly what Montgomery and Shelley stated:

Mr. McCLOY. Did you see any signs of a lunch there, a chicken there?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I will tell you where that story about the chicken comes from. At the other window above there, where people in days past, you know had eaten their lunches, they left chicken bones and pieces of bread, all kinds of things up and down there. That isn't where he was at all. He was in a different window, so I don't think those things have anything to do with it. Someone wrote a story about it in the papers, and we have got all kinds of bad publicity from it and they wrote in telling us how to check those chicken bones and how to get them from the stomach and everything.


Montgomery and Shelley explain multiple locations of chicken pieces,

Mooney no sack: Mr. BALL - You didn't see a paper sack anywhere near a two-wheel truck or a Dr. Pepper bottle?
Mr. MOONEY - No, sir; in my running around up there, I didn't observe it. Possibly it was there. I am sure it was But I didn't check it.

McCurley-- no sack
Weatherford the rifle --sack was CE 142
Boyd saw multiple sacks. --"some paper sacks," 30 to 40 feet to the west
Montgomery --sack was somewhere

None of these detectives mention the pop bottle.


Rowland started his testimony by telling the WC his eyesight was better than perfect, and after getting caught repeatedly fabricating the details of his testimony, ends the testimony weeping because he knows they caught him. Rowland's description of a person in the SN did not match a single person known to the other employees of the TSBD as evidenced by your posting of Shelley's affidavit.

BRW was never in the SN.

I've asked you this twice without getting a reply. So, I'll ask again; how can you possibly know this for sure? You wouldn't be making it up, would you?

[Colin Crow]

BRW was never in the SN. BRW ate his lunch by the third set of windows and left his lunch and pop bottle where it was photographed. No other mention of a pop bottle or lunch sack was noted by the detectives. 


Fritz states the same sentiment that Alyea stated. Media influence.

Also, Fritz states exactly what Montgomery and Shelley stated:

Mr. McCLOY. Did you see any signs of a lunch there, a chicken there?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I will tell you where that story about the chicken comes from. At the other window above there, where people in days past, you know had eaten their lunches, they left chicken bones and pieces of bread, all kinds of things up and down there. That isn't where he was at all. He was in a different window, so I don't think those things have anything to do with it. Someone wrote a story about it in the papers, and we have got all kinds of bad publicity from it and they wrote in telling us how to check those chicken bones and how to get them from the stomach and everything.


Montgomery and Shelley explain multiple locations of chicken pieces,

Mooney no sack: Mr. BALL - You didn't see a paper sack anywhere near a two-wheel truck or a Dr. Pepper bottle?
Mr. MOONEY - No, sir; in my running around up there, I didn't observe it. Possibly it was there. I am sure it was But I didn't check it.

McCurley-- no sack
Weatherford the rifle --sack was CE 142
Boyd saw multiple sacks. --"some paper sacks," 30 to 40 feet to the west
Montgomery --sack was somewhere

None of these detectives mention the pop bottle.


Rowland started his testimony by telling the WC his eyesight was better than perfect, and after getting caught repeatedly fabricating the details of his testimony, ends the testimony weeping because he knows they caught him. Rowland's description of a person in the SN did not match a single person known to the other employees of the TSBD as evidenced by your posting of Shelley's affidavit.

Jack, can we deal with one at a time?

Here is another comment attributed to Alyea by Dale Meyers/Dave Reizes

"..I ran on upstairs with the Secret Service men. Then other units came in - the Riot Squad. I thought I was going to film a gun fight. They ran to the 4th floor and I went with them. Some of the other units went to the top of the building. They were conducting a systematic search. It boiled down to the sixth floor. After awhile it was obvious that the assassin was not in the building. They looked for the gun. I filmed 400 ft. of film of the Secret Service men looking for the assassin, climbing over boxes, over the rafters, and the actual finding of the gun. At the time it was suspected that the assassin had stayed quite a time there. There was a stack with a stack of chicken bones on it. There was a Dr. Pepper bottle which they dusted for fingerprints."

http://www.jfk-online.com/alyea.html

This is the full article that quite honestly appears to be a rambling mess. If true, virtually all the police who testified purged and made made significantly false statements. Just one example is that he claimed Mooney did not arrive on the 6th floor until after the discovery of the rifle. I can find virtually no corroboration of almost any of his "story". Do you really wish to use him as part of your argument? If so I would appreciate the source material you have used to base your opinion on and exactly what conclusions you have derived from his material.

[Walt Cakebread]

Jack, can we deal with one at a time?

Here is another comment attributed to Alyea by Dale Meyers/Dave Reizes

"..I ran on upstairs with the Secret Service men. Then other units came in - the Riot Squad. I thought I was going to film a gun fight. They ran to the 4th floor and I went with them. Some of the other units went to the top of the building. They were conducting a systematic search. It boiled down to the sixth floor. After awhile it was obvious that the assassin was not in the building. They looked for the gun. I filmed 400 ft. of film of the Secret Service men looking for the assassin, climbing over boxes, over the rafters, and the actual finding of the gun. At the time it was suspected that the assassin had stayed quite a time there. There was a stack with a stack of chicken bones on it. There was a Dr. Pepper bottle which they dusted for fingerprints."

http://www.jfk-online.com/alyea.html

This is the full article that quite honestly appears to be a rambling mess. If true, virtually all the police who testified purged and made made significantly false statements. Just one example is that he claimed Mooney did not arrive on the 6th floor until after the discovery of the rifle. I can find virtually no corroboration of almost any of his "story". Do you really wish to use him as part of your argument? If so I would appreciate the source material you have used to base your opinion on and exactly what conclusions you have derived from his material.

Alyea wrote his story long after 11/22/63.....   Here's an example from his distorted story....

 I looked over the barricade and saw three shell casings laying on the floor in front of the second window in the two window casement. They were scattered in an area that could be covered by a bushel basket. They were located about half way between the inside of the barricade.

Detective JC Day wrote that there were only TWO spent shells and a "lever action 6.5 rilfle" ...  And there is not a single photo that shows three spent shells lying on the floor as described by Alyea....  The official DPD crime scene photos DO NOT show the shells on the floor in an area that could be "covered by a bushel basket".   In the DPD photos the shells are lying next to the wall.

Tom Alyea is a LNer....He believes that Lee Oswald was guilty of murdering JFK.....Even though he knows without any doubt that the DPD created false evidence to incriminate Lee Oswald.

[Colin Crow]

Alyea wrote his story long after 11/22/63.....   Here's an example from his distorted story....

 I looked over the barricade and saw three shell casings laying on the floor in front of the second window in the two window casement. They were scattered in an area that could be covered by a bushel basket. They were located about half way between the inside of the barricade.

Detective JC Day wrote that there were only TWO spent shells and a "lever action 6.5 rilfle" ...  And there is not a single photo that shows three spent shells lying on the floor as described by Alyea....  The official DPD crime scene photos DO NOT show the shells on the floor in an area that could be "covered by a bushel basket".   In the DPD photos the shells are lying next to the wall.

Tom Alyea is a LNer....He believes that Lee Oswald was guilty of murdering JFK.....Even though he knows without any doubt that the DPD created false evidence to incriminate Lee Oswald.

Walt, I am trying to understand how Jack is using Alyea to support his argument. So far I have seen Jack claim that the chicken lunch was on the 5th floor according to Alyea and that there was no chicken on the 6th. Those that saw chicken were mistaken and only recalling what they heard second hand. So, is that what happened, a chicken free 6th floor (Alyea) or not? Once Jack clarifies what the exact argument is with Alyea we can hopefully make some progress.

[Walt Cakebread]

Walt, I am trying to understand how Jack is using Alyea to support his argument. So far I have seen Jack claim that the chicken lunch was on the 5th floor according to Alyea and that there was no chicken on the 6th. Those that saw chicken were mistaken and only recalling what they heard second hand. So, is that what happened, a chicken free 6th floor (Alyea) or not? Once Jack clarifies what the exact argument is with Alyea we can hopefully make some progress.

Colin.... How do you hope to prove anything in debating chicken bones?    The chicken bones are not evidence of anything....except they seem to prove that someone ate some fried chicken for lunch.....