Truly's False Roll

[Dan O'meara]

This is more in a continuing pattern of making a mountain out of a molehill.  You begin with a false (or at least a very questionable premise) that Truly lied about the roll call. And that he did this to "steer the investigation towards" Oswald.  That sounds like you are suggesting that Truly was part of the conspiracy to frame Oswald for the crime given its proximity to the crime (i.e. just a short time afterward).  It is hard to explain that conduct in any other way.  Truly had no apparent personal animosity toward Oswald to steer the DPD to Oswald as a suspect in the murder of the President.  By implication that leaves Truly as part of the conspiracy.  There is absolutely no evidence - none - to suggest this is the case. 

Your analytical powers leave a lot to be desired.
Firstly, I do not begin with the premise that Truly lied about the roll call.
Even the most cursory glance through what I've posted reveals that.
I begin with Biffle overhearing Truly's interaction with Fritz during which he hears that Oswald has failed to show up for a roll call and that they "can't find him anywhere".
I then present evidence that this roll call did not take place.
I also present evidence that this singling out of Oswald via the invented roll call immediately turns the direction of the investigation towards Oswald.
The roll call is the single element that turns the investigation towards Oswald but the roll call didn't happen. Truly invented it. I am at a loss to explain how this could be done in any innocent fashion so I am led to conclude that Truly lied about the roll call.

It's not a premise I begin with, it is a conclusion I am led to by the evidence.

If you believe the roll call happened, present the evidence.
If you believe there is an innocent explanation for Truly inventing the roll call, let's hear it.

The bottom line is this - if it is demonstrated beyond doubt that Truly lied about the roll call, then this itself is evidence that he was involved in a conspiracy to frame Oswald.

We can test the plausibility of this theory by applying some level of critical analysis to determine if it makes any sense in the context of a conspiracy.  And it doesn't.  Truly is the person who actually vouches for Oswald when Baker has a gun pointed at him.  The conspirators in this fantasy later recruit Ruby to silence Oswald (but only after he has an opportunity to speak before the world press and talk with his family).  Surely, they would have taken this golden opportunity in the lunchroom to silence or arrest Oswald at the TSBD but Truly is the guy who allows him to escape.  Why would Truly have to fabricate a roll call to steer the investigators to Oswald?  He could merely mention that he noticed he was not present.  Truly would have had some cause to bring Oswald to mind because he knew that Oswald - unlike most others - had been in the building.  It's not every day that Truly would have been involved in the search for a murderer that included a cop pulling a gun on one of his employees.  So Truly knows Oswald was in the building at the time of the shooting and notices that he is gone afterward.  It would be natural to point that out as it differed from the conduct of most every other employee.

When Baker turns to Truly and says "Does this man work here?", what do you think Truly should do if he is a conspirator?

Can we ever untangle all the details of the roll call?  Was it like in grade school or more informal in which some witnesses like Frazier might recall it as a roll call and others not mention it because Truly just asked around?  Who knows?  The roll call is not the issue.  The important point is that Oswald WAS missing.  Whether that was noticed via roll call or otherwise.  The conspirators certainly knew that Oswald would soon come to the attention of the authorities because he was already a suspect person known for his nutty political activities and was missing.  What would be the rush?  The more Oswald ran and evaded the authorities the more guilty he appeared.  If he got to Mexico (unlikely for a guy with no money or car) then who cares?  They would eventually capture or kill him.  The incentive of the conspirators was for the public to believe Oswald was guilty.  Flight does that.  The FBI and others would eventually capture him.  If they are "in" on the conspiracy, they already presumably know who the patsy is anyway.  No need for any roll call cover story given that Oswald worked in the building, was a known kook to the FBI, left a ton of evidence including his rifle, and was missing.  They didn't need Truly to fabricate any story to point the finger at Oswald.

Waffle.

[Bill Chapman]

If you believe the roll call happened, present the evidence.

Living History with Karen Westbrook Scranton

27:40-ish
'They took a roll call to make sure everyone was there' -- Scranton

[Richard Smith]

Your analytical powers leave a lot to be desired.
Firstly, I do not begin with the premise that Truly lied about the roll call.
Even the most cursory glance through what I've posted reveals that.
I begin with Biffle overhearing Truly's interaction with Fritz during which he hears that Oswald has failed to show up for a roll call and that they "can't find him anywhere".
I then present evidence that this roll call did not take place.
I also present evidence that this singling out of Oswald via the invented roll call immediately turns the direction of the investigation towards Oswald.
The roll call is the single element that turns the investigation towards Oswald but the roll call didn't happen. Truly invented it. I am at a loss to explain how this could be done in any innocent fashion so I am led to conclude that Truly lied about the roll call.

It's not a premise I begin with, it is a conclusion I am led to by the evidence.

If you believe the roll call happened, present the evidence.
If you believe there is an innocent explanation for Truly inventing the roll call, let's hear it.

The bottom line is this - if it is demonstrated beyond doubt that Truly lied about the roll call, then this itself is evidence that he was involved in a conspiracy to frame Oswald.

When Baker turns to Truly and says "Does this man work here?", what do you think Truly should do if he is a conspirator?

Waffle.

It makes no sense for Truly to fake a roll call when there was nothing to preclude him from having a roll call.  LOL.  He doesn't need to fake anything as an excuse to notice that Oswald is missing.  He had ample cause to notice (with or without a roll call) that Oswald was missing.  If Truly is part of some conspiracy with the role to bring Oswald to the attention of the authorities as you conclude (something that is pointless from a conspiracy perspective since the authorities would have quickly identified an unaccounted for nut job as a suspect) then he has a roll call or just claims he noticed him missing.  A perfectly reasonable explanation.  He doesn't make it up a fake excuse.  It's not like Oswald was still there and having a roll call would undermine this objective.  Another in a growing list of being unable to see the forest for the trees.

[Richard Smith]

When Baker turns to Truly and says "Does this man work here?", what do you think Truly should do if he is a conspirator?

Waffle.

I'm not sure why I should have to explain how your fantasy conspiracy worked.  If Truly is part of a conspiracy to ensure that Oswald is apprehended, the plan presumably wouldn't involve vouching for Oswald to the DPD so that he could escape only then to turn around and make up a fake roll call so that he can be apprehended.  Truly could have told Oswald to accompany them on the search for the assassin and kept him from leaving until the DPD secured the building.  Imagine Old Ozzie on the trail of the assassin! 

[Charles Collins]

Your analytical powers leave a lot to be desired.
Firstly, I do not begin with the premise that Truly lied about the roll call.
Even the most cursory glance through what I've posted reveals that.
I begin with Biffle overhearing Truly's interaction with Fritz during which he hears that Oswald has failed to show up for a roll call and that they "can't find him anywhere".
I then present evidence that this roll call did not take place.
I also present evidence that this singling out of Oswald via the invented roll call immediately turns the direction of the investigation towards Oswald.
The roll call is the single element that turns the investigation towards Oswald but the roll call didn't happen. Truly invented it. I am at a loss to explain how this could be done in any innocent fashion so I am led to conclude that Truly lied about the roll call.

It's not a premise I begin with, it is a conclusion I am led to by the evidence.

If you believe the roll call happened, present the evidence.
If you believe there is an innocent explanation for Truly inventing the roll call, let's hear it.

The bottom line is this - if it is demonstrated beyond doubt that Truly lied about the roll call, then this itself is evidence that he was involved in a conspiracy to frame Oswald.

When Baker turns to Truly and says "Does this man work here?", what do you think Truly should do if he is a conspirator?

Waffle.

…if it is demonstrated beyond doubt that Truly lied about the roll call,…


Two people, who were there, state that there was a roll call and have been pointed out in this thread. There is no reason whatsoever to believe that Truly lied about the roll call.

[Dan O'meara]

…if it is demonstrated beyond doubt that Truly lied about the roll call,…


Two people, who were there, state that there was a roll call and have been pointed out in this thread. There is no reason whatsoever to believe that Truly lied about the roll call.

I have to assume the two people you're talking about are Frazier and Karen Westbrook Scranton.
Firstly, Scranton is talking about a roll call taken on the second floor of the office workers there and has nothing to do with any roll call that may or may not have taken place on the first floor. Unless you're aware of a roll call where everyone in the building was taken to the same room and checked.
Secondly, Frazier has already been dealt with. I can't find any mention of a roll call in the interview you posted although it does contain Frazier's claims that after the shooting, instead of going straight back into the TSBD and down into the basement as he stated in his WC testimony, he walked towards the railroad yard where he encountered an impeccably dressed man with a rifle which was placed into a car. He then walked to the corner of Elm and Houston where he saw Oswald walking up Houston street toward him! It is these kind of claims that have undermined his credibility as a witness and the reason why his earlier statements should be accepted. I came across this excerpt from an interview with Frazier in 2002 - https://app.box.com/s/1rtitsd5catfh496qbdaxjrc96zhsp87


BUELL WESLEY FRAZIER -- "Mr. Shelley got us together--he and Mr.
Truly--and we had a roll call."
GARY MACK -- "And where did this take place?"
FRAZIER -- "Outside Mr. Shelley's office."
MACK -- "Did they actually read off names? Or did they just ask you guys,
'anybody missing'?"
FRAZIER -- "No, they read names off and you had to answer."
MACK -- "Okay. And who was missing?"
FRAZIER -- "The only person missing was Lee Oswald."

There are a number of problems with this.
'1) Frazier never mentions any kind of roll call in his WC testimony even though he talks about hanging around the area outside Shelley's office.
2) Not one single person working under Truly testifies to anything even remotely like this.
3) Truly himself never mentions anything even remotely like this.
4) Givens is also absent at this time.

Obviously, when witness testimony disagrees with what you think it's "he said, she said" crap but Frazier's later, completely unsubstantiated claims about a roll call decades after the event is all you need.
In the excerpt of the interview I've posted Frazier clearly states that the only person missing was Lee Oswald. This is from his WC testimony:

Mr. Frazier: Yes, sir; I told them and naturally Mr. Shelley and Billy vouched for me and so they didn't think anything about it.
Mr. Ball: Did you hear anybody around there asking for Lee Oswald?
Mr. Frazier: No, sir; I didn't.
Mr. Ball: At any time before you went home, did you hear anybody ask for Lee?
Mr. Frazier: No, sir; I don't believe they did, because they, you know, like one man showed us, we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper information where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more, and then we went on up to a little bit more to the front entrance more toward Mr. Shelley's office there with another man and stood there for a little while and told us all that was there could go ahead and go home.

[Dan O'meara]

It makes no sense for Truly to fake a roll call when there was nothing to preclude him from having a roll call.  LOL.  He doesn't need to fake anything as an excuse to notice that Oswald is missing.  He had ample cause to notice (with or without a roll call) that Oswald was missing.  If Truly is part of some conspiracy with the role to bring Oswald to the attention of the authorities as you conclude (something that is pointless from a conspiracy perspective since the authorities would have quickly identified an unaccounted for nut job as a suspect) then he has a roll call or just claims he noticed him missing.  A perfectly reasonable explanation.  He doesn't make it up a fake excuse.  It's not like Oswald was still there and having a roll call would undermine this objective.  Another in a growing list of being unable to see the forest for the trees.

"It makes no sense for Truly to fake a roll call when there was nothing to preclude him from having a roll call."

There is an incredibly simple point being made in this thread that you do not know how to deal with.
Truly lied to Fritz and his men about taking a roll call in which it was discovered Oswald had left the building.
You cannot provide any credible evidence that such a roll call took place.
That evidence does not exist.
It's enough that not one of the warehouse men who testified made any mention of anything like a roll call conducted by Truly.
But when we examine Truly's testimony it is clear that no such roll call took place:

"When I got back to the first floor, at first I didn't see anything except officers running around, reporters in the place. There was a regular madhouse."
"Then in a few minutes--it could have been moments or minutes at a time like that--I noticed some of my boys were over in the west corner of the shipping department, and there were several officers over there taking their names and addresses, and so forth."

Baker and Truly arrive back on the first floor around 10-15 minutes after the shooting to find "a regular madhouse".
I believe Tom Alyea takes footage of the two men stood talking with others shortly after they arrive on the first floor.
After an indeterminate amount of time Truly states that he notices some officers taking the names and addresses of some of his "boys". Frazier alludes to this in his WC testimony:

"...we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper information where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more..."

Truly continues:

Mr. Truly: There were other officers in other parts of the building taking other employees, like office people's names. I noticed that Lee Oswald was not among these boys.
So I picked up the telephone and called Mr. Aiken down at the other warehouse who keeps our application blanks. Back up there.
First I mentioned to Mr. Campbell--I asked Bill Shelley if he had seen him, he looked around and said no.

Mr. Belin: When you asked Bill Shelley if he had seen whom?

Mr. Truly: Lee Oswald. I said, "Have you seen him around lately," and he said no.
So Mr. Campbell is standing there, and I said, "I have a boy over here missing. I don't know whether to report it or not." Because I had another one or two out then. I didn't know whether they were all there or not. He said, "What do you think"? And I got to thinking. He said, "Well, we better do it anyway." It was so quick after that.
So I picked the phone up then and called Mr. Aiken, at the warehouse, and got the boy's name and general description and telephone number and address at Irving.

Not only is it abundantly clear that no roll call took place, Truly makes the decision that Oswald is missing even though he "had another one or two out then" and he "didn't know whether they were all there or not".

He didn't know whether they were all there or not !!

For some reason known only to himself Truly rings up Aiken for Oswald's details. Somehow he has discerned that Oswald has left the building and is the only employee missing.
It is clear you want to jump ahead to make your argument that the invented roll call has no relevance but it is down to the evidence to determine the correct opinion and not, as you would have it, down to your opinion to determine the correct evidence.
So I'll keep it simple and to the point of this thread:

1) Do you agree there was no roll call taken by Truly?
If so:
2) Do you agree Truly invented this roll call?
If so:
3) Do you agree this invented roll call was used to single out Oswald as a person of interest to the police?

Keep to the subject of the thread rather than trying to reverse engineer your own entrenched position to try and deal with this issue.