JFK Assassination Forum

Just in case anyone missed it on DVP's "JFK Videos" thread, this is JBC's first interview, conducted in June 1964. He extensively discusses the shooting and the WC's efforts to convince him of the SBT. (The WR would not be issued for months, and the interview proceeds as though the SBT was not yet final.) JBC is adamant and, from a lawyer's perspective, a fantastic witness. In later years, he must have been under great pressure to toe the line, but he is adamant here.

     So I condense the discussion to 3 Bullet Points, and you then claim that's ALL the information? Your memory continues failing you. There's also: (4) The "wide open" Huge Gates which granted clandestine access/exit from the TSBD. Those "wide open" Huge Gates being almost directly across the street from this "getaway" car. (5) The Couch Film clearly showing "2 Guys" moving away from the "getaway" car only 20 seconds after the Kill Shot. and, (6) The "attention" the DPD devoted to this car. The DPD immobilized this "getaway" car from the front and the back, along with a shotgun pointing skyward DPD Officer standing guard over it. This was No ordinary car. It was an abandoned "getaway" car. And the DPD knew it.

It is comical that you think any of this is an indication the car in question is a getaway car. How you conclude one from the other is truly amazing. For example, you assume a photo of a cop with a shotgun pointed upward is an indication he was guarding the car. I have seen lots of footage of DPD officers holding shotguns surrounding the TSDB looking at the upper floors of the building. With these officers surrounding the building, it is not at all surprising that one of them would be standing near the car in question. Your silliness is in assuming that because one of the cops was near the car he was guarding the car.

And based on that information, the only explanation you could come up with is that the car was a getaway car, that never got away. WTG, Clouseau.

     So I condense the discussion to 3 Bullet Points, and you then claim that's ALL the information? Your memory continues failing you. There's also: (4) The "wide open" Huge Gates which granted clandestine access/exit from the TSBD. Those "wide open" Huge Gates being almost directly across the street from this "getaway" car. (5) The Couch Film clearly showing "2 Guys" moving away from the "getaway" car only 20 seconds after the Kill Shot. and, (6) The "attention" the DPD devoted to this car. The DPD immobilized this "getaway" car from the front and the back, along with a shotgun pointing skyward DPD Officer standing guard over it. This was No ordinary car. It was an abandoned "getaway" car. And the DPD knew it.

Humm, well, since 2/3 to 3/4 of the Western world finds your theory of the JFK assassination to be implausible, perhaps you should focus on coming up with a plausible lone-gunman theory. Here are just a few of the markedly implausible aspects of the lone-gunman story:

-- Your supposed lone gunman, Lee Harvey Oswald, who was at best a mediocre shot when using a semi-automatic rifle against stationary targets at Marine rifle ranges, allegedly used a bolt-action rifle to perform a shooting feat that has never been duplicated, not even by Master-rated riflemen who used the alleged murder weapon and who fired under easier conditions than those Oswald would have faced.

Oswald was more than capable of making the shots that killed JFK. His longest shot was only 88 yards, lest than half the distance he had to qualify at in the USMC. [quite]

Not one of the rifle tests that have been done to date have duplicated all of the conditions under which the supposed lone-gunman would have had to fire. In the one rifle test that duplicated most of those conditions, the 1967 CBS rifle test, only one of the 12 riflemen scored two hits in the required timeframe on the first attempt, and that was only because the test counted shots as "hits" even if they landed far down on the back or far out on the shoulder of the target silhouette, at least tripling the size of the target compared to Oswald's alleged shooting feat.[/quote]

This one has been a favorite red herring argument of the CTs for years. No shooting in the history of firearms has ever been duplicated because every shooting has its own set of variables that cannot be duplicated. There is nothing about Oswald's shooting of JFK with his Carcano rifle that was beyond his capabilities.

-- You can't even identify when Oswald could have zeroed the alleged murder weapon. Some of you have even floated the absurd argument that the rifle would not have needed to be zeroed, a spurious notion that even WC staffer Wesley Liebeler scorned in an internal WC memo.

Tell us why it is necessary to prove when Oswald zeroed his rifle. Is that a legal requirement to prove somebody committed a homicide with a firearm?

-- You have your supposed lone gunman shooting from the sixth-floor window when multiple eyewitness accounts (1) independently put him on the first and second floors of the building during the shooting, and (2) rule out the claim that he dashed down the stairway in time to be seen by Officer Baker beyond the second-floor landing's door to the lunchroom.

Now you are just making things up. Nobody put Oswald at another location in the TSBD DURING the shooting. Your lie refutes itself. How could Oswald be on the first AND second floors during the shooting. It's amazing somebody who has been at this as long as you have could come up with a claim so wacky.

-- Your alleged lone gunman went to the trouble of carefully hiding his rifle but left his paper "gun case" and his three spent shells in plain view near the sixth-floor window.

So?

-- Your supposed single assassin allegedly ordered his rifle by mail, idiotically and needlessly creating a paper trail that led straight back to him, when he could have easily bought a better rifle at a local gun store that would have been untraceable (there was no gun registration in Texas in 1963). Not only this, but he mail-ordered the rifle using name Hidell (although no Hidell was listed as authorized to get mail from his post office box), and then, incredibly, carried a fake Hidell ID card on him on the day of the shooting!

Oswald didn't buy the rifle for the purpose of killing JFK because he couldn't have possibly known 8 months prior to the act, he would be handed and opportunity to do that. A firearm is only traceable if the authorities have the weapon in their possession. When Oswald took the shot at Walker, he was able to leave the scene with his weapon. He didn't have that option when he killed JFK. Leaving the building with the rifle was not an option. Imagine if Oswald was holding the rifle when Baker confronted him. The encounter would have ended very differently and possibly badly for Baker since Oswald would have still had a live round in the chamber. Oswald could have bought better rifle but it would have cost him more money.

Oswald was no fool and was not ignorant. He was highly intelligent. He spoke fluent Russian. He was a voracious reader. Oswald’s tested IQ scores generally ranged from 103 in the fourth grade to 118-119 on subsequent tests. His 118-119 scores put him in the above-average category. Historical and psychiatric evaluations consistently classified his overall intelligence as above average. Says British scholar Anthony Summers,

. . . evidence suggests Oswald was far from stupid. School records show that in several subjects he was three years ahead of his class, and his intelligence was noted by his officers in the Marine Corps. (Not in Your Lifetime: The Defining Book on the JFK Assassination, p. 77).

So what's your point. Nobody has said Oswald was stupid. Oswald was presented a golden opportunity to achieve fame by killing JFK. His options were limited. The time and place were dictated to him. He had to smuggle his rifle into work and then leave it behind when he fled the scene. Your whole premise is that Oswald planned to get away with the crime. I don't think that even crossed his mind. I think he was perfectly willing to trade his life for JFKs just as the three previous presidential assassins had done. Booth couldn't have been more conspicuous after he shot Lincoln. Everybody in the theater knew who he was when he leapt from Lincoln's box onto the stage. Guiteau and Czolgosz both committed their crimes at close range knowing they would be apprehended immediately. They didn't seem to care. Why do you assume Oswald would have.

You have your supposed lone gunman using the wrong kind of ammo to have caused the bullet fragmentation seen on the JFK autopsy skull x-rays.
This isn't even a close call. No FMJ bullet would have exploded into dozens of tiny fragments and several sizable fragments, in addition to depositing a large fragment, two small fragments, and several tiny fragments 1 cm below its alleged entry point. Such behavior for FMJ bullets is unknown in forensic science. Revealingly, the HSCA's medical panel declined to cite a single case where an FMJ bullet had behaved in this manner, even though they knew this was an issue.

Can you cite an expert in either wound ballistics or forensic medicine who shares your opinion on this or is this just another of your amateurish arguments.?

 

Again, these are just a few of the implausible claims of the lone-gunman theory.

The only implausible claims are the ones made by you.

Does anyone have any idea when the missing daybooks of George Hunter White went missing? Or if they were ever seen when the books surfaced in the 1970's? I am talking about the daybooks for the years 1963, 1964, and 1966 through 1969. They were not digitized and placed online by the Stanford Library, which now holds the originals. Stanford claims to not have these missing books.

This is, to say the least, a curious gap.

John Crewdson, the legendary NYTIMES reporter, reported on the George Hunter White diaries as early as 1977 in this NYTIMES article.https://www.nytimes.com/1977/09/20/archives/abuses-in-testing-of-drugs-by-cia-to-be-panel-focus-senate-panel-to.html The memorable quote from his piece:
“He paid his rent,” Mr. Milonas said, adding that he could shed no light on an entry in Mr. White's diary for Oct. 19, 1961 that refers to an afternoon meeting at the Planation Inn of the “civil liberties and rubber hose society.”

They were very hard to get access to at that time. Crewdson has no recollection of whether the missing books were in the collection when he looked at them. Several researchers like Hank Albarelli and Doug Valentine looked at the books in either the 70's or 80's, but I have not seen references to GHW daybooks from the missing years in their writings.

The story of the daybooks is that they were passed along after his death to a local community college. From there they went to another library and finally ended up at Stanford.

Were the key books never given (along with all the others) to the community college by White's wife? Or did they disappear some time after that?

Thanks! DAN MCGUIRE