Author Topic: The HSCA Says...James J. Rowley  (Read 498 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Rob Caprio

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 23069
The HSCA Says...James J. Rowley
« on: November 14, 2017, 04:02:06 PM »
Disclaimer: I will no longer respond to any posts that are off topic and/or meant to derail the issue of the opening post. This should not be taken as me running, but instead seen as me keeping the topic on track.

I have no issue with any WC defender, therefore, I am happy to discuss the case in a manner that uses the actual evidence with them. IF the WC was correct in their final conclusion as they claim then this should be no problem for them.

I will not participate in any personal discussions with them as these are meant to distract and discredit instead of focusing on the JFK assassination. I come here to discuss and learn about the JFK assassination and nothing more.

No more games with the  :character0029:. The LNers have to to discuss the WC's, HSCA's and ARRB's evidence or move along.

****************************************

The House Select Committee On Assassinations (HSCA) was called to session to review, and in some cases investigate, what the Warren Commission (WC) did and didn’t do in regards to the John F. Kennedy (JFK) assassination.

One of the key groups involved in the WC’s “investigation” was the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Another was the Secret Service (SS) who had also been responsible for the protection of Presidential John F. Kennedy (JFK). Needless to say they failed in that duty. This post will look at the testimony of the head of the SS at the time of the assassination.

The HSCA Says … James J. Rowley.


****************************************

On September 19, 1978, James Rowley appeared before the HSCA. He had not been with the president in Dallas, Texas, when he had been assassinated so his testimony would be more big picture in regards to what happened after the shooting.

He instructed Paul Paterni, Deputy Chief, to locate the closest inspector to Dallas and then dispatch him there. It turned out to be Thomas Kelley who was wrapping up a trip to Louisville, Kentucky.

Early on in his testimony Rowley makes an interesting comment.


Mr. MATTHEWS. At the time you made that assignment to Inspector Kelley, did you give him any specific instructions of what he should do when he reached Dallas?

Chief ROWLEY. I did not speak to him, but I am quite sure that Deputy Chief Paterni did. Paterni told him to take charge of the investigation, which was also my thought at the time we decided to send him there.

What does Rowley mean by “take charge of the investigation?” The SS, like the FBI, did not have jurisdiction for the crime as in 1963 the killing of a president was NOT a federal crime. The city of Dallas had jurisdiction for the assassination which meant that the Dallas Police Department (DPD) had jurisdiction. So how could Inspector Kelley of the SS take charge of the investigation?

It should be noted that despite having no jurisdiction for the assassination the SS took both the body of JFK and the presidential limousine back to Washington, D.C., within a short time of the shooting.

Rowley is then asked about several reports regarding a conspiracy plan to kill JFK in Chicago, but says that he never saw one of the reports and did not recall the other despite his initials being on it.

He then says something that seems ridiculous.


Mr. MATTHEWS. Well, did you receive a report indicating how the agents had performed at the time that the shooting episode occurred in Dealey Plaza?

Chief ROWLEY. The report indicated that they performed adequately under the circumstances. The action of Agent Clint Hill,that he was attempting to take some action, is indicative of the agent's response.

How in the world could he say “that they performed adequately” when no one did anything during the whole shooting sequence besides Clint Hill? The assassination was filmed and photographed so we can see what the SS did, and it was basically nothing.

No one tried this cover JFK. The driver of the limousine, William Greer, did not speed up and drive away. Not one agent reacted and returned fire. There were two incidences of action by the SS and neither pertained to JFK.

Lyndon B. Johnson’s (LBJ) SS agents did react as he was supposedly covered by one of them. Rowley mentioned SS Agent Clint Hill and said that he was attempting to “take some action” and he was, but it can be argued that this action was for Jacqueline Kennedy’s benefit because he was assigned to her and she was attempting to crawl on the trunk of the limousine. His action was too late to save JFK’s life anyway.

How can any person, let alone the SS Chief, think that the SS performed “adequately” on November 22, 1963? Given the bad performance in protecting the president, why did he think that they could do a good job with the investigation?


Mr. MATTHEWS. At the time of the assassination, had the Secret Service established any procedures for the handling of physical evidence?

Chief ROWLEY. I think basically they handled the physical evidence as they would any other evidence, particularly evidence in the criminal field.

Mr. MATTHEWS. Mr. Kelley mentioned that there was some confusion as to what the scope of the Secret Service investigation was. What authority did the Secret Service have to participate in the investigation?

Chief ROWLEY. We were involved in the investigation in that we had the responsibility of protecting the President. The reason for my dispatching Mr. Kelley to Dallas was to supervise the investigation, to ascertain the facts as quickly as possible.

We have seen that their  “handling” of the president’s dead body and the limousine were illegal actions since the SS had NO jurisdictions on November 22, 1963. If you are interested in the issue of jurisdiction please see my “Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions” series as I have gone into this issue quite a bit there.

Briefly, jurisdiction dictates who is responsible for a crime in terms of investigating it and prosecuting it. This is a vitally important issue. Jurisdiction is usually based on geography, the type of crime committed or who was affected by the crime. For example, a person is murdered in New York City. The jurisdiction for the crime belongs to the New York City Police Department. If however the person is a federal employee then it becomes a case for the FBI. If the person is a military member then it goes to CID or NCIS.

Jurisdiction was meant to help prevent the overloading of one area with investigations and prosecutions.

Once a jurisdiction is set then that group is responsible for the investigation, gathering of evidence, processing of evidence and prosecution of the defendant(s). In the case of the JFK assassination the jurisdiction resided with the DPD, Irving Police Department and the Sheriff's Office on November 22, 1963. This did NOT legally change until LBJ’s Executive Order took effect on November 26, 1963.

If we take Rowley's statement at face value it means that they handled other physical evidence the same way that they handled the body and limousine – illegally.

Rowley is then asked what authority the SS had to investigate this crime on November 22 and he provides a shifty and dishonest answer. He said that they were involved in the investigation because they were responsible for the protection of the president. These two things are NOT the same. The SS actually had no investigative authority. Furthermore, given their performance in protecting the president who would think that they would do any better with an investigation?

The SS certainly had no authority to “supervise the investigation” as Rowley said. It makes one wonder what Inspector Kelley was actually supervising. The cover-up perhaps?

Rowley is asked why Kelley couldn't  have obtained a tape recorder for the three interviews he sat in on with LHO. Rowley actually said, “I don't know whether we had tape recorders, but I think you must recognize under the situation at that time that Mr. Kelley was rushed down there and even if he had the funds to rent a tape recorder, I don't think he would have had the time to do so.”

What? So no one within the DPD, FBI or the SS could obtain a tape recorder? Apparently even court reporters were hard to find too.


Mr. EDGAR. Would you have insisted that word for word, verbatim be taken down by a court reporter?

Chief ROWLEY. If you could obtain one, I suppose you could. But in the confusion, no one had an opportunity to ask questions because in addition to the people that he described there, there were also the press right beyond the perimeter trying to ask questions.

Sure. It is more likely no one wanted to get LHO's words down. It was safer that way. Perhaps LHO never said anything to take down. I mean all we have is the word of some questionable organizations and people for what went on between November 22-24, 1963.

Rowley acknowledges that the DPD had jurisdiction during his testimony.


Mr. ROWLEY. … In addition, you had the situation with the Dallas Police Department. The State had the responsibility initially. So that as Tom Kelley indicated this morning, you know, they were the host, so therefore you had to respect their jurisdiction.

To carry this a bit further, the FBI kept after me to try to get our man in charge in Dallas, Vernon Sorrels who was the agent in charge, and had a rapport with the Chief of the Dallas Police Department, to get them to release the rifle so that it could be flown to Washington and for ballistic tests. This is the process that I had to go through at the time in order to get them to release it. So I give you that for what it is worth that there was confusion and difficulty.

This is yet another confirmation illustrating that the DPD had jurisdiction for the crime and evidence. The FBI was using SS Agent Forrest Sorrels to get the alleged murder weapon when they had NO right to it. The SS was even more guilty as they just took the body of JFK and the limousine.

What do you think? Do you think that the SS did an adequate job on November 22, 1963? Do you believe that the SS agents couldn't differentiate between backfires and gunshots because they were focusing on the people in Dealey Plaza?

Do you think that the SS should have been supervising the investigation? Do you believe that the SS and others couldn't obtain a tape recorder or a court reporter? How did they take the statements of other suspects?

One of the big issues is that Rowley wouldn't confirm that the WC was ever told about the Chicago and Miami plots (or Tampa even though it is not mentioned). This along with the Fidel Castro assassination plans by the CIA were huge omissions that had to affect the final conclusion.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2017, 09:56:49 PM
by Rob Caprio
»

Offline David Jackson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 61
  • 0
Re: The HSCA Says...James J. Rowley
« Reply #1 on: November 14, 2017, 06:57:04 PM »
The SS as an organisation were complicit in the plot.  The SS work for the Treasury and we all know what JFK was doing to the Treasury when he started cutting them out of issuing bank notes.  The Treasury had the motive and the means.  They illegally removed key evidence; the limo and the body.  They were with the DPD during the interviews.  There's no way the SS would confuse gunshots and fire crackers with their training and the photos show how quickly they turned to look behind after the first shot.  They slowed down in the kill zone on Elm too.

The recent document release is gradually revealing that the CIA and other agencies had more knowledge about Oswald than previously admitted and its likely they knew of the plot and let it happen which makes them as guilty as the shooter.  However, before it happened they manipulated situations like the imposter in Mexico City to frame others for the conspiracy.  The rogue agency elements wanted a pre-emptive nuclear strike on Russia and to overthrow Cuba.  The MC charade allowed them to keep their options open.  However, after the deed they royally soiled themselves when they thought Russia might strike first.  Hence RFK and LBJ assuring Russia that they didn't hold Russia responsible.

The WC had the brief to determine a lone nutter solely to avoid nuclear war.  In this regard it was a great success.  In terms of justice for the murder of JFK it failed dismally as it couldn't achieve both.

Offline Paul May

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7063
Re: The HSCA Says...James J. Rowley
« Reply #2 on: November 14, 2017, 07:45:15 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The SS as an organisation were complicit in the plot.  The SS work for the Treasury and we all know what JFK was doing to the Treasury when he started cutting them out of issuing bank notes.  The Treasury had the motive and the means.  They illegally removed key evidence; the limo and the body.  They were with the DPD during the interviews.  There's no way the SS would confuse gunshots and fire crackers with their training and the photos show how quickly they turned to look behind after the first shot.  They slowed down in the kill zone on Elm too.

The recent document release is gradually revealing that the CIA and other agencies had more knowledge about Oswald than previously admitted and its likely they knew of the plot and let it happen which makes them as guilty as the shooter.  However, before it happened they manipulated situations like the imposter in Mexico City to frame others for the conspiracy.  The rogue agency elements wanted a pre-emptive nuclear strike on Russia and to overthrow Cuba.  The MC charade allowed them to keep their options open.  However, after the deed they royally soiled themselves when they thought Russia might strike first.  Hence RFK and LBJ assuring Russia that they didn't hold Russia responsible.

The WC had the brief to determine a lone nutter solely to avoid nuclear war.  In this regard it was a great success.  In terms of justice for the murder of JFK it failed dismally as it couldn't achieve both.

Where to begin?  The plot?  What plot?  Be specific and avoid bias and speculation.  Thats been rampant for 54 years.  Thanx.

Offline David Jackson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 61
  • 0
Re: The HSCA Says...James J. Rowley
« Reply #3 on: November 14, 2017, 08:05:44 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Where to begin?  The plot?  What plot?  Be specific and avoid bias and speculation.  Thats been rampant for 54 years.  Thanx.

Have a wild guess Sherlock.  Not been too much speculation and bias since the HSCA

Offline Paul May

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7063
Re: The HSCA Says...James J. Rowley
« Reply #4 on: November 14, 2017, 08:29:07 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Have a wild guess Sherlock.  Not been too much speculation and bias since the HSCA

Here we go again.  New kook poster incapable of answering a direct question and even getting sassy about it.  It never changes.

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Super Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10048
Re: The HSCA Says...James J. Rowley
« Reply #5 on: November 14, 2017, 09:03:39 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Here we go again.  New kook poster incapable of answering a direct question and even getting sassy about it.  It never changes.

...as opposed to the old kook poster who gets sassy about everything.

Offline David Jackson

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 61
  • 0
Re: The HSCA Says...James J. Rowley
« Reply #6 on: November 14, 2017, 09:55:57 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
...as opposed to the old kook poster who gets sassy about everything.

 snigger1 :051bye: