Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: This is how the rifle was gotten into the building  (Read 31238 times)

Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Re: This is how the rifle was gotten into the building
« Reply #32 on: May 11, 2020, 01:08:39 AM »
Advertisement
I'm a busy boy these days but I seem to recall a memo in which these rods were explained. As I recall Belin was out at the Paine house with some members of the DPD, when he asked Mrs. Paine if she'd actually had any curtain rods. When she told him yes, and showed him the rods, he decided it was best if they checked the rods to see if there was any evidence Oswald had handled them.


That's they way I recall it, anyhow. If my recollection is accurate, well, then, that would explain why the DPD knew the exhibit numbers.

I hope somebody with more time clears this up.

Thank you for this, Mr Speer!  Thumb1:

I have never come across such a memo and would be very grateful if someone could unearth it so we could assess its credibility.

In the meantime............ how would it "explain why the DPD knew the exhibit numbers"? Those exhibit numbers hadn't been assigned yet---------and wouldn't be for another eight days!

Here's how they were assigned in Ms Paine's home on the evening of 23 March:

Mr. JENNER - The short piece which Mrs. Paine has picked up and has exhibited to me, we will mark "Ruth Paine Exhibit No. 270," and we will cut a piece of the other twine or string and mark that as "Ruth Paine Exhibit No. 271."
...
Mr. JENNER - We will mark the sheet of wrapping paper which we have just cut from a roll of wrapping paper as "Ruth Paine Exhibit No. 272." Would you mark that, please, Miss Reporter?
...
Mr. JENNER - Off the record.
Miss Reporter, would you mark the strip of sticky tape I now hand you as "Ruth Paine Exhibit No. 273"?
...
Mrs. PAINE - It looks rather thin to me, rather thinner than the string on the package, sir.
Mr. JENNER - All right. We will take a sample of that, and that will be marked "Ruth Paine Exhibit No. 274."
...
Mr. JENNER - Miss Reporter, the cream colored curtain rod, we will mark Ruth Paine Exhibit 275 and the white one as Ruth Paine Exhibit No. 276.


Pure happenstance, right? How did DPD on 15 March see into the future and know that exactly this would happen on 23 March?

 Thumb1:

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: This is how the rifle was gotten into the building
« Reply #32 on: May 11, 2020, 01:08:39 AM »


Offline Pat Speer

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 88
Re: This is how the rifle was gotten into the building
« Reply #33 on: May 11, 2020, 05:26:20 AM »
You're right, Alan. I thought you were complaining that the exhibits had been given numbers before they were introduced during testimony. I thought that this was okay, because I had a clear recollection of a WC counsel (I thought Belin) going out to the house and giving exhibit numbers to items found in the garage. But what I'd forgotten was that, in a remarkably strange twist, Jenner had taken Mrs. Paine's testimony from her garage, and had assigned the exhibit numbers right there in the garage.

In such case, you are correct: it makes little sense that the DPD would know these numbers in advance. The exhibits were supposedly in Mrs. Paine's garage on the 23rd, even though they were supposedly sent to the lab on the 15th, and not released until the 24th.

Something is indeed screwy. I still have the feeling I've looked into this, however, and found a plausible excuse. I'll let you know if it comes back to me.

But in the meantime, let me add a little food for thought. The shipping of the rods to the DPD lab, and Mrs. Paine's subsequent testimony, both occurred in a period when the WC and FBI were at war, and the FBI was refusing to help the Commission with its investigation.

From patspeer.com, Chapter 3:

On 3-11, Warren Commission Counsel Melvin Eisenberg and David Belin visit the FBI crime lab. An internal FBI memo to FBI crime lab chief Ivan Conrad reflects the growing tension:  "During the further course of the discussion, Mr. Belin advised that inasmuch as it appeared that almost all of the investigation in this matter had been conducted by the FBI, and since the firearms identification was crucial to the case, the Commission felt that there was merit in having the firearms evidence examined by some other organization and was considering making such a request. Under any other circumstances a comment of this kind would have been the basis for an immediate discontinuance of FBI Laboratory cooperation and service; however, Belin was merely advised in this instance that any decision as to such course of action, of course, was strictly up the Commission." To this memo FBI Director Hoover adds that it is "getting to be more and more intolerable to deal with this Warren Commission."

And Hoover's irritation is infectious. A 3-18-64 memo from Dallas Special-Agent-in-Charge J. Gordon Shanklin to file (found in the Weisberg Archives) illuminates: "Inspector Malley said that the Bureau is sending a teletype with instructions re 'a bunch of real crackpots who will be in Dallas next week.' One is Hubert, a criminal law professor at Tulane University. Three attorneys on his staff are Norman Redlich, Joseph Ball, and a man named Genner (phonetic). We are to be extremely cautious in all connection with them. A loyalty investigation is being conducted on Genner and Ball. Redlich has been over in Russia and is on the borderline. Mr. Malley instructed that all personnel be told that if they have any dealings with these people, to keep quiet and not volunteer any information. The Director has said with regard to any request made by them of the Dallas Office, that it must first be cleared with the Bureau. This applies to everything, and we are to be extremely careful how we answer any questions."

Malley had it backwards, of course. Hubert, Ball, and "Genner" (actually Albert Jenner) worked for Redlich; Redlich did not work for Hubert.

And, from there, the antagonism between the FBI and the commission only grows. A 3-19 memo from Assistant Director Alex Rosen to Assistant Director Alan Belmont relates: "The Dallas Office called today and advised that United States Attorney H. Barefoot Sanders, Dallas, had telephonically advised attorneys from the President's Commission had arrived in Dallas today and were in his office. He advised they intended to interview between 50 and 100 witnesses within the next two to three weeks. Sanders requested the Dallas Office to locate six individuals that the attorneys advised they desire to interview on Friday morning and request these individuals to appear at the office of United States Attorney Sanders...The Dallas Office was advised that inasmuch as the United States Attorney's office had the names of the individuals and the addresses, this did not appear to be a matter that should be handled by the Bureau; and that Mr. Sanders should be told that the location of witnesses for the President's Commission where the names and addresses were available, was a matter that should be handled either by the United State's Attorney's office or whomever they should designate, but that it was not a matter that the Bureau should handle. The Dallas office was further advised that in the event the United States Attorney's Office was unable to locate these witnesses and it became a matter of a fugitive-type investigation to locate the witnesses, then the Dallas Office could accept a request to locate the witnesses and advise the Bureau promptly."

And it didn't stop there. A 3-24 memo from Rosen to Belmont adds: "This matter (Note: Rosen means The commission's desire to use outside experts) was discussed with J. Lee Rankin, General counsel, the President's Commission, in the early evening of March 23, 1964. Mr. Rankin was advised that in view of the action taken by the Commission concerning the firearms evidence, it was obvious the Commission does not have confidence in the FBI Laboratory, and that in view of the independent examinations being requested, it would appear desirable for the Commission to have whatever examination they desire from independent experts made and for the Bureau to step out of the picture from the standpoint of Laboratory examinations. It was pointed out to Mr. Rankin that our Laboratory was greatly burdened with a large volume of work and that if the examinations that we made were not going to be accepted, it would appear that there would be no reason for our Laboratory experts to be tied up on these examinations in utilizing the time it requires to furnish testimony concerning matters where independent examinations are being made...Throughout the discussion, Mr. Rankin seemed to be a little disturbed over the Bureau pointing out to him that the Commission obviously lacked confidence in our Laboratory and he repeatedly commented that the independent examinations of evidence were being made at the instructions of the seven members of the Commission. He gave no indication, however, whether this was the desire of certain members of the Commission and others were going along, or whether the Commission was in full agreement concerning this matter."

It is clear from these memos that the FBI considers itself above the Commission, and answerable to the "President's Commission" only as a courtesy to the President. The Commissioners, no doubt, know that dumping the FBI as their main investigative agency would be a political nightmare, and that Hoover would use his media sources to make it look like the Commissioners had gone overboard, and were wasting taxpayers' money. And Rosen knows the Commissioners know this. His threats, then, are really a warning: stop requesting outside help, which could only hurt the reputation of the FBI, or else.

Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Re: This is how the rifle was gotten into the building
« Reply #34 on: May 11, 2020, 11:28:11 AM »
You're right, Alan. I thought you were complaining that the exhibits had been given numbers before they were introduced during testimony. I thought that this was okay, because I had a clear recollection of a WC counsel (I thought Belin) going out to the house and giving exhibit numbers to items found in the garage. But what I'd forgotten was that, in a remarkably strange twist, Jenner had taken Mrs. Paine's testimony from her garage, and had assigned the exhibit numbers right there in the garage.

In such case, you are correct: it makes little sense that the DPD would know these numbers in advance. The exhibits were supposedly in Mrs. Paine's garage on the 23rd, even though they were supposedly sent to the lab on the 15th, and not released until the 24th.

Something is indeed screwy. I still have the feeling I've looked into this, however, and found a plausible excuse. I'll let you know if it comes back to me.

But in the meantime, let me add a little food for thought. The shipping of the rods to the DPD lab, and Mrs. Paine's subsequent testimony, both occurred in a period when the WC and FBI were at war, and the FBI was refusing to help the Commission with its investigation.

From patspeer.com, Chapter 3:

On 3-11, Warren Commission Counsel Melvin Eisenberg and David Belin visit the FBI crime lab. An internal FBI memo to FBI crime lab chief Ivan Conrad reflects the growing tension:  "During the further course of the discussion, Mr. Belin advised that inasmuch as it appeared that almost all of the investigation in this matter had been conducted by the FBI, and since the firearms identification was crucial to the case, the Commission felt that there was merit in having the firearms evidence examined by some other organization and was considering making such a request. Under any other circumstances a comment of this kind would have been the basis for an immediate discontinuance of FBI Laboratory cooperation and service; however, Belin was merely advised in this instance that any decision as to such course of action, of course, was strictly up the Commission." To this memo FBI Director Hoover adds that it is "getting to be more and more intolerable to deal with this Warren Commission."

And Hoover's irritation is infectious. A 3-18-64 memo from Dallas Special-Agent-in-Charge J. Gordon Shanklin to file (found in the Weisberg Archives) illuminates: "Inspector Malley said that the Bureau is sending a teletype with instructions re 'a bunch of real crackpots who will be in Dallas next week.' One is Hubert, a criminal law professor at Tulane University. Three attorneys on his staff are Norman Redlich, Joseph Ball, and a man named Genner (phonetic). We are to be extremely cautious in all connection with them. A loyalty investigation is being conducted on Genner and Ball. Redlich has been over in Russia and is on the borderline. Mr. Malley instructed that all personnel be told that if they have any dealings with these people, to keep quiet and not volunteer any information. The Director has said with regard to any request made by them of the Dallas Office, that it must first be cleared with the Bureau. This applies to everything, and we are to be extremely careful how we answer any questions."

Malley had it backwards, of course. Hubert, Ball, and "Genner" (actually BrianJenner) worked for Redlich; Redlich did not work for Hubert.

And, from there, the antagonism between the FBI and the commission only grows. A 3-19 memo from Assistant Director Alex Rosen to Assistant Director Alan Belmont relates: "The Dallas Office called today and advised that United States Attorney H. Barefoot Sanders, Dallas, had telephonically advised attorneys from the President's Commission had arrived in Dallas today and were in his office. He advised they intended to interview between 50 and 100 witnesses within the next two to three weeks. Sanders requested the Dallas Office to locate six individuals that the attorneys advised they desire to interview on Friday morning and request these individuals to appear at the office of United States Attorney Sanders...The Dallas Office was advised that inasmuch as the United States Attorney's office had the names of the individuals and the addresses, this did not appear to be a matter that should be handled by the Bureau; and that Mr. Sanders should be told that the location of witnesses for the President's Commission where the names and addresses were available, was a matter that should be handled either by the United State's Attorney's office or whomever they should designate, but that it was not a matter that the Bureau should handle. The Dallas office was further advised that in the event the United States Attorney's Office was unable to locate these witnesses and it became a matter of a fugitive-type investigation to locate the witnesses, then the Dallas Office could accept a request to locate the witnesses and advise the Bureau promptly."

And it didn't stop there. A 3-24 memo from Rosen to Belmont adds: "This matter (Note: Rosen means The commission's desire to use outside experts) was discussed with J. Lee Rankin, General counsel, the President's Commission, in the early evening of March 23, 1964. Mr. Rankin was advised that in view of the action taken by the Commission concerning the firearms evidence, it was obvious the Commission does not have confidence in the FBI Laboratory, and that in view of the independent examinations being requested, it would appear desirable for the Commission to have whatever examination they desire from independent experts made and for the Bureau to step out of the picture from the standpoint of Laboratory examinations. It was pointed out to Mr. Rankin that our Laboratory was greatly burdened with a large volume of work and that if the examinations that we made were not going to be accepted, it would appear that there would be no reason for our Laboratory experts to be tied up on these examinations in utilizing the time it requires to furnish testimony concerning matters where independent examinations are being made...Throughout the discussion, Mr. Rankin seemed to be a little disturbed over the Bureau pointing out to him that the Commission obviously lacked confidence in our Laboratory and he repeatedly commented that the independent examinations of evidence were being made at the instructions of the seven members of the Commission. He gave no indication, however, whether this was the desire of certain members of the Commission and others were going along, or whether the Commission was in full agreement concerning this matter."

It is clear from these memos that the FBI considers itself above the Commission, and answerable to the "President's Commission" only as a courtesy to the President. The Commissioners, no doubt, know that dumping the FBI as their main investigative agency would be a political nightmare, and that Hoover would use his media sources to make it look like the Commissioners had gone overboard, and were wasting taxpayers' money. And Rosen knows the Commissioners know this. His threats, then, are really a warning: stop requesting outside help, which could only hurt the reputation of the FBI, or else.

Thanking you kindly once again, Mr Speer! What a scream Shanklin's memo is ("Redlich has been over in Russia and is on the borderline"!).

'Something screwy' is an apt description of the shenanigans around the curtain rods! Your noting of the WC-FBI tensions around this time (second week of March) is very much on point------------we have a three man dance between SS (Agent Howlett), DPD (Lt. Day) and WC (Jenner). FBI nowhere to be seen. Although it is worth noting that this is the time they suddenly get all interested in a certain clipboard shown them back in December...

It beggars belief that no one in the FBI had thought to ask Ms Paine back in November whether any curtain rods were missing from her home. It would have surely been one of the very first questions they would want the answer to. Yet not a single mention of this crucial issue to be found in those early (or later) FBI reports.

 Thumb1:

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: This is how the rifle was gotten into the building
« Reply #34 on: May 11, 2020, 11:28:11 AM »


Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: This is how the rifle was gotten into the building
« Reply #35 on: May 11, 2020, 03:56:28 PM »
Thanking you kindly once again, Mr Speer! What a scream Shanklin's memo is ("Redlich has been over in Russia and is on the borderline"!).

'Something screwy' is an apt description of the shenanigans around the curtain rods! Your noting of the WC-FBI tensions around this time (second week of March) is very much on point------------we have a three man dance between SS (Agent Howlett), DPD (Lt. Day) and WC (Jenner). FBI nowhere to be seen. Although it is worth noting that this is the time they suddenly get all interested in a certain clipboard shown them back in December...

It beggars belief that no one in the FBI had thought to ask Ms Paine back in November whether any curtain rods were missing from her home. It would have surely been one of the very first questions they would want the answer to. Yet not a single mention of this crucial issue to be found in those early (or later) FBI reports.

 Thumb1:

It beggars belief that no one in the FBI had thought to ask Ms Paine back in November whether any curtain rods were missing from her home.

Why would they ask?.....When they knew the curtain rod story was BS!

Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Re: This is how the rifle was gotten into the building
« Reply #36 on: May 11, 2020, 04:29:34 PM »
It beggars belief that no one in the FBI had thought to ask Ms Paine back in November whether any curtain rods were missing from her home.

Why would they ask?.....When they knew the curtain rod story was BS!

Are you kidding, Mr Cakebread? They could tell the world about the curtain rods still in Ms Paine's garage--another of the commie's lies exposed!

But no. Up until the WC testimony taking in the Paine home in March 64, all we get on the matter is............. radio silence.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: This is how the rifle was gotten into the building
« Reply #36 on: May 11, 2020, 04:29:34 PM »


Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Re: This is how the rifle was gotten into the building
« Reply #37 on: May 11, 2020, 04:36:05 PM »
Are you kidding, Mr Cakebread? They could tell the world about the curtain rods still in Ms Paine's garage--another of the commie's lies exposed!

But no. Up until the WC testimony taking in the Paine home in March 64, all we get on the matter is............. radio silence.

They could tell the world about the curtain rods still in Ms Paine's garage-

I fail to see how that would have advanced the framing of Lee Oswald......  Simply because Ruthie had curtain rods in the garage wouldn't have meant much....Or am I missing something?

Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Re: This is how the rifle was gotten into the building
« Reply #38 on: May 11, 2020, 05:11:25 PM »
They could tell the world about the curtain rods still in Ms Paine's garage-

I fail to see how that would have advanced the framing of Lee Oswald......  Simply because Ruthie had curtain rods in the garage wouldn't have meant much....Or am I missing something?

Yes, you are! Curtain rods missing from the garage = unwelcome boost for Mr Oswald's (alleged) claim to Mr Frazier; no curtain rods missing = welcome boost for counterclaim that he lied to Mr Frazier.

And! Let's not forget that the WC built an entire (and otherwise totally unnecessary) testimony-taking session around the phoney 'finding' of two curtain rods in the Paine garage-------even rigging the thing so that they would land on the numbers 275 & 276. As Mr Speer says, something screwy here!

 Thumb1:

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: This is how the rifle was gotten into the building
« Reply #38 on: May 11, 2020, 05:11:25 PM »


Online Richard Smith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5025
Re: This is how the rifle was gotten into the building
« Reply #39 on: May 11, 2020, 06:13:57 PM »
When do you think the WC decided to call them '275 & 276', Mr Smith? And why those numbers? What was 'Ruth Paine Exhibit 1'?

Thumb1:

I've asked you a couple of very simple questions to test the veracity of your otherwise baseless theory that Oswald carried some curtain rods to work.  Thus far you have refused to even attempt to answer.  So once again:

1) Why would "Mr. Oswald" himself lie and deny that he carried curtain rods that day if he in fact had done so?  It would have aided his own cause to direct the DPD to that package as it would confirm that there was no rifle in it. 

2) Why would the authorities who you believe are otherwise involved in a frame up that includes denying that he carried any curtain rods suddenly, on their own motion, months after Oswald's death bring those curtain rods to light, test them for Oswald's prints (the same guy they are trying to frame by denying he carried any curtain rods!), and document all this on a form? 

3) Who found these curtain rods at the TSBD and how have they been kept quiet?

The narrative you have concocted makes absolutely no sense.  Both Oswald and his alleged framers are acting contrary to their own self interest in this fairy tale.