Then went outside to watch P. parade ( Parts 1 & 2 )

[Dan O'meara]

Ah, this amusingly evasive response gets us to the heart of the matter, Mr O'Meara. Where in the TSBD do you believe Mr Oswald was at the time of the assassination?

Don't know.

~Grin~ Doesn't sound like it. Your second refusal to answer the question of whether Mr Oswald did indeed see Messrs Jarman and Norman re-enter the building shortly before the assassination is noted.

If you want to ask the question, ask the question.

He never confirmed Mr Oswald's confirmation of the lunchroom incident, but---------after the deep-sixing of his draft interrogation report---------he did go along with the burying of Mr Oswald's actual claims. So he was part of the cover-up but not specifically of the lunchroom hoax.

Hmmm...

Do you believe agent Bookhout was part of the Hoax?

[Alan Ford]

Don't know.

So why do you think he needs to fabricate an alibi by making a false claim about having gone to one to eat lunch and then gone outside to watch the P. Parade?

Do you believe agent Bookhout was part of the Hoax?

Already answered------no, he was not part of the lunchroom hoax.

[Dan O'meara]

So why do you think he needs to fabricate an alibi by making a false claim about having gone to one to eat lunch and then gone outside to watch the P. Parade?

The important part of his false claim is that he was outside watching the P. parade, the implication being that he was outside the TSBD as JFK passed by. This is his first interrogation. He is being questioned about the shooting of the president. The shooting took place from the TSBD. Oswald is the prime suspect for the shooting. His first reaction must be to distance himself from the alleged crime.

Already answered------no, he was not part of the lunchroom hoax.

So Bookhout's report dated the 25th which contains the full lunchroom encounter is not part of the Hoax.
It must be.
How can you say Bookhout isn't part of the Hoax?

[Alan Ford]

The important part of his false claim is that he was outside watching the P. parade, the implication being that he was outside the TSBD as JFK passed by.

You've just done a 180, Mr O'Meara. Just to be clear: You now accept that Mr Oswald did indeed claim to have been outside at the time of the assassination?

So Bookhout's report dated the 25th which contains the full lunchroom encounter is not part of the Hoax.
It must be.
How can you say Bookhout isn't part of the Hoax?

I do apologize, Mr O'Meara, I misread your question: yes, Agent Bookhout (author of the lunchroom-fiction solo interrogation report) was indeed a party to the lunchroom hoax.

[Dan O'meara]

You've just done a 180, Mr O'Meara. Just to be clear: You now accept that Mr Oswald did indeed claim to have been outside at the time of the assassination?

Just to be clear Alan.
You asked me this - "Do you believe that Mr Oswald did, however, make those claims in that first interrogation?"
I answered - "Yes, I do believe Oswald made those claims in his first interrogation."

I have not done a 180. I think you might be getting a little tired.

I do apologize, Mr O'Meara, I misread your question: yes, Agent Bookhout (author of the lunchroom-fiction solo interrogation report) was indeed a party to the lunchroom hoax.

Ok, Bookhout is part of the Hoax but Hosty isn't.
Is Fritz part of the Hoax?

[Alan Ford]

Just to be clear Alan.
You asked me this - "Do you believe that Mr Oswald did, however, make those claims in that first interrogation?"
I answered - "Yes, I do believe Oswald made those claims in his first interrogation."

I have not done a 180. I think you might be getting a little tired.

No, Mr O'Meara, you're projecting.

You had been maintaining steadfastly that Mr Oswald merely claimed to have gone outside to watch what he thought would be the P. Parade, but that he never claimed to have been outside actually watching it. Your position has just shifted, most tellingly. You now accept that Mr Oswald did indeed claim to have been "outside watching the P. Parade" (your words). This admission commits you further to recognition of the fact that Mr Oswald's claim in this regard was not accurately reflected in the officially published interrogation reports, i.e. it was covered up.

Now.... You say you don't know where exactly Mr Oswald was at the time the shots rang out. However, you believe Mr Oswald lied because he needed to create an alibi for his part in the assassination. You also believe he confirmed the post-assassination lunchroom encounter with the officer and Mr Truly.

How exactly does confirming a post-assassination lunchroom encounter with an officer and Mr Truly AND claiming to have reacted to this encounter by (first) going down to eat lunch and (then) going outside and watching the P. Parade (!) serve Mr Oswald's cause of fabricating an alibi?
 

Ok, Bookhout is part of the Hoax but Hosty isn't.
Is Fritz part of the Hoax?

No, at least not initially. On 12/23/63 Captain Fritz writes a report for Chief Jesse Curry in which he mentions that one of his officers (Officer Baker) "stopped" Mr Oswald "on the third or fourth floor on the stairway". Which indicates that, even at this late stage, he was out of the loop on the details of the lunchroom hoax.

However, he was of course a party to the burying of Mr Oswald's actual claims (though he did slip up when giving his WC testimony).

[Alan Ford]

"Then went out to watch P. parade"

It doesn't say he saw the parade, does it.

O'Meara Exhibit A