Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Oswald: No power lunch  (Read 53501 times)

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10810
Re: Oswald: No power lunch
« Reply #440 on: September 27, 2021, 11:27:52 PM »
Advertisement
Adams handwritten corrections and signature on the original transcript trump any objection that you or Ernst can come up with.

The page that contains mention of Shelley and Lovelady contains a single handwritten word, "there".  You evidence that this word was written by Victoria Adams is . . . ?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald: No power lunch
« Reply #440 on: September 27, 2021, 11:27:52 PM »


Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Re: Oswald: No power lunch
« Reply #441 on: September 28, 2021, 12:15:40 AM »
The page that contains mention of Shelley and Lovelady contains a single handwritten word, "there".  You evidence that this word was written by Victoria Adams is . . . ?

Also! Why are the corrections written in on this document not reflected in the officially published testimony? Thus-----------to take the example above---------we have "it was a pause" rather than "there was a pause".......

Also #2! At the end of her testimony, Ms Adams waives the right to read and sign her testimony. So why do we have a transcript purporting to be read, corrected & signed by her? Strange!

Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Re: Oswald: No power lunch
« Reply #442 on: September 28, 2021, 12:34:40 AM »
Again, my conclusion is based on Adams' own description of her encounter with the police officer behind the TSBD.

And what conclusion might you have reached if you had factored in Ms Adams' mention of seeing Mr Joe Molina & Ms Avery Davis in front of the building when she arrived there?

Quote
We know from her account that the encounter occurred very close to the TSBD itself: she had to skirt the west side of the building to get to the front, and her initial response to the officer is, "but I work here." She doesn't say "but I work over there." This, in turn, demonstrates that the tracks she crossed were the spur running next to the Depository.

The officer's instructions are very specific: return to the building. That's would be expected if he was trying to seal off the building to keep people from leaving or those from outside from entering onto the premises.

Oh but these are two very different things, Mr Todd. An officer whose job is to seal the building from the rear will not be standing by the railway tracks! Proof that he didn't care about who was coming in or out of the building is the fact that he let Ms Adams and Ms Styles NOT re-enter the building.

Quote
If his goal was to keep her out of the rail yards, then he wouldn't have cared where she went so long as it wasn't the rail yards, and he wouldn't have ordered her to a specific destination.

To top it off, you've mangled (oh, let's say it just for giggles: misrepresented) Harkness' testimony. After he'd put Euins in Sawyer's car, Harkness went around the TSBD to cover the rear of the building until he was relieved by other officers assigned to that task. He then went back to the front and helped Sawyer deal with crowd control for some unspecified amount of time. Only then was he tasked with checking freight cars on a train that was set to leave the yard. Going by DPD the radio logs. This activity didn't commence until after 1:44 PM, when the radio dispatcher told Sawyer that the railroad people wanted an outbound train to be inspected so it would be clear to leave the yard. The train involved was a northbound train located to the West of Lee Bowers' tower. The freight car shakedown is too far away from the TSBD to account for Adams' police encounter, and happens much, much later than you want to believe.

I never argued that Adams said that she "didn't leave the building until after a cordon was established". I said that her description of a confrontation with a Dallas police officer is what we would expect to see had the officer been trying to seal off the building,

Again-----------no

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald: No power lunch
« Reply #442 on: September 28, 2021, 12:34:40 AM »


Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Re: Oswald: No power lunch
« Reply #443 on: September 28, 2021, 12:36:59 AM »
This is all just a big bag of hot air intended to talk around the 900 pound gorilla whose married to the elephant in the room. However much innuendo you'd like to pile on, she was given the opportunity to review, make suggested corrections, and sign the transcript of her testimony.

She was indeed given that opportunity. And here's how it played out:

Mr. BELIN - Miss Adams, you have the opportunity if you would like, to read this deposition and sign it before it goes to Washington, or you can waive the signing of it and just let the court reporter send it directly to us. Do you have any preference?
Miss ADAMS - I think I will let you use your own discretion.
Mr. BELIN - It doesn't make any difference to us. If it doesn't make any difference, we can waive it and you won't have to make another trip down here.
Miss ADAMS - That is all right.

Online Mitch Todd

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 907
Re: Oswald: No power lunch
« Reply #444 on: September 28, 2021, 08:59:24 AM »
The page that contains mention of Shelley and Lovelady contains a single handwritten word, "there".  You evidence that this word was written by Victoria Adams is . . . ?

Let me put it this way:
Barry Ernst say's that she signed it and that it's her handwriting on the document. From what I see, the handwriting for "there" was made by the same had as the signature on the last page. As such, there is no reason not assign "there" and the signature and the other writing as Adams'. If you want to argue that it's not Adams' writing on that page, or any other, you're free to do so. But don't think anyone else is going to notice unless you can provide any evidence.
   

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald: No power lunch
« Reply #444 on: September 28, 2021, 08:59:24 AM »


Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7395
Re: Oswald: No power lunch
« Reply #445 on: September 28, 2021, 07:30:06 PM »
Let me put it this way:
Barry Ernst say's that she signed it and that it's her handwriting on the document. From what I see, the handwriting for "there" was made by the same had as the signature on the last page. As such, there is no reason not assign "there" and the signature and the other writing as Adams'. If you want to argue that it's not Adams' writing on that page, or any other, you're free to do so. But don't think anyone else is going to notice unless you can provide any evidence.
 

Remember this?

And finally it should be noted that on 04/04/64 WC assistant counsel Leon Hubert wrote a remarkable memo in which he refered to a recent staff meeting in which he had objected to what he called "editing of the transcripts of depositions". In the same memo he also complains about the practice of waiving signatures by the witnesses and advocates to have witnesses read and sign the transcript even if it contains errors, which according to him can later be rectified.

Now, isn't it just remarkable that Victoria Adams initially waived signing her testimony, as that would save her from having to return to sign it, only to be confronted by somebody at work a few days later who insisted she would sign after all. And isn't it just as remarkable that Victoria Adams told Barry Ernest that she never testified that she saw Shelley and Lovelady on the first floor?


Btw, How do you reconcile these two statements?;

Adams handwritten corrections and signature on the original transcript trump any objection that you or Ernst can come up with. If she signed off on it, that's what she said that she said. BTW, Lovelady did mention seeing a woman on the first floor. While he said he couldn't swear that it was Adams, but he didn't say that it wasn't have been her. Just because Adams saw and recognized Lovelady and Shelly on the first floor doesn't mean that they were looking in the right direction or paying attention at the right time.

Barry Ernst say's that she signed it and that it's her handwriting on the document.

Amazing, isn't it? You rely on Ernest for confirming that Adams signed the document, yet at the same time you dismiss whatever else Adams told Ernest....

If she signed off on it, that's what she said that she said.

Sure about that? Perhaps you should have a closer look at WC assistant counsel Leon Hubert's memo.....


And you seem to be struggling to make up your mind about Dorothy Garner as well;

First you dismiss what Garner said by qualifying a letter from the office of a United States Attorney to the Chief Counsel of a Presidential Commission as "hearsay"


The one thing that's clear about the Stroud letter is that it's hearsay. We don't really know exactly what she said to Stroud. We know that Truly said he ran into an officer on the 4th floor as he was descending. 

Then you have the ladies (by which I pressume you mean Adams, Styles and Garner) nowhere near the stairs, implying that Garner made up what she told Stroud (and Barry Ernest)


As for what Our Ladies of the Fourth Floor would have heard, it may not have been anything from near the stairs if they were still at the window in the office and so attuned to the activity on the ground below and/or their own chatter.

And then you have Garner simply misinterpreting what she saw, when she was at the stairs;

For my "alternative timeline" to work, all I need are two things:

1.) For Adams to have left later than she remembered (IIRC, Styles thought it was minutes, not seconds, after the last shot was fired)
2.) for Garner to have misinterpreted seeing a later pairing of Truly and a DPD officer with the original Truly/Baker stairmaster episode.
 

So, what is it? Was Garner not near the stairs? Or was she near the stairs but lied to Stroud, or did Stroud perhaps lie to Rankin? Or was she near the stairs and saw Truly coming down and somehow figured he was coming up?


And how about this beauty;

For my "alternative timeline" to work, all I need are two things:

1.) For Adams to have left later than she remembered (IIRC, Styles thought it was minutes, not seconds, after the last shot was fired)
2.) for Garner to have misinterpreted seeing a later pairing of Truly and a DPD officer with the original Truly/Baker stairmaster episode.


Only to say a little bit later;


I don't think you can really make a simple timeline out of all this.

So, on the one hand you claim your timeline would work, and on the other hand you say you can't make a simple timeline. Pray tell, how can a timeline, you say you can't make, still work?

Apart from the obvious fact that you are making a number of erroneous assumptions - the main one being that the officer who told Adams to return to the building was Harkness - the real reason why you can't make a simple timeline is that the parts you've challenged in my timeline don't compute with the other known facts making it impossible to make a conclusive timeline.

Btw, the officer that told Adams to return to the building would IMO never have allowed her to run to the front of the building, if he was indeed locking down the building. Instead he would have told her to go back in the same way she came out (at the back) where he could have seen her go in, rather than risking she would not re-enter, out of his sight, at the front entrance.

« Last Edit: September 29, 2021, 12:37:14 AM by Martin Weidmann »

Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Re: Oswald: No power lunch
« Reply #446 on: September 29, 2021, 01:12:00 AM »
So!

The now-famous 'Stroud letter' includes the following------------------



And yet NONE of the corrections itemized here are reflected in the the published testimony of Ms Adams.


Genuine Question!

Can anyone point me to an instance----------other than Ms Vicki Adams -----------of the following happening with a WC witness?:

1. Witness WAIVES the right to read and sign their testimony transcript
2. Witness subsequently DOES make handwritten corrections to their testimony
3. These handwritten corrections ARE available for us to read
4. The handwritten corrections made by the witness are NOT however reflected in the published testimony

Can anyone even point to an instance of 2+3+4?

Thanking you!  Thumb1:
« Last Edit: September 29, 2021, 01:14:15 AM by Alan Ford »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Oswald: No power lunch
« Reply #446 on: September 29, 2021, 01:12:00 AM »


Offline Alan Ford

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4820
Re: Oswald: No power lunch
« Reply #447 on: September 29, 2021, 02:14:06 AM »
Now!

The 'corrected' Adams testimony transcript--------i.e. with handwritten corrections--------bears two stamps:



If I understand this correctly, the 1967 stamp cancels the 'TOP SECRET' classification, whereas the 2011 stamp declassifies the document fully.

Mr Barry Ernest notes wryly-----------------

"this differing transcription shows an additional declassification stamp, bearing a more recent date of February 9, 2011. Coincidentally, that is two months after existence of the Martha Joe Stroud letter was disclosed for the first time in the self-published edition of The Girl on the Stairs."

Let us note that Ms Adams told Mr Ernest that she did indeed receive a transcript of her testimony sent to her office, to which she wrote in some corrections. However, she was adamant that she did NOT testify to, or read/correct any testimony transcript including mention of, Messrs Lovelady and Shelley on the first floor after she and Ms Styles ran down the back stairs.

Ms Styles (now Butler) has backed up Ms Adams on this issue: no Mr Lovelady, no Mr Shelley

There is a solution to this, my friends------------------it's not pretty but it is perfectly feasible. And it does not make a liar of Ms Adams.........
« Last Edit: September 29, 2021, 02:24:55 AM by Alan Ford »