Choose Search Type
Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Latest topics
» Prayer Man Vs Sasquatch
Today at 11:55 am by Jake Sykes

» Shirley Temple is Prayer Man According to Duncan McRae
Today at 6:48 am by Sharon Horizons

» ROKC Lampoon
Yesterday at 9:08 am by greg parker

» The Bold and the Italics
Yesterday at 9:06 am by greg parker

» The Eighth Naval District
Thu 08 Dec 2016, 11:33 pm by Hasan Yusuf

» Send Lawyers Guns & Money Pt2
Thu 08 Dec 2016, 8:08 pm by barto

» Send Lawyers Guns & Money Pt1
Thu 08 Dec 2016, 11:58 am by barto

» JFK Assassination
Thu 08 Dec 2016, 7:15 am by jack ferguson

» Lifton on his "new evidence"
Thu 08 Dec 2016, 4:47 am by steely dan

Log in

I forgot my password

Social bookmarking

Social bookmarking Digg  Social bookmarking Delicious  Social bookmarking Reddit  Social bookmarking Stumbleupon  Social bookmarking Slashdot  Social bookmarking Furl  Social bookmarking Yahoo  Social bookmarking Google  Social bookmarking Blinklist  Social bookmarking Blogmarks  Social bookmarking Technorati  

Bookmark and share the address of REOPENKENNEDYCASE on your social bookmarking website

Bookmark and share the address of REOPENKENNEDYCASE on your social bookmarking website

RSS feeds


Yahoo! 
MSN 
AOL 
Netvibes 
Bloglines 


Affiliates
free forum
 



Rushoman to Judgement

Page 5 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by greg parker on Sun 07 Apr 2013, 12:34 pm

Richard Gilbride wrote:The agent's "Not in our lifetime" remark was recalled by Myra DaRouse in an interview she had with John Armstrong in 1995, recounted in "Harvey and Lee" on p. 83. He had brought up a brief interview with the FBI dated April 2, 1964; she said instead that it had taken place on November 25, and had lasted over two hours. Imagine if she had decided to tell that to some reporter at the New Orleans States-Item; I think the dark cloud of domestic conspiracy had scared most regular folks into silence.

I don't think it's fair to suggest that Yates dropped his hitchhiker off at the Carousel- Dempsey Jones did specify Yates had "taken this boy to Houston and Elm" and been told this before the assassination. I have to agree with Robert that the call to Irving, that Gilpin vouches for on the 21st, was probably spuriously tied to the Oak Cliff visit by Yates. I'm still inclined to think the incident took place on the 20th.

This 2038 Commerce refrigeration company address throws a whole new light on this subject. My guess would be that Yates was cagey about what day it was directly because of Ruby, whom Yates certainly would have learned operated an establishment right down the street. If Yates held back some details in his initial story, it gave him an escape hatch- he could claim ignorance, were a personal threat to arise.

Yates may have been innocently wasting time on the company clock on the morning of November 20 in Oak Cliff, for example looking over the latest LPs at the Top Ten Records store (!?), confused and understandably didn't want to mention it.

Myra is probably a very sweet old lady... but as in other aspects of what she told Armstrong, she seems to be conflating.

None of us are ever very satisfied with coincidences.

The FBI report dated 4/2/64 happens to coincide with Earl warren's "Not in our lifetime comment". I am certain that is what she is recalling and wrongly attributing to an agent she mistakenly believes interviewed her for 2 hours on Nov 25. The "2 hours" comment alone should be enough to knock this nonsense on the head. They didn't interview anyone in the field for that length of time.

It may have suited Armstrong's purposes for Myra to say the interview took place on Nov 25 and took 2 hours because it makes it look like they were busy rigging the evidence to hide "Harvey" and didn't date Myra's report until 4/2 /64 because of that. The deeper I dig into Armstrong and his witnesses, the more disgusted I become. Sorry Richard, but that's the way I feel about it.

I think I'm going to have to move this thread... 'cause I can see where it's heading... Very Happy

You do have a point regarding Yates telling Jones pre-assassination about dropping the hiker at Elm & Houston. Yet the HH asking if he knows the Carousel as they took off bespeaks of the HH making this inquiry specifically because that is where he is headed.

I need some help with orientation again. Would Yates dropping the HH off at the Carousel entail driving past his own place of employment? If so, That may explain him dropping him off at Elm & Houston - he simply did not want to risk being seen by his boss or co-workers since he was supposed to be in Irving - or at least on his way there.

_________________
Mixing Pop and Politics he asks me what the use is
I offer him embarrassment and my usual excuses
While looking down the corridor
Out to where the van is waiting
I'm looking for the Great Leap Forward

            Billy Bragg
-----------------------------
 Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
             Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me

greg parker
Admin

Posts : 3451
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia

View user profile http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by Guest on Sun 07 Apr 2013, 5:38 pm

Richard,

I've just woken up so will reply to some of your other points later.

But can you give me an explanation as to why the December 10, FBI report was very specifically changed to make it read like the HH asked if Yates knew the Carousel Club later in the journey as opposed to if Yates knew the Carousel Club as soon as he got in the car?

This is a very particular part of the FBI report that we know was changed because we can see the typed words crossed out, other words written in, and Ralph Yates' initials. The changes completely change the context of the paragraph and make it look as thought they were deep in conversation and had travelled a fair distance before the question about the Carousel Club came up.

Any thoughts?

Plus, if we're taking Dempsey Jones' FBI statement verbatim, then he says Ralph discussed this HH with him (not in detail) the "day before the President was shot." So why do you now believe that the incident with Yates and the HH took place on Wednesday the 20th? Yates said he told Jones the same day. Jones said it was the day before the President was shot. You've also claimed that Yates would have told Jones immediately, once he got a spare minute.

I fail to see how any of the evidence supports the Irving call and the incident took place on Wedensday. It would appear that you just want to believe it because then it looks like even Ralph's bosses were against him. Shocked

You said it was "unfair" of me to ignore one of the sentences. If the Jones report is verbatim for me, it's verbatim for you too.

Richard Gilbride wrote:The agent's "Not in our lifetime" remark was recalled by Myra DaRouse in an interview she had with John Armstrong in 1995, recounted in "Harvey and Lee" on p. 83. He had brought up a brief interview with the FBI dated April 2, 1964; she said instead that it had taken place on November 25, and had lasted over two hours. Imagine if she had decided to tell that to some reporter at the New Orleans States-Item; I think the dark cloud of domestic conspiracy had scared most regular folks into silence.

I don't think it's fair to suggest that Yates dropped his hitchhiker off at the Carousel- Dempsey Jones did specify Yates had "taken this boy to Houston and Elm" and been told this before the assassination. I have to agree with Robert that the call to Irving, that Gilpin vouches for on the 21st, was probably spuriously tied to the Oak Cliff visit by Yates. I'm still inclined to think the incident took place on the 20th.

This 2038 Commerce refrigeration company address throws a whole new light on this subject. My guess would be that Yates was cagey about what day it was directly because of Ruby, whom Yates certainly would have learned operated an establishment right down the street. If Yates held back some details in his initial story, it gave him an escape hatch- he could claim ignorance, were a personal threat to arise.

Yates may have been innocently wasting time on the company clock on the morning of November 20 in Oak Cliff, for example looking over the latest LPs at the Top Ten Records store (!?), confused and understandably didn't want to mention it.




Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by Guest on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 2:29 am

2038 looks to be slightly east of the intersection of Commerce & South Central Ave., which is also known as Rt. 559. This Rand McNally has an enlargement of Dealey Plaza/adjacent downtown, but the enlargement is a bit thin on address numerals. For orientation, 2038 is about 0.3 miles beyond DPD HQ (which, with the Municipal Annex, straddles the 1800 block) and about 0.6 miles beyond the Carousel Club. So Yates, coming off the RL Thornton, would reach the Carousel 1/2 mile before his Butcher company.

In Yates' November 26 interview, he stated "as they drove along" His December 10 interview .stated "as I drove off" but was later changed to "Later as I drove along".

It looks to me that when Yates proofread his December 10 interview, he realized "as I drove off" could be interpreted as "as soon as I picked up this hitchhiker he said to me that..." so he amended it in line with his initial statement, to "Later as I drove along, this man asked me..."

Jones' corroboration that Yates had "taken this boy to Houston and Elm" is much stronger than Yates' pre-amended statement. It seems to me that the Carousel Club got mentioned early in the ride, but not right after the hitchhiker got in.

Jones did not specifically state that his initial conversation with Yates took place on November 21. It's unfortunate that the report is unclearly worded, since it can be interpreted along the lines of "Yates did not discuss this man the next day in any great detail. He did not seem to be obsessed. He gave fewer details than on November 20, and only mentioned this man in passing. But after the President was shot..."

November 21 seems to be ruled out, because of the time conflicts- Gilpin gave the Irving service call to Yates about 10:30, Sam Owens received a call from Yates out in Irving about 11:30, and it was a 2-hour service call, i.e. roughly lasting from 11:00- 1:00. And Jones had recalled an 11:00/11:30 initial conversation.

But the 20th wasn't looked into with any kind of thoroughness. All I'm aware of is that look at Charlie's Meats in Oak Cliff, which hadn't sent a check to the Butcher company, which Yates had allegedly picked up. So Yates fibbed in this instance. I think he was doing something embarrassing on company time that he didn't want to talk about, mainly because it was personal and on company time. Possibly he was in the habit of milking the clock and didn't want to get found out.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by Guest on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 3:33 am

Richard Gilbride wrote:

In Yates' November 26 interview, he stated "as they drove along" His December 10 interview .stated "as I drove off" but was later changed to "Later as I drove along".

It looks to me that when Yates proofread his December 10 interview, he realized "as I drove off" could be interpreted as "as soon as I picked up this hitchhiker he said to me that..." so he amended it in line with his initial statement, to "Later as I drove along, this man asked me..."

You mean the way I interpreted it? The way it makes sense? It makes sense for two reasons:

i) Drivers picking up hitchhikers generally ask them where they are going once the hitchhiker is in the car
ii) Drivers picking up hitchhikers generally don't leave it until they've talked about strip clubs and strip club owners before asking them "Where am I dropping you, bud?"

You know why? So they don't end up being taken in the wrong direction...

Failing the driver asking, the HH generally asks.

I'll tell you what, Richard, I've come across researchers clinging to things like drowning men before today, but please don't let yourself go down when there's someone here offering to save you. Very Happy

I'm expected to believe that Ralph Yates changed his typed FBI report because he thought people might think it meant the hitchhiker wanted to get dropped off at the Carousel and to be more specific he changed it to read that the conversation came up "later" in the journey? And he left his report with the giant narrative hole in it instead? He didn't know where the hitchhiker was going until they were almost there?

The Hitchhiker according to you had a very specific spot he was heading to, the corner of Houston & Elm, yet he did not speak to the driver concerning where he was going until later in the journey? Pull the other one...

You can't have it both ways, Richard. You can't have the HH going to a very specific location in Dallas, and not having it broached as soon as he got in the car. Anyone would think this finely tuned CIA doppelgänger plot was being left to chance...

I cannot fathom why you would expect me to believe that the original Yates report, where a destination is discussed as soon as the HH gets in in, makes less sense than the altered report where no destination is discussed until they were almost in Dallas? Shocked

Richard Gilbride wrote:

Jones did not specifically state that his initial conversation with Yates took place on November 21. It's unfortunate that the report is unclearly worded, since it can be interpreted along the lines of "Yates did not discuss this man the next day in any great detail. He did not seem to be obsessed. He gave fewer details than on November 20, and only mentioned this man in passing. But after the President was shot..."

November 21 seems to be ruled out, because of the time conflicts- Gilpin gave the Irving service call to Yates about 10:30, Sam Owens received a call from Yates out in Irving about 11:30, and it was a 2-hour service call, i.e. roughly lasting from 11:00- 1:00. And Jones had recalled an 11:00/11:30 initial conversation.

But the 20th wasn't looked into with any kind of thoroughness. All I'm aware of is that look at Charlie's Meats in Oak Cliff, which hadn't sent a check to the Butcher company, which Yates had allegedly picked up. So Yates fibbed in this instance. I think he was doing something embarrassing on company time that he didn't want to talk about, mainly because it was personal and on company time. Possibly he was in the habit of milking the clock and didn't want to get found out.

I don't really know what to say this, Richard, I really don't.

Here I am being nice...

The Jones report does not specifically state that Yates told him before the assassination that he dropped him at Houston and Elm.

You keep shifting the goalposts in your favour here, dude. If your opinions made any sense I'd be the first one to tell you. But they don't...

Could Jones not be out by 30 minutes in his recollections, Richard? Or are all of the times in these reports accurate to the second?

No one wants to answer my question I've been asking for nearly a week. You may have answered it but I've missed it, so can you have another crack please because it goes to the heart of this for me...

Why would an Oswald doppelgänger, setting Oswald up as the lone assassin, want to talk about Jack Ruby and the Carousel Club?

This hitchhiker has got a giant neon sign above him, flashing, in the shape of an arrow, with the name Crafard on it...


Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by Hasan Yusuf on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 5:57 am

Lee,

Going off memory, Larry Hancock argues in his book that Ruby and the Carousel club were mentioned to set Ruby up as an alternative patsy, and to connect Cuba to the assassination, since Ruby was involved in gun running into Cuba.

Sorry I couldn't give you a clear answer. I'll have to read through Larry's book tomorrow. Now don't get me wrong, I think it was Crafard who was picked up by Yates, and that there was nothing sinister about it. I just thought I'd mention it, FWIW.

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1784
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by Guest on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 6:34 am

Hasan Yusuf wrote:Lee,

Going off memory, Larry Hancock argues in his book that Ruby and the Carousel club were mentioned to set Ruby up as an alternative patsy, and to connect Cuba to the assassination, since Ruby was involved in gun running into Cuba.

Sorry I couldn't give you a clear answer. I'll have to read through Larry's book tomorrow. Now don't get me wrong, I think it was Crafard who was picked up by Yates, and that there was nothing sinister about it. I just thought I'd mention it, FWIW.

Hi Hasan,

No worries. I was aware of Larry's position. I believe he's going to reevaluate it. He's been in touch with me for copies of everything I've been using and he's going to update his blog.

Let's see what he comes up with. Larry's perspective does not venture into Harvey & Lee territory. Plus, it doesn't make much sense.

I'm actually convinced it was Larry Crafard now. I don't believe there's any doubt about it.

Whether there was anything dodgy or sinister about the incident, I simply don't know. Was there something dodgy and sinister about Larry Crafard, hell yeah.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by greg parker on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 8:34 am

Hasan,

I think Larry's take on Ruby and the Carousel being mentioned is the only way you could view it when looking through the prism of being a CIA operation.

One problem seen is that, as far as I can tell, no other alleged doppelganger ever failed to call himself "Oswald" and/or produce Oswald ID, and no other did mention Ruby or the Carousel.

That you me and Lee seem to be the only ones who believe this was Crafard is a bit puzzling (shit, do I sound like Fetzer? If so, shoot me now!). Given the evidence we have to go on, the circumstantial case is pretty damn solid, imo. Almost overwhelmingly so.

greg parker
Admin

Posts : 3451
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia

View user profile http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by greg parker on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 10:18 am

Let's try a slightly different tack on the question of the Elm & Houston drop-off point versus the presumed ultimate destination (by me, Lee and possibly Hasan?) of the Carousel.

How far from the presumed destination of 1026 N Beckley was "Oswald" dropped by Whaley?

Was it by any chance, a similar distance to what we see between the corner of Elm & Houston and the Carousel? if it is, is that just coincidence or can something more be taken from it?

Is there for instance, some intel manual that specifies getting dropped off (in some situations) at X distance fro your actual destination? I know that has been suggested in the past re the Whaley cab ride...

Just throwing it out there as an admittedly long-shot solution...

_________________
Mixing Pop and Politics he asks me what the use is
I offer him embarrassment and my usual excuses
While looking down the corridor
Out to where the van is waiting
I'm looking for the Great Leap Forward

            Billy Bragg
-----------------------------
 Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
             Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me

greg parker
Admin

Posts : 3451
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia

View user profile http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by Guest on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 11:29 am

The Beckley ramp is approximately 3 miles from the outskirts of downtown Dallas. This CTKA Larry Hancock article has a nice vintage postcard view of how downtown looked from Redbird Airport, about 5 miles farther out. The point being that downtown shoots straight up after a whole lot of flat terrain.

http://www.ctka.net/2013/Hancock_Redbird.html

It would be pretty obvious that a hitcher on the Beckley ramp was headed downtown, unless he specified otherwise right off the bat. The initial words exchanged may well have been, "Headed downtown?" and "Yeah", with either man asking.

The specific drop-off point was indicated as they approached downtown, in both the Nov. 26 interview: "the man indicated that he was going on Houston Street" and Dec. 10 interview: "This man said he was going to Houston Street." This is all corroborated by Dempsey Jones, that the HH was taken to Elm & Houston.

3 sources expressing 1 fact: Yates picked up a HH in Oak Cliff and dropped him off near the TSBD.

Yates on Nov. 26 "did not recall" ever having been at the Carousel Club; he "did not remember" on Dec. 10. A guy with 5 kids is familiar with a sleazy upstairs bar 1/2 mile from his company, before the assassination? Doubt it entirely. I believe Ralph Yates here.

Yes, knowing what he knew post-assassination, Yates amended his Dec. 10 "as I drove off" to "Later as I drove along", so that nothing construing a drop-off at, or Yates' prior knowledge of, Ruby's club could be interpreted from his conversation.

Their preliminary conversation was about whether to put the package in back or up front in the cab. Then it would seem Yates drove off. He describes on Nov. 26 that the HH asked "if he knew a certain party". Then the HH asks if Yates had ever been to the Carousel. On Dec. 10 this gets inverted: The HH asks if Yates knew where the Carousel was, then asks if he knew a Jack Ruby.

Nothing definitive here, but I'm disposed to the earlier version as the more probable since it's fresher. So Yates tells the HH he doesn't know much about Ruby or the Carousel. So much for this small talk. Now they move on to talk about the Stevenson incident and assassinating JFK.

There isn't anything I see to imply that the HH asked Yates if he knew where the Carousel was, first thing as he got in. Lee, I think you're hoping for too much, building this argument around Yates' use of "off" as opposed to the amended "along". It couldn't have been a 5-minute ride, all told. Yates understandably may have mixed up his memory sequence in the 2 weeks between Nov. 26 and Dec. 10.

(one post to follow)

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by Guest on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 11:52 am

One would surmise, if it were the only information available, that Dempsey Jones' report indicates his initial conversation with Yates took place on November 21: "He said Yates did not discuss this man the day before the President was shot in any great detail".. No other indication of time is given, other than that it took place "about 11:00 or 11:30 AM, one morning"; that jives with Yates' Nov. 26 report that he picked up the HH "at approximately 10:30 AM".

But there is other information. Yates said he wasn't sure whether it might have happened on the 20th. Gilpin specifically recalled he gave Yates his 10:30 Irving service order "at the TBSC office" on Nov. 21. Gilpin and Owens provide strong evidence that the HH incident did NOT take place on Nov. 21 (WCD 5 p. 422)

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docid=10406&relPageId=427

Who is this Arthur Carter, the SA who wrote Dempsey Jones' report? What a convoluted mess. I know I've seen his name several times before. That 4th paragraph, 6 lines long, is just 1 sentence. It's not clearly stated at all that Yates & Jones had their initial conversation "on the day before the President was shot".

Jones would have to be off by more than 30 minutes, he'd have to be off by at least 2 hours in his recollection of the time of day, and he did recount "one morning".

Someone at the FBI could have checked out Yates' whereabouts more assiduously for Nov. 20, but they didn't. Or, perhaps they didn't report what they'd found. As "Unspeakable" describes on pp. 353-4, "<On Jan. 2> Hoover noted that a previous FBI investigation into whether Yates may have been at his company at the same time he said he picked up the Oswald-like hitchhiker provided insufficient evidence "to completely discredit Yates' story".

As to why the doppelganger would bring up the subject of Ruby, I would speculate that the doppelganger knew that should the "real" Oswald survive his arrest, Ruby would be selected as the back-up patsy.

"Oswald" worked at the Carousel in June & July, according to Dorothy Marcum, who briefly dated Ruby. "Oswald" regularly drove Ruby's Cadillac to the shop for repairs, according to mechanics William Chesher and Robert Roy.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by greg parker on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 12:58 pm

Another "Oswald" in the Carousel sighting which was without doubt, Crafard:
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10405&relPageId=797


Last edited by greg parker on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 10:30 pm; edited 1 time in total

_________________
Mixing Pop and Politics he asks me what the use is
I offer him embarrassment and my usual excuses
While looking down the corridor
Out to where the van is waiting
I'm looking for the Great Leap Forward

            Billy Bragg
-----------------------------
 Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
             Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me

greg parker
Admin

Posts : 3451
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia

View user profile http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by greg parker on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 1:08 pm

In the Spring and Summer of 1963 Dorothy Marcum dated Jack Ruby. She was certain that Oswald and Ruby not only knew each other, but that
Oswald had worked for Ruby in June and July, 1963.

According to Armstrong, "she was certain".

Richard, have you ever checked Armstrong's claims even once?

"She stated she has never dated Jack Ruby, knows nothing of his character, background or associates and definitely could furnish no information as to Ruby's association with Lee Harvey Oswald'"
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10405&relPageId=796
I guess she buckled under threat of being sent to the looney bin...?


_________________
Mixing Pop and Politics he asks me what the use is
I offer him embarrassment and my usual excuses
While looking down the corridor
Out to where the van is waiting
I'm looking for the Great Leap Forward

            Billy Bragg
-----------------------------
 Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
             Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me

greg parker
Admin

Posts : 3451
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia

View user profile http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by greg parker on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 2:19 pm

Richard, this is from one of your earlier posts

Crafard did confide to researcher Peter Whitmey that he'd been a "hit man" in the 60's. I always interpreted that as pertaining to his post-carnival barker days & post-assassination days, conjecturing that he got tangled up with the Jewish mob, but am only guessing.

No interpretation needed. According to Whitmey, Crafard specifically stated it was prior to Dallas:


During my initial interview with Craford at a bar/restaurant in the small town where he lives in a rural area of Oregon, he revealed to me that he had been a “hit man” in the early sixties in San Francisco, prior to going to Dallas. While living there he got involved with the granddaughter of the local “Don”, and, unfortunately for Craford, she became pregnant. However, in exchange for leaving town and promising never to contact her again, Curtis was spared the usual harsh treatment associated with organized crime. Although I was somewhat skeptical of Craford’s claim, his older brother, whom I later spoke to by phone, appeared to confirm what Curtis had revealed to me.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/creatingapatsy.htm

I don't think there is any need to imagine it was for the Jewish mob, either.

Crafard told the WC he belonged to the General Assembly and Church of the First Born.

This particular breakaway church from the Mormons was, independent of Larry Crafard, cited as being behind the assassination:
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=62293&relPageId=13

It seem the "church" was indeed, capable of murder:

By 1962, Ervil LeBaron was the Presiding Patriarch of the church and number two in authority to Joel LeBaron. By 1967 he was teaching that he, not Joel, was the proper head of the church. Joel and other leaders of the church denounced Ervil and released him from his position.
In August 1972, Ervil LeBaron and his followers established the rival Church of the Lamb of God. Ervil began teaching his followers that he was the "One Mighty and Strong" prophesied of in the Doctrine and Covenants, and he prophesied that "Joel will be put to death". On 20 August 1972, Joel LeBaron was shot in the head by one of Ervil's followers. Joel was succeeded by his brother Verlan, who was killed in an automobile accident in 1981.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_the_Firstborn_of_the_Fulness_of_Times

Feud, assassination
In the early 1970s, Benji's grandfather Joel LeBaron and great-uncle Ervil LeBaron fell into a bitter feud over leadership of the clan's Church of the Firstborn of the Fulness of Times.

One of Ervil's followers assassinated Joel in Baja California 36 years ago. Others killed several dozen more people in the ensuing years, including two in Houston, for which a handful of Ervil's children were sentenced in 1997 to long prison terms.

The LeBarons and their followers saw themselves as ordained to create the conditions for the return to Earth of Jesus Christ and his prophesied reign. But the men of the LeBaron clan were ex-communicated more than 60 years ago for their insistence on maintaining plural wives.
http://www.chron.com/life/houston-belief/article/Defying-Mexican-gangs-costs-Mormons-their-lives-1617514.php

I was skeptical that Crafard would tell anyone he was ever a hitman if indeed, he really had been... but if you think he was, this Church - and any indications of a phony army discharge as cover - is where I'd start trying to prove/disprove it.

_________________
Mixing Pop and Politics he asks me what the use is
I offer him embarrassment and my usual excuses
While looking down the corridor
Out to where the van is waiting
I'm looking for the Great Leap Forward

            Billy Bragg
-----------------------------
 Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
             Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me

greg parker
Admin

Posts : 3451
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia

View user profile http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by Guest on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 6:02 pm

Version One

Ralph Yates picked up a Hitchhiker with a package in Oak Cliff. The Hitchhiker looked remarkably like Lee Harvey Oswald because he was a CIA impersonator who was part of a plot to make the driver of the car later link Lee Harvey Oswald to a paper package and the Texas School Book Depository. The CIA impersonator made sure he was picked up close to the North Beckley rooming house so the link would be established later even though the distance between the pick up point and rooming house is more than 15 blocks and nearly a mile.

Version Two

Ralph Yates picked up Larry Crafard with a package in Oak Cliff. The Hitchhiker looked remarkably like Lee Harvey Oswald because Larry Crafard looked like Lee Harvey Oswald. Larry Crafard looked so much like Lee Harvey Oswald that we have at least six other people on record who reported, post-assassination, that thought they had seen Oswald when, in fact, the person they saw was Crafard. Crafard was picked up on the Beckley entrance to the RL Thornton Expressway. Much closer to Jack Ruby's house than it was to 1026 North Beckley.

Version One

The Oswald impersonator, to further implicate the real Lee Harvey Oswald, spoke of shooting the President from a window of a building with a rifle.

Version Two

Ralph Yates brought up in conversation the Presidential visit, the Stevenson incident and the motorcade route. Larry Crafard then brings up a possible assassination attempt and whether the President could get shot from a building window. Ralph Yates has been discussing the exact same thing with at least one of his work colleagues. Both Yates and Crafard have served in the military.

Version One

Ralph Yates is asked by the Oswald impersonator, part way through the journey, whether he knows the Carousel Club or Jack Ruby. This is a back up plan to set Ruby up as an alternative pasty should the Oswald plan go wrong.

Version Two

Ralph Yates is asked by the Larry Crafard, as soon as the car takes off, if he knows the Carousel Club. The reason Crafard asks is because that's where he is going as he works there. Crafard then asks Yates if he knows the owner, Jack Ruby, as Crafard thinks he is a big shot working for Ruby.

Version One

Ralph Yates asks the Oswald impersonator where he wants dropping off and he tells him Houston Street. This is to further reinforce Lee Harvey Oswald as the JFK assassin and link him to the area.

Version Two

Ralph Yates asks Larry Crafard if he will get out on Houston Street rather than Commerce because Yates has been skipping work and his work building is on Commerce and he doesn't want to risk being seen by a co-worker. Alternatively, Larry was taking his package to a dry cleaners or [insert place of business here] prior to going to work at the Carousel Club and so asked to get out on Houston Street.


Ralph Yates contacted the FBI on Tuesday November 26 once the link between Ruby and Oswald had been 100% established. It is likely that it was the Ruby/Carousel link that pushed Yates to action. Not the package, window shades, Oak Cliff or Houston Street elements.

The Ruby/Carousel was the memorable lightbulb moment for Yates. So I fail to see how plan A of version one of the story above, setting up Lee Oswald as the patsy, would ever work, because Patsy plan B containing the Carousel Club was always going to be part of Yates' story.

However, we know that Crafard was a hitchhiker. We know he worked for Ruby. We know he worked at the Carousel and Vegas Clubs. We suspect he lived at the Carousel although I may have a alternative proposal coming soon. We know he looked and dressed like Oswald. We know he was mistaken for Oswald on numerous occasions after the assassination. We know Jack Ruby lived in Oak Cliff. The only solid evidence we have of FBI documents being literally changed are directly connected to changing the context of when Yates' hitchhiker asked about the Carousel and the changes to the FBI report avoid the Carousel Club being the hitchhiker ultimate destination. If the changes were made to avoid a Carousel Club destination then it points to Crafard.

This is a no brainer if ever there was one


Last edited by Lee David Farley on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 6:49 pm; edited 3 times in total

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by Guest on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 6:14 pm

Richard Gilbride wrote:The Beckley ramp is approximately 3 miles from the outskirts of downtown Dallas. This CTKA Larry Hancock article has a nice vintage postcard view of how downtown looked from Redbird Airport, about 5 miles farther out. The point being that downtown shoots straight up after a whole lot of flat terrain.

http://www.ctka.net/2013/Hancock_Redbird.html

It would be pretty obvious that a hitcher on the Beckley ramp was headed downtown, unless he specified otherwise right off the bat. The initial words exchanged may well have been, "Headed downtown?" and "Yeah", with either man asking.

Richard,

You claimed initially that the Oswald impersonator wanted to get picked up in Oak Cliff close to the rooming house to establish a link between the house and Oswald.

Now you say that the HH was picked up on that specific ramp because it was headed downtown.

Are you now disassociating yourself from the view that part of the HH's plan was to associate a link between himself and the 1026 North Beckley rooming house?

And can I ask why you presume complete and utter innocence on Ralph Yates part connected to everything we have discussed? We've now reached the point where you are assuming that just because Ralph Yates had five kids he would not know anything about a sleazy strip joint on the same street as the one where he worked. Now, you may be right but it does not automatically follow that just because someone has five kids then they are as pure as the driven snow. I mean, do we now have to assume that every single patron of the Carousel Club were all eligible bachelors? That none of the Police Officers who frequented the place had any kids or does the number five have significance? Five kids and above equates to no knowledge of strip clubs. Four or less you become aware of the strip club's existence. No kids and you're stuffing dollar bills in the stripper's g-string?

I'm perplexed. Could Ralph not read? CAROUSEL - BURLESQUE. The letters on the sign were quite big and you didn't even have to know it was "upstairs."

P.S. taking into account your rationale for the changes to Yates' FBI report, do you now think the following changes were just Mrs. Mary Bledsoe making sure she was being clear?

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=329104

You want me to buy into Yates wanting to be incredibly specific about two particular words in his report to help save any future confusion but failed to say what the hitchhiker said when he first got in? His sense of accuracy has kinda backfired, hasn't it because I am confused.


Last edited by Lee David Farley on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 7:31 pm; edited 5 times in total

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by Guest on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 6:19 pm

Greg

Can we start putting a definitive list together of Oswald sightings that were Crafard?


Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by greg parker on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 6:29 pm

Yes, we can.

However there is one I would want to leave off because of information I have developed around it for my book.

_________________
Mixing Pop and Politics he asks me what the use is
I offer him embarrassment and my usual excuses
While looking down the corridor
Out to where the van is waiting
I'm looking for the Great Leap Forward

            Billy Bragg
-----------------------------
 Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
             Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me

greg parker
Admin

Posts : 3451
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia

View user profile http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by Guest on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 6:47 pm

greg parker wrote:Yes, we can.

However there is one I would want to leave off because of information I have developed around it for my book.

No worries.

We've got Litchfield and Bogard. Who else?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by Guest on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 7:01 pm

We've got William Cooper, Wise and Wahrmund:

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10405&relPageId=797

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10405&relPageId=798

Does the Allright Parking appearance coincide with Crafard making threats to Ruby that he would be leaving the Carousel if he wasn't put on a salary?

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by Hasan Yusuf on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 7:15 pm

Lee David Farley wrote:
Hasan Yusuf wrote:Lee,

Going off memory, Larry Hancock argues in his book that Ruby and the Carousel club were mentioned to set Ruby up as an alternative patsy, and to connect Cuba to the assassination, since Ruby was involved in gun running into Cuba.

Sorry I couldn't give you a clear answer. I'll have to read through Larry's book tomorrow. Now don't get me wrong, I think it was Crafard who was picked up by Yates, and that there was nothing sinister about it. I just thought I'd mention it, FWIW.

Hi Hasan,

No worries. I was aware of Larry's position. I believe he's going to reevaluate it. He's been in touch with me for copies of everything I've been using and he's going to update his blog.

Let's see what he comes up with. Larry's perspective does not venture into Harvey & Lee territory. Plus, it doesn't make much sense.

I'm actually convinced it was Larry Crafard now. I don't believe there's any doubt about it.

Whether there was anything dodgy or sinister about the incident, I simply don't know. Was there something dodgy and sinister about Larry Crafard, hell yeah.

Hi Lee,

I also have no doubt that it was Crafard who was picked-up; and boy, do I agree there was something sinister about him. Well done to both you and Greg for everything you've uncovered concerning Crafard. That's what I call real research.

I'm also interested in seeing what Larry comes up with regarding Yates. His book is one of the best I've read, and I sure hope he comes up with something good.


Last edited by Hasan Yusuf on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 7:31 pm; edited 1 time in total

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1784
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by Hasan Yusuf on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 7:26 pm

greg parker wrote: That you me and Lee seem to be the only ones who believe this was Crafard is a bit puzzling (shit, do I sound like Fetzer? If so, shoot me now!). Given the evidence we have to go on, the circumstantial case is pretty damn solid, imo. Almost overwhelmingly so.

What can I say, Greg. Some people just can't let go of theories they have clinged onto for so long. In a way I can understand that. I'm not likely to let go of Gerald Hill as a conspirator, but I think the case against him is pretty solid. However, I've let go of theories such as the back of JFK's head being blown out, and the BS lunchroom encounter, whereas, there are many researchers who will refuse to do so.

I totally agree with you that the circumstantial case against Crafard is quite solid. It just amazes me (and I mean this in the most positive way) that it has taken almost an entire 50 years for two researchers to figure out that it was Crafard who was picked-up by Yates. There are some who say that there is no point in continuing to research the assassination, because nothing new can be uncovered. The research you and Lee (and others) have done has proven them to be dead wrong.

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1784
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by Guest on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 7:36 pm

Hasan Yusuf wrote:
Lee David Farley wrote:
Hasan Yusuf wrote:Lee,

Going off memory, Larry Hancock argues in his book that Ruby and the Carousel club were mentioned to set Ruby up as an alternative patsy, and to connect Cuba to the assassination, since Ruby was involved in gun running into Cuba.

Sorry I couldn't give you a clear answer. I'll have to read through Larry's book tomorrow. Now don't get me wrong, I think it was Crafard who was picked up by Yates, and that there was nothing sinister about it. I just thought I'd mention it, FWIW.

Hi Hasan,

No worries. I was aware of Larry's position. I believe he's going to reevaluate it. He's been in touch with me for copies of everything I've been using and he's going to update his blog.

Let's see what he comes up with. Larry's perspective does not venture into Harvey & Lee territory. Plus, it doesn't make much sense.

I'm actually convinced it was Larry Crafard now. I don't believe there's any doubt about it.

Whether there was anything dodgy or sinister about the incident, I simply don't know. Was there something dodgy and sinister about Larry Crafard, hell yeah.

Hi Lee,

I also have no doubt that it was Crafard who was picked-up; and boy, do I agree there was something sinister about him. Well done to both you and Greg for everything you've uncovered concerning Crafard. That's what I call real research.

I'm also interested in seeing what Larry comes up with regarding Yates. His book is one of the best I've read, and I sure hope he comes up with something good.

I'm sure Larry won't stray too far from his original position but we'll see, Hasan.

Greg and I have been discussing Crafard's whereabouts between 12:30 and 2:00 on 11/22 and we have quite a few contradictions. Perhaps you can help by looking into his documented whereabouts to see if you can make sense of it. A good starting point is the Crafard and Armstrong exhibits as published by the WC.

BTW: We haven't got to the onset of Ralph's illness within the confines of the new narrative. I still think Ralph was using information he was hearing on the news to bolster his sighting especially around the package length and contents, and the photograph shown to him.


Last edited by Lee David Farley on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 8:04 pm; edited 1 time in total

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by Guest on Mon 08 Apr 2013, 7:41 pm

Hasan Yusuf wrote:
greg parker wrote: That you me and Lee seem to be the only ones who believe this was Crafard is a bit puzzling (shit, do I sound like Fetzer? If so, shoot me now!). Given the evidence we have to go on, the circumstantial case is pretty damn solid, imo. Almost overwhelmingly so.

What can I say, Greg. Some people just can't let go of theories they have clinged onto for so long. In a way I can understand that. I'm not likely to let go of Gerald Hill as a conspirator, but I think the case against him is pretty solid. However, I've let go of theories such as the back of JFK's head being blown out, and the BS lunchroom encounter, whereas, there are many researchers who will refuse to do so.

I totally agree with you that the circumstantial case against Crafard is quite solid. It just amazes me (and I mean this in the most positive way) that it has taken almost an entire 50 years for two researchers to figure out that it was Crafard who was picked-up by Yates. There are some who say that there is no point in continuing to research the assassination, because nothing new can be uncovered. The research you and Lee (and others) have done has proven them to be dead wrong.

I think a Wicker Man is currently being built to house Greg and me, Hassan. Don't know who'll have the honour of lighting it though.

Wink

Hoping for Christopher Lee but will probably get Albert Doyle.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by Hasan Yusuf on Tue 09 Apr 2013, 1:35 am

Lee David Farley wrote: I think a Wicker Man is currently being built to house Greg and me, Hassan. Don't know who'll have the honour of lighting it though.

Wink

Hoping for Christopher Lee but will probably get Albert Doyle.

I think Doyle is certainly an ideal candidate for that, Lee. I fear I might not be too far behind you guys.

This is an FBI interview of Crafard on 28/11/63.

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0102a.htm

Crafard claimed that he was awakened by Andy Armstrong after the President had been shot.

Armstrong testified as follows concerning Crafard:

Mr. HUBERT. All right, so you got to the Carousel about what time?

Mr. ARMSTRONG. About 12:15, I would say.

Mr. HUBERT. You had a key to get in, of course?

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Yes--I went in and I had to use the restroom, and so I went to the restroom and then I heard a lot of sirens and I listened to the sirens for a second or two and they got louder and they got more sirens, so I decided I would go get my transistor and see what was going on, and that's when I heard that there had been a shooting at the President or something like that. Somebody had tried to assassinate the President, or something, and then I run in and I woke Larry up--Larry was staying there.

Mr. HUBERT. Who is Larry?

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Larry Crafard.

Mr. HUBERT. Where was he staying?

Mr. ARMSTRONG. He was sleeping in a little room there.

Mr. HUBERT. You say you went and woke him up?

Mr. ARMSTRONG. I woke him up.

Mr. HUBERT. How did you do it?

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Well--I shook him.

Mr. HUBERT. Was the door of his room closed or not?

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Well, the door of his room was--no, it wasn't closed

So Armstrong confirms that Crafard was asleep at the Carousel club at the time the President was assassinated. But just how reliable is Armstrong? And why the heck would Crafard be sleeping when the President was passing through town? Very odd if you ask me.

Based on the FBI report, it’s very obvious that it was Crafard who was with Ruby at the electronics store; and not Oswald. I got the following from Bill Kelly’s blog:

“Information from our Dallas office provides names of several persons connected with Ruby and Oswald. Robert Kermit Patterson, admitted 6J (homosexual), contacted resident agent Dallas about 1330 CST yesterday and said he had information in regard assassination of President Kennedy. Patterson said he and one Donald C. Stuart operated Contract Electronics, 2533 Elm Street, Dallas. About two weeks ago, Jack Ruby/aka/Rubenstein and subject Oswald visited Contract Electronics and wanted work done on a microphones at Ruby Carousel Night Club, Dallas. On this occasion ruby told Oswald to write names of Patterson and Stuart in Carousel guest book. Contract Electronics did the requested mike work at the Carousel and were paid by Negro employee.”

I’m 100% sure you guys already knew about the above info, but I thought I’d post it for the benefit of the forum lurkers.

I also find it interesting that Crafard told Ruby on November 17 that he was quitting work at the Carousel the next day, only to stay when Ruby allegedly promised he would put him on a salary.

I'll keep searching when I find the time.

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1784
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by Guest on Tue 09 Apr 2013, 3:04 am

Hasan Yusuf wrote:
Lee David Farley wrote: I think a Wicker Man is currently being built to house Greg and me, Hassan. Don't know who'll have the honour of lighting it though.

Wink

Hoping for Christopher Lee but will probably get Albert Doyle.

I think Doyle is certainly an ideal candidate for that, Lee. I fear I might not be too far behind you guys.

This is an FBI interview of Crafard on 28/11/63.

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0102a.htm

Crafard claimed that he was awakened by Andy Armstrong after the President had been shot.

Armstrong testified as follows concerning Crafard:

Mr. HUBERT. All right, so you got to the Carousel about what time?

Mr. ARMSTRONG. About 12:15, I would say.

Mr. HUBERT. You had a key to get in, of course?

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Yes--I went in and I had to use the restroom, and so I went to the restroom and then I heard a lot of sirens and I listened to the sirens for a second or two and they got louder and they got more sirens, so I decided I would go get my transistor and see what was going on, and that's when I heard that there had been a shooting at the President or something like that. Somebody had tried to assassinate the President, or something, and then I run in and I woke Larry up--Larry was staying there.

Mr. HUBERT. Who is Larry?

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Larry Crafard.

Mr. HUBERT. Where was he staying?

Mr. ARMSTRONG. He was sleeping in a little room there.

Mr. HUBERT. You say you went and woke him up?

Mr. ARMSTRONG. I woke him up.

Mr. HUBERT. How did you do it?

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Well--I shook him.

Mr. HUBERT. Was the door of his room closed or not?

Mr. ARMSTRONG. Well, the door of his room was--no, it wasn't closed

So Armstrong confirms that Crafard was asleep at the Carousel club at the time the President was assassinated. But just how reliable is Armstrong? And why the heck would Crafard be sleeping when the President was passing through town? Very odd if you ask me.

Based on the FBI report, it’s very obvious that it was Crafard who was with Ruby at the electronics store; and not Oswald. I got the following from Bill Kelly’s blog:

“Information from our Dallas office provides names of several persons connected with Ruby and Oswald. Robert Kermit Patterson, admitted 6J (homosexual), contacted resident agent Dallas about 1330 CST yesterday and said he had information in regard assassination of President Kennedy. Patterson said he and one Donald C. Stuart operated Contract Electronics, 2533 Elm Street, Dallas. About two weeks ago, Jack Ruby/aka/Rubenstein and subject Oswald visited Contract Electronics and wanted work done on a microphones at Ruby Carousel Night Club, Dallas. On this occasion ruby told Oswald to write names of Patterson and Stuart in Carousel guest book. Contract Electronics did the requested mike work at the Carousel and were paid by Negro employee.”

I’m 100% sure you guys already knew about the above info, but I thought I’d post it for the benefit of the forum lurkers.

I also find it interesting that Crafard told Ruby on November 17 that he was quitting work at the Carousel the next day, only to stay when Ruby allegedly promised he would put him on a salary.

I'll keep searching when I find the time.

Hasan,

I like presenting the evidence and information in a way that people not 100% up to speed with the intricacies actually understand what we're talking about, so I'd recommend you post anything you think is valuable regardless of whether you think we may have seen it before.

On the issue of Crafard getting woken up by Andy Armstrong, well, we have a couple of different versions from Larry himself. One version has it that Armstrong woke him by telephone to inform him that the President had been shot. Another version that his "buddy" told him. Crafard had no buddies. He was the epitome of the word "loner." The key to the waking him up is simply as an alibi, IMO. I suspect that Crafard was over in Oak Cliff at approximately 1:08 PM.

I mentioned to Greg today that if you go to Crafard's second round of testimony from Volume XIV of the WCH you will see something very strange. There are dozens of items of evidence entered into proceedings during Crafard's testimony, all of them assigned Crafard Exhibit numbers. Not one of those Exhibits appear as Exhibits in the accompanying volumes, WCH Volume XIX.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Rushoman to Judgement

Post by Sponsored content Today at 12:06 pm


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 5 of 7 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum