Leo Sauvage

Original post by Paul Francisco Paso at the ROKC Webs Forum, I have archived the thread.
http://www.prayer-man.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/rokc%20forum/www.reopenkennedycase.org/apps/forums/topics/show/13346848-leo-sauvage-.html
Since i came across some more quotes by him I decided to re-open the thread.

Paul's stuff:

hought I'd start this topic on Leo Sauvage who was one of the early critics of the Warren Report. This was ripped from Ken Rahns site http/www.kenrahn.com/JFK/JFK.html but it seems that some of his links are out of date. I've got a bit of time atm so I'll endeavour to try and get access to some cache pages and copy and paste them here for posterity. 
Short Bio
Leo Sauvage was serving as chief U.S. correspondent for the French daily Le Figaro when Kennedy was assassinated. One of France's most distinguished writers, he took an early interest in the assassination and soon published the book L'Affaire Oswald in Paris. In March 1964 he published a summary of the book under its English title "The Oswald Affair" in Commentary, making it one of the earliest articles published after the assassination. After Thomas Buchanan published his early book Who Killed Kennedy?, Sauvage aligned himself strongly against it and the six-part series in the French weekly L'Express from which the book was synthesized. He did battle with Buchanan in a three-part series in The New Leader (Sauvage, Buchanan, Sauvage) in its issues of 28 September and 9 November 1964.(For specific links to Sauvage's two contributions to this series, see below.) For more on this minifeud, and Buchanan's article in response to Sauvage's first, see Pre-WCR Reactions of the Left.
Shortly after the Warren Commission released its Report, Sauvage published in The New Leader another three critical articles on it, entitled "The Warren Commission's Case Against Oswald," "Oswald's Case Against the Warren Commission," and "The Case Against Mr. X." We also provide links to these three articles below. Sauvage was a cogent thinker and a very good writer, even in English. His articles presage many of the arguments that the JFK critical community would make for many more years. His articles make good reading because they express their criticisms more clearly and cogently than most later writers would.
 

1.The Oswald Affair

Léo Sauvage
Commentary, March 1964, pp. 55–65
(A Commentary Report)
 
http://www.kenrahn.com/JFK/The_critics/Sauvage/The_Oswald_Affair/Oswald_Affair.html

2.The Case Against Mr X
 
http://kenrahn.com/JFK/The_critics/Sauvage/Case_Against_Mr._X/Case_Against_Mr_X.html


3.The Warren Commission’s Case Against Oswald

By Leo Sauvage
The New Leader, 22 November 1965, pages 16–21


http://kenrahn.com/JFK/The_critics/Sauvage/WC_Case/WC_case_against_Oswald.html


4.Oswald’s Case Against the Warren Commission

By Leo Sauvage
The New Leader, 20 December 1965, pages 5–10


 
http://www.kenrahn.com/JFK/The_critics/Sauvage/Oswalds_Case/Oswalds_case.html


5.As I Was Saying

By Leo Sauvage
The New Leader, 9 November 1964, pages 11–13


 
 
http://kenrahn.com/JFK/The_critics/Sauvage/As_I_Was_Saying/As_I_was_saying.html


6.Thomas Buchanan, Detective

By Leo Sauvage
The New Leader, 28 September 1964, pages 10–15


 
http://kenrahn.com/JFK/The_critics/Sauvage/Buchanan_Detective/Thomas_Buchanan_detective.html
 
Edited for convenience. Sorry for going all Tom Scully on the first efforts.
These articles serve to prove that the much anticipated Warren Report had its initial critics at the time.These guys were justifiably suspicious as we are today. Its our job to keep it going. Much of the stuff Sauvage mentions in 1964 is being claimed as recent discoveries by some of the boneheads researching today. This stuff also serves to remind us that we should look beyond what is already known. The Warren Report was officially the beginning of the cover up that is still going on today. Let's all get behind Prayer Man and put an end to the bullshit already.

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

This is from Jack White;s "Escape" document

3/64                 Bob Considine of the Hearst Press ... was told that Oswald had been questioned inside the building "almost before the smoke from the assassin's gun had disappeared."  As for me, I have the direct testimony of one of the two witnesses, Mr. Roy Truly.  When I asked him whether it had taken a long time for him and the motorcycle policeman to reach the lunchroom, he answered ..."Oh, no!  It was as soon as the last shot was fired when I saw the officer come running.  As a matter of fact, it was so soon afterwards that I don't believe he was riding in the motorcade.  He must have been off his motorcycle, standing nearby.  Anyhow, it was right away after the shots.  I knew they were shots, but had no idea they were fired from the building.  I thought the officer wanted to get to the roof for a better look and I immediately offered to show him how.  We ran to the freight elevators in the back of the building because the front elevators do not go beyond the fourth floor, but the two freight cars had both been left somewhere up in the top floors and we took the stairs, the officer ahead of me.  When I reached the second-floor landing, the officer was already at the open door of the lunchroom, some twenty or twenty-five feet away.  No, I couldn't tell you exactly how much time it took, all, this, but it wasn't long …"
 
The obvious question, then, is whether there was enough time for Lee Oswald - if he fired the shots from the front window on the sixth floor - to run to the staircase in the back [that is, on the opposite side of the building], hide the gun, and go down four flights of stairs to the lunchroom before the motorcycle policeman and Mr. Truly saw him there, not panting, not looking suspicious, and probably sipping a Coke [which means additional time for getting it out of the vending machine and opening it].
 
… [the] authorities, by trying too hard to place Oswald in the Elm Street building immediately after the assassination, came close to providing him with an alibi ...  Commentary: Leo Sauvage
 
3/64                 The fact of Oswald's presence on the second floor, it should be noted, was first presented to the public as evidence against him.
 
... I can see only one explanation for the emphasis both Mr. Wade and Chief Curry placed on how soon after the the shots Oswald was seen inside the building, and for the singular statement by Chief Curry - never repeated, but never corrected as a mistake either - to the effect that there were other witnesses to Oswald's presence in the lunchroom besides the motorcycle policeman and Mr. Truly.  ... there were no witnesses to testify to the exact time Oswald left the Elm Street building - and since this raised the possibility that he might claim to have left it before the crime, it became important to stress his presence in the building after the shots had been fired. Commentary: Leo Sauvage
 
3/64                 Captain Fritz ... triumphantly announced to press and television that no fewer than six witnesses had seen Oswald there [in the building] shortly before the shooting.  One of these witnesses, Captain Fritz said, had invited Oswald to come outside with him to watch the approaching motorcade from the street, and Fritz seemed to attach great importance to the fact that Oswald, after refusing the invitation, had asked that witness to send the freight elevator back up to him.
 
The chief of the Dallas Homicide Bureau did not explain how a hand-operated freight elevator could be sent anywhere without an operator in it.  … Commentary: Leo Sauvage

3/64                 On 12/8, the New York Journal American published a "step by stealthy step" account of the assassination …, by Gene Roberts originally published in the Detroit Free Press and then syndicated to various other newspapers across the country.  Somewhere in the middle of that story, the following lines appeared:
 
"The storage room seemed made to order for an assassin.  It was cluttered with rows of book cartons, some of them in stacks six feet high.  Five depository employees had worked in the storage room until noon, covering its floor with plywood, …”
 
...  But how is it that the police found Oswald's palm print, but no other, on a carton which, it now develops, must have been shifted back and forth during the morning by several different hands?  And since it now also appears that Oswald could not, because of the exceptional activity going on there all morning, have used the convenient hiding places of the sixth floor, where did he keep his rifle from sight until noon?  When did he take it out from where he had hidden it?  How did he get it to the sixth floor window in time for the murder without being seen? Commentary: Leo Sauvage

Thanks Barto for putting it up. Cheers bro.

Two points stick out about the Truly interview. The first that Baker was ahead of him up the stairway. Second that at that time Truly did not know what upper floors the elevators were on. By the time he came to testify this had been resolved for him by the Ball and Belin trip to Dallas for the various re enactments. I beleive he relayed back to them what they told him to say about them both being stuck on 5.

Him  being ahead of Baker was not told only to Sauvage but also to the Detroit Press, and in that very same week in his SS statement it has been turned around and also him being on the steps to the third floor was 'invented'
SS introed a lot of dodgy stuff.
http://www.prayer-man.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/rokc%20forum/www.reopenkennedycase.org/apps/forums/topics/show/13339922-ahead-of-me.html

And yw Paul, the guy deserves a major credit for bringing stuff to light others simply failed to do so

Any guesses as to why they changed it around to Truly being ahead?

It happened in the first week of Dec. and it shows in the Secret Service report.

To be able to isolate Oz and 'Momma Son'? To show that Oswald had made his way down and into the lunch room and use it as a backup for his presence away from it all?  I don't really know and would have to resort to speculation.

I cannot think of anything else, but it is that very same bit that throws a massive spanner in the works. As Truly should have seen the door close before he went up to the 3rd fl.

Truly said the door was closed, and so did Baker.
Baker went in and the door was closed when Truly approached and opened the door and leaned in (yeah right!!!).

What I do think is that this scenario required Truly to become more of a fantasist during his WC testimony as with other matters, like running up those stairs in front of the TSBD.

I think having Truly lead the climb up the stairs may have something to do with Baker's 4th floor initial affidavit. He got his bearings wrong apparently.

hutchinsonnews-19631227

"There are disturbing aspects about the 'lunchroom episode'."

Yeah. Still are. Because the lunchroom episode is a fiction.