Send Lawyers Guns & Money Pt2

First topic message reminder :

Professor Charles ("Chuck") Webster
Very little can be gleaned from the Warren Commission volumes about Charles Webster except that he had been at police head-quarters most of the day following the assassination; that he was a law professor at the Southern Methodist University (SMU); that he gave assurances to the DCLU delegation about Oswald's civil rights; that he had taken this delegation to Captain King for further assurances; that he may himself have been involved with the DCLU; and that he very likely attended a meeting with various officials regarding the upcoming arraignment. However, there is one document of no little interest in the HSCA subject files. It is a FBI memo regarding the American GI Forum and is dated June 20, 1960. This indicates that Bill Lowery had attended a meeting of a committee which had formed to support Webtser's run for Congress. The committee members were mainly CPUSA members or past members.[6] Lowery had been a founding member of the Dallas branch of the American GI Forum along with TSBD employee, Joe Molina. He had also been an FBI informant/infiltration agent since 1945. Another of those founding members was Felix Bartello (also an informant). Bartello was later to become a member of a Minutemen splinter group which had formed in support of Edwin Walker's efforts at Oxford. One of the other members, Ashland Burchwell, had been caught en-route to Mississippi with a car load of weapons.

In 1963, Lowery testified against a suspected communist named John Stafford before the Subversive Activities Control Board (SACB) in Washington. Stafford is also mentioned in the above document. The case drew headlines when RFK asked Texas state authorities to refrain from taking action on Stafford until the Feds were through with him. Further controversy arose when Lowery's status as informant was blown when, at the hearings, he admitted he had infiltrated the GI Forum and other reputable groups for the FBI. The FBI predictably denied he was acting for anyone other than the CPUSA - a lie exposed through the release of files.

As a sidebar, it may well be the Stafford case that gave Edwin Walker the idea to allege RFK had intervened in having Oswald released from police custody after being arrested for the Apr 10 so-called assassination attempt. Prof. Webster seems to have had a very cozy relationship with the Dallas DPD for someone of so pink a hue.

Grier & Louise Raggio timeline
1938: Louise Ballerstedt joins the American Friends Service Committee and spends that summer working in Galena, Illinois for the Society of Friends

1939: Louise graduates from the University of Texas and is awarded a Rockefeller Foundation grant for a one-year internship at the White House. Here, she meets the likes of Eleanor Roosevelt, befriends LBJ and dates John Connally. While in Washington, she also works for the National Youth Administration (NYA)

1940: Louise returns to Austin still with the NYA, working under Jake Pickle.[7] April 19, 1941: Grier Raggio and Louise Ballerstedt marry after a short courtship. Grier, a lawyer, is working for the Department of Agriculture investigating misuse of food stamps for purchase of alcohol and other illegal substances

December 7, 1941: Pearl Harbor is attacked by the Japanese resulting in the US entering WWII and Grier is drafted

March, 1942: Grier is sent to Pacific Theater after initially being sent to New Orleans to attend Officer's Training School for Intelligence where he is rejected on security grounds. He serves with the 386th Air Service Group. During the course of the war he would send letters home highly critical of the US army

August 6, 1942: First son Grier, Jr is born

September, 1945: Grier returns from the war and works for the Veteran's Administration Board

1946: Second son Tom is born

1947: At the insistence of Grier, Louise enrols in Southern Methodist University law School

1947: Third son Kenneth is born. Louise drops out of law school

1948: Grier is relieved of duties while answering 8 charges of "Un-American activities" including; being a member of the Communist Party; a member of the American Spanish Aid Committee; a member of the American Civil Rights Union; that he had advocated and praised the Russian system of government to co-workers and; that on another occasion had advocated the overthrow of the government by force. He and Louise travel to Washington where Grier appears before the Veterans Administrations Loyalty Board. He denies all charges except one - telling a fellow worker that “there is no difference between Stalin forcing Communism on the countries of Europe and the US forcing democracy on them”. This statement he asserts, had been taken out of context. He is cleared by the board and returns to work. Throughout this period and perhaps beyond, the Raggio's claim their phone is tapped and that they are under constant surveillance

1949: Louise and Grier join the Unitarian Church

1950: Louise returns to law school

1952: Louise graduates and does volunteer work for the League of Women Voters and the Women’s Alliance of the Unitarian Church while practicing law part-time from home. Meanwhile, Grier is again the focus of government interest in his activities

1953: Louise obtains a job as an assistant DA under Henry Wade through the help of friend and mentor, Judge Sarah T Hughes. Judge Hughes would, after the assassination of JFK, administer the oath of office to LBJ

March 1, 1954: Grier is guest speaker at a meeting of the Peace and World Relations Group of the Temple Emanu-El Sisterhood. His subject is, "Are We in Danger of Losing Our Civil Rights and Liberties?"

1955: Grier Raggio opens a law office in the Rio Grande Building in Dallas [8]

April, 1956: Louise quits DA's office to join her husband's law practice. Firm is now known as Raggio & Raggio and specializes in divorce cases

1957: Louise's former employer, Jake Pickle, becomes director of the Texas State Democratic Executive Committee. Holds that position until 1960

1960: Louise serves on the newly organized Family Law Section of the State Bar

1961: Jake Pickle becomes a member of the Texas Employment Commission

1961: Sarah Hughes becomes a Federal District Judge

January 27, 1963: Grier debates Wyatt W Lipscomb, city attorney in Garland for the Soroptimist Club of Dallas at the Baker Hotel. Subject of debate is "Does Membership in the United Nations Serve the Best interests of the United States?" Louise is a club member

November 13, 1963: Ruth Paine files a petition for divorce stating she separated from Michael on September 1, 1962, and that for 6 months prior to
separation, she had suffered a course of "unkind, cruel harsh and tyrannical treatment and conduct" at the hands of her husband. Ruth's attorney in this filing was Louise Raggio.[9] Recall that the Paine's and Raggio's attend the same church

November 22, 1963 Morning: Grier and Louise are at the Trade Mart for the luncheon [10]

November 22, 1963 Evening: Grier gets a call either from an ACLU member in Austin (according Greg Olds) or from Washington (according to Louise) concerning either finding out if Oswald was being denied counsel (according to Olds) or asking that he witness Oswald's arraignment (according to Louise). Grier phones Olds about this. In turn, Olds phones police, then calls Grier back. Grier suggests they go down and check out the situation

November 22, 1963, 11:15 PM: Olds, Raggio and 2 other DCLU members meet across from City Hall at Plaza Hotel, then try to talk to Earl Cabell without success before speaking with Prof. Charles Webster outside the office of Captain Fritz

November 22, 1963, 11:40 PM: Webster takes delegation to Captain King

November 22, 1963, 11:50 PM: According to Wade, Grier Raggio and Charles Webster are both at a meeting just prior to the midnight press conference regarding the arraignment in the JFK case. David Johnston however, only named himself, Curry, Fritz, Wade and 2 or 3 assistant DAs as being present

Midnight: According to Olds, the others in the delegation go home at the time he goes down to watch the press conference [11]

1970: Grier and Louise's eldest son, Grier, Jr starts up a journal called "The New Democrat" which he edits with Stephen Schlesinger, son of JFK aide and historian, Arthur

October 26, 1970: Conservative journalist, John Chamberlain writes widely published article, "Where else Can Democrats Go?" predicts that Raggio (whom Chamberlain describes as a Mayor John Lindsay functionary) and Schlesinger are "sewing the dragon's teeth" through their support of McGovern which he states will lead to problems at the '72 convention unless the Left gets its way

1972: Gary Allen, a John Birch Society propagandist and author of "None Dare Call it Conspiracy" publishes "Richard Nixon: The Man Behind the Mask" which quotes from the Chamberlain article, suggesting that Nixon and some of the Left in the Democratic Party are "part of the same conspiracy".

According to Allen, the Left, with Raggio and chlesinger playing prominent roles, will split the party, ensuring an easy win for Nixon

guns & money
There are two other people named Raggio who turn up in the records. Any connection to Grier Raggio is unknown, and they are mentioned here only for the benefit of anyone who might have an interest in genealogy. The first is David L Raggio originally of Natchitoches, Louisiana. He was a WWII veteran who served with the 879th Airborne Engineers.

Raggio, in 1963 and by now a geologist, entered into a partnership with Richard Davis and Gus de la Barre. The business which resulted was known as the Guatemalan Lumber & Mineral Corp. In actuality however, it was a front for training Cuban exiles at camps in the area around Lake Pontchartrain.

The second is William Raggio. As Washoe County District Attorney and friend of Frank Sinatra, he was heavily involved in the investigation into the December 8, 1963 kidnapping of Sinatra's son, Frank Jr. In March, 1968, New Orleans played host to the National Convention of District Attorneys. An awards banquet was planned as part of the convention with Hubert Humphrey originally slated as guest speaker. When Humphrey withdrew after hearing how Garrison was criticizing LBJ over various aspects of the Shaw case, as well as the original investigation of the assassination, Garrison placed himself into the guest speaker role.

The organizing committee, fretting over what Garrison might say, requested a meeting with him. The meeting culminated in barbed exchanges between Garrison and Raggio - who had attempted to warn Garrison to leave out any mention of the assassination in his speech. Garrison reacted by cancelling the banquet and shipping all the catered food to an orphanage.

In 1970, Richard Nixon hatched plans to recapture a hostile senate for the Republicans at the Nov 3rd elections. To this end, he hand-picked 9 candidates. Among them was William Raggio. Raggio failed in his bid.

In 1972, he did win a seat in the Nevada state senate, and has held it ever since.


ENDNOTES
[1] Commission Exhibit 987 is a letter from Greg Olds to J Lee Rankin. It is on DCLU letterhead which lists all board members and other office holders within the organization.

[2] Also according to Louise Raggio, her husband had called Olds at the insistence of someone from the Washington Office - not Austin.

[3] Commission Document 87, p 549

[4] Treasure-Hunting in the National Archives, The Third Decade, vol 2, # 2 by Sylvia Meagher, January 1986. The document cited by Meagher in the article is found in Commission Document 5, p 400

[5] The 1:35 Arraignment and the Rewriting of History, The Third Decade, vol 3, # 4 by Timothy Cwiek, May, 1987

[6] NARA Record Number: 124-90010-10040

[7] Pickle bio: 1938; United States Navy, served three and a half years; area director, National Youth Administration, 1938-1941; radio business; public relations executive; director of Texas state Democratic Executive Committee, 1957-1960; member of Texas Employment Commission, 1961-1963). He had also been a political aide to LBJ and in Nov 1963 was the Democratic Nominee in the 10th District run-off with Republican Jim Dobbs. He was hated by the liberal faction of his own party who had got Kennedy over the line in Texas in 1960. In fact, one of those Kennedy supporters, Jack Ritter appeared on TV, Nov 21 urging those who had previously supported him to now support Dobbs, indicating that Pickle was not an acceptable candidate for the Democrats, and had been "less than forthright" during debates. Kennedy was due in Austin after the Dallas visit.

[8] The 112th MIG also had an office in the Rio Grande Building, as did the Immigration & Naturalization Service. The latter was listed in Oswald's address book

[9] Warren Commission Document 849, p33. As no further action was taken within 6 months of filing, the case was automatically dismissed

[10] November 22 - The Day Remembered by Morning News Staff, Dallas, p136

[11] Unless otherwise stated, background information on Louise and Grier Raggio has been sourced from the roster of the 386th Air Service Group; Louise Raggio's autobiography, Texas Tornado; Louise Raggio profile from the Texas State Bar; article published by the Texas Women Lawyers Association, "Louise B Raggio: Handing the Torch to Today's Generation" and; The Dallas Morning News archives

Webster was the foil.
Professor Chuck had a background of working with the DPD.

While professing a bit of criticism about Texas law and order, as expected by anyone in such a field of study, might use this knowledge as a tool or weapon depending the circumstance.

Charles W. Webster, Ph.B., LL.B., Professor of Law

https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/22412033/

 Paper Says Oswald Was Schizophrenic NEW YORK. W -- The Post said today that Lee Oswald, accused as the assassin of President Kennedy, had a psychiatric and truancy record in the Bronx.
The American Psychiatric Association announced, meantime, that it will offer the court a group of psychiatrists to examine Ruby. Charles W. Webster, who said he teaches a course in psychiatry at Southern Methodist University and is a lawyer by training, said he feels the court "should call in its own specialists, rather than the defense or prosecution." Webster said he was contacted by Dr. L. J. West, an officer in the association and professor of psychiatry at the University of Oklahoma in Oklahoma City, about the offer. He said West wanted him to "be the local spokesman." Webster said West told him the association was willing, if the judge or the court desired,
Family Court, as saying the information had been given to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. "IT WAS learned from other sources that the psychiatric re- recommended young Oswald--then only 13--for commitment," the Post said. "The recommendation was turned down by the court. "The probation report found schizophrenic tendencies and said that Oswald was 'potentialy dangerous.' "The boy's mother testified that she could not cope with him." Young Oswald had been taken o the court in 1953 for long-term truancy. Justice Kelley, who was not a member of the court at the time, confirmed that there had seen a psychiatric report on Oswald, but declined to disclose the nature of it, the Post said. It quoted her as saying: "Our records are always confidential and we never reveal them to anyone. I did give some information to the FBI, as an exception, and contrary to our regular rules, for the simple reason that Oswald is dead and if this kind of report could cast See OSWALD, Page 8


DALLAS UPI*— Former Maj. Gen Edwin A. Walker will enter a hospital later today for a court-ordered psychiatric examination to determine whether he is capable of understanding the rebellion, insurrection and seditious conspiracy charges against him. Charles W. Webster, attorney for psychiatrist Dr. R. L. Stubblefield. said Walker would ba admitted to Parkland Hospital In Dallas as an in-patient. Walker, his mother from Canter Point. Tex., and his attorneys met with Webster and Stubblefield Wednesday and agreed to begin the long-delayed examination. Th# World War ll and Korean War hero, who resigned his Army commission to campaign for what he called a "pro-blue" brand of Americanism, was arrested by federal officers at Oxford, Miss., during the anti-integration riots on the campus. He was sent to the federal prison hospital at Springfield. Mo., for mental examination, a move which caused charges that his civil liberties had been violated Walker now is free on $50,090 bond. He has been staying at his home in Dallas. Webster said the examination would take four or five days No details of the examination will be made public ;
https://newspaperarchive.com/garland-daily-news-nov-08-1962-p-1/


November 12, 1962
The Montana Standard and The Butte Daily Post from Butte, Montana · Page 12
Walker May Face More Mental Tests DALLAS (UPN -- Former Ma] Gen. Edwin A. Walker may have to undergo further psychiatric tests, his lawyer said Sunday, but he will not be required to remain in a hospital under observation. Walker, celebrating his 53r birthday, was released from Park land Hospital Saturday night. He was admitted lo the hospital Thursday to undergo tests to determine whether he is mentally capable to face federal charges of seditious conspiracy, insurrection and rebellion growing out of the riots at The University of Mississippi more than a month ago. A hospital spokesman announced Saturday night that psychiatrist Dr. Robert Stubblefield, in charge of the tests, "has discharged Gen. Kelwin A. Walker from Parkland Hospilal." "Additional conferences may be arranged by consultation between Dr. Stubblefield and his attorney, Charles Webster, a professor at Southern Methodist University law school, and attorneys for Gen Walker." the spokesman said. The tesls were ordered by U.S Dist Judge Claud Clayton of Oxford, Miss., shortly after Walker was arrested at Oxford during the rioting on The Old Miss campus. The (tests were part of an agreement under which Walker was released from a federal prison hospital at Springfield, Mo. The results will he given to Clayton at Oxford Nov. 20. They will not be made public.
https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/75125833/

 WEBSTER, , PATRICIA (PAT) DeWANE Was born on November 7, 1920, and died peacefully on November 19, 2007 at the age of 87. She was preceded in death by her husband, Chuck, her son, C.J., and her granddaughter, Sara Murawski. Patricia was born to Dr. Joseph and Harriet DeWane in Minot, ND, but lived her early life in Wolf Point, MT. She graduated from Marquette University in 1941 with a degree in Journalism. Pat met Chuck at Marquette and raised 6 children. Together they were founding members of the Catholic Inter-racial Council of Dallas. After Chuck's death in 1969, Pat went back to school, graduating with a Master's Degree in Social Work from the University of Texas at Arlington. Pat had an illustrious career at Campfire Girls, Parkland Hospital and Child Protective Services, where she retired in 1987 as an Intake Supervisor. After her retirement, she continued her community service though volunteer work with various organizations, including Trinity Ministries and Austin Street Shelter. Pat was a devout Catholic, a "Yellow Dog Democrat", and a fierce advocate for abused and neglected children. She handled many adversities in her life with extraordinary strength and courage. Pat is survived by her brother Larry, of Nashville, TN; daughters-- Maureen and companion Virginia O'Rourke of Phoenix, AZ; Mike Murawski and husband Jerry of Farmers Branch; sons-- Patrick and wife Susie Martin of Redondo Beach, CA; Kevin and wife Pam of Grapevine, TX; and Rev. Terry and wife Rev. Marsha of Ft. Thomas, KY; grandchildren-- Ellen Baumann, Stephen and Christina Webster; Brian, Carey and Kimberly Murawski; Michael and Shannon Webster; and Jacob Webster; and 3 great-grandchildren.
http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/dallasmorningnews/obituary.aspx?n=patricia-webster&pid=98394702


Dodson, Pruill to Attend Law Enforcement Institute Police Chief Warren Dodson and Traffic Capt. F. M. Pruitt of Abilene Police Department will hear some topnotch speakers at the Institute of Law Enforcement at Personnel," "Human Motiva the Southwestern Legal Foundation in Dallas. The two officers have been nslilulf from Sept, 9 to 20 on 'Field Supervision of fie Police Traffic Function." Relations," "Purpose of the Traffic Court," "DWI Cases," "Dis aster Control," "Training Programs, "Selective Assignment o: lions," and "Nc'Iigenl Homicide.' 1 There are many others. Lecturers will be Chief Charles ranted scholarships to attend the Batchclor of the Dallas police force; John L. Briggs, chairman Citizens Traffic Commission; j A y r c s Compton' of Ayrcs Comii- Fifly such scholarships, payingjton Associates; C. G. Conner, two-thirds of Ihc regular $75 tuition, are offered peace officer.-;, Charles W. Webster. Insfi- j t u l p director, has announced. Mayors and police chiefs may nominate people for the awards. Webster said the September event will be the first instilute to assistant chief, Texas Highway Patrol; Chief J. K. Curry, Dallas police force: Jame-S P, Econnmos, director of the Traffic Court Pro-| of the American Bar Assn.; Ben Ellis, assistant district attorney, Dallas County; Herberti fiaron, t r a f f i c prosecutor, New Or-! be held. He said the. Institute wasilcnns; Chief Carl Hansson, Dallas established "because of "he lotig-i police force; Arthur L. Harding, fill need for some place where professor of Law, Southern Meth- additional training could be oh-|odist University; .1. Donald Hill, Uiinpd." (National Safety Council; Lt. 11. C. It is operated on a pennauc-oi.iKockns, Dallas police force; Capt hasi 1 ;, presenling four two-week H. II. Lunday, Dallas police force; Consccirttvc Deathless Hoys S rofoiim-i in ? ? 3 7 . I Accidents Sot. and SUR, . 14 Accidents in 1957 1.5*9 Injured Sot and Sun 3 Injured in 1957 *.67 iiisliUilcs d u r i n g the year and a i m - M o r i o n F. Mason, M.D., Univer-j ing ill a cnmpiphcn.'ive 12-wcckjsily o,' Texas' Southwestern Medi-j course every summer. jcal School. James Musick, execu- Scholarships to the firs! i n s l i t i i t e i t i v e director, Texas Safety Assn.; are made available through thelGprnld O'Connell, Traffic Insli- iiniprnsily of Inn Dallas citizens ' l u l o , Norlhwc.slprn University; T r n f f i e Commission, the TexasJA. Q. Sarlain, professor of the Law Enforcement Foundation and chology, SMU; Robert E. Stoltz, other iniprpslcd citizens of Dallas-department of psychology, SMU; Webster announced. ;Henry Wade, district attorney, Among its numerous subjects Dallas County: anrf Moss \Vim- to be discussed at Ihc Soptomborlni.-.!.. .Professor of law, SMU. ^ I n s t i t u t e ore "The Department of' Over-all title of the September Public Safety and Local Law En-^nstitute is "Field Supervision of (forccmcnt," "Supervisor-Employe,the Police Traffic Function."





Obituary Patricia Dewane Webster;
Advocate worked to help neglected children
The Dallas Morning News23 Nov 2007
Patricia DeWane Webster was orphaned before she was 10 years old. She spent much of her adult life as a fierce advocate for abused and neglected children.
Ms. Webster, 87, died Monday of natural causes at Tremont Retirement Community.
She was a just a very caring, compassionate person,” said her daughter, Michael Mary “Mike” Murawski of Farmers Branch.
A small, intelligent woman, Ms. Webster always used perfect grammar and word selection, her daughter said.
“She was very dynamic; she gave people a lot of strength,” Mrs. Murawski said.
Ms. Webster, who was born in Minot, N.D., grew up in Wolf Point, Mont.
“She was raised by other people, so therefore her life was harder, and therefore she saw the difficulties in others,” her daughter said. “She just had a very caring heart for children and those who lived in situations that were not good.”

In 1941, Ms. Webster received a bachelor’s degree in journalism from Marquette University, where she met her husband, Charles W. “Chuck” Webster.
The couple lived in New York and Wisconsin before moving to Dallas in 1954. Dr. Webster was a law professor at Southern Methodist University.
Ms. Webster was a stay-athome mom who was actively involved in the community.
She and her husband cofounded the Dallas Catholic Interracial Council.
When Dr. Webster died in 1969, Ms. Webster went to work at Sears to help make ends meet, her daughter said. She then returned to school and earned a master’s degree in social work at the University of Texas at Arlington.

Ms. Webster was a social worker for Camp Fire Girls, Parkland Memorial Hospital and Child Protective Services, where she retired as an intake supervisor in 1987.
In retirement, Ms. Webster was a volunteer at Trinity Ministries and the Austin Street Centre, until about five years ago, her daughter said.
She considered herself a “yellow-dog” Democrat and worked on numerous political campaigns.
“She and Ann Richards were good friends,” her daughter said.
Ms. Webster was an active parishioner of Holy Trinity Catholic Church.
“Anything she could do to help others out, she did,” Mrs. Murawski said.
In addition to her daughter, Ms. Webster is survived by another daughter, Maureen Webster of Phoenix; three sons, Patrick Webster of Redondo Beach, Calif., Kevin Webster of Grapevine, and the Rev. Terry Webster of Fort Thomas, Ky.; a brother, Larry DeWane of Nashville, Tenn.; nine grandchildren; and three greatgrandchildren.

1942
Mr. and Mrs. George Barwise announce the coming marriage of their daughter, Patricia Ann De Wane, to Charles Webster of Baraboo, Wis. The wedding will take place this spring in Milwaukee. Miss DeWane attended the Ursuline academy in Great Falls and Marquette university at Milwaukee.

Vengeance Is Mine So Say The Jury?

JURY SENTENCING - GRAB-BAG JUSTICE
by
Charles W. Webster*
"Trying a man is easy, as easy as falling off a log compared
to deciding what to do with him when he has been found
guilty."'
It has often been stated that the most significant advance which
could be made in the criminal jurisprudence of the State of Texas
would be to take the sentencing power away from the jury. Only
Texas and seven other states' give the jury discretion to determine
sentences in all cases, while the other forty-two plus the federal
system vest the power of sentencing in the court. This Article is
designed to determine whether there is any valid reason for continuing
the practice of jury sentencing in present-day law or whether ....

While the determination of guilt
or innocence has traditionally been a jury function, in only a few
states has the jury also been granted the power to fix the sentence
within limits established by the legislature."
Since the common law permitted the judge to determine the
punishment, this for a time became the procedure in Texas. Following
the formation of the Republic of Texas, the First Congress in
1836 enacted legislation which made no appreciable change in the
existing practice."5 For the ten years of the Republic, the power of the
judge to fix the penalty was not disturbed. The change to jury determination
of the penalty was affected by one of the first laws passed
by the first legislature of the State of Texas in 1846, which empowered
the jury to sentence the defendant in all criminal cases
except (1) capital cases and (2) cases for which punishment was
fixed by law."
Present law provides that the jury shall assess the penalty in all
cases where it is not absolutely fixed by statute. "If the plea is not
guilty . . . [the jury] . . . shall assess the punishment in all cases
where the same is not absolutely fixed by law to some particular
penalty."" If the accused pleads guilty and waives a jury trial, the
judge may affix the sentence.'"

Mr. JOHNSTON. I was first called to handle the issuance of the search warrant involving the residence at 1026 North Beckley.
Mr. HUBERT. Did you issue that search warrant?
Mr. JOHNSTON. Yes; and not only did I issue the search warrant, I was requested by the officers to go with them and also Assistant District Attorney Bill Alexander was in on that search also, which turned out to be the room in which Lee Harvey Oswald had been living on North Beckley. I was present when that search was made and also seizure of the things that were in his room.

By far the most bizarre judges and search in history!!

Some make a point of Oswald saying "So this is the trial" when being arraigned.
This is wise.
Often the arraignment is the trial.
It is the road to exoneration or to trial depending on what is said and presented there and then.
By that I mean it is often where the case is first discussed by all parties.
The defense tries to have the charges dismissed, reduced, so on, as a good defense lawyer would.
But depriving Lee of even a witnesses at the arraignment is at least trampling our rights, as was making sure he had no defense present.
Was Nichols telling him he can get a lawyer appointed until at trial?
Seems what I recall of the episode was to stall as much as possible his seeking counsel. Now how can Nichols advise Lee of his legal rights and is not a criminal lawyer. He can't, not fully, and not properly.
At arraignment Lee could have professed his innocence and his alibi, named those whom saw him about the time of the shots... but we the people were prevented from the arraignment. So we too were robbed of our rights to hear his pleas.
What could Webster say to Oswald, as a lawyer and or Doctor?
As a Doctor and Lawyer he could play both sides of the fence.
Was he playing lawyer but really being a doctor?
The methods and abuses by authorities against Lee Oswald and we the people must be fully exposed.

That and subjoining of perjury by counsel for the Presidents commission prove by a preponderance of examples that the rights of Lee Oswald were not properly upheld before or after his murder.  

www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CR/htm/CR.15.htm
www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/CR/htm/CR.17.htm


In addition to the assistance afforded by Federal agencies, the Commission
throughout its inquiry had the cooperation of representatives
of the city of Dallas and the State of Texas. The attorney general of
Texas, Waggoner Carr, aided by two distinguished lawyers of that
State, Robert G. Storey of Dallas, retired dean of the Southern
Methodist University Law School and former president of the American
Bar Association, and Leon Jaworski of Houston, former president
of the Texas State Bar Association, has been fully informed at
all times as to the progress of the investigation, and has advanced
such suggestions as he and his special assistants considered helpful to
the accomplishment of the Commission’s assignment. Attorney General
Carr has promptly supplied the Commission with pertinent information
possessed by Texas officials. Dallas officials, particularly those
from the police department....

on February 25, 1964, requested Walter E.
Craig, president of the American Bar Association, to participate in
the investigation and to advise the Commission whether in his opinion
the proceedings conformed to the basic principles of American justice.
Mr. Craig accepted this assignment and participated fully and without
limitation. He attended Commission hearings in person or
through his appointees.

Oswald was arrested by the Dallas police as a suspect in (Tippit murder). Based on evidence provided by Federal, State, and local agencies, the State of Texas
arraigned Oswald within 12 hours of his arrest, charging him with
the assassination of President Kennedy and the murder of Patrolman
Tippit. On November 24, 1963, less than 48 hours after his arrest,
Oswald

Mr. HUBERT. Did he make any comment upon that at all ?

Mr. JOHNSTON. Yes, sir; but I can't recall what it was. At this particular time he made some remark. Also at the second arraignment for the murder of President Kennedy, when he was brought through the door at this time, he said, "Well, I guess this is the trial," was the statement that he made then, but I don't remember what he said at the arraignment regarding Officer Tippit.

Why is this hard for him to recall?
Transcription unavailable?
They did have a clerk of the court or court reporter there??
They did have a steno or typist available?
No pleas to enter? Okay but how did the defendant answer?
Guess it didn't matter in Dallas Texas before Judge N Jury Johnston.
Just read it off and waive bye bye

Mr. HUBERT. Now, let's pass to the arraignment concerning President Kennedy, and I wish you would dictate into the record the same information you did as to the first one.
Mr. JOHNSTON. All right, sir. This was the arraignment of Lee Harvey Oswald for the murder with malice of John F. Kennedy, cause No. F-154, The State of Texas versus Lee Harvey Oswald. The complaint was filed at 11:25 p.m., was accepted by me at 11:26 p.m. It was filed at approximately 11:25 p.m. by Capt. J. W. Fritz, homicide bureau of the Dallas Police Department, and was accepted by Henry Wade, criminal district attorney, Dallas County, Tex., and was docketed as cause No. 154, F-154 at 11:26 p.m.
Shortly after this is when the defendant was taken to the detail room or the assembly room.
Mr. HUBERT. What happened at this arraignment--was it the same as before?
Mr. JOHNSTON. He was not arraigned at this time. He was then arraigned after he was removed to the detail room where the press was allowed to have their first interview with the defendant, with Lee Harvey Oswald.

---

Subsequently in a conference between Captain Fritz, Mr. Wade, and two or three of his assistants and myself, and Chief Curry--it was decided to go ahead and arraign him and that arraignment was held at 1:35 a.m., November 23, 1963, in the identification bureau of the Dallas Police Department, and once again I appraised him of his constitutional rights, read the affidavit, and advised him again that I remanded him to the custody of the sheriff, Dallas County, denying bond as capital offense. He was also told at both of these instances that he would be given the right to contact an attorney of his choice.




I was attending the luncheon, when one of the sergeants of the Dallas Police Department came to my table and asked me to please come with him, and I was then informed of what had happened, and was asked to go immediately to Parkland Hospital, and upon arriving there found Judge Theron Ward, the justice of the peace, Precinct 3, from Garland, handling the inquest on President Kennedy. They did not know Judge Ward and that's the reason they had called me, not knowing he was already there.

Selective memory?
Mr. HUBERT. When that was done with him, did he have to pass through this crowded area?
Mr. JOHNSTON. Yes, sir; those newspaper people--he certainly did.
Mr. HUBERT. Did they make any remarks to him or ask him questions?
Mr. JOHNSTON. They were asking questions--yes, sir; "Did you do it? Did they get the gun? Was that your gun?" Everything imaginable that's what your newspaper people were calling to him as he would go out of there. Every time I would leave to get a drink or get a cup of coffee or anything, it was the same thing. "What's happened? Tell us what's going on? Has he said anything? Has he admitted anything?"

Oswald Arraigned at 11:26pm ??? NO CHARGED!

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/lee-harvey-oswald-arrested-accused-killing-jfk-1963-article-1.2431162


Oswald said what?

11:20 - 11:25 P.M.
Oswald appears in a lineup for a press conference. The media asked him about his earlier arraignment.

"Well, I was questioned by Judge Johnston. However, I protested at that time that I was not allowed legal representation during that very short and sweet hearing. I really don't know what the situation is about. Nobody has told me anything except that I am accused of murdering a policeman. I know nothing more than that, and I do request someone to come forward to give me legal assistance."

When asked, "Did you kill the President?" Oswald replied, "No. I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the hall asked me that question. . ."I did not do it. I did not do it. . . I did not shoot anyone."


Next day Sat 23rd at 1:35am arraigned for JFK murder,
at 6:15pm he is charged with Connally assault to murder.
Better late than never eh John Boy

It was not hard for Johnston to recall what was being said.
It was mega hard for anyone present to recall anything what was being said.

And Johnston gives the game away 
FF 1 min in


In a few weeks all of you will be able to read in depth how Leroy got shafted in the rear on the 22nd and during the early hrs of the 23rd........

And here is Hosty

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10406#relPageId=405&tab=page

REad the final paragraph.

Need more?

Ok

Ed. Ledoux wrote:Mr. HUBERT. Did he make any comment upon that at all ?

Mr. JOHNSTON. Yes, sir; but I can't recall what it was. At this particular time he made some remark. Also at the second arraignment for the murder of President Kennedy, when he was brought through the door at this time, he said, "Well, I guess this is the trial," was the statement that he made then, but I don't remember what he said at the arraignment regarding Officer Tippit.

Why is this hard for him to recall?
Transcription unavailable?
They did have a clerk of the court or court reporter there??
They did have a steno or typist available?
No pleas to enter? Okay but how did the defendant answer?
Guess it didn't matter in Dallas Texas before Judge N Jury Johnston.
Just read it off and waive bye bye

Mr. HUBERT. Now, let's pass to the arraignment concerning President Kennedy, and I wish you would dictate into the record the same information you did as to the first one.
Mr. JOHNSTON. All right, sir. This was the arraignment of Lee Harvey Oswald for the murder with malice of John F. Kennedy, cause No. F-154, The State of Texas versus Lee Harvey Oswald. The complaint was filed at 11:25 p.m., was accepted by me at 11:26 p.m. It was filed at approximately 11:25 p.m. by Capt. J. W. Fritz, homicide bureau of the Dallas Police Department, and was accepted by Henry Wade, criminal district attorney, Dallas County, Tex., and was docketed as cause No. 154, F-154 at 11:26 p.m.
Shortly after this is when the defendant was taken to the detail room or the assembly room.
Mr. HUBERT. What happened at this arraignment--was it the same as before?
Mr. JOHNSTON. He was not arraigned at this time. He was then arraigned after he was removed to the detail room where the press was allowed to have their first interview with the defendant, with Lee Harvey Oswald.

507

---

Subsequently in a conference between Captain Fritz, Mr. Wade, and two or three of his assistants and myself, and Chief Curry--it was decided to go ahead and arraign him and that arraignment was held at 1:35 a.m., November 23, 1963, in the identification bureau of the Dallas Police Department, and once again I appraised him of his constitutional rights, read the affidavit, and advised him again that I remanded him to the custody of the sheriff, Dallas County, denying bond as capital offense. He was also told at both of these instances that he would be given the right to contact an attorney of his choice.




I was attending the luncheon, when one of the sergeants of the Dallas Police Department came to my table and asked me to please come with him, and I was then informed of what had happened, and was asked to go immediately to Parkland Hospital, and upon arriving there found Judge Theron Ward, the justice of the peace, Precinct 3, from Garland, handling the inquest on President Kennedy. They did not know Judge Ward and that's the reason they had called me, not knowing he was already there.

Selective memory?
Mr. HUBERT. When that was done with him, did he have to pass through this crowded area?
Mr. JOHNSTON. Yes, sir; those newspaper people--he certainly did.
Mr. HUBERT. Did they make any remarks to him or ask him questions?
Mr. JOHNSTON. They were asking questions--yes, sir; "Did you do it? Did they get the gun? Was that your gun?" Everything imaginable that's what your newspaper people were calling to him as he would go out of there. Every time I would leave to get a drink or get a cup of coffee or anything, it was the same thing. "What's happened? Tell us what's going on? Has he said anything? Has he admitted anything?"

Oswald Arraigned at 11:26pm ??? NO CHARGED!

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/lee-harvey-oswald-arrested-accused-killing-jfk-1963-article-1.2431162


Oswald said what?

11:20 - 11:25 P.M.
Oswald appears in a lineup for a press conference. The media asked him about his earlier arraignment.

"Well, I was questioned by Judge Johnston. However, I protested at that time that I was not allowed legal representation during that very short and sweet hearing. I really don't know what the situation is about. Nobody has told me anything except that I am accused of murdering a policeman. I know nothing more than that, and I do request someone to come forward to give me legal assistance."

When asked, "Did you kill the President?" Oswald replied, "No. I have not been charged with that. In fact, nobody has said that to me yet. The first thing I heard about it was when the newspaper reporters in the hall asked me that question. . ."I did not do it. I did not do it. . . I did not shoot anyone."


Next day Sat 23rd at 1:35am arraigned for JFK murder,
at 6:15pm he is charged with Connally assault to murder.
Better late than never eh John Boy

Then of course there is the question why there is no charge for trying to attempt to kill uncle Nick.......I mean of that was so clear cut as Nicky professed then there should have been a fourth charge!

My understanding has always been that LHO complained of having no legal representation during the midnight press show and that was followed by a press grilling as to whether he had been arraigned on Kennedy. At that, Fritz, Wade etc had a quick little meeting after which they stopped the show and hustled Oswald off for the arraignment.

Or so they say...

Bart will rip this apart soon.
I'm collecting raw data.

Here is some more:


[url=https://servimg.com/view/17602890/662]
[/url]

Dallas Times Herald
https://www.picclickimg.com/d/l400/pict/162555091949_/JFK-John-F-Kennedy-Assassination-Dallas-Times-Herald.jpg
Appears to be issues from Friday 22 Sat 23 Sun 24 and two final editions one is Sat.


https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338588/m1/1/
Jailers Warren-Todd -Curry letter


November 2, 2006, Accessories After the Fact: "The Warren Commission, the Authorities, & the Report, by Sylvia Meagher, Paperback –
Originally published in 1967, Sylvia Meagher's masterful dissection of the Warren Report, based on the Commission's own evidence, has stood the test of time well. In some cases, declassifications of government records have corroborated Meagher's suspicions and analyses, such as her amazing assertion that Oswald had never actually been charged with Kennedy's murder, despite sworn testimony to the contrary

(see Commission Document 5 for the FBI's statement that "such arraignment was not necessary").

Meagher's book raises the most serious questions not only about Oswald's guilt in the JFK assassination and related crimes such as the Tippit murder and the Walker shooting, but also about the methods and honesty of the Warren Commission, the FBI, and various Dallas Police and other officials.



Box 05 Folder 02 Item 085 and 084    Report-typed     date unknown     an unknown author     Photocopy Lists dates, time and personnel involved in the arraignments of Oswald and Ruby
http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/data.htm




Plans by Dallas police to
link the Nor. 22 assassina-
tion of President Kennedy
with an International con-
spiracy mere headed off by
Washington officials a few
hours before the arraignment
of Lee Harvey Oswald, the
suspected killer The New
York Herald Tribune has
learned.

The disclosure was made
by a high-ranking law offi-
cial here and confirmed by
David Johnston, the Justice
of the Peace before whom
Oswald was arraigned.

Washington was anxious
not to have the assassination
tied In with an International 
plot because of the harm it 
would do to US foreign |
relations the official com-
mented.

He said that after the ar-
rest of Oswald. Dallas County
District Attorney Henry Wade
received an urgent telephone
call from Washington re-
questing him to make certain
that the charge was one of
straight murder — avoiding
the mention of possible for-
eign acommplices

Mr. Johnston reported that
Mr. Wade Informed him prior
to witing the complaint
against Oswald that the call
came from the State Department 

The complaint for
the slaying of John F. Ken-
nedy was filed at 11:26 p. m.
by Capt Fritz and accepted
by Mr. Wade. It is numbered
F 264. Arraignment was at
1:25 am Fri Nov. 22, before
Judge Johnston.

The judge observed that
Mr. Kennedy’s title as Pres-
ident was never noted In the
complaint. In all references
he Is simply designated as
a Ur^fr-Tririceft.

corroborated Sylvia Meagher's charge that the Warren Commission covered up misbehavior and lies of the Dallas police. On pp. 304-9, Sylvia Meagher
assembled facts to challenge Dallas Police Chief Curry's sworn testimony that Oswald "was arraigned for the assassination of the President" and that Curry himself "was present at the time" (4H 156). This was audacious skepticism in the face of considerable testimony in support of Curry, including that of Detective Captain Will Fritz (4H 221). Sylvia Meagher was one of the first to entertain seriously Oswald's own surprising claim that he had not been charged with the murder of President Kennedy, or even heard anything from the Dallas police about such a charge (WR 201, cf. infra, p. 306).
Astonishingly, the unpublished Warren Commission Documents support Ms. Meagher against the alleged "eye-witnesses." According to an early FBI report, based on information from Fritz's office, Oswald was arraigned only on the charge of murdering Officer Tippit:
No arraignment on the murder charges in connection with the death of President Kennedy was held inasmuch as such arraignment was not necessary in view of the previous charges filed against Oswald and for which he was arraigned.
(Commission Document 5, p. 400)

The story as told by Curry, I think this part of his testimony is worth repeating here in its context.

(Testimony of Jesse Edward Curry)

The Chairman. Chief, on your arraignments does the magistrate advise the petitioner as to his right to counsel? Mr. Curry. Yes, sir; he does. The Chairman. Does he ask him if he has counsel? Mr. Curry. I don't recall him doing that. I am not customarily present when a person is arraigned. The Chairman. You were not present at the arraignment? Mr. Curry. I was present when he was arraigned for the assassination of the President. I was not present when he was arraigned for the murder of Tippit. The Chairman. I suppose they make a stenographic record of that, do they not? Mr. Curry. Yes, sir; I am sure they do. The Chairman. That is all I have. Mr. Rankin. Chief, our people made an inquiry whether there was a stenographic record. They don't believe there was any. Mr. Curry. I am not sure of that. I know at the time he was arraigned for the assassination of the President I was present there at the time. It was decided that we should, district attorney was there at the city hall. He was there during most of the evening. Mr. Rankin. Will you just describe for the Commission what happened during the arraignment for the assassination, who was present, what you saw. Mr. Curry. As I recall, I know the Justice of the Peace David Johnston was there. It seemed like Sergeant Warren, but I couldn't be positive but some of the jail personnel brought him out into the identification bureau. Mr. Rankin. How was he taken out? Were there several people around him, what was the security arrangements? Mr. Curry. At that time there was only, we were inside the offices of the criminal identification section. He was brought out through a door that opens from the jail into the criminal identification section. There was only about a half dozen of us altogether there, I don't recall who all was there. Mr. Rankin. What do you mean by the criminal identification section. Could you describe what that is? Mr. Curry. That is the identification bureau. Mr. Rankin. Does that have a room that this meeting occurred in? Mr. Curry. It is not a room such as this. It was in the little foyer or lobby, and it is separated from the jail lobby. Mr. Rankin. Did the justice of the peace sit or stand or what? Mr. Curry. He stood. He stood on one side of the counter and Oswald on the other side of the counter. Mr. Rankin. What floor is this on? Mr. Curry. The fourth floor. Mr. Rankin. That is nearest the place where there are some filing cabinets? Mr. Curry. Yes; it is. Mr. Rankin. And besides the people that you have described, I assume that you yourself were there as you have said? Mr. Curry. Yes; I was. Mr. Rankin. Was there anyone else that you recall? Mr. Curry. Not that I recall, other than the justice of the peace. Mr. Rankin. Will you describe what happened? Mr. Curry. Lee Harvey Oswald was brought in and the complaint was read to him, and here again he was very arrogant and he said, "I don't know what you are talking about. That is the deal, is it," and such remarks as this, and the Justice of the peace very patiently and courteously explained to him what the procedure was and why it was. Mr. Rankin. What did he say about that? Mr. Curry. I don't recall his exact words. Mr. Rankin. Just tell us in substance. Mr. Curry. He didn't--as I recall, he didn't think much of it. He just said, "I don't know what you are talking about." Mr. Rankin. What did the Justice of the peace say about the procedure and any rights and so forth?

Only 4 newspapers as reporting the arraignment that weekend; the Philadelphia Bulletin, the Dallas Times-Herald, the New York Times and the Washington Evening Star. Of those, only the Bulletin and the Times actually used the word "arraignment".


Looking into this further, Cweik found no follow up stories in any of the 4 papers, including in "wraps-ups" of the entire weekend. Stranger still; no other publications picked up the story. In an effort to find out more, Cwiek contacted the reporter for the Bulletin who had landed this apparent major scoop, John McCullough. McCullough declined an interview. He did appear before the Warren Commission, but did not offer information about the arraignment, nor was he asked about it. The story got even stranger when Cwiek looked more closely at the other 3 papers. The Times article appeared in the microfilm records of the newspaper, but not in any actual hard copies that were tracked down.[5] And to top it off, the Evening Star reporter was Jeremiah O'Leary. O'Leary was once described by Carl Bernstein as having "a valuable personal relationship" with the CIA during the 1960s.


Overall it is pretty safe to say that it is shocking how complicit the MSM has been on this particular issue.

The Wash Evening Star is at Baylor
http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/cdm/compoundobject/collection/po-jfk-np/id/965/rec/18
But it does not use the word arraignment. It is in the left column at the very bottom
"The formal charge against Oswald was placed by Dallas police against the slender ex-marine at 12:25 A.M. EST"


And this is the best copy I have found so far on the Philadelphia Evening Bulletin. In this green section you can decipher "arraignment"
Love the headline btw "Suspect arraigned, charges frame-up"

And Bart's capper
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npdstctr78A

and mine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AclFGjNlV08

On November 23, 1963, at 12:35 A. M., Lieutenant K. P. Knight of the
Identification Bureau, Dallas Police Department, presented a “Tempo” **
for Lee Harvey Oswald to be brought to the Identification Bureau for
the purpose of processing (finger prints and picture taking).

** Tempo defined as a printed form whereby the Jailer is authorized

to release certain prisoners to persons that work outside the jail.

This form is filled out by all that take prisoners out of the jail
except the officers that work inside the jail.

I, Wilson F. Warren, Sergeant of Police, Jail Supervisor, and T. V.

Todd, assistant Jailer took this prisoner from the fifth floor of the
City Jail to the Identification Bureau via the elevator to the fourth
floor of the Police and Courts Building. Here we remained in sight of
the prisoner (Oswald) until Captain George M. Doughty and Lieutenant
Knight had completed the processing of Oswald. Upon completion of this
processing, we returned Lee Harvey Oswald to his cell on the fifth floor
of the Police and Courts Building at approximately 1:10 A. M., 23 November
1963.

At approximately 1:30 A. M., Chief J. E. Curry contacted me by telephone and
instructed me to bring Oswald to the Identification Bureau for the purpose
of arraignment. Again Officer T. V. Todd and myself brought Oswald from
the Jail cell on the fifth floor to the Identification Bureau where Judge
David Johnston held the arraignment of this prisoner. After the arraignment
was finished and the prisoner was dismissed by the Judge, we returned him to
his cell on the fifth floor of the Police and Courts Building at approximately
1:45 A. M. , 23 November 1963.


Here we have no TEMPO for the 1:30 sign out,
as it was jailers who took Lee out of the jail? just a call from Curry?
...
hmmm so no documentation is what I'm getting at. Other than the April 11th letter

The good news is that Terry bought the Bulletin newspaper for me and will scan it in, so detailed scans to be revealed in about 5-7 days.

Thanks Terry 

Barto and Ed, these recent posts on this thread underlines why it's time for me to call it a day.

I had forgotten making all of these arguments in Part One of this.

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t15-send-lawyers-guns-money-pt1 wrote:was the arraignment a fabrication?
An alternative explanation for the vagueness and ambiguity was put forth by Sylvia Meagher in Accessories After the Fact. Meagher noted the absence of a check-out slip for moving Oswald from his cell, the lack of a transcript for the arraignment, and that a detective in the room in which it allegedly took place had known nothing about it, even though he claimed to have been there until 2:30am. Meagher therefore concluded that no arraignment had taken place.

It was the mention of the Timothy Cwiek Third Decade article that rang the bell because I used and cited it.

Not that these recent posts have been a waste of time - far from it. They bring a whole swag of new material to the table. I'm just a bit pissed at myself for arguing here that the arraignment did happen, when in fact, I had previously presented the counter-argument to it. Forgetting more and more - a sure sign I'm past my use-by date.

Bart and Ed independently coming to this is enormous because they always bring great material.

What stands out for me is the way Webster has come under their microscope. Learning that he was involved in psychology and was a founder of the Catholic Interracial Council opens up doors to walk through and explore.

For example do those two things bring him into the orbit of the Cuban Catholic Relief Mission and Lucille Connell who also dabbled (big time) in psychology?

That is no reason to call it a day, the post was from 2009 so everyone forgets stuff.
I did lose track of the 1st post and re-read the thing about two weeks ago and the Meagher article was just spot on and I decided to dig more into.

This is very significant and shows how messed up Wade, Curry and Fritz were and just lied to everybody. Did not expect this from Curry tho, but now he is on the Blacklist as well.

There are still a few questions remaining

wtf was Webster doing there all day?

And why was Oswald not  arraigned for the JFK murder? I thought the case was cinqued 

Corpus Christie Times Nov 30th 1963

barto wrote:That is no reason to call it a day, the post was from 2009 so everyone forgets stuff.
I did lose track of the 1st post and re-read the thing about two weeks ago and the Meagher article was just spot on and I decided to dig more into.

This is very significant and shows how messed up Wade, Curry and Fritz were and just lied to everybody. Did not expect this from Curry tho, but now he is on the Blacklist as well.

There are still a few questions remaining

wtf was Webster doing there all day?

And why was Oswald not  arraigned for the JFK murder? I thought the case was cinqued 

Barto, it's a sign of mental tiredness that I could so completely forget. It was only TC's unusual surname that brought it back.

Yours and Ed's work stands on it's own, is nothing short of mind-blowing and helps firm up other evidence and suspicions I already had about the man. 

Have already tied him to a certain former part-time neighbor of the Paine's through a peak national body. I really want to dig into any connections the Catholic Inter-racial Council had with the Catholic Cuban Relief Mission and if he had any dealings with Connell through their mutual interests in mental health.

As for why he was there all day, we can only guess. I think you guys have established he was well-acquainted and on very good terms with the DPD. My best guess (assuming for the sake of argument he was part of any plot) is that he volunteered his services after hearing Oswald was taken alive, and did so for the purpose of helping to head off any "problems". My gut feeling is that it was Webster who suggested Abt to Oswald as a means of a further commie smear.

The whole arraignment thing is weird. On the one hand, there is no evidence he was questioned about the Tippit killing, yet he was arraigned for it. On the other hand, he was grilled about the assassination but was (most likely) not arraigned for it.

greg parker wrote:Barto and Ed, these recent posts on this thread underlines why it's time for me to call it a day.

I had forgotten making all of these arguments in Part One of this.

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t15-send-lawyers-guns-money-pt1 wrote:was the arraignment a fabrication?
An alternative explanation for the vagueness and ambiguity was put forth by Sylvia Meagher in Accessories After the Fact. Meagher noted the absence of a check-out slip for moving Oswald from his cell, the lack of a transcript for the arraignment, and that a detective in the room in which it allegedly took place had known nothing about it, even though he claimed to have been there until 2:30am. Meagher therefore concluded that no arraignment had taken place.

It was the mention of the Timothy Cwiek Third Decade article that rang the bell because I used and cited it.

Not that these recent posts have been a waste of time - far from it. They bring a whole swag of new material to the table. I'm just a bit pissed at myself for arguing here that the arraignment did happen, when in fact, I had previously presented the counter-argument to it. Forgetting more and more - a sure sign I'm past my use-by date.

Bart and Ed independently coming to this is enormous because they always bring great material.

What stands out for me is the way Webster has come under their microscope. Learning that he was involved in psychology and was a founder of the Catholic Interracial Council opens up doors to walk through and explore.

For example do those two things bring him into the orbit of the Cuban Catholic Relief Mission and Lucille Connell who also dabbled (big time) in psychology?

HAHA!
Really, you forgot about 1 post.. Please!! I have forgotten half the things I have found.
It would be impossible to hold a solid position on the basis of Meagher alone, save the extant sketchy details.
That was the WC and DPD's job to con you into thinking it likely did take place.
Of course you now have more if not all the available information.

Greg I showed Bart where you were all over this in 2005. You nailed it.
That is why we are here.

I have flipped back and forth on bits of this, as that is what the cluster called the JFK investigation is designed to do.
I argued with Gary Mack, a skilled manipulator, about various aspects but never lost the fact Lee was innocent of the Murder of JFK.
I argued that even if he killed Tippit it was because they were out to murder him. Of course Lee had nothing to do with it, but one can see why it "COULD" of happened.
Cops kill those they wish to prevent from a day in court or that could show their hand as a corrupt bunch of killers.
That they are bold enough that they could do this to a family man standing on the front steps before god and country is the reason the case deserves a new chance.
We as ROKCers know the score, you helped build the score board mate!
If you insist on a break I don't envy you.
The volume of proof provided here by you in the recent few months has been of great benefit.
I especially thank you for the summary of leads and other threads which are accumulations of all the questions and or details not provided elsewhere.
If anything we have amassed too much for one person to have at ones fingertips let alone to keep straight every nuanced report or detail.
We have shifted the paradigm so far who can believe it.
I point to the assholes, yes assholes, whom still claim this is too big a conspiracy to be true.
They are the ones whom need to take an extended length break.

We need to follow up the new leads

Cheers!!
Ed

Can anyone hazard a guess as to the numbers.
The Felony case numbers.
Why are they in numerical sequence?
F-153 and F154 and F-155 for Tippit 7:15pm 11/22, JFK 1:35am 11/23 and Connally 6:15pm 11/23.
Were there no other felonies committed in Dallas COUNTY between Friday and Saturday night?
I find that a bit hard to believe. Just one other felony case would mess the congruence up.
So why the sequential case numbers, no other cases in twenty four hours?

..unless they had agreed to charge on the three counts Friday afternoon and it was stalled till ____ fill in blank, evidence was secured or confession rendered.

Just a ?
Thx.
Ed

Ed,

this is a response I got to a post back in '02 at McAdams' forum:

clark wrote:Very good post.
How do you keep this stuff straight in your head?


Just curious.


::Clark::

It was a gift, or a curse or whatever, but one that seems to be slipping a bit.

luckily I have every faith in you guys    You're killing it.

The whole arraignment thing is weird. On the one hand, there is no evidence he was questioned about the Tippit killing, yet he was arraigned for it. On the other hand, he was grilled about the assassination but was (most likely) not arraigned for it.

Seems Tippit was conveniently forgotten
Or they knew full well the Markham boy had shot him on his way home from Burt's(?)
Seems they knew full well Oswald did not attempt violence on a cop, Nick included.
Why no charges for a hurt leg of a policeman.
I've said it before they did not question him about the theater except for him supposedly carrying a pistol.
The lines of questioning were questionable.
He should of been asked:was he at the shoe store.
That is a Reid technique which would put him in an uncomfortable position if he was running from police and had in fact duck dodged into the entry. What of the purchase of a ticket to the picture show. No reason to not ask him his reason for sneaking in.
Unless that Reid technique training told them to avoid this as it predisposed his innocence on the time and payment to enter said theater... so best to avoid it and just claim his confession was to carrying a pistol.


When I read the statement analysis of LHO I have two basic flaws to point out.
1) The statements were not recorded except in the hallway and at the midnight press conference.
2) Relying on the memories of the very cops whom don't recall much
is apt to be wrong or in their vernacular.
Fritz and others paraphrased statements or modified them for public consumption.
From statement analysis:
"As I previously mentioned not all of these statements credited to Lee Harvey Oswald are exact quotes. We also do not know what questions were asked of Oswald. Based on the statements compiled by Mae Brussell, Oswald does show signs of being deceptive.
HOW DO YOU KNOW AS YOU JUST SAID THEY ARE NOT QUOTES!


Truthful people will usually remain consistent in their language. In referring to the firearm that he was carrying when he was arrested at the movie theater, Oswald sometimes called it a "pistol" and other times called it "gun."
And not one was recorded, so is a spurious claim he changed language.
He had another change in language when he said he went to "the movie" and later said went to a "picture show." These changes in language indicate his story is not coming from memory.
Wrong Cops in the arrest car said this in their vernacular MOVIE and or MOVIE THEATER,
Fritz said it in his interrogation as MOVIE, second interrogation Fritz claims it as Picture Show. As was stated by the analyst above it could have been anyone in the room asking in their vernacular about a picture show as opposed to a movie.


He started out giving some general and vague denials; "I did not kill anybody" "I haven't shot anybody." A good denial is when a person is very specific; "I did not shoot the President."
He was not given specifics to refute, so how at the time would he do anything but be specific as possible in his claim he did not shoot anyone.
Anybody is very specific as it includes everyone, cops, presidents, governors, bystanders like Tague ...
Hey.. Why no charges for Tague wounding?


He often gave a weak denial using the word never as opposed to saying, "I didn't."
Really? NEVER is weak?
Several times he said he never owned a rifle yet he also said, "I did have a small rifle some years in the past."
So what, as a kid in TEXAS most owned a bb pellet or 22. Not exactly a snipers murder weapon. He may of owned a shotgun, technically not a rifle, in SU too. 


Oswald's statement, "Everybody will know who I am now" indicates he believed he would receive a lot of publicity. Most innocent people would not be thinking that.
Really, most innocent individuals would rather have a degree of anonymity especially when applying for work.
Gee, might be tough to get his next job or keep the TSBD now, that would be heavily on a family mans mind trying to get his family together. To be labelled a communist defector and shown what you have been doing as an informant might be on a mans mind too. As we do not know what was said to scare Lee, perhaps without Lee around Ruth would be Marina's only hope for staying in the country.. 


Later in his statements Oswald did give some good denials saying that he did not shoot the President. However, when we consider everything he said and did not say, his language tells us that he was responsible for shooting President John F. Kennedy and Officer J.D. Tippit.
Bullshit. He was finally being given more specifics and charges.
Only then would he know what this was all about and a weak case where Lee was a possible conspirator was pressured by Washington to be changed to a simple murder charge.
That was Lee's confession, he was in the building.
That was enough.
So much for statement analysis of "Lee's" words.


We know what happened next. It was game on to adjust the story.
Buell standing on the steps with Oswald became just Buell, oh and a shadowy unknown figure... an escape and another murder, to be included to bolster it all.

If it wasn't for Lee the authorities would of had their hands full.
They should be thanking the memory of Lee, an innocent man filling in for several killers that day.
He would be asked about being on the bus and about an interaction with a lady. They would spring this lady was his landlady, again putting Lee in an uncomfortable position if he was on that bus and got off.
But we have no indications these questions or elements were asked.

This is where the State of Texas is building its case in the interrogations and trying to cause a confession due to the overwhelming evidence or by subterfuge and deception. IE your friend Buell squealed and said you brought a package big enough to be a gun to work. That is a lie that is
acceptable under judicial review or appeal.
Like when they lied to a suspect and said the man he was accused of murdering had pulled through and was recovering in the hospital.
Truth was the man died, was in the morgue, and never had any chance to pull through or recover.
The appeal was dismissed as that was a legal tactic to gain a confession.

I see this whole case like a television commercial for a miracle cleaner, where the cleaning is never proven, video edits and questionable images, before is really after, are their proof, nothing in real time or actually sworn to. Guaranteed of course...just send lawyers guns & money for prompt reply

Cheers, Ed

greg parker wrote:Ed,

this is a response I got to a post back in '02 at McAdams' forum:

clark wrote:Very good post.
How do you keep this stuff straight in your head?


Just curious.


::Clark::

It was a gift, or a curse or whatever, but one that seems to be slipping a bit.

luckily I have every faith in you guys    You're killing it.

More like a muscle.
It becomes reflexive with constant repetition.
Best way to preserve it is exercise and stretching.
as best said by a weight lifter I know;
ISYMFS

The point about the Case numbers is a Judge will have the clerk call and have the next docket number available given to them from the court docket. This was done supposedly at 11:26 after a charge was signed at 11:25. I am guessing by phone the judge called the clerk and had the number assigned to him.
Much like a traffic ticket which requires a court appearance.
The officer has to call and get the clerk of the court to assign the date and case number to which you must appear.
The cops do not get them issued beforehand like a booklet of bus transfers. Neither do Judges.
So why the three consecutive. Troubling it is.

And another judge was already working on the JFK murder...
How is it Johnston circumvents another justice of the peace from performing his duties, under what law?
Cops get to pick the judge... FFS if that is not an infringement of due process and the fact Johnston is with the police at the Beckley raid means the whole Beckley farce is supported by a Judge N Jury Johnston.

Means Johnston is issuing warrants for address before the tenant has been established.
It means Judge N Jury Johnston is a liar, a corrupt case all to himself.
He should be the respondent in felony case number F-156

Did the DPD use certain judges or JOTP to secure its warrants in weak or questionable cases, the ones overturned by DNA for example, as they were the only ones dirty enough to go along with blatant disregard of rights.

Need more data.
Cheers, Ed

Lead:

"Have already tied him to a certain former part-time neighbor of the Paine's through a peak national body. I really want to dig into any connections the Catholic Inter-racial Council had with the Catholic Cuban Relief Mission and if he had any dealings with Connell through their mutual interests in mental health.

As for why he was there all day, we can only guess. I think you guys have established he was well-acquainted and on very good terms with the DPD. My best guess (assuming for the sake of argument he was part of any plot) is that he volunteered his services after hearing Oswald was taken alive, and did so for the purpose of helping to head off any "problems". My gut feeling is that it was Webster who suggested Abt to Oswald as a means of a further commie smear."

Greg, Please add to summary of leads or proper place where it doesn't get lost in the whirlwind.


Legal case trumps the heck outta the medical bs.
The public is more responsive to this than body snatchers and coffin swaps as far as a credible and sustainable argument.

The Prayer Man evidence for his alibi and it being robbed from him.
SOLID!
Legal case for his being falsely accused then authorities covering up their mistakes by further incriminating an innocent man.
SOLID!
Abusing their legal authority...SOLID!
The pre-surgery surgery of JFK's head... weak as tea!

As you've said before Greg lets make the case, not the "movie of the week."

If anything mine the threads here again for additional leads to follow facts established and holes created. Things have changed since 2002 and your abilities are not subject, the mindset has only improved.

We need your summation counselor!
Closing arguments and case notes too please.

Cheers, Ed