truly, kaminsky and oswald and the address confusion

First topic message reminder :

@Steve Thomas You made the following observations over at the Ed Forum. Sorry to address them here, but that's the way it is.

a) there is no indication that employees were required to show any ID to Kaminsky; and,

There is at least an indication - short of outright proof.

Here is what Harold Norman told the HSCA investigator:

This was no "roll call" he is talking about. You don't take names and addresses at a roll call. You don't tell people to go home and not go anywhere until the cops contact you at a roll call. Police, especially when taking lots of names and addresses that they KNOW they will need to contact later, do not ask for that information to be supplied verbally.  They could not trust everyone not to give false information. NOr could they affor to spend all that time asking for the right spellings of surnames or street names. The situation, at the very least, called for sighting ID with an address.

b) even if Oswald had shown his library card as ID, there was nothing on it that would lead the police to Beckley.

Sorry for the confusion, but neither I nor Jim said it did.

Here is how I think they got that address
https://gregrparker.com/forums/topic/the-johnsons-fay-puckett-and-pat-hall/

c) the idea that Kaminsky saw Oswald's library card upside down is pure speculation - there's no way for us to know.

It's not pure speculation. Pure speculation is the evidence-free assertion that the boarding house address and the old Elsbeth address were obtained from Intel files,

This is based on the fact that

• Truly and Kaminsky were at that door collecting this information
  
• The common sense idea that Kaminsky would require sighting of ID
  
• The fact that Oswald only had one ID with an address on it - his old library card
  
• The fact that the address he had when he obtained that card is the address shown on the list
  
• That, as demonstrated, when held upside down, his name left to right, reads the same as it does on the list - "Harvey Lee Oswald". Also the card has a smudged numeral which could account for the slightly wrong street number on the list. 
  
  

In short, Steve, I see a lot of very good circumstantial evidence for the name and address on that list as coming from that library card. I have never seen anything but evidence-free assertions for any other explanation.

If you do have some evidence pointing elsewhere, I really would appreciate seeing it (if it is something you are free to share).

Steve Thomas wrote: I'm assuming you hit the letter U on your keyboard, instead of the letter I.

Yep. Going blind!

I have not studied the Mexico City affair and cannot talk to you intelligently, or knowledgeably about it.

I have not studied it to the extent others have. I know this will sound odd, but I actually think they have over studied it - especially in relation to CIA documents. If you go hunting sasquatch for too long, you're bound to start "seeing" traces of them. What I do know is that Oswald told Marina and Ruth he was going to Houston where he had a friend who would help him look for work. W know he tried to contact Horace Twifold in Houston without success. That was undoubtedly te "friend" he was talking about. We also have FBI reports from interviews with customers and the manager of a private employment agency in Houston who place Oswald in that agency. Additionally, the bus ticket seller at Houston gave a description of clothing that Marina denied belonged to Lee, and finally, all 4 bus witnesses lied about Oswald being a passenger and there will be a paper on this somewhere down the track. Mumford for example, has him eating large Mexican meals at every stop. But that was not possible. His stomach literally would not have handled because of an infection caused by roundworms. There is a thread on this forum somewhere about  that. Those witnesses had what can only be described as interesting backgrounds. 

 If what I believe is true, I noted a couple of things:

1. Harvey Lee Oswald was not in the DPD Intelligence Files.
   
2. Charles Givens, who had a record of narcotic arrests; and as such, would fall under the purview of the Special Service Bureau is listed as NONE. Is this possibly an indication that Givens was an undercover informant to the Criminal Intelligence Section of the Special Service Bureau?
   
3. The list was drawn up long after the 12:45 radio call.
   

1. I'd tend to agree
   
2. Hadn't thought of that, but seems more than possible
   
3. Maybe. But that first name and address. was not obtained from any intel file. It came from Oswald. We know Oswald said he was stopped at the front door and asked for his details. We know Truly vouched for him as an employer at that point. We know Oswald had ID with the Elsbeth address.
   

If the 12:45 radio call description came from the FBI, why did it have a physical description, but no name?

It would have been very unwise to admit they had the name already - regardless of whether it came from FBI, Army Intel or any other agency. Can you imagine the frenzy of questions that would have generated? It need not have come from FBI anyway. I'm sure it was disseminated to other agencies as well as to the State Dept.

I personally believe that the information about a Harvey Lee Oswald was coming from George Lumpkin, who was the Commandant of the 4140th US Army Reserve Training School in Dallas, and George Whitmeyer, who Winston Lawson told the Warren Commision "taught Army Intelligence".
Billy Senkel, who rode in the Pilot Car with Lumpkin and Whitmeyer, was sent out to 1026 N. Beckley, and when he got there, was asking for a Harvey Lee Oswald.

Okay. But I think it went like this.

Pat Hall has claimed over the years that her mother Fay phoned the Johnsons at the cafe because she thought she recognized the suspect being arrested as one of their paying guests. During testimony however the Johnsons claimed they were phoned by a friend who was a cop for a private railway company. That cop also happened to be a reserve officer for the DPD.


I cannot see what the urgency would have been for that cop to phone the Johnsons - or why they saw the need to go home after that call. What makes sense of it is this - Fay actually phoned that cop to advise him. He then phoned the Johnsons at the cafe and told them what Fay said and that they better get home because after he passes the information on to Fritz, there will be cops coming to do a search. 


I think that Senkel was given a copy of the Revill list (it was surely copied several times before and after being typed) - even if it had not been typed yet... because it had the suspect's name (most likely Fay only knew the name "Lee"). But I think also, they would have wanted to check other names on that list against the registry because communist cells sometimes used boarding houses. Recall that Fritz testified to getting the address from a cop whose name he could not recall.


What do you make of Marguerite's 1960 description of Lee matching the suspect description? 

Also, I am still confused as to whether you believe "Harvey Lee" existed in real life or just on paper? It seems to me if you believe Oswald introduced himself to Lord as Harvey Lee Oswald, then you think he was a flesh and blood person? 

greg_parker wrote: It seems to me if you believe Oswald introduced himself to Lord as Harvey Lee Oswald, then you think he was a flesh and blood person? 

Greg,


I do not believe that Oswald introduced himself to Billy Joe Lord as Harvey Lee. The mistake is in Weissman's write-up.



Letter from Bill Lord to President, Jimmy Carter, 1977:
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=145503&search=%22obvious_as+to+be+grotesque%22#relPageId=134&tab=page
refers to Oswald several time as Lee Oswald.

Undated Affidavit of Billy Joe Lord given to the Warren Commission:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/lord.htm


3. “On September 20, 1959, I boarded the freighter S.S. Marion Lykes at New Orleans. Upon boarding the ship, I was shown to my room, and when I got there, Lee Harvey Oswald was already there and moving in. We were to share this room. I had never before seen nor heard of Lee Harvey Oswald. Lee Harvey Oswald and I shared this cabin for the duration of the trip to France which was fourteen days.”



As far as the Library card goes, I have my suspicions.

The only two accounts that put the Library card in Oswald's wallet prior to his arrival at police headquarters are both erroneous.

Lieutenant Jack Revill testified before the Warren Commission on May 13, 1964. (Bob Carroll had already testified a month earlier – see below)
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/revill2.htm

The questioning concerns a Report that Revill wrote out at approximately 3:30 to 3:35 on the afternoon of the 22^nd concerning Lee Harvey Oswald at 605 Elsbeth St.
This Report is CE 709 at (17H495)
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1134#relPageId=521&tab=page


Mr. REVILL. That is what they gave me.
Mr. RANKIN. You found that out?
Mr. DULLES. This is an address he once lived at.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you know that?
Mr. DULLES. This is correct. I want to find out what he knows about it.

Notice the interplay between Rankin and Dulles. Dulles seems to know about the Elsbeth St. address and he wants to know how Revill knows about it. Dulles immediately takes over the questioning, which was pretty unusual. Normally it was the staff lawyers who did the questioning of witnesses.

Mr. DULLES. Could I ask a question? Where did you get this address that you put on of 605 Elsbeth Street, do you recall?
Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; from Detective E. B. Carroll or Detective Taylor.
Mr. DULLES. Are they subordinates?
Mr. REVILL. No; they are detectives assigned to the special service bureau. One of them works the narcotics squad and one of them is assigned to the vice unit.
Mr. DULLES. You never ascertained where they got it?
Mr. REVILL. No, sir; this might be the address that they got from Oswald, I do not know. I never even thought about it until you brought up the point that this is not the address.
Mr. DULLES. Can you find out where they got this address?
Mr. REVILL. Yes, sir; I can.
Mr. DULLES. I think that would be useful. I would like to know that. I would like to know where they got this address also.

Mr. REVILL. It would have been the same day because this was made within an hour----

The CHAIRMAN. I think that is all. Thank you, again, lieutenant.
Mr. REVILL. I will attempt to find out on that address, and I shall let Mr. Sorrels know, with Secret Service.

It's Dulles, not Rankin who keeps pushing Revill where he got this address. Is Dulles concerned that Revill knew about a connection of a Harvey Lee Oswald to Elsbeth St, and how Revill would know about that? Just about the time when Revill would have revealed when he obtained this address, he is cut off.

Warren Commission Document# 948 is a memo from Sorrels to Inspector Kelley dated May 19, 1964.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11344#relPageId=2&tab=page

In that memo, Sorrels says that Revill contacted Sorrels (it does not say how this contact was made), and said that Revill told him he got the 605 Elsbeth address orally from Bob Carroll. As the driver of the car that took Oswald from the Theater to the police station, Carroll allegedly looked back over his shoulder and read the address off a Dallas Public Library card that had been removed from Oswald's billfold by one of the officers in the back seat. Carroll allegedly said that he misread the number as 605 instead of 602.

This is six days after Revilll's WC testimony, and one month after Bob Carroll told the WC that no mention of an address had been made in the car transporting Oswald to City Hall.

As a matter of fact:

Detective Bob Carroll's testimony before the Warren Commission April 3, 1964
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/carroll.htm

Mr. BELIN. Did he give two names? Or did someone in the car read from the identification?
Mr. CARROLL. Someone in the car may have read from the identification. I know two names, the best I recall, were mentioned.
Mr. BELIN. Were any addresses mentioned?
Mr. CARROLL. Not that I recall; no, sir.

In their after-action reports filed with Chief Curry on December 3rd, neither Caroll (DPD Archives Box 5, Folder# 2, Item# 73), nor Detective E.E. Taylor, Special Services Bureau, Narcotics Section (DPD Archives Box 5, Folder# 2, Item# 81) make any mention of giving Revill Oswald’s address.
http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/box5.htm

K.E. Lyon, who was also in the car transporting Oswald to City Hall in his report: Box 5, Folder# 2, Item# 78 makes no mention of obtaining Oswald's address

Did any of Oswald's ID in his billfold have the Irving address on it?
Is Hill lying?

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/hill_gl.htm

About the time I got through with the radio transmission, I asked Paul Bentley, "Why don't you see if he has any identification."
Paul was sitting sort of sideways in the seat, and with his right hand he reached down and felt of the suspect's left hip pocket and said, "Yes, he has a billfold," and took it out.
I never did have the billfold in my possession, but the name Lee Oswald was called out by Bentley from the back seat, and said this identification, I believe, was on the library card.
Mr. BELIN. All right; when did you learn of his address?
Mr. HILL. There were two different addresses on the identification.
One of them was in Oak Cliff. The other one was in Irving. But as near as I can recall of the conversation in the car, this was strictly conversation, because I didn't read any of the stuff. It didn't have an address on Beckley, that I recall hearing.
Mr. BELIN. Let me ask you this. Now from the time you got in the car to the time you got to the station, I believe you said that at least the second question asked was where do you live, and the man didn't answer?
Mr. HILL. The man didn't answer.
Mr. BELIN. Was he ever asked again where he lived, up to the time you got to the station?
Mr. HILL. No; I don't believe so, because when Bentley got the identification out, we had two different addresses. We had two different names, and the comment was made, "I guess we are going to have to wait until we get to the station to find out who he actually is."

Secret Service Report of Dallas SS Agent Robert Steuart dated November 24, 1963.
Itemizes the contents of Oswald's billfold:
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10490&search=Oswald_billfold+contents#relPageId=220&tab=page

“I examined the contents of billfold which I was told was taken from Assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald.”

Item numbers 6&7: front and back sides of Dallas Public Library card bearing the address of 602 Elsbeth. There is nothing in those billfold contents which gives an Irving address.

In his after-action Report, M.G, Hall wrote that FBI Agent Manning Clements inventoried the contents of Oswald's wallet on the evening of November 22^nd. On the 23^rd, Clements wrote a Report detailing the contents of Oswald's wallet.
Warren Commission Document 5 page 94.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10406#relPageId=95&tab=page
This is page 3 of Clement's Report.
A Dallas Public Library card listing the address of 602 Elsbeth.
Nothing in his billfold with an Irving address.

The only two accounts that put the Library card in Oswald's wallet prior to his arrival at police headquarters are erroneous.

In his after-action Report dated December 3, 1963, DPD Archives, Box 2, Folder# 7, Item# 4, page 2
http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/box2.htm

Detective Paul Bentley wrote: “On the way to the City Hall, I removed the suspect's wallet and obtained his name.... I turned his identification over to Lt. Baker. I then went to Captain Westbrook's office to make a report of this arrest.”

There is nothing in his Report about obtaining an address.


Steve Thomas

Steve Thomas wrote:Greg,


I do not believe that Oswald introduced himself to Billy Joe Lord as Harvey Lee. The mistake is in Weissman's write-up.

Okay, thanks. Got it now!

As far as the Library card goes, I have my suspicions.

The only two accounts that put the Library card in Oswald's wallet prior to his arrival at police headquarters are both erroneous.

Not surprisingly I suppose, I disagree.

There was no address mentioned in the car (according to the evidence we have), but I am not sure that is all that meaningful. At that stage, they were only interested in a name and we know from Bentley's report that he pulled Oswald's wallet and obtained a name (singular). 

In that memo, Sorrels says that Revill contacted Sorrels (it does not say how this contact was made), and said that Revill told him he got the 605 Elsbeth address orally from Bob Carroll. As the driver of the car that took Oswald from the Theater to the police station, Carroll allegedly looked back over his shoulder and read the address off a Dallas Public Library card that had been removed from Oswald's billfold by one of the officers in the back seat. Carroll allegedly said that he misread the number as 605 instead of 602.

Dubious hearsay that appears to me at least, to be an attempt to cover up that the address was provide by Oswald via the library card at the TSBD front door.

Did any of Oswald's ID in his billfold have the Irving address on it?
Is Hill lying?

No it didn't and yes he is lying regarding that point and the number of names found by Bentley. Firstly, none of this was in Hill's initial report and secondly, Bentley reported finding only a single name in his initial report. 

Detective Paul Bentley wrote: “On the way to the City Hall, I removed the suspect's wallet and obtained his name.... I turned his identification over to Lt. Baker. I then went to Captain Westbrook's office to make a report of this arrest.”

There is nothing in his Report about obtaining an address.

As above, I don't think they were interested in an address at that time and that being the case, the first ID they came across would suffice - so it could have been any card he had that provided that single name. They most likely wanted a name to see if it was one familiar to any of them. The address at that stage, was not going to tell them anything useful. They would get the address for the records and to arrange a search once at DPD HQ.

greg_parker wrote:No it didn't and yes he is lying regarding that point and the number of names found by Bentley. Firstly, none of this was in Hill's initial report and secondly, Bentley reported finding only a single name in his initial report.

Greg,

Actually, those weren't their initial reports.
A while back, I was struck by the fact that, on their arrival back at police headquarters, everyone involved in Oswald's arrest gathered together on Westbrook's office to jointly write up their reports concerning Oswald's arrest. That gave them the opportunity to compare notes and "get their stories straight"

In his after-action Report dated December 3, 1963, DPD Archives, Box 2, Folder# 7, Item# 4, page 2
http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/box2.htm

Detective Paul Bentley wrote: “On the way to the City Hall, I removed the suspect's wallet and obtained his name.... I turned his identification over to Lt. Baker. I then went to Captain Westbrook's office to make a report of this arrest.”

There is nothing in his Report about obtaining an address. Oswald's ID immediately went to Lieutenant Baker. Where is Bentley's Report to Westbrook done on November 22^nd. Was it written, or was it just an oral report? Why did he go to Westbrook to make his Report? Westbrook was in Personnel.

Gerald Hill's testimony before the Warren Commission
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/hill_gl.htm

“Bentley had sprained an ankle, and Lyons had sprained an ankle while effecting the arrest--they were fixing to have to make a whole bushel basket of reports--we adjourned to the personnel office, which was further down the hall from homicide and I sat down and started to try to organize the first report on the arrest.
I originally had the heading on it, "Injuries sustained by suspect while effecting his arrest in connection with the murder of Officer J. D. Tippit," and a few minutes later Captain Westbrook came in the office and said that our suspect had admitted being a Communist. This is strictly hearsay. I did not hear it myself.
He himself also said a few minutes later he had previously been in the Marine Corps, had a dishonorable discharge, had been to Russia, and had had some trouble with the police in New Orleans for passing out pro-Castro literature.
This still is all hearsay because I didn't actually hear it firsthand myself.
And at about this point Captain Westbrook suggested that I change the heading of my report to include arrest of the suspect in the assassination of the President and in the murder of Officer J. D. Tippit, which I did.
I originally wrote the report for Bob Carroll's signature and for my signature, and left it with the captain to be typed while we moved over in another office to get a cup of coffee and sort of calm down and recap the events.
By then McDonald was there, and we had added some information that he could give us such as the information about "This is it." Which the suspect allegedly said as he came into contact with him.
The exact location of the officers and who was there on the original arrest and everything, and we were waiting around for the secretary to finish the report.
When we got it back ready to sign, Carroll and I were sitting there, and it had Captain Westbrook's name for signature, and added a paragraph about he and the FBI agent being there, and not seeing that it made any difference, I went ahead and signed the report.
Actually, they were there, but I didn't make any corrections.
And as far as the report, didn't allege what they did, but had added a paragraph to our report to include the fact that he was there, and also that the FBI agent was there.
Now as to why this was done, your guess is as good as mine.”


Westbrook was adding things. Where is the report of Oswald's arrest that has Westbrook's signature on it?



Steve Thomas

Steve Thomas wrote:

greg_parker wrote:No it didn't and yes he is lying regarding that point and the number of names found by Bentley. Firstly, none of this was in Hill's initial report and secondly, Bentley reported finding only a single name in his initial report.

Greg,

Actually, those weren't their initial reports.
A while back, I was struck by the fact that, on their arrival back at police headquarters, everyone involved in Oswald's arrest gathered together on Westbrook's office to jointly write up their reports concerning Oswald's arrest. That gave them the opportunity to compare notes and "get their stories straight"

In his after-action Report dated December 3, 1963, DPD Archives, Box 2, Folder# 7, Item# 4, page 2
http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/box2.htm

Detective Paul Bentley wrote: “On the way to the City Hall, I removed the suspect's wallet and obtained his name.... I turned his identification over to Lt. Baker. I then went to Captain Westbrook's office to make a report of this arrest.”

There is nothing in his Report about obtaining an address. Oswald's ID immediately went to Lieutenant Baker. Where is Bentley's Report to Westbrook done on November 22^nd. Was it written, or was it just an oral report? Why did he go to Westbrook to make his Report? Westbrook was in Personnel.

Gerald Hill's testimony before the Warren Commission
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/hill_gl.htm

“Bentley had sprained an ankle, and Lyons had sprained an ankle while effecting the arrest--they were fixing to have to make a whole bushel basket of reports--we adjourned to the personnel office, which was further down the hall from homicide and I sat down and started to try to organize the first report on the arrest.
I originally had the heading on it, "Injuries sustained by suspect while effecting his arrest in connection with the murder of Officer J. D. Tippit," and a few minutes later Captain Westbrook came in the office and said that our suspect had admitted being a Communist. This is strictly hearsay. I did not hear it myself.
He himself also said a few minutes later he had previously been in the Marine Corps, had a dishonorable discharge, had been to Russia, and had had some trouble with the police in New Orleans for passing out pro-Castro literature.
This still is all hearsay because I didn't actually hear it firsthand myself.
And at about this point Captain Westbrook suggested that I change the heading of my report to include arrest of the suspect in the assassination of the President and in the murder of Officer J. D. Tippit, which I did.
I originally wrote the report for Bob Carroll's signature and for my signature, and left it with the captain to be typed while we moved over in another office to get a cup of coffee and sort of calm down and recap the events.
By then McDonald was there, and we had added some information that he could give us such as the information about "This is it." Which the suspect allegedly said as he came into contact with him.
The exact location of the officers and who was there on the original arrest and everything, and we were waiting around for the secretary to finish the report.
When we got it back ready to sign, Carroll and I were sitting there, and it had Captain Westbrook's name for signature, and added a paragraph about he and the FBI agent being there, and not seeing that it made any difference, I went ahead and signed the report.
Actually, they were there, but I didn't make any corrections.
And as far as the report, didn't allege what they did, but had added a paragraph to our report to include the fact that he was there, and also that the FBI agent was there.
Now as to why this was done, your guess is as good as mine.”


Westbrook was adding things. Where is the report of Oswald's arrest that has Westbrook's signature on it?



Steve Thomas

Steve from what you posted, it doesn't exist because Hill signed it instead.

Yes, they may well have intended to write all manner of reports explaining Oswald's injuries and their own alleged ones and etc.

But the only report of any note that they needed to do at that time was the arrest sheet - and that would not have anything about what happened on the trip in.

The reports I reference are the first reports describing the arrest and the trip in to HQ. 

Whilst it was common practice for cops to get their stories straight before writing reports, there is not much evidence of that here. Some give information that others do not, and some reports contradict some points of other reports. Seems to me that the only thing they agreed to include was Oswald admitting he had a gun on him. Which to me is a very good indicator that he never. It is no different than someone protesting too much... you start to think that they are trying a bit too hard to convince you of something.

Contradictions can also be seen in their individual testimonies where one says Oswald punched McDonald with a left, another says a right and yet another says both. That may not seem like much, but it is enough to get any testimony about the scuffle dismissed in any case against Oswald. I know this because I have experienced it, having once been arrested for assault (defending my ex-girlfriend from her then ex). I hit him several times in the face. The cops got on the stand and said he was bruised down the right side of his face. Photos showed a small amount of bruising on the let side. The magistrate threw the case out on that basis. Did I do it? Fucking oath I did. But the prick had her by the wrist and was hurting her. (Long story, but in hindsight, it was a set up. He deliberately set out to manufacture that situation and obviously had friends on the force).

So that is just on one small point. Meanwhile McDonald said he stopped the gun firing by jamming his hand in it - but Bentley made the same claim about himself in his report. And just why the hell wasn't Bentley called? Maybe because they knew he never pulled any Hidell ID out of the wallet?

More than that, I am genuinely confused by what you think your version of all this actually means in the big picture regarding names, addresses, and real and fake ID? 

What I see is cops scrambling after the event to bend evidence and statements to fit the Oswald did it narrative. 

I see evidence indicating Oswald had his library card on him and used it to leave the TSBD.

I see evidence that Oswald made the Hidell card as innocent practice with specialized equipment at JCS, but with the cops changing the name on it from Oswald to Hidell after finding that the weapons were ordered in that name.

I see evidence that Fay Puckett made a phone call to advise that she recognized the suspect as a paying guest at her parents boarding house, followed by a call made by a family friend - a reserve cop - to the Johnsons about the assassination and that call causing the Johnsons to rush home as if expecting a visit from the cops - and lastly, I see that Fritz testified that he was given that address by a cop.

Shit, after me and my then girlfriend were arrested, they tried to pull every stunt in the book to get me to confess to an unprovoked assault up to and including the good cop/bad cop routine and interviewing us in separate rooms with one of my interrogators disappearing for a few minutes then coming back and telling me that she had admitted everything. I just reflexively smirked at him - so I get Oswald's smirk. He knew the games they were playing. 

In short, I see normal everyday explanations readily available in the extant evidence for these things, side by side with cops acting like cops and scrambling to make the evidence work for them, instead of against. It is everyday run-of-the-mill fare in every police station in the world.

With thanks to Dennis Morissette and Linda Giovanna Zambanini.