An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario

Tue 20 May 2014, 2:14 am

First topic message reminder :

I'm posting this as a separate topic so we can work through a few things away from the distractions and emotional aspects of the other thread that is currently ongoing.

Richard Gilbride asked me recently if I had truly considered the lunchroom encounter as fact or whether I was dismissing every aspect of it out of hand.

The answer is I have, on many occasions, worked through the official lunchroom encounter narrative and could never get it to match the evidence. The testimony of both Baker and Truly just didn't support the event occurring the way they both said it occurred barring - or including - their many contradictions.

I think many of us here have over the last few months posted numerous pieces of evidence on the other thread that proves there are fundamental problems inherent in the official narrative concerning this encounter.

So, to play fair and not be accused of bias or being welded to the theory of a "non-event" I have today been playing around with some ideas in light of some very small snippets of testimony that were quite unusual to me. At the time of reading them I didn't post them but I believe they now could possibly make sense.

I'm posting this to have it criticised, ripped to pieces, rebuilt, insertions and deletions added and taken away -- given the wealth of knowledge that exists on this forum and following the old adage that "the devil is in the details", between us we have all of the available details locked between our ears to try and put this riddle together.

Failing that I will well and "Truly" give up on this Godforsaken part of the story.

Lunchroom Encounter Version II

The only way a lunchroom encounter makes any sense to me after reading dozens of documents, portions of books and previously posted research is if Baker and Truly went up the southeastern stairs, through the office area, along the corridor, past the lunchroom and out the vestibule door.

If this thing has legs and is possible then it supports most of our beliefs that Truly was most definitely choreographing the entire scenario.

What if…

i) Truly was stood waiting on the TSBD steps and his role was to divert an immediate Dallas Police Department response?

ii) Baker dismounts his motorcycle and runs up toward the building. At the top of the steps or immediately inside the lobby, gun drawn, Baker asks both Oswald and Truly where the stairs are. Truly steps up the plate and takes Baker inside the lobby. Oswald says nothing.

iii) Truly tells Baker they can take the elevator but rather than take him to the rear freight elevators that go all the way up to the seventh floor he instead turns the corner of the lobby and takes him to the one in the lobby that will only go to the fourth floor. There is no power to this elevator and after waiting for a short period of time Truly tells Baker they can take the stairs. Again, rather than taking Baker to the rear stairs that go all the way to the top of the building he instead takes him up the southeastern staircase right next to them that only goes to the second floor.

iv) While Truly & Baker are waiting for the elevator, Lee Oswald has gone up the stairs to the second floor.

v) Reaching the second floor Baker and Truly run through the office area and down the corridor that leads to the vestibule door. Baker ahead of Truly as per Truly's quote to Leo Sauvage.

vi) As they reach the vestibule door Baker looks into the lunchroom window and sees Oswald in there.

vii) Baker is concerned that he has now seen this guy twice. He opens the door and tells him to come over.

viii) Baker asks Truly if Oswald works there. Truly says yes.

ix) They head through the vestibule door leaving Oswald behind and on the second floor landing Truly tries to call the western service elevator but it does not arrive.

x) Truly then leads Baker to the rear second floor staircase and they ascend to the fourth floor.

xi) Baker sees the man who will later be described in his affidavit. Truly "vouches" for this guy too. Oswald doesn't go into the affidavit because Baker saw him at the front doors.

xii) They both reach the fifth floor. Get into an elevator. Conveniently bypass the sixth floor. Arrive on the seventh floor and go up to the roof.

What does this scenario solve?

It solves all timing issues concerning Adams and Styles descending unseen by Truly and Baker because Truly and Baker were approaching the second floor staircase from a different direction.

It solves why we have absolutely no witnesses to Truly and Baker running through the first floor area and Truly hollering up the elevator shafts. Troy West was brought in as a Warren Commission witness to confirm that he saw this event take place. Unfortunately for David Belin he didn't. What West went on record stating was that he saw a "crowd" of officers and FBI men coming in. Belin even tried to lead him into saying that he saw Truly. He said he didn't remember. Without him there is no one. If West remembered a crowd of officers and what he describes as "FBI" men rushing through his work area then I have no doubts he would have remembered "the boss" running in with a helmeted police officer shouting up the elevator shaft. I'm assuming it would be quite a memorable event to a guy who spent every single day wrapping parcels.

It solves the issue of Baker not being able to see into the lunchroom from his alleged position running from the first floor staircase to the second floor staircase. In the alternative scenario he actually walked past the lunchroom door.

It solves the issue of the contradiction in Truly's statements concerning him being in front of and behind Baker -- the official narrative had to change this part of the story because Baker being ahead of Truly in the official version of events would significantly reduce the amount of time of the very brief encounter between Oswald and Baker. Hence all of the nonsense about Truly running ahead and being left by Baker to continue ascending the stairs. The alternative scenario actually has Truly right there with the officer when he first sees Oswald in the lunchroom and is supported by many of Truly's early statements.

It might solve the question as to why the southeastern elevator had its power shut down.

Primary evidence going against alternative scenario

Baker's first day affidavit says:

"As I entered the door I saw several people standing around. I asked these people where the stairs were. A man stepped forward and stated he was the building manager and that he would show me where the stairs were. I followed the man to the rear of the building and he said, "Let's take the elevator."

This is somewhat problematic for one reason. It insinuates that they immediately ran to the rear of the building on their way to the stairs. However, it doesn't preclude Baker following the man up the southeastern stairs before heading to the rear of the building. I will defer to Troy Eugene West once again not seeing either of them run through the first floor office.

Other thoughts

If Truly was a puppet master in taking Officer Marrion Baker on wild goose chase inside the building then it makes sense to me that he would take him on the longest route possible up that building.

Is this what happened?

Was Baker hoodwinked by the southeastern elevator that had no power? Was he hoodwinked into going up the southeastern stairs that only led to the second floor?

Is this why we have serious reservations that Truly could have looked up the elevator shafts from the first floor yet still knew the elevators were on the fifth floor? Because they were purposely out of action along with the southeaster elevator? Is that why the shouting up the shaft nonsense was a little late arriving even though the closest witness to it heard sod all, and didn't see the guy who was supposed to be shouting?

Was there also another time wasting exercise involved?

I was reading through the testimony of Mrs. Robert Reid last week refamiliarising myself with her recollections. A portion of her testimony jumped out at me and I found it decidedly odd:

Mr. BELIN. Did Lee Harvey Oswald walk past you?
Mrs. REID. Yes; he did.
Mr. BELIN. Kept on walking in the same direction?
Mrs. REID. Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN. How far did you see him go?
Mrs. REID. I didn't turn around to look. He went on straight, he did not go on past the back door because I was facing that way. What he did after that---
Mr. BELIN. But you know he did not go out the same back door he came in?
Mrs. REID. No; he did not.
Mr. BELIN. Do you know whether or not he went into the conference room?
Mrs. REID. Well, I wouldn't think he did because this door off here was locked and I had unlocked it for the policeman myself.
Mr. BELIN. All right, let's put an arrow here to the door that you say was locked, and we will put-do you want to put in the word "locked" in there, if you would, please?
Mrs. REID. All right.
Mr. DULLES. On which side was it locked or did you take the key away, was it locked so that you----
Mrs. REID. I would go in from this way. I wasn't going in from our office into the conference room.
Mr. DULLES. And you locked that door?
Mrs. REID. We did. They had asked me, I went in there with the policeman into the conference room.
Mr. DULLES. Did you take the key?
Mrs. REID. Yes, sir; I did, I got it for Mr. Williams.
Mr. DULLES. No; I mean after you locked the door do you leave the key in the lock?
Mrs. REID. No.
Mr. BELIN. What I want to know is this, Mrs. Reid. When you came back up into the building after the shooting and you walked into the conference room, at that time was the door which you have marked "locked," was it locked at that time when you came in?
Mrs. REID. Yes, sir; it was to---it was locked when I got to it, I will say that.
Mr. BELIN. Let me ask you this. Had you been the one who had locked it before or don't you know?
Mrs. REID. Oh, no, I couldn't say that because too many people used the conference room.
I would have no way of knowing who locked it or if it is left unlocked. The porter locks it in the evening.
Mr. BELIN. All right.
If one is locking that door with a key do you lock the door from the inside of the conference room?
Mrs. REID. Either way.
Mr. BELIN. Or the outside, either was?
Mrs. REID. Either way.
Mr. BELIN. Who has custody of the key?
Mrs. REID. I got that from Mr. Williams' desk, because that is where I got it from, and then the porter has one. I could not say. They all have the keys.
Mr. BELIN. When did you get it to unlock the door?
Mrs. REID. Well, by the time the policeman got there and started searching our floor. I can't recall whether I had taken him into the lounge first because they had me to go in there with him, the ladies' lounge, or whether they went in there because there is a little stand in here that Mr. Cason uses when we have a conference, and he jerked it back because it would have been humanly possible for a person to have gotten in there, but it was up against the wall and there was no one there.
Mr. BELIN. Would this have been more or less than 5 minutes after you got back in the building that you opened the lounge?
Mrs. REID. That is where you all get me in this time because I was not watching the clock that day.
Mr. BELIN. That is all right.

I have bolded the segments that interest me.

Here is a diagram of the second floor as published in the Warren Commission exhibits showing what they claimed was Oswald's route:

An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario - Page 3 Altgen11

An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario - Page 3 Altgen11

The conference room is located next to Mr. Jack Cason's office who was the President and Treasurer of the TSBD and it had two doors - a south door and northwest door.

Reid is on record claiming she was asked to open and lock the north western door of the conference room.

Here is her commission exhibit where she marks the word 'lock' on the conference room door she was was asked to lock:

An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario - Page 3 Reid_c10

An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario - Page 3 Reid_c10

Now, forgive me if I have this arse backwards but there is access to the eastern freight elevator from the second floor through this conference room as well as through the lunchroom. Just two ways in and if you lock both the conference room door and the lunchroom door you can completely block access to and from the easter elevator. Access to the western elevator was from the stairway landing.

I am deeply suspicious of this limited access to the eastern elevator and lumping into the mix Mrs. Reid spilling the beans about being asked to open and lock the conference room door has certainly perked my interest in who asked her to do this. My gut instincts tell me it was Truly as he and Baker ran through the office area. The timings that centre on Reid in trying to get her aligned to meet Oswald after the official lunchroom encounter do not work for me. Her own amnesia on when she was specifically asked to open and lock the conference room door - given that she was specifically asked by David Belin during her WC appearance if the opening and closing of the door took place within five minutes of her getting back to the office makes me want to focus much more time on her.

Summary

I have done my best to make sense of a lunchroom encounter. Given the evidence this is the best I can do. The official version of how it happened just does not work.

If I was asked by a high profile relative to be an inside man after an assassination I would certainly be doing my best to lead law enforcement officials on a wild goose chase similar to the alternative scenario outlined above and if what I have posited is remotely true I can certainly understand Marrion Baker being completely disorientated regarding the floors he was actually on during those initial 5 minutes.

The conference room is incredibly intriguing to me and the less said about the dumb waiter, the better.

Okay - get out your hedge strimmers, axes and Rottweilers. Start tearing into it...

Fri 23 May 2014, 1:52 pm

beowulf wrote:Where did Oswald introduce that word? I'll admit its a little more high-fallootin' than most of the Texas bunch, but I cannot recall where Oswald brought it up.
I think Stan explained above how Oswald even came up with the word, I hadn't come across the word vestibule since I was an altar boy but I didn't know till just now that its also a nautical term.

Oswald, of course, was a Marine. Even on dry land Marines still use nautical terms, to the point of absurdity really (bulkhead instead of walls, deck instead of floor, hatch instead of door). That the Navy uses vestibule explains why the high school dropout Oswald appears to have correctly used a word that didn't seem to be in the vocabulary of Truly, Baker or even WC lawyer David Belin.

To say vestibule is a nautical term is a bit too strong. Nautical terms are things like port, starboard, forward, aft, overhead, deck, bulkhead, hatch, head (restroom), ladder (stairs), etc. But vestibule was a term we used on the ship I was on. I would have to conclude it was used elsewhere in the Navy too (I never even thought about it until today). But I wouldn't go so far to say it was a nautical term, per se.

You are correct about the Marines using nautical terminology. The USMC is actually part of the Navy Department and they have a naval heritage. For example, the Marines have no medics but use Navy hospital corpsmen for this purpose. Once assigned to the Marines, the corpsmen live, act and train with Marines, but still keep their Navy uniforms and insignia. Marines are closest to the Navy.

It is interesting to consider that Oswald may very well have introduced "vestibule" to the vocabulary of the WC proceedings.

Fri 23 May 2014, 2:09 pm

greg parker wrote:Baker said third or fourth in his affidavit, but another part of his testimony indicated it was likely the fourth - so we can dismiss the third. Likewise we can dismiss the fourth - at least as far this being Oswald. That leaves the first and the second. And there are a million and one reasons to discount the second floor.

Considering all of the evidence and the pros and cons of every scenario, I have to give the nod to the first floor. Easily.

Fri 23 May 2014, 2:52 pm

I've never believed the 2nd floor lunchroom scenario but it wasn't due to my deductive prowess. I have none I am afraid.
The story of Truly charging up ahead of Baker, who then happens to suspect no one other than Oswald of all people, by sticking his pistol in his gut while Oswald is totally non responsive, was always difficult to swallow. Too unbelievable. It was only recently when Lee found the Truly interview by Sauvage saying Baker went ahead of him, and prior to that, an FBI report that revealed that Oswald had stated he worked there in response to Baker apprehending him, that I realised it was in fact all bullshit like I suspected. That was enough proof in my mind it didn't happen. What truth they were hiding I don't know enough about, but I'll give the nod to PM and the first floor scenario. Especially after reading Harry Holmes testimony again.
This is a mess I was never too keen on cleaning up in my mind. The WC were a bunch of fucking slobs with this investigation.

Fri 23 May 2014, 3:43 pm

Might make for a good poll topic. Where did the Baker-Truly-Oswald encounter take place?

a) fourth floor
b) third floor
c) second floor
d) first floor
e) more than one floor
f) didn't happen

Or something like that. Just an idea.

Fri 23 May 2014, 6:05 pm

greg parker wrote:

Paul Klein wrote:

beowulf wrote:Mr. HOLMES. He [Oswald] said it was in the vestibule...

I added the Oswald in brackets, sorry if that was confusing.
Holmes's recollection of Oswald placing the Baker encounter in first floor vestibule is ignored because LNers and CTers have spent 50 years agreeing that the second floor encounter happened (they're simply split on whether this nails him or exonerates him).
Since that has been a baseline assumption that "everyone" agreed on, few people have given Holmes's testimony a second thought.

Depending on what you read, he was on the 4th, the 3rd, the 2nd or the 1st. How anyone can agree on EXACTLY where he was after sifting through all this is anyone's guess and just a guess. Its enough to make you write off the whole episode.

Paul,

Some papers that weekend using police sources have him interacting with a cop while trying to leave from the front door. Oswald himself apparently said the same thing. Added to that, at least one of his work colleagues (Jarman?) told the HSCA investigator Oswald had been allowed to leave by police at the front entrance while he and his friends were forced to remain.

Baker said third or fourth in his affidavit, but another part of his testimony indicated it was likely the fourth - so we can dismiss the third. Likewise we can dismiss the fourth - at least as far this being Oswald. That leaves the first and the second. And there are a million and one reasons to discount the second floor.

Looking at the floor plans of the TSBD makes the 3rd floor highly unlikely for an encounter with someone "walking away from the staircase". Essentially it looks like an enclosed landing with only one doorway sized entry/exit.

Fri 23 May 2014, 6:22 pm

Weren't there other people on the fourth floor? Someone who could corroborate this supposed encounter there?

A & S had descended from there but I thought there were other people still around.

Fri 23 May 2014, 6:48 pm

terlin wrote:Weren't there other people on the fourth floor? Someone who could corroborate this supposed encounter there?

A & S had descended from there but I thought there were other people still around.

Terry,

it comes down to interpretation of "come up". In the Stroud document Dorothy Garner saw B + T "come up". To some, that indicates she saw them on the landing. To others (well, me anyway) it's a bit too ambiguous to pin down that easily and could just as well be referring to just seeing them on their way up (that is to say, she saw them coming up but returned to her desk prior to them appearing on the landing. She becomes an even less tenable witness (to me, anyway) once you consider what she told Barry Ernest. When asked about Truly, she could recall seeing him more than once during the day, but couldn't recall where or when. With regard to the 4th floor, she could only recall a cop (or cops) coming up.

Fri 23 May 2014, 6:58 pm

greg parker wrote:

terlin wrote:Weren't there other people on the fourth floor? Someone who could corroborate this supposed encounter there?

A & S had descended from there but I thought there were other people still around.

Terry,

it comes down to interpretation of "come up". In the Stroud document Dorothy Garner saw B + T "come up". To some, that indicates she saw them on the landing. To others (well, me anyway) it's a bit too ambiguous to pin down that easily and could just as well be referring to just seeing them on their way up (that is to say, she saw them coming up but returned to her desk prior to them appearing on the landing. She becomes an even less tenable witness (to me, anyway) once you consider what she told Barry Ernest. When asked about Truly, she could recall seeing him more than once during the day, but couldn't recall where or when. With regard to the 4th floor, she could only recall a cop (or cops) coming up.

There were 6 women left on the floor after Adams and Styles departed. At some point they moved to the west windows and were observed there when Norman, Jarman and Williams came down the stairs shortly after Baker and Truly took the elevator.

As for the Stroud document.

Martha Stroud was an Assistant US Attorney and it would appear quite precise with her language. As written it would imply that she (Stroud) heard Garner make the statement. Also the claim is that Garner saw “Mr Truly and the policeman” come up. She did not see the girls go down but knew, given the interest by the WC in Adams’ story, the significance of sighting Truly arrive on the landing with THE (not a) policeMAN (not men).

I think here inability to recall in recent interviews may be explained by the passage of time.

Fri 23 May 2014, 7:26 pm

So, whether or not any of the girls saw B & T arrive at the fourth floor, if there was a person Baker saw walking away from the stairs that he called to stop - and whom Truly then vouched for - why did no one else on the floor notice this fellow? (the fellow other than B&T)

Or did they?

Fri 23 May 2014, 8:05 pm

Colin Crow wrote:

greg parker wrote:

terlin wrote:Weren't there other people on the fourth floor? Someone who could corroborate this supposed encounter there?

A & S had descended from there but I thought there were other people still around.

Terry,

it comes down to interpretation of "come up". In the Stroud document Dorothy Garner saw B + T "come up". To some, that indicates she saw them on the landing. To others (well, me anyway) it's a bit too ambiguous to pin down that easily and could just as well be referring to just seeing them on their way up (that is to say, she saw them coming up but returned to her desk prior to them appearing on the landing. She becomes an even less tenable witness (to me, anyway) once you consider what she told Barry Ernest. When asked about Truly, she could recall seeing him more than once during the day, but couldn't recall where or when. With regard to the 4th floor, she could only recall a cop (or cops) coming up.

There were 6 women left on the floor after Adams and Styles departed. At some point they moved to the west windows and were observed there when Norman, Jarman and Williams came down the stairs shortly after Baker and Truly took the elevator.

As for the Stroud document.

Martha Stroud was an Assistant US Attorney and it would appear quite precise with her language. As written it would imply that she (Stroud) heard Garner make the statement. Also the claim is that Garner saw “Mr Truly and the policeman” come up. She did not see the girls go down but knew, given the interest by the WC in Adams’ story, the significance of sighting Truly arrive on the landing with THE (not a) policeMAN (not men).

I think here inability to recall in recent interviews may be explained by the passage of time.

Colin, were any of those in the office area able to see or hear anything happening at the stair landing? If not I don't see their relevance.

Re the Stroud document... claiming Stroud is precise in her writing from this one document sample is not a good idea, imo. What you are saying is, she is precise because the information is accurate and we know the information is accurate because she is precise. Do we have other samples of her writing? Barry Ernest described the Garner information in the Stroud document as having the appearance of an aside. I'll let others decide for themselves: http://mysite.verizon.net/restu5kb/id19.html

And I still say there should be some doubt that Stroud is even directly quoting Garner. Can we explain how that came about? Did Garner accompany Victoria Adams to the US Attorney's office? Did Stroud visit Adams at her place of work? Unless we can pin one of those two options down as definitely having occurred, then it is merely speculation that it is even a direct quote.

Yes, later memories are a problem... but her later memory is what it is and is no more a problem than a document in which some speculation is needed to give it primacy. Her later memory was of seeing one... maybe more... cops come up, with no specific memory of where or when she had seen Truly.

The problem is not with me. It is with Stroud's IMprecision in not specifying the circumstances surrounding her obtaining the Garner information, and with Ernest not asking more questions.

I can only repeat -- given the above - Garner is not someone I'd be relying upon in regard to sorting anything out. Ernest's hyping of her is just that... hype.

Sat 24 May 2014, 1:43 am

greg parker wrote:

Colin Crow wrote:

greg parker wrote:

terlin wrote:Weren't there other people on the fourth floor? Someone who could corroborate this supposed encounter there?

A & S had descended from there but I thought there were other people still around.

Terry,

it comes down to interpretation of "come up". In the Stroud document Dorothy Garner saw B + T "come up". To some, that indicates she saw them on the landing. To others (well, me anyway) it's a bit too ambiguous to pin down that easily and could just as well be referring to just seeing them on their way up (that is to say, she saw them coming up but returned to her desk prior to them appearing on the landing. She becomes an even less tenable witness (to me, anyway) once you consider what she told Barry Ernest. When asked about Truly, she could recall seeing him more than once during the day, but couldn't recall where or when. With regard to the 4th floor, she could only recall a cop (or cops) coming up.

There were 6 women left on the floor after Adams and Styles departed. At some point they moved to the west windows and were observed there when Norman, Jarman and Williams came down the stairs shortly after Baker and Truly took the elevator.

As for the Stroud document.

Martha Stroud was an Assistant US Attorney and it would appear quite precise with her language. As written it would imply that she (Stroud) heard Garner make the statement. Also the claim is that Garner saw “Mr Truly and the policeman” come up. She did not see the girls go down but knew, given the interest by the WC in Adams’ story, the significance of sighting Truly arrive on the landing with THE (not a) policeMAN (not men).

I think here inability to recall in recent interviews may be explained by the passage of time.

Colin, were any of those in the office area able to see or hear anything happening at the stair landing? If not I don't see their relevance.

Re the Stroud document... claiming Stroud is precise in her writing from this one document sample is not a good idea, imo. What you are saying is, she is precise because the information is accurate and we know the information is accurate because she is precise. Do we have other samples of her writing? Barry Ernest described the Garner information in the Stroud document as having the appearance of an aside. I'll let others decide for themselves: http://mysite.verizon.net/restu5kb/id19.html

And I still say there should be some doubt that Stroud is even directly quoting Garner. Can we explain how that came about? Did Garner accompany Victoria Adams to the US Attorney's office? Did Stroud visit Adams at her place of work? Unless we can pin one of those two options down as definitely having occurred, then it is merely speculation that it is even a direct quote.

Yes, later memories are a problem... but her later memory is what it is and is no more a problem than a document in which some speculation is needed to give it primacy. Her later memory was of seeing one... maybe more... cops come up, with no specific memory of where or when she had seen Truly.

The problem is not with me. It is with Stroud's IMprecision in not specifying the circumstances surrounding her obtaining the Garner information, and with Ernest not asking more questions.

I can only repeat -- given the above - Garner is not someone I'd be relying upon in regard to sorting anything out. Ernest's hyping of her is just that... hype.

The 2 women at the western end of the 4th floor watching the motorcade were in a room that had wire mesh wall, not a solid one. Unfortunately the WC did not include pictures of the 4th floor. One might assume that boxes were stored there. I seem to remember that some information indicated the landing area had some low tables and might have not impeded view of the stairs significantly. I think this was discovered by Tony Fratini on Duncan's forum last year.

Certainly at some point prior to N,J&W descended at least 3 of the women had already moved to the western windows. It is not clear how long they waited after the shots before leaving the 5th floor.

I do not know if Stroud was precise or not. I claimed it "appeared" she might have been. She obviously made an attempt to clarify the attribution to Garner in the statement. Certainly the comment should have been further investigated. All the women should have been interviewed to determine what they saw/heard.

There are a number of other indicators that lend weight to the theory that the girls descended before B&T started up. The Stroud document is not a necessity IMO, just another piece that discounts the alternative.

Sat 03 Sep 2022, 1:37 pm

A 2011 post to google groups by Sean Murphy:
---------------------
A couple of years back, I made contact with Sandra Styles. She told me that she felt Victoria Adams had significantly exaggerated the speed with which the pair descended from the fourth to the first floor after
the shooting.

In the light of Barry Ernest's new book 'The Girl on the Stairs', I decided to contact Sandra once again to discuss this matter. She has some rather interesting things to say. Rather than summarise them (and risk putting words in Sandra's mouth), I shall simply offer the relevant text from Sandra's own emails. In a
number of places I've highlighted key details. Before doing so, however, I would like to apologise to Barry Ernest for having on a previous occasion called his integrity as a researcher into question. The gap between what Sandra has told me and what Barry says she told him is not at all as large as I had alleged. My apologies, Barry.
Sean Murphy
***

In my first email I asked Sandra to respond to the following words from Barry (as posted on a research forum), who was himself responding to what Sandra had told me a couple of years back:

'When I interviewed Sandra Styles in 2002, she said absolutely nothing
of the kind to me. What she did say was, she couldn't be sure exactly
how quickly she left the window and went down the stairs, but she
recalled she did so "rather quickly," in her words, and "when Vicki
did," again in her words. Why she would say otherwise now, especially
when she said what she did then and added, "Vicki was the more
observant one," is beyond me.'

Here was Sandra's response to me:

'First of all, I do not recall that Barry put much emphasis on the
timing or that we spent time discussing that aspect. I stand by what
I said to you. At the time, I first thought we went downstairs
quickly; but in thinking about it further, I came to the conclusion
that it was not immediately. I told an interviewer (FBI? not sure)
that when we got downstairs, the police were there so I assumed we went down quickly; however, the interviewer told me that it took the police 15-20 minutes to get to the Depository, so I accepted that we must have taken longer to get downstairs than I first thought. I went with what Victoria said because she spoke with such certainty; since I couldn't say for sure, I didn't argue with her. She also told office workers that on the way down, she noticed the freight elevator cables were moving. I'm not sure what that would prove; but since I did not notice that, that is what I meant when I said she was more observant. Barry was working closely with her, and I didn't want to get into it with her when I couldn't prove it either way.

Barry's main discussion with me concerned the outlay of the office:
the exact location of the back stairs in relation to the other
elevator, which direction the building faced, etc. Since I didn't
have scanning capabilities, I had to describe all that verbally in
several emails. We were all interviewed several times by different
entities over the next year. I always said the the same thing to each
one: that I had nothing of importance to help their investigation.
Their concern was whether I knew Oswald, had ever seen him, etc. As
to the timing of the whole thing, I wasn't sure then and can't say for
certain now. I only go by what seems reasonable. I can only report my
personal recollections the best I can. I was easily led back then,
lol. If she said we went down immediately, I thought that must be
true. If the interviewer said that was not possible due to the amount of time it took the police to get over there, I re-thought it and accepted HIS assessment. The truth may lie somewhere in between. What is logical is that, in all the pandemonium, it is unlikely that we would hear shots and head for the back stairs!'

***

In my reply, I put two points to Sandra:

1) The authorities' claim that it took 15-20 minutes for police to get
to the Depository was way off.
2) Barry had come across the so-called Stroud document, in which
Dorothy Ann Garner is reported to have told authorities she saw Baker
and Truly come up onto the fourth floor AFTER Adams and Styles had
left it.

Sandra's response:

'Hmmmmmmm, points to ponder. At this point, I'm wondering whether I
was even there! hahaha

1. My initial sense was that we went down soon after, and the 15-20
minute delay given by the investigator DID seem a bit long, but I took
his word for it. We did linger at the window a bit trying to sort it
out, and I'm sure it was Vicki's idea to go find out what was going
on; therefore we wouldn't have waited a long time to make the decision
to go downstairs. I am certain that we went to the public elevator
first, but may not have waited long there either. My hesitancy on the
timing in all the interviews probably accounts for why they did not
pursue further information from me. As I told everyone who ever
asked, I had no real sense of that aspect of the investigation.
Still, logic tells me it had to take a couple of minutes at least for
things to sink in and to make the decision to go. Therefore, I'll give up a few of those minutes but still don't remember it's being a matter of a few seconds. However, I yield to wiser heads if the evidence is there.

2. I know nothing of Dorothy Garner's part. I don't know where she
was at the time. Her office was near the front elevator, but she
could have been in the lunch area on the other side near the back
stairs. It seems odd to me that if the two men ran up the back stairs
a minute or so after the shooting, we did not encounter them on our
way down even if we had left immediately and even more strange that
Mrs. Garner would have been in a position to see them coming up. It
all goes back to the fact that I could be totally off on my
calculations, and anything is possible. I cannot swear in any venue
that what I thought was actually true. I still see it all in my
mind's eye and have not changed my opinion about what we did and when, but I could be mistaken about the number of minutes. I suppose I
could blame the fact that I am 71 and let it go at that!! No, that
would be too easy.'

***

In my reply, I asked Sandra a number of follow-up questions:

a) Could she recall what her initial time estimate for their going to
the stairs was - i.e. before she was told that the police didn't get
to the Depository for 15-20 minutes?

Her answer: 'Not less than a minute, I thought more like a couple. I
do realize that time takes on feet of its own in a situation like a
shooting or other catastrophe, and witnesses have different takes on
it. I am glad to have the 15-minute thing put to rest; even then it
didn't make sense that it would take the DPD that long to cross the
street.'

b) Could she describe the layout of the fourth floor?

Her answer: 'Here is the layout of the office: Mr. Bergen's office
was in the SE corner and opened into the reception area, as did the
publlic elevator and Dorothy's office. Directly across from Dorothy's
office was a small conference room. Behind the reception area were
the desks of the Customer Service Reps (I was one of those) and
Records (Elsie's job). Then there were the stacks where free teacher
aids and supplies were kept. On the other side of the stacks was the
break/lunch area (not a separate enclosed room), which had a table,
coffeepot and a refrigerator (no drink machine). It was all open; the
only doors were in the bosses' offices, the conference room, and the
back. The elevator opened directly into the reception area. The door
in the NW corner of the breakroom led to the stairs/freight elevator/
storage area.'

c) Could she give any more detail on Victoria's observation about the
elevator cables moving?

Her answer: 'I don't remember any of that. She didn't mention it to
me on the way down or up. As I recall, she only mentioned it later
offhandedly, but I don't recall the circumstances as to how or exactly
when it came up in conversation.'

Two months after Sean's post appeared, Barry Ernest interviewed Mrs Garner. In that interview, she could not recall when and where she had seen Truly that and only recalled seeing a policeman or a number of policemen coming up the stairs. Following are excerpts from the article written on that interview:

I began with preliminaries, asking her what things were like that

day.

"It was total confusion," she said. "The Dallas police, FBI,

Secret Service were coming up the stairs, in the elevators, in all the

offices. The news media and workers and outsiders were going

everywhere."

The Dallas Police Department, she said, "took over our phones."

When I asked what that meant, she explained.

"They wouldn't allow personal calls to go out. After the

employees were allowed to leave, I went to a nearby diner and called

my husband."

Had she seen Roy Truly on November 22nd?

"I saw him several times that day," she said, but I'm not sure

when or where."

How about a policeman accompanied by Truly coming up the stairs?

"I remember I saw a policeman or police officers on the stairs,

yes."

I pressed a bit more and asked the question again, recognizing

the passage of time, the "confusion of the moment" as she had called

it, and the fact its significance was lost on her may have made the

question seem unimportant.

Did she remember seeing Roy Truly and a police officer come up

the stairs together?

"I could have," she answered, "but there was so much confusion.

It was, after all, a few years ago!"

"The passage of time" argument may apply here - but at this point in time, I'm not buying it. Her recollections of seeing possibly multiple cops coming up the stairs, and having no recollection of Truly, fits perfectly with what other witnesses said at the time. That is, no recollection of Truly, but of seeing one or more cops enter and go through the building and up.

So where does that leave the Stroud document? Well, there is no indication that Garner saw that document or knew what it said about her. What would have been known to authorities in Dallas though, is that the Baker-Truly story was in dire nee of life-support...

I conclude that Garner saw the same as others a cop or cops - no Truly.

Truly did eventualy go up with a cop - George Lumpkin - to report Oswald missing.

On another matter... to address the issue raised by Styles to Sean Murphy... that is that she initially thought they went down quickly - BUT NOT AS QUICKLY AS INDICATED BY ADAMS. She then changed her mind because there were a lot of police in the building by the time they got down and the FBI told her that the police did no go into the building for 15 to 20 minutes after the shots. She she accepted that as the timeframe.

But it was her initial estimate that rings true. What she was most likely told by the FBI was that it took the police 15 to 20 minutes to seal the building - not that it took them that long to enter it. That there were police inside when they got down means the run down was not IMMEDIATE, and that there was a delay of a few minutes at least, before that ran down.

The WC (Belin) diligently avoided asking Adams about any officers being on the first floor...

I would also add that based on Adams' interviews compared to those of Styles... the latter comes across as more believeable. Adams seems to be enjoying the limelight a bit too much...

An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario

An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario

Re: An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario

Re: An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario

Re: An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario

Re: An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario

Re: An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario

Re: An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario

Re: An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario

Re: An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario

Re: An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario

Re: An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario

Re: An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario

Re: An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario

Re: An Alternative Lunchroom Encounter Scenario