JFK - Attentataufdeckung

Jackie Kennedys blutverschmiertes Kleid kann man im Nationalmuseum in Maryland ansehen - ab dem Jahre 2103.

Erst am nächsten Morgen streifte sie die verschmutzte Kleidung ab. Ein Dienstmädchen faltete das Kostüm zusammen und legte es in eine Schachtel. Diese wurde an Jackies Mutter Janet Lee Bouvier geschickt. Jahrelang lagerte das Kleidungsstück auf dem Dachboden. 2003 übergab es Jackie Kennedys Tochter Caroline an das Nationalarchiv in Maryland – verbunden mit der Auflage, dass es bis 2103 nicht der Öffentlichkeit gezeigt werden dürfe.

Quelle: https://www.stern.de/lifestyle/mode/jackie-kennedy-und-ihr-blutverschmiertes-kostuem-von-chanel-9516426.html

@bredulino

bredulino schrieb am 15.12.2020:Im Umkehrschluss kann auch kein OTler einfach so behaupten, dass LHO auf den Foto die Oswald die Tatwaffe halten würde...

Doch, das können sie, denn die "OTler" können sich auf Experten berufen, die wissen wie Fotos ausgewertet werden. Demgegenüber können die "VTler" nur auf Laien verweisen, die nach dem "sieht-aus-wie-" oder dem "sieht-nicht-aus-wie-Prinzip" vorgehen. Das ist eben der kleine, aber feine Unterschied.

Africanus schrieb:Doch, das können sie, denn die "OTler" können sich auf Experten berufen, die wissen wie Fotos ausgewertet werden.

Hast du nicht geschrieben, dass es unmöglich sei wegen der unterschiedlichen Neigung? Außerdem sind das doch zweidimensionale Bilder... Das soll doch alles unmöglich sein?!
Warum konnten dann weder Warren-Kommission noch HSCA eindeutig sagen, dass es es sich genau um das Tatgewehr handelt?

@bredulino

bredulino schrieb:Hast du nicht geschrieben, dass es unmöglich sei wegen der unterschiedlichen Neigung?

Kurz Antwort: Nein, das habe ich nicht geschrieben.

Africanus schrieb:Kurz Antwort: Nein, das habe ich nicht geschrieben.

Dann drücke dich genauer aus. Was meinst du dann genau? Du hast nicht geschrieben, dass wenn Experten es tun, es korrekt sei, trotz unterschiedlicher Neigungen. Warum passen z.B. weder bei WC nach HSCA die Winkel in den Rekonstruktionen nicht?
Beitrag von bredulino (Seite 1.547)

Was ist deine Meinung zu den von Pathologen (Experten) gemessenen 17 cm?

Wie kann man weiterhin behaupten, dass es bei den offiziellen Untersuchungen mit rechen Dingen zuging?

Barry Ernest knew that Adam's original testimony was recorded by a court stenographer, as was the testimony of all persons interviewed by the Commission. He traveled to the National Archives and asked to examine the court stenographers record. Mr. Ernest was surprised and troubled when advised that the original stenographer's records for April 7, 1964 were missing. The only people to have access to National Archive records are people within our Federal Government. And if certain records disappear from the National Archives, then they disappeared for the benefit of the government. Without the original stenographer's record, we will never know if her WC testimony, as recorded in the WC's 26 volumes, was accurate.

Adams died on November 15, 2007 (age 66) of cancer, so now it is up to JFK researchers to determine the truth. Was Adams' W.C. testimony accurately recorded and published in the W.C. volumes? Did she see Shelley and Lovelady on the 1st floor one minute after the shooting? Or did Adams, after 40 years of threats and intimidation, finally just give up and say what the government wanted her to say? The decision is yours

http://harveyandlee.net/TSBD_Elevator/TSBD_elevator.html

The typewritten transcript of Cadigan's original testimony is in the National Archives, but it has been altered. Someone (the handwriting appears to be Allen Dulles) drew lines through the words, “this material, I believe, was returned to the Dallas Police within two or three days...” This portion of Cadigan's testimony was deleted and does not appear in his testimony as published on page 434 of Volume VII of the Warren Volumes.

http://harveyandlee.net/FBI/FBI.html

Now, let's note the differences between the original full-color form published on the the UNT website, and the black and white copy of this form published as CE 1952 in the Warren Commission's volumes. To create CE 1952, someone had to:

- Remove the signature "John Joe Howlett" from the "specimen released to" line.
- Change the date of the specimen's release from "3-24-64" to "3-26-64."
- Re-write Lt. Day's signature on the "specimen released by" line.
- Inadvertently change the relationship of the "d" in "Oswald" and the "a" in "Day" in the writing at the bottom of the page.
http://www.patspeer.com/chapter-4g-thoughts-on-the-shots

monstra schrieb:Aber alle haben ein Recht auf ehrliche Befassung, ordentliche Prüfung, auf Gleichbehandlung und auf Wahrung ihrer Grundrechte. Wäre es normal, das zu missachten, würden es alle hier merken, egal ob sie Mollath mögen oder nicht. Und deswegen war dieser Fall für uns alle gut.

Es sei denn man heißt Lee Harvey Oswald.



https://jfkfacts.org/perception-management-public-relations-and-the-jfk-story/


Aus juristischer Sicht könnte folgender Artikel zu den Verhören Oswalds interessant sein- da findet sich einiges, was hier schon angesprochen wurde, z.B. die fragwürdigen Identifizierungen Oswalds durch Zeugen.

Da der Artikel sehr lang ist, hat der Autor eine Zusammenfassung geschrieben, Lee Harvey Oswald’s Interrogations in a Nutshell. Es ist ist im sinne einer Timeline geschrieben.

- Oswald is arrested inside the Texas Theatre and according to Sergeant Gerald Hill Oswald demands a lawyer and complains about police brutality (page 22).


- Frank Underwood is inside the same elevator Oswald is going up to the third floor with. Oswald tells him he did not kill anybody (page 23).


- Gerald Hill who is being interviewed twice shortly after Oswald’s arrest and drop off on the third floor states Oswald’s name in both instances. There is no mention of the Hidell name (page 24).


- Before Oswald is talked to by Rose and Stovall he is frisked by Charles Truman Walker, who was present during his arrest at the Texas Theatre and is part of the group of policemen dropping Oswald off on the third floor of City Hall. He does not find anything in his pockets (page 25). Yet before Oswald’s first line-up with Helen Markham detectives Sims and Boyd find 5 bullets and a bus ticket in his pockets almost 2.5 hours later (page 83).


- Kent Biffle destroys the roll call(s) scenario from Roy Truly from a timing perspective (pages 29-30).


- While Oswald is being talked to by detectives Gus Rose and Richard Stovall it emerges that both detectives contradict themselves during their Warren Commission testimony when it comes to whether Oswald used the Hidell or Oswald name by way of identification (pages 27-28).


- In the past few decades detective Jim Leavelle has positioned himself as the person who interrogated Oswald before Captain Will Fritz did, whereas the statements by him during his Warren Commission testimony and his own written statement contradict this (pages 30-34).


- Detective Joe Cody inserts himself as well as the person who talked to L.H.O. before Will Fritz interrogated him. This is only backed up by him and no documentation (pages 34-36).


- T.L. Baker confirms it was Rose and Stovall who had a chat with Oswald before he was interrogated by Will Fritz (page 37).


- Before Will Fritz returns to City Hall from the T.S.B.D. he makes a detour via Sheriff Bill Decker’s office. Nothing is known about what was discussed between the two (page 38).


- Will Fritz did not audio record the interviews and could have borrowed equipment to do so, nor used a stenographer, during the first interrogation James Hosty is the only person who took notes. Fritz’s handwritten notes are not contemporary.


- During Will Fritz’s first interrogation, according to his handwritten notes, Oswald clearly stated where he was at the time of the shooting. “Out with Bill Shelley, in front.” (page 40). A handwritten document by F.B.I. agent James Hosty states “Then went outside to watch P. Parade” (page 54).


- This very same document by Hosty states that Oswald got his coke for his lunch. And this is repeated in the typed up joint Hosty-Bookhout report (page 65).


- B.I. agent James Bookhout changes this narrative in his solo report from Nov. 24th to an encounter inside the second floor lunch room (page 66).


- After Oswald’s first interrogation with Will Fritz, he is being questioned by Forrest Sorrels of the Secret Service. Oswald thinks he is a lawyer and once known to him that he is S.S. he wonders whether Sorrels is supposed to get him an attorney (page 69).


- There are plenty of indicators that the line-ups were not as impartial as they should have been (pages 84-85).


- The first line-up with Helen Markham is nothing short of a drama as she needs to be sedated beforehand (page 93).


- Helen Markham during her W.C. testimony denied no less than six times recognising Lee Oswald as Tippit’s killer (pages 86-88).


- Marrion Baker overhears Oswald shouting ‘I want a lawyer’ during the second interrogation (page 95)


- Roger Craig sees and reports that Oswald left around 12:42 from the T.S.B.D. running down the hill in front of the T.S.B.D. and confronts him later on in the office of Will Fritz (pages 96 – 106).


- During the second line-up Cecil McWatters has difficulty picking Lee Oswald out as the man who was on his bus (page 104).


- Sam Guinyard and Ted Callaway who work not far away from the location where Tippit was shot, contradict each other during their W.C. testimonies (pages 109-112).


- Ted Callaway also mentions a second person involved in the shooting, and according to Domingo Benavides he asked him what happened and which direction the killer had gone.


- Galloway’s and Guinyard’s statements are taken before the line-up. The two men’s handwritten statements are taken and the No. 2 ID is added on the typed statement after (page 108).


- The biggest absentee from this group of men is Domingo Benavides, he was closest to the Tippit killing and must have been able to identify Tippit’s killer. The D.P.D. does not get a statement from him nor is he asked to identify the killer during the line-up(s) and he only appears in front of the W.C. in March 1964 (page 113).


- At about 19:10 hrs Oswald is arraigned for the murder of officer Tippit by Justice of the Peace David Johnston. There are several detectives present, plus Captain Fritz and Chief of Police Jesse Curry. Their remembrance as to what exactly happened is hazy to say the least (pages 114-116).


- Shortly after the arraignment Oswald is being filmed complaining of not having legal representation present during this hearing and again denies having shot anyone (page 117).


- Oswald’s second line-up for the Davis sisters has the Dallas Police put two blonds in the lineup along with Oswald and Ables (page 118-121).


- After the line-up Oswald appears in the corridor again and asks for legal representation, and also mentions that he did not shoot anyone and that people keep asking him that. At the end of that very short walk back into Fritz’s office he exclaims to be a patsy (pages 122-123).


- Shortly after Henry Wade arrives at City Hall and is surprised to see Jim Allen inside Will Fritz’s Robbery & Homicide office. Allen is a former assistant D.A. and at that time a private citizen yet is a close friend of Fritz (pages 123-124).


- Buell Frazier is brought in the evening and interrogated. There is a report by Frazier that Will Fritz brought in a statement for him to sign that made him an accomplice to Oswald’s killing of J.F.K. to which Frazier refused to go along with. Fritz raised his hand following that, after which Frazier promised him a hell of a fight. Later on that evening Frazier is subjected to a polygraph test, the results of this test have diappeared (pages 126-128).


- In the evening Oswald has his fingerprints and palmprints taken, but the Dallas police also takes paraffin tests of his hands and his right cheek to determine whether he fired a weapon. E. ‘Pete’ Barnes had not applied this test to a suspect’s face ever before. Nor would it not have made one iota of difference in determining whether Oswald had fired a rifle that day and the tests itself can be questioned for the fact that Oswald’s finger prints were taken before the paraffin tests (pages 129-137).


- Assistant D.A. Bill Alexander, along with Jim Allen, wants to charge Oswald with J.F.K.’s murder as part of an international communist conspiracy. Higher ups make him retract this (pages 138-143).


- Howard Brennan appears at City Hall to view a line-up and fails to I.D. Oswald as the sixth floor shooter (pages 144-152).


- B.I. agent Manning Clemments interrogates Oswald on his physical description and background information (pages 153-158).


- Detective John Adamcik (who speaks a little Russian) interrogates Oswald before Oswald makes his appearance at the press conference (pages 159-160).


- Greg Olds and a few of his A.C.L.U. colleagues arrive at City Hall late in the evening to ascertain whether Oswald is having any legal representation, they are given the run around by some of Fritz’s people (pages 162-169).


- In the very early morning of Nov. 23rd Oswald stands in front of the press exclaiming having no idea what the whole situation is about and asks a few times for legal representation in the very short time he is actually allowed to talk (pages 174-179).


- After the press conference Oswald is taken to jail and Henry Wade talks to the press. During this Wade makes mention of a fictitious cab driver by the name Daryl Click. More importantly Wade has to admit that while the papers have been signed to accuse Oswald of killing J.F.K. at least an hour before Oswald is yet to find out. There are strong indicators this was never done (pages 181-183 and 186-223).


- Oswald has finger prints and his mug shot taken after the press conference, he also has to hand over his shirt which is taken in by the F.B.I. and flown to Washington shortly after (pages 184-185).


- Besides Oswald’s bus ride a cab ride is inserted in Fritz’s interrogation notes from the first interrogation on the 23rd, but also the Domino Room situation with junior and one other Negro gets a mention. Fritz barely investigates this, as this would provide Oswald an alibi for the time period after 12:00 whereas J. E. Hoover wants a follow up handled promptly (pages 204-207).


- James Bookhout’s, Thomas Kelley’s reports and Fritz’s notes make a first mention of John Abt during the Saturday morning interrogation (pages 206, 210 and 213).


- During this very same interrogation the Hidell name pops up for the first time according to the reports by Fritz, Kelley and Bookhout and the W.C. Commission testimony of Forest Sorrels (pages 208, 210, 213, 215 and 217).




- Inspector Thomas J Kelley of the Secret Service writes in his report of that interrogation that he asked him ‘if he viewed the parade and he said he had not’ this cannot be corroborated by Fritz’s or Bookhout’s notes at all (pages 209-214).


- Joe Molina, of the accounting department of the T.S.B.D., arrives at the D.P.D. after a visit by some heavy weights in the middle of night who searched through his house for a few hours and come up with nothing of significance. He is being kept at the D.P.D. for roughly 7 hours and loses his job about one month later as Chief Curry names him to the press as a subversive person (pages 218-223).


- Harold McDervid, a Chicago lawyer, has offered council to Oswald via telegram after trying via the phone before. His messages are filed away never to reach Oswald (pages 224-225).


- Marina and Marguerite Oswald get to see Lee for about half an hour.


- Oswald is interrogated again for a brief period mainly to ascertain where his belongings are and what his place(s) of residence are (page 226).


- Oswald could not call anyone until Nov 23rd at 13:40 almost 24 hours after his arrest. This is his first attempt at calling John Abt (page 229).


- Oswald’s line-up in front of William Whaley and William Scoggins. This time he is accompanied by three fellow prisoners, of which one is of Mexican heritage. During the transfer to the line-up Oswald is heard bitterly complaining about the difference in appearance by just wearing a t-shirt to anyone who can hear it (231-233).


- William Whaley identifies the wrong man (No. 2) as the killer of Tippit. Oswald was No. 3, and Whaley needed to correct himself during his W.C. testimony. Whaley also admitted signing a statement before he was taken to the line-up and again had to correct himself. Nor did he read the statement before signing it. Whaley’s W.C. testimony with regards to what Oswald was wearing is enough to disqualify him as a reliable witness. (pages 233-242).


- William Scoggins had seen a picture of Oswald in the paper on the morning of the 23r and he described the assailant going west before the murder, this would exclude Oswald being the killer as Helen Markham said the assailant was travelling east (pages 242-246).


- Robert Oswald gets to visit his brother Lee for about ten minutes after a four hour wait, during the conversation they have Lee tells his brother to not form any opinion on the so- called evidence (pages 248-253).


- Lee Oswald makes another call, one of which to Ruth Pain who is anything but helpful. Nobody knows at that time where his wife, Marina, is (pages 254-260).


- Louis Nichols visits Oswald in jail to enquire about whether Oswald has legal representation (pages 261-265).


- Oswald can be heard during a transfer towards Fritz’s office demanding hygienic rights (page 266).


- During the interrogation following the transfer the back yard photos are introduced to Oswald. He denies it is him in the photographs (pages 267-271).


- After this interrogation Oswald is led down the corridor again and is captured saying he “emphatically denies these charges” (page 271).


- Shortly after that Will Fritz appears in front of the reporters and declares Oswald being the killer of The President without going into evidence (pages 272-273).


- In the evening of Nov. 23rd when Oswald comes out of the jail elevator room Marrion Baker happens to stand very near the entrance. Upon spotting Oswald he ducks away (page 273).


- After returning to his cell Oswald makes another phone call which happens to last 30 minutes (page 276).


- An alleged Raleigh call to/from Oswald to John Hurt never happened (pages 277-279).


- On Sunday morning Oswald is interrogated one last time. Postal Inspector Harry Dean Holmes is a new addition to the group of people interrogating him, his report and W.C. testimony of that particular interrogation nullifies the second floor lunch room encounter (pages 281-302).


- Following this interrogation Oswald is transferred and subsequently shot and killed by Jack Ruby (pages 303-307).


- After Oswald’s killing a piece of paper with phone numbers is found on him. One of these numbers has not been in use since 1956 (page 309).


- By having a close look at Fritz’s report after time stamping the daily reports and statements it has become abundantly clear that Will Fritz twisted things round, not in favour of Oswald’s innocence of shooting Tippit and J.F.K., but to ascertain his guilt (pages 310-324).

http://www.prayer-man.com/lee-harvey-oswalds-interrogations-in-a-nutshell/


Link zum eigentlichen Essay:
http://www.prayer-man.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Anatomy%20Of%20Oswalds%20Interrogations%20V3-WEB.pdf

@monstra

Ich habe grade das dokument entdeckt, laut dem Nicolas Katzenbach Oswald schon am 22. November (!) als den Täter


Original anzeigen (0,3 MB)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TV3f0SMsTVDIxAkrZPuvthdf1xMmS7Dp/view

Was ein Hoover-Dokument vom 24.11. bestätigt:
Original anzeigen (0,2 MB)

http://www.prayer-man.com/nicholas-katzenbach-was-working-hard-on-crucifying-lee-oswald/


Und das, obwohl die Beweislast sehr dünn war, und auch nicht sicher war, ob LHO nicht doch Teil eines Kompletts war.

Hoover zweifelte Anfang 1964 immer noch an der Geschichte von Oswald in Mexico City:




https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/mexico-city-part-6-who-knew-what-and-when

Die ersten Aussagen von Marina Oswald und Ruth Paine waren auch eindeutig:

Original anzeigen (0,3 MB)

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/26619-the-wcr-fbi-and-the-mexico-trip/page/2/?tab=comments#comment-427954

Dem Mitarbeiter der kubanischen Botschaft in MC wurde erst bei der Befragung durch das HSCA Oswalds Visa-antrag gezeigt:

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/26619-the-wcr-fbi-and-the-mexico-trip/?do=findComment&comment=428213


Original anzeigen (0,2 MB)

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/26619-the-wcr-fbi-and-the-mexico-trip/page/2/?tab=comments#comment-427954


Alles Dokumente gefunden im Thread The WCR, FBI and the Mexico Trip

bredulino schrieb:Ich habe grade das dokument entdeckt, laut dem Nicolas Katzenbach Oswald schon am 22. November (!) als den Täter

...festlegte.

@bredulino

Schreib doch einen Blog, statt mit meterlangen Monologen einen Thread voll zu müllen, in dem keiner mehr mit Dir diskutiert.

off-peak schrieb:Schreib doch einen Blog

Den gibt es doch ;)

off-peak schrieb:Schreib doch einen Blog, statt mit meterlangen Monologen einen Thread voll zu müllen, in dem keiner mehr mit Dir diskutiert.

Trage doch mal was Sachliches, Konstruktives zum Thema bei. Meine Person ist unwichtig. Originaldokumente und neue, nicht so bekannte Details in den Focus zu rücken ist eines Debunkers nicht würdig. Warum diese Quellenphobie?

bredulino schrieb:Originaldokumente und neue, nicht so bekannte Details in den Focus zu rücken ist eines Debunkers nicht würdig. Warum diese Quellenphobie?

Das alte Problem: Auf verlinkte Quellen zu verweisen und einen Sachverhalt oder eine Meinung in eigenen Worten zusammenzufassen wäre etwas anderes, als den Thread immer gleich mit der notorischen Text- und Bilderwand zu erschlagen.

Nemon schrieb:Das alte Problem: Auf verlinkte Quellen zu verweisen und einen Sachverhalt oder eine Meinung in eigenen Worten zusammenzufassen wäre etwas anderes, als den Thread immer gleich mit der notorischen Text- und Bilderwand zu erschlagen.

Sag doch einfach mal: "Danke für die Quellen! Das Ausmaß war mir bis jetzt nicht so bekannt."
Ich habe geschrieben, dass man ganz oben schon Oswald als den Täter präsentieren wollte und dann Quellen präsentiert.

off-peak schrieb:Aber wie ein andere User hier schon so schön meinte: Es ist auch nichts Willkürliches. Es gelten eben, durchaus einsichtig, Regeln und Kriterien (zB dafür was Belege wären) für eine allgemein akzeptierte Objektivität.

Wenn ich auf Text- und Bilderwand verzichte und nur Links bringe, werden meistens nicht angeklickt und gelesen. Wenn so etwas überhaup eintritt hängt man sich an einem einzelnen Punkt oder einem Detail in der Einleitung auf und ignoriert den Rest...
Wollt ihr auf ewig so tun, als ob es diese Dokumente und Aussagen nicht geben würde? Seid ihr offen für neue Informationen? Seid ihr ergebnisoffen?
Soll weiterhin geleugnet werden, dass niemand Oswald als den Schützen im 5. Stock identifizierte, niemand bezeugen konnte, Oswald die Treppe herunterrannte?