Morley at the Hearings #2
Collusion?
Facebook Comments
Reader Getting your Trinity Audio player ready... |
Collusion?
In the first, and what I thought would be the only post on this subject, I showed Morley writing about pre-hearing discussions with Rep Luna in which he warned her that the NBC films were worthless as evidence and that no one he hangs with takes them seriously yada yada fucking yada, so she is wasting her time, while adding that he “hopes” that NBC will one day release the films so it can be put to rest.
Here it is again
So, to quote the above accurately
I told her it is NOT a definitive piece of evidence
It is NOT important to the JFK community
I advised her to drop it
I hope some day NBC will clear the air by making available high-res scans
So again, why do you “hope” NBC will release high res scans while simultaneously advising that all efforts to get such scans should be aborted?
But now to the point of this additional post on the subject, because since writing the first piece, I have read the hearing transcripts.
Here is the part in question
(49:35)
I want to also just so that note that we should follow of course the facts wherever they go. Mr. Morley, in the run-up to this hearing, I know that there was some public reporting about this video that has been referenced. It’s never before seen video of the shooting. Now that video itself is not a secret. I mean, JFK researchers have known about this video for a few years. Is that correct?Jefferson Morley (49:55):
For decades. Yes.
Mr Garcia (49:56):
Okay. And the film is not definitive about Oswald’s whereabouts at the time of the incident?
Jefferson Morley (50:03):
No. It is not.
Mr Garcia (50:04):
Okay. And it’s not regarded as overly important by serious JFK researchers. Would you agree with that?
Jefferson Morley (50:11):
Correct.
Mr Garcia (50:11):
Okay. And it has never been a factor in major analysis in the causes of JFK assassination. Is that also correct?
Jefferson Morley (50:18):
Not in mine and not in any of the researchers I work with.
Mr Garcia (50:22):
Okay. Thank you. And I think it’s important to clarify that because I think there’s a lot of speculation and interest in the video, but I think we should be very clear about what the video actually is. Also, I know as it relates to the rollout of the JFK files, it also included a lot of, I think, personal information. Mr. Davisson, I just want to turn to you for a minute.
So Garcia specifically asks these questions of Morley and NOT Stone or di Eugenio.
And the film is not definitive about Oswald’s whereabouts at the time of the incident?
And it’s not regarded as overly important by serious JFK researchers. Would you agree with that?
Okay. And it has never been a factor in major analysis in the causes of JFK assassination. Is that also correct?
It is clear that the questions were either supplied by Morley, or that Garcia was present when Morley alleges he tried to dissuade Rep Luna from pursuing the films.
Pre-arranged questions and answers at such a hearing is despicable behavior. Ask anyone who is familiar with the Warren Commission hearings.
This also calls into question Morley’s attempt to use the CIA Oswald file being held by Angleton as proof of CIA involvement in the assassination. This testimony was eviscerated by Morley’s dance partner, Rep Garcia, and he was forced to admit it is only evidence of surveillance of Oswald. What strikes me as particularly troubling about this is that Morley is renowned for not speculating, attacking others for speculating, and basically sticking to verifiable facts (with exceptions noted below).
Yet it would be obvious even to a mad cow that he was stretching the Oswald file evidence way beyond it’s inherent meaning. So why did he do it? And why is it his collaborator in trying to get Rep Luna to lay off NBC the one who is showing him the error of his ways on the file evidence?
It has long been suspected that this “community” has been infiltrated by CIA or FBI assets. Indeed, it sometimes only takes someone to mildly disagree with a theory for the accusation to be levelled. I have had it levelled at me, but I have never suggested it about anyone else. In fact, I had it pegged as an accusation to boost the accuser’s self-importance. “Look at me! I’m so important and my theory is so close that the feds are out to stop me!”
The Morley dance with Garcia, is in stark contrast to his penchant for chastising everyone else for speculating or theorizing, instead of just stating the “facts”. The Morley-Garcia rehearsed dance on the NBC films and his “backdown” on the value of the CIA Oswald file under questioning by Garcia have me seriously wondering if Morley is an asset of some sort.
We can add his claim that Oswald did in fact go to Mexico City (something he provably did not do but the CIA is desperate to hang on to), along with his acceptance of any and all evidence-free rumors, accusations, or hearsay about JFK being a sex predator, to the list of reasons for questioning Morley’s motives.
The latter is particularly pernicious as it devalues JFK and his legacy to the point where his untimely death is made seem almost justified.
And just to be clear… JFK may well have been a drug-addled sex fiend who somehow managed to bang everything including the fridge door, despite his crippling back condition. But the issue is the lack of any evidence. In fact, once when I challenged another who believes all of the rumors and accusations, to actually cite some evidence, all he could come up with was a letter written by JFK saying he would be sure to meet up with a particular woman when he was next in Germany! That’s it. That is the extent of the evidence among the dozens of accusations and rumors.
I’m not begging. But I do like coffee!
You laid out a very compelling case that Morley could be a CIA asset, spewing disinformation about about the JFKA, the Darnell Film, & Oswald and Mexico City. Wow! I’m totally livid to see the evidence about Morley laid out like this! Thank you for this important takedown!
Rather than tell Luna for example that the Darnell Film “is NOT a definitive piece of evidence” and “It is NOT important to the JFK community” He could’ve gone into HONEST detail and said given the current poor quality multigeneration copies we have of it, it’s not definitive…however, it’s highly suggestive, and a digital scan of the Camera Original held by NBC could be definitive, so getting it is of paramount importance! He also could’ve said it is important to a LARGE group of JFKA researchers who have deeply studied it the over the last 15 years (although you could go all the back to Bernabei and Weisberg), and he could’ve mentioned the recent best selling PM books by Stan Dane, and most importantly, Bart Kamp, so that the public could further read about it and make their own decisions about PM!…But no! He says it’s basically useless, and “RESEARCHERS” plural, aren’t even interested in it. Total lies!
Addendum: It has also bothered the hell out of me from the get go that the name of the film (Darnell) and Prayer Man, were never mentioned, before or during or after the hearing! Why not share that info with the public! Another part of the coverup!
Funny you should say that, When Larry Schnapf passed on information about the films to them, he got both names wrong.
Again – they should have had someone well-versed in the research on the alibi, and the history of efforts to get the films there at those hearings, But you only get in if you are a celebrity or a hanger-on of a celebrity. In the US, I can only think of two who could have done it. Ed Ledoux or Stan Dane. But of course, neither are celebrities. So we get an aged Stone who stumbled and stammered when it came to the films, and di Eugenio who didn’t really say a lot. Then you get the person who said the most, who happens to have been opposed to getting the films from the get-go.
WOW did not know Schnapf got the film names wrong! What did he tell Luna? I Was under the impression from Bart that Stone or Jimmy Di passed along the PM/Darnell info to Luna. Also why not Barto? Nothing against Stan or Ed but Bart has done more work on PM than anyone and has written THE most up to date and top PM book.
The story about Schnapf is on the Ed Forum. He passed on info separately to Jimmy di and Stone.
Yes, I agree. Bart would be the guy. But I was thinking only of people living in the US. I doubt they would have flown anyone in from overseas for it.
Shoot, I would’ve seriously paid for Bart’s plane ticket, if they invited him and let him talk! He’s that important!
You’re one of the good guys, that’s why.
Here is the heading of a thread by Schapf at the Ed Forum:
My Letter to Luna Today Worked. She Just Announced On Jessie Watters That She Is Asking NBC for the Wegman/Darnall Films!
It is clear from the thread that he believed he had spelled the names correctly.
It is good that something is happening. But it is disgraceful that those who got the ball rolling have been excluded Because the misinformation at the hearings would have been addressed, and most certainly basic stuff like misspelling the names of the two cameramen would never occur.
LOL! “Wegman/Darnall” (sic). Totally agree we needed people there that know what they’re talking about regarding the films and PM!
And thank you for the “good guys” compliment, Greg! 🙂
Didn’t know it was on the Ed Forum. I’m rarely on there now.
I want to comment on your calling out Jimmy di and Stone’s, appearance at the Luna hearing when they had refused to help pry the Darnell and Wiegman films from NBC when folks asked them to a few years ago. I couldn’t find that message so I’m posting this here.
I can add something to the story. After watching the 2 hr doc that Stone and Jim produced in which they had Whoopi Goldberg conclude Oswald was not on the 6th floor, based on Barry Ernest’s account, I contacted Jim thru his website. I suggested that was the perfect spot to ask the followup question: then where was he?
They had not yet released their 4 hour version. I suggested simple, uncontroversial language they could use to answer the question, like: we don’t know, but NBC has two films that might answer the question that they refuse to let anyone see. It was a springboard to a topic Stone has talked about before: the moral bankruptcy of the media.
I got no response from Jim. But then Stone went on Joe Rogan’s show with its millions of viewers. Sure enough Rogan asked Stone, at about the one hour mark, well, then where was Oswald? Unprepared, Stone totally blew it. In the 2nd floor lunch room, he said. Showing Stone had no idea what he was talking about on several levels. Yet as you point out, Stone, Jim, and Morley are the people chosen to speak for all of us.
Btw, Luna also was set up to ask Stone if he thought she should ask NBC for the films (tho she said “copies” not the original) and he he said yes. So that much was accomplished and apparently the letter went out to NBC shortly thereafter.
Which brings up the question: has NBC responded and if so what did the say? The letter apparently was sent almost a month and half ago. What did Luna’s the letter actually say? Did she make it clear she was asking as a member of Congress in order to enforce provisions of the JFK Act that had been long ignored, particularly by NBC? This wasn’t like you or me asking. We were easy to ignore.
I asked Schnapf if he had seen letter’s contents and he said no.
Do you, Greg, or anyone of your vast connections know if NBC has responded. I posted the question on Morley’s site after he raised Trump’s grad to a B+ during an article in which he discussed remaining records not released and never mentioned the D&W films . The only response I got that’s a good question.
I posted on Luna’s facebook page but that was a waste of time. We’ve been granted a small opening. I don’t need to tell you how important it is to follow up on it.
That whole thing has the appearance of a shambles where no one seemed to have a full grasp of the facts.
Or they grasped it but chose to cover it up (as Morley did). I’m a little shocked that Jimmy Di didn’t speak up.
Roger & Greg, I have not checked this thread in quite awhile and just now saw Roger’s excellent reply above. Came here after seeing a shocking post by Barto on his PM site about how Morley was so uninterested in getting the Darnell & Wiegman films. He posted a quote from Morley which has to be seen to be believed (you’ve probably already seen it but this was my first time just today – been busy with other things).
On Mar 29 Gerald Posner posted a LONG, LONG tweet, full of disinfo about the Darnell & Wiegman films and Prayer Man. It begins:
“Time for a dose of reality.
This 👇is the supposedly smoking gun video that @RepLuna said last night had “never been seen before” and “could blow open the entire JFK investigation….” followed by his endless pile of BS!
Then Morley glowingly replies to him in two tweets on Mar 30, 2025.
Morley said NBC was not hiding anything and then went on to suck GERALD POSNER’S itty bitty CIA dick, and gargle his nut sack!!! It’s obscene how Morley’s Mar 30 twitter replies to Gerald Posner glowingly praised him and tagged him!
Morley tweeted on Mar 30 (and this is also copy/pasted into Bart’s post on his PM site):
“When @RepLuna asked me about this film after talking to Watters, I told her it is NOT secret. It is NOT a definitive piece of evidence. It is NOT important to the JFK research community. I advised her to drop it. I hope NBC will someday clear the air by making available a high-res scan of the original Darnell and Wegmen films. [The fucker can’t even spell WIEGMAN correctly!] NBC is not hiding anything.
@geraldposner is right about this. [!!!]
“In my testimony to the House Task on Tuesday, I will be talking about–and sharing for the first time–a rather more important new JFK evidence to emerge: the CIA’s complete pre-assassination file on Lee Harvey Oswald. It was not fully declassified until 2023. In conjunction with documents released last month, THE OSWALD FILE points to CIA complicity. I’ll explain Tuesday.”
He then posts a follow up tweet (same day, Mar 30):
“Gerald’s right about this film.. it is not new… It is not definitive… And it is not particularly important to most JFK researchers …..none of my beliefs about the causes of the assassination are based on this piece of film.”
Isn’t it sweet how they’re on a first name basis!
Well, Jeff, what did you do after those replies to your lil’ CIA buddy? Spit or swallow?!
Hi Linda, Was unaware of the known plagiarist Posner’s tweet but quoted that last Morley BS is one of these threads.
The thing that reall annoys me is that Rep Luna was so ill-informed – or so confused about what she was told – that she got it all wrong, or at best, skewed And yes, They all sat there and never corrected her. It gave an opening for the Piglet to stick his snout in and attack her errors – whiich have nothing to do with the substance of the real arguments as put by me, Barto, Ed, Stan, Sean and others.
It is a complete clusterfuck and Morley is no doubt happy as a piglet in shit over it.
Disgust doesn’t begin to describe how I feel about him, the commmittee, and those invited to sit and talk shit.
I have known for a long time that Morley is an arsehole.
Posted on behalf of Roger as it seems to have not worked for him:
==========================
I posted it. Morely has emerged as one of the more insidious “researchers” around. It’s fitting the MSM gives him such space.
I’m still trying to find out what happened the Luna’s attempts to get the D&W films from NBC. It’s been 4 months. Larry Schnapf said on EF that Luna is considering subpoenaing NBC for the Sheridan files. I asked what about the D&W films but got no answer. Surely they understand that the D&W films are more important at this stage. I say that without knowing what’s in the Sheridan files.
===============================
Roger, firstly apologies. Wasn’t trying to steal credit. Honestly thought I had postred it.
Secondly, what happened seems no different to what happened with certain people on FOX who claimed to have seen explosive CIA docs – nothing. Becausre none of it means anything to them unless they can extract polical mileage for themselves or political pain on the enemy – and they will do anything including making shit up to obtain those ends. If she gave a damn about any of this, she’d have gotten the claims being made correct instead of fucking it all up alllowing the atttack dogs to snap at the droppings, instead of following the scent.
Here is my original response to Linda that somehow never got posted.
RO
Linda,
Until recently I had been going to Morley’s Thursday night zoom calls. He not only dissed the importance of the D&W films there as he did at the first Luna hearing, he said similar things about the Zapruder film. He said he didn’t think the Z film was altered, but in any case that’s not important either!
In the course of clawing his way to be the go to guy on the JFKA among mainstream media, he has offered a carefully crafted message.
He doesn’t know who murdered JFK (and doesn’t seem to care). He’s not a conspiracy theorist. As a former WaPo reporter, he’s looking for a good story. He wrote a book on Angleton and has recently glommed on to the Joannides files and the surveillance of Oswald as topics of utmost importance.
The latter has led him to tippytoe into a consideration of CIA involvement using careful phrasing. The CIA was somehow involved. Possibly using Oswald. Maybe even as a shooter. He has shown the surveillance of Oswald was a lot more pervasive than the agency has admitted. Gee, why else would they watch him?
The problem of this should be obvious. It opens a wide path for the current CIA leadership to say, you’re right, Jeff. We did follow Oswald a lot as you’ve shown, but we failed to prevent him from shooting Kennedy. A terrible mistake those guys made back then. We’re sorry. We’ll try to do better.
A classic limited hangout.
Ultimately Morely’s recent work, while garnering him fame and some adulation, is mostly just another diversion that leads nowhere important.
RO
Really well put, Roger! I don’t trust him at all anymore, and feel he’s helping them to put forward their limited hangout, while we get crumbs about what actually happened and who – and who DIDN’T – do it (ie: LHO). I had no idea until these recent Luna Hearings and Morley’s burial of the Darnell & Wiegman Films, that we’ve fought for so long for, what a conniving LN bastard he actually is! But that sucking up to Posner – of all people – was the icing on the cake for me! Is Morely working for the CIA Mockingbird now, or just trying to self-servingly be in the spotlight and line his own pockets?! Either way it’s disgusting.
I agree Luna is pretty clueless, and Morley is taking full advantage of her naiveté and lack of knowledge about the case. I don’t feel she’s purposefully trying to bury things, but she’s just ignorant of the case and willing to believe “authorities” like Morley! I am also perplexed as to why Jimmy Di didn’t speak up to correct the record. He’s long been one of my favorite JFKA researchers – I’ve even said he’s at the top of my “pantheon” of JFKA researchers. So, is he bowing to Morely to lead the panel so as not to step on his toes? Or is he not as knowledgeable about PM and the Darnell & Wiegman films as I thought he was? Have you ever spoken to him about PM & the importance of those films?! I have a hard time believing that he he would assist Morley – or anyone – in helping the CIA craft a limited hangout.
When the 2 hour version of the doc Jim did with Oliver Stone came out, it contained an interview with Barry Ernest recounting the story of “The Girl on the Stairs” (Vicki Adams). It had Whoopi Goldberg concluding that Oswald was not on the 6th floor at the time of the shooting. A 4 hour version was in the works.
I emailed JIm and said after the Goldberg statement was a perfect time to ask the question, well then where was Oswald. and go into his alibi He could explain that NBC was hiding evidence that might be able to answer that question. Stone’s animosity toward the media is well known. It would have been right up his alley.
Jim didn’t answer me. When Stone later went on Joe Rogin, Rogin asked him that very question. Stone said Oswald was in the 2nd floor lunchroom at the time of shooting. An answer that is wrong on several levels And a gigantic missed opportunity, given the size of Rogin’s audience and the apparent interest of Rogin himself.
I don’t know what Jim’s opinion is of the importance of the D&W films. I don’t think he has challenged Morley’s nonsense, or been at the forefront of attempts to get the films. Although Luna was getting advice from somewhere to try to get them and followed that up.
It’s been 4 months since Luna said she would ask NBC for them. The other day on EF Larry Schnapf said Luna was considering issuing a subpoena for the Sheridan files held by NBC. No mention of D&W.
Roger, Ernest is another who is full of shit and is anti-PM. I note with some amusement that his publisher is Pelican.
https://gregrparker.com/forums/topic/the-2nd-floor-lunchroom-encounter-a-reply-to-barry-ernest/#postid-111
In Australian slang, a “pelican” is someone silly, foolish, or clumsy.
As for the Stroud document —
Truly is named – the name of the cop however is only assumed to be Baker. I say it was Doughty and Truly going up to inform Fritz that Oswald was missing. Why? Because there was no Baker-Truly run up the stairs. Doughty was the only cop who went up there with Truly… and it was indeed sometime shortly after 12:45. Crucial becaise Oswald could not be officially missing until after his lunch break was over. He had a right to be afbsent from the building between 12 anf 12:45.
In support of my argument is what Sandra Styles told Sean Murphy, She did not believe they immeditaely ran down the stairs. But she was niave and went along with Adams – until the FBI told her that if cops were inside when they got down there, then it had to have been 15 to 20 minutes after the shots because that was how long it took cops to get there, That wasn’t true of course – that was the alleged time it took to secure the building. However, again being niaive and despite thinking that time frame was too long… she accepted it. In her more mature years and in her corresponance with Seam, she concluded the truth was more likely somewhere in between “immediately” and “15 to 20 munites” and she bases this not just on no memory of going immediately, but on the fact that she could not comprehend running straight down without knowing what they might encounter on the way down or outside. They would have taken time to discuss it.
Running straight down makes as much sense as an unarmed Truly running ahead of Baker looking for an armed and obviously lethal assassin.
Jim di is not about rocking any boats. He has his place on the same totem pole as Stone and he is not about to risk it to help us. And he WAS asked to do that several years ago when we were trying to get Stone’s attention. on it.
As for Stone himself, I doubt he will let go of the second floor lunchroom encounter, It is one oif the most iconic scenes in his movie, afterall.
We are on our own with this. We always have been, despite occasional positive noises from others about helping.
I agree to an extent, Greg. After what Adams said in the 1966 TV interview that she *did* see Shelly and Lovelady after coming down the steps, contradicting what she told Ernst as a primary basis for his book, I conclude Adams is unreliable. Ernest should not have based his book on her.
Styles is not a good source either. She was not into the story like Adams and ultimately deferred to Adams when pressed. In the book Ernest has her backing Adams. Even saying she didn’t see the limo go under the overpass because she had already left the window. To go down the stairs?
She originally contradicted Adams to Murphy to the extent he wondered how Ernest got it so wrong. But as I remember it, (correct me if I’m wrong) after all his conversations with Styles he apologized to Ernst for implying Ernest deliberately misled. It was clear Styles wasn’t reliable either.
Bottom line, as I have said repeatedly, it is Garner who is the real source for what happened, not the other two women.
It was Ernest who discovered Stroud ‘s letter to Rankin they tried to bury and thus brought Garner into the picture. The WC had ignored her.. Out of the blue Stroud quotes Garner as saying after Adams and Styles went down the stairs she was still on the 4th floor when Truly and (an unnamed) cop arrived there. She never saw or heard Oswald.
I think of Stroud as perhaps something of a hero too. Why did she refer to Garner in a letter that was supposed to simply transmit the corrections Adams wanted to her testimony. Maybe she knew enough to understand the problem that Garner caused for Rankin and crew. Stroud sent the letter by registered mail so there would be a record of it. Maybe that’s why the corrections to Adams’s testimony she included were never made. They didn’t want to draw attention to the Stroud letter as the source; they buried it.
Ernest’s book is misguided but there are valuable things in it. Including his discovery that the steno tapes of Adams, Shelly, and Lovelady are missing from NARA. That is the definitive evidence of what each said.
Why indeed mention it. Note that the names Truly AND Baker are mentioned in the letter. Yet when she allegedly saw them, Garner could not possibly have known the cop’s name. She was never asked to identify Baker as that cop, so at this point you have to assume it was Baker…and assume that “after” means “immediately after”… and not say 15 or 20 minutes after.
So while you may view her as a hero, I am a bit more suspicious. Mrs Reid, Truly’s secretary, was drafted in to shore up the very weak Truly-Baker run up the stairs evidence – and this to ne, looks like another effort.
As for the run down the stairs – at least one of them said that they went to the store room first. Which is where Garner supposedly was, iirc?
I agree that neither women are totally reliable. But Styles comes across as more honest – and her statement virtually saying she wasn’t stupid enough to charge straight down the stairs without a moment’s hesitation makes no sense in the circumstances.
She also said that Ernest wasn;t interested in hearing about the timing. He was using her for the layout of the offices. Yes Sean did apologise publicly to Ernest, but I think it was a qualified apology,
Ernest is living off the Stroud document. Just like Morley lives off his Joanides crusade.
To reiterate: Garner’s statements are untested (as stated – no ID on the cop) and rely totally on assumptions that it was Baker and that an unspecified timeframe can be assumed to be “immediately”.
Are you aware that Truly and Mrs Reid;s husband were rewarded for Truly and Mrs Reid;s testimony with a guided tour of FBI HQ?
How many witnesses in any case ever, can lay claim to such royal treatment?
No, Greg, Stroud’s letter refers to Garner saying Truly and “a policeman” reached the 4th floor after Adams and Styles went down the steps. Stroud did not name the cop. See p.298,the Girl on the Stairs
Of course they never asked Garner who the cop was. They tried to ignore her completely and bury the letter. They made up the Truly and Baker story and the 2nd floor lunch room encounter. They weren’t about to give someone a chance to contradict it.
Ernest tracked Garner down and talked to her in 2011. (see pp 266-70 in his book). He didn’t ask her who the cop was either. In fact Garner had no reason to know who he was, as you say.
The fact that Garner didn’t know who the cop was does not make her statement “untested”, nor , obviously, did she assume it was Baker. That is the assumption of all who believe the lunch room encounter.
Both Garner and Stroud left behind information that contradicted the heart of their Oswald story, when so many others looked the other way. That’s worth something.
The umteenth example of why I should not rely on memory. You’re right, She never said it was Baker – I have gotten so use to peolple saying she saw Truly and Baker that I forgot that’s not what she said.
They couldn’t ask her who the cop was. How the hell would she know his name?But they could have shown her a photo of Baker to ID.
What I am not getting with your take Roger, is how you decide what she meant – there is no way now of knowing what she meant by “after” they went down she saw…. how long is “after”?
What you say also leaves me scratching my head wondering what exactly you do think happened regarding all of this.
There was no Truly-Baker run up the stairs. The whole story of a cop using a human shield is preposterous, plus there was a statement by one of the workers that Truly never left the first floor (presumably until he wemt to report on Oswald to Fritz), and we have a document saying he was stationed at the front door with Det Kaminsky, and Oswald saying he was stopped at the front door by Truly and a cop. According to the report, Kaminsky was checking ID and Truly was confirming that the person had legit business in the building ( as in HE IS OKAY – HE WORKS HERE) That is where those words were spoken and the contect they were spoken in.. Not in the second floor lunchroom.
So if you do not believe the 2nd floor story, but you do believe Garner’s story…. she has to be talking about 15 or 20 minutes after the shots when Truly and Doughty go up.
To ne, the document is totally useless unless you are willing to put all your eggs into demanding it was Baker and that it happened at whatever time suits your theory. Not saying you think it was Baker, not=r that you are insisting on anything to suit any theory, I am justb totally lost about what value you see in the document, given the anout of conjecture needed, and in view of other facts we now have.
How long is “after” Adams and Styles went down the steps in Garner’s statement?
Garner had told Ernest she stayed on the 4th floor until about 2:30. She followed Adams and Styles to the 4th floor stairs. She never saw or heard Oswald come down the steps the whole time she was there. Regardless of when Truly and a cop arrived, including in your scenario of 15-20 minutes after the shooting.
Only if Oswald somehow went down the steps before the women arrived at them is Garner’s statement unimportant.
So we’re back to this point: when did Adams and Styles go down the steps?
Did the women leave fairly quickly, as at least Garner and Adams claim, or delay long enough to let Oswald slip by and go down the steps first without being seen or heard by anyone?
Bart says there were something like 20 people between the 2nd and 4th floors at the time. Garner said some others on the 4th floor came over near where she was to look out the windows toward the grassy knoll. Yet the WC was unable to intimidate, browbeat, or cajole *any one* of these people, including the 3 women, into saying they saw or even heard Oswald coming down the steps. Because it didn’t happen.
Fritz said they never had anyone who could put Oswald on the 6th floor with a gun in his hand. So they had to find some way to situate Oswald on the scene in such a way that he could have shot Kennedy. They chose to fabricate the lunch room encounter, then discredit Adams while ignoring Garner and Styles, and everyone else who could have seen or heard Oswald, to accomplish this.
Your reasoning about why Adams and Styles would have delayed going down the steps–it was dangerous–is plausible, but I don’t find it convincing. Something had just happened to Kennedy. They weren’t sure what. The women were in their early 20s. Adams, in particular would have wanted to find out. After she went home, she sat down and wrote a multipage letter to a mentor of hers from high school setting down her thoughts about what she had seen. Styles was mostly a follower; she just went along.
In any case, here’s what I think happened if there was in fact a shooter, not Oswald, from the TSBD.
The premurder plan was for the shooter to stay right where he was and blend in with the cops who were framing Oswald. There was no need to escape. They were already going after Oswald the patsy.
Roger, this is just running in circles. My point is it’s pointless and un-needed. Oswald was not up there, and there is mountain of far less ambiguous and loosely worded statement to back that up.
This is not a smoking gun document, but it sure blows a lot of smoke.