Jump to content


The Stemmons Freeway Sign

  • Please log in to reply
19 replies to this topic

#1 Brian Kelshaw

Brian Kelshaw

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 190 posts
  • LocationWolverhampton, UK.

Posted 26 July 2014 - 05:18 PM

Is the supposed removal of the Stemmons Freeway sign within days of the assassination a myth? After an extensive online search, the only two references I can find are these.




This is as comprehensive a study as I've seen, and it suggests that the sign did not come down until June 24th 1964.


The only other reference to actual removal, or even temporary removal, I can find is as follows.


"Whitewash 11..The Report onthe Warren Commission"........Harold Weisberg 1966..
Page 4......
"The Commission staff was not unaware of this, for although there is no indication  it ever heeded it's own unavoidable proof or wondered why anyone would dream of destroying evidence in the assassination of an American President, the whole story was blurted out by Emmett J.Hudson, ( witness to the killing )groundskeeper of Dealey Plaza, in his belated testimony of July 22,1964, almost two months after the Commission had originally scheduled the end of it's work..( first mentioned page 45..WhiteWash.) .
Not only were the hedges and shrubbery trimmed, thus destroying all the projection points essential to photographic analysis, but all the road signs absolutely vital in any reconstruction had been moved-------All Three Of Them--------Zapruder had filmed over the top of the center sign ( Stemmons) ..Two of the signs were entirely removed. The one over which Zapruder filmed was replaced, and there is no reason to believe it's replacement is in exactly the same location in the ground or at exactly the same height above it.
Unless both of these conditions, plus the angle of the sign toward Zapruder's lens , were exactly identical with conditions when he took his pictures, no precise reconstruction is possible..
All this funny business with the signs got on the record by accident, not through the diligence of the Commission or it's counsel. Wesley J.Liebeler was questioning Hudson. Not until eight months to the day after the assassination, but finally Hudson was being questioned. He volunteered this testimony: "Now, they have moved some of those signs. They have moved that R.L. Thornton Freeway sign and put up a Stemmons sign ".....It was this "Stemmons" sign over which Zapruder photographed.
"They have? They have moved it?" Liebeler asked, his cool nonchalance preserved in cood type.
"Yes, sir." replied Hudson.
"That might explain it", Liebeler then said. at the same time, without even seeming so to intend, preserving for both the Commission and history the certain knowledge that the two photographs about which he was interrogating Hudson, one taken at the time of the assassination and the other after it, were not in agreement. ....And here the accidental interest of the Commission in the destruction and mutilation of the most essential evidence ended"..................


The problem with Hudson's testimony however is not what he said, but when he said it...July 24th 1964. If the author of the history above is correct, could Weisberg be assuming that Hudson was referring to the signs having been removed much earlier? And if they were removed and replaced, that begs two questions. Firstly, when, and secondly, if the photo's in the above piece were taken on the day of the re-enactment, then those who replaced the sign took care to replace it with the same uneven cant it had originally.


If anyone has any further evidence of the sign's removal please share it.....

  • DosephOr likes this

#2 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham


  • Administrators
  • 3,070 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 26 July 2014 - 06:55 PM

Good post, Brian. Thanks for raising these points. I have heard mixed stories about when the Semmons Sign was first "moved" to a slightly different location and when it was actually removed from the Plaza. I'll be interested in reading what anyone else knows about it.

Greg Burnham



"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown



AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page



AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

YouTube Channel:

#3 Bob Prudhomme

Bob Prudhomme

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 108 posts
  • Locationwestern Canada

Posted 18 August 2014 - 08:58 PM



Thanks for posting this. I had only glossed over Hudson's testimony but read the whole thing carefully last night after reading your post.


Interesting that Liebeler chooses not to pursue a line of questioning involving the signs.

  • Brian Kelshaw likes this
"He was always cold, but the Land of Gold seemed to hold him like a spell,
Though he'd often say, in his homely way, that he'd "Sooner live in Hell....."

"The Cremation of Sam McGee" by Robert W. Service

#4 Staffan H Westerberg

Staffan H Westerberg

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 178 posts
  • LocationStockholm, Sweden

Posted 19 August 2014 - 01:49 PM

Brian, what about the claim there was a bullet hole (perhaps holes) in the Stemmons FWAY sign? If they moved it (replaced it) then that would be a good reason. I think John Costella said something about when the sign was (allegedly) moved, but I fail to remember in what interview he said it - I think on Fetzers Real Deal talking to Len Osanic, but I could be wrong.

#5 John Costella

John Costella

    Founding Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11 posts
  • LocationSan Francisco, CA

Posted 19 August 2014 - 03:48 PM

I know only as much as Greg says above. I believe that some of the various stories about the sign were circulated because it was problematical in the extant Z film. As with many things in this case, it would be great to know the truth.

#6 Bob Prudhomme

Bob Prudhomme

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 108 posts
  • Locationwestern Canada

Posted 21 August 2014 - 10:41 AM

I recall seeing a photo of what was claimed to be a mark made by a bullet in the sidewalk just up from the Stemmons Freeway Sign. Just how a bullet could have hit the sidewalk here without striking a bystander was another matter.


However, when I visited Dealey Plaza in 1996, I walked past this spot and was surprised to see a piece of the sidewalk had been removed, at roughly this location, with a 3 or 4 inch coring drill, and replaced with fresh concrete.


Anyone else ever see this? 

"He was always cold, but the Land of Gold seemed to hold him like a spell,
Though he'd often say, in his homely way, that he'd "Sooner live in Hell....."

"The Cremation of Sam McGee" by Robert W. Service

#7 Bernice Moore

Bernice Moore

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 452 posts

Posted 02 November 2014 - 10:02 PM

Some of this old post may be of interest...b

The re-enactment was conducted between 6 a.m. and 1 p.m. on Sunday May 24, 1963. Obviously the light conditions were different between the photographs (sunny or cloudy). However the conditions in CE894 - CE897, in which the dark end of the sign pole is missing, are the same as in CE888-CE890, and CE893, in which the dark top of one or both poles is visible.

"Whitewash ....The Report on the Warren Commission".1965.......page 44..

Harold Weisberg.

""Six months and a day following the assassination.( May.23/64 ) the Warren Commission had the FBI photographic agent, Lyndal L.Shaneyfelt ( 5 H 138 ) do a photographic re-enactment. The report indicates no reason for such a prolonged delay.

The Secret Service had completed it's re-enactment by Dec. 5. 1963. It is difficult to imagine that the Commission could have loaded Mr.Shaneyfelt with more invalidating conditions..His re-enactment could only serve one purpose...to try and make credible a reconstruction under which the Commission's thesis, that all the shots came from the sixth floor window, might be possible..In fact, he attempted nothing else.In order to accomplish this, he had to show that no shot was fired before the frame numbered 210 on the Zapruder film..

To begin with, Shaneyfelt had to work with a black-and-white copy of the original Capruder colour film. Necessarily, the copies were less clear. Then the reactments began at 6 a.m as a concession to traffic. Between the time of the year and the time of the day differences between the mock-up and the real thing, al the values of shadows in photographic intelligence were forfeited, For the precise placing of the camera, mounted on the rfile, and other measuring devices Sheneyfelt had the information supplied by the Commission. He was working in fractions of degrees, yet he had to bade everything on "information furnished us by the Commission, phtoographs taken by the Dallas Police Department immediately after the assassination....." 5H145.......

( Don't you believe it..NOT)...see Tom Aylea..information.)


None of the photos of swuch are or were in agreement with each other nor the facts, as the testimony also shows...."with none of them at the momen of the assassination showed, this was an immediate and total disqualification of anything he might try...
No matter how fine and expert Shaneyfelt , no matter how excellent his equipment or how careful his associates, his testimony and reconstruction could have no validity"..

" For example, Example Exhibit 887 ( R99) is a camera mounted atopn the rifle pointing westward from the sith-floor window. The window is raised several inches higher than it was shown in the Dillard photograph. Of necessity the rife is mounted on a photographic tripod. But there can be only one necessity for fudging on the window--- to make the whoe reconstruction possible where otherwise it would not have been. The tripod is adjustable. The rifle is inside the window. With such an obvious flaw, the exhibit is invalid as is any testimony based on it..Another photograph of the re-enactment printed on page 41 of Life Magazine for Oct. 2,1964, shows that part of the reconstruction was made with the window entirely open...This picture shows the ballistic expert resting his arm on a box incorrectly positioned . It is much too far to the west.... Worse, the rifle is without it's telescopic sight. Can any testimony based upon this reconstruction have any value ?"

snip...page 45...

"" In addition, the experts " duplicated certain frames of the Zapruder film" and of two others available to the Commission. These appear in the Report on pages 100-8 and are readily available for inspection. Not a single on can be called a duplication, as the most superficial inspection, even without instruments, will show. The angles are grossy different. The elevations are radicaly wrong.

Even the backgrounds are not the same. One of the best examples is the critically important frame 210 ( R102) . Thes are printed side by side and it will be no problem for any doubting reader to satisfy himself.
This particular illustration is also proof of another inexcusable fault :

The landscaping in the background has been altered.....
Valuable intelligence was thus lost........ In other cases trees which served the same purpose were removed and even the vital signs that figure in all of this identification and testimony were both moved and removed..It is no longer possible to make the most precise photographic reconstruction of the assassination because of this destruction and mutilation of evidence.........."'


"Whitewash 11..The Report onthe Warren Commission"........Harold Weisberg 1966..

Page 4......

"The Commission staff was not unaware of this, for although there is no indication it ever heeded it's own unavoidable proof or wondered why anyone would dream of destroying evidence in the assassination of an American President, the whole story was blurted out by Emmett J.Hudson, ( witness to the killing )groundskeeper of Dealey Plaza, in his belated testimony of Juy 22,1964, almost two months after the Commission had originally scheduled the end of it's work..( first mentioned page 45..WhiteWash.) .

Not only were the hedges and shrubbery trimmed, thus destroying all the projection points essential to photographic analysis, but all the road signs absolutely vital in any reconstruction had been moved-------All Three Of Them--------Zapruder had filmed over the top of the center sign ( Stemmons) ..Two of the signs were entirely removed. The one over which Zapruder filmed was replaced, and there is no reason to believe it's replacement is in exacty the same location in the ground.orat exactly the same height above it.

Unless both of these conditions, plus the angle of the sign toward Zapruder's lens , were exactly identical with conditions when he took his pictures, no precise reconstruction is possible..

All this funny business with the signs got on the record by accident, not through the dilligence of the Commission or it's counsel. Wesley J.Liebeler was questioning Hudson. Not until eight months to the day after the assassination, but finally Hudson was being questioned. He volunteered this testimony: "Now, they have moved some of those signs. They have moved that R.L. Thornton Freeway sign and put up a Stemmons sign ".....It was this "Stemmons" sign over which Zapruder photographed.

"They have? They have moved it?" Liebeler asked, his cool nonchalance preserved in cood type.

"Yes, sir." replied Hudson.

"That might explain it", Liebeler then said. at the same time, without even seeming so to intend, preserving for both the Commission and history the certain knowledge that the two photographs about which he was interrogating Hudson, one taken at the time of the assassination and the other after it, were not in agreement. ....And here the accidental interest of the Commission in the destruction and multilation of the most essential evidence ended"..................

Page 130:

"When Hudson reaffirmed his testimony ( and the landscaping also was altered,with the destruction of essential photo-intelligence and analysis reference points in the backgrounds of the pictures)..., the complacent assistant counsel replied, ""That might explain it, because this picture here, No 18, was taken after the assassination and this one was taken at the time----No. 1..""

The "after" refers to the official reconstruction of the crime!.....Hudson's unanticipated blurting out of what is obvious from the most cursory examination of the photographs evidence marks the beginning and the end of the Commission's interest."


ALSO...THE LINK.....http://www.maryferre...84&relPageId=33


#8 Bernice Moore

Bernice Moore

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 452 posts

Posted 03 November 2014 - 10:58 AM

There may also be some further interesting information with this article by Michael Griffith, which was once on the web....he did some very good work his old site is still missed by some...thanks Mike...b

Extra Bullets & Missed Shots...

Michael T.Griffith

* Dallas policeman J. W. Foster, who was positioned on top of the triple underpass, saw a bullet strike the grass on the south side of Elm Street near a manhole cover, about 350 feet from the TSBD. He reported this to a superior officer and was instructed to guard the area (Shaw and Harris 72-75; Marrs 315).

Journalists and bystanders were kept at a distance from the spot where the bullet landed. An unidentified blond-haired man in a suit was photographed bending down, reaching out his left hand toward the dug-out point on the ground as if to pick up something, standing back up, apparently holding a small object in his hand, and then putting his hand in his pocket (Shaw and Harris 73-74). The hole made by the bullet was even photographed, and the picture appeared in the FORT WORTH STAR-TELEGRAM on 11/23/63.

In his WC testimony, Officer Foster denied a bullet was recovered from near the manhole cover, though he did not explain what the man in the suit picked up and put into his pocket. Foster did, however, say that a bullet "had hit the turf there at that location [near the manhole cover]."

Contemporary press accounts reported that a bullet was retrieved from the dug-out hole in the grass near the manhole cover. For example, when the FORT WORTH STAR-TELEGRAM published a photo of the hole in the grass, it included the following caption:

One of the rifle bullets fired by the murderer of President Kennedy lies in the grass across Elm Street. . . .

The next day the DALLAS TIMES HERALD, in referring to the hole in the grass, reported:

Dallas Police Lt. J. C. Day of the crime lab estimated the distance from the sixth-floor window . . . to the spot where one of the bullets was recovered at 100 yards.

Newsman Richard Dudman said the following about this miss and the recovered bullet in the 12/21/63 issue of the NEW REPUBLIC:

On the day the President was shot I happened to learn of a possible fifth [bullet]. A group of police officers were examining the area at the side of the street where the President was hit, and a police inspector told me they had just found another bullet in the grass.

Richard Trask, dismissing all evidence to the contrary, argues that the blond-haired man did not pick up a bullet from the hole in the grass (Trask 497-498, 542-543). Trask rests his case almost totally on the fact that the two of the photographers who took pictures of the event, Jim Murray and Bill Allen, later denied that a bullet was found. But neither Murray nor Allen could say positively that a bullet was NOT found; rather, they simply did not BELIEVE that a bullet had been found. Nor did either of them explain exactly what it was that the unidentified man picked up and put in his pocket. Trask concedes that the photographic record of the event does not refute the accounts of a bullet being recovered from the hole in the grass. He also acknowledges that in the photos the left hand of the unidentified man in the suit is "cupped" after he stands up, which would certainly suggest he was holding something.

Murray said he accepted "the later speculation" that the hole and accompanying mound in the grass were made by "brain matter from Kennedy's skull." Are we to believe that the unidentified man in the suit picked up brain matter and put it in his pocket? If the hole was made by brain matter, why did the Dallas police maintain a guard over the hole for the next several hours? Why did not a single police or FBI report mention the finding of brain matter at this location? And what about the credible contemporary accounts that a bullet was recovered from the hole in the grass? What's more, how would brain matter from Kennedy's skull have made it all the way to that location, much less to have arrived there with enough force to dig into the grass?

Allen said he didn't believe a bullet was found because neither Walthers, Foster, nor the blond-haired man specifically mentioned having just picked up a bullet after the man stood up. But this was surely a rather weak reason for concluding the man didn't pick up a bullet. Furthermore, as mentioned, when newsman Richard Dudman entered the area at the side of Elm Street where the President had been shot, a police inspector informed him that they had "found another bullet in the grass." In point of fact, the discovery of the bullet in the grass near the manhole cover was photographed and widely reported in the press. It was, however, quickly dismissed and then ignored by federal investigators because they were already committed to a scenario of only three shots fired by a lone gunman from the sixth floor of the Book Depository Building.

In the photos taken of this event, i.e., the finding and removal of the bullet, one can see Officer Foster and a civilian-clothed Deputy Sheriff Buddy Walthers standing over the spot where the bullet landed, along with the unidentified man in the suit. It has been suggested that the man was a federal agent of some kind. Given the man's dress and appearance, this is not an unreasonable suggestion. Dallas police chief Jesse Curry believed the man was an FBI agent, and some researchers have tentatively identified the man as FBI Agent Robert Barrett.

As mentioned, the identity of the blond-haired man is unknown. The recovered bullet was never entered into evidence, and its present whereabouts are not known.


Also; Bullet holes in the limousine and extra bullets in Dealey Plaza (Extended English Version) - YouTube

#9 Bernice Moore

Bernice Moore

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 452 posts

Posted 03 November 2014 - 11:23 AM

An old post from Jack....That relates to this subject imo...b

This is an interesting thread, but it is like looking at individual trees instead of the forest.
Here is how I have always looked at the wounds/shots:

1...back/neck wound(s) JFK
2...throat wound JFK
3...head wound(s) JFK
4...back chest wound JBC
5...front chest wound JBC
6...top wrist wound JBC
7...bottom wrist wound JBC
8...thigh wound JBC
9...dent in limo chrome
10...windshield bullet hole
11...bullet fragments in car
12...bullet found at hospital
13...bullet(s) found in grass
14...ricochet wound to Tague
15...smoke reported by eyewitnesses
16...multiple gunshots heard by ear witnesses
17...timing/spacing/direction of shots
18...alleged weapon falsity
19...incompetent alleged gunman

Looking at the forest instead of the trees gives a clearer understanding of the
lone nut gunman/single bullet theory posed by the official story.

Could a lone gunman in the sixth floor window do all of this? No.



....for some reason it is not taking hold... :unsure: I will keep trying till it does...thanks..b
  • David Sparks likes this

#10 Bernice Moore

Bernice Moore

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 452 posts

Posted 03 November 2014 - 11:30 AM

FROM ROBERT GRODEN, his HSCA-documented comments about the panels report, 1979"



There are nearly 2 dozen suspected firing points in Dealey Plaza that have been raised by Warren report critics through the years. Of these, several are worthy of close inspection for they may be candidates of probable sources of shots within the plaza. Some of the 2 dozen:

1. The TSBD easternmost sixth floor window facing south (the "Oswald" window).
2. The TSBD roof.
3. The TSBD seventh floor.
4. The TSBD fourth floor, third pair from the left (west) end.
5. The TSBD westernmost pair of sixth floor windows facing south.
6. The Dal-Tex building second floor.
7. The Dal-Tex building third floor.
8. The Dal-Tex building third floor. (any of the top three).
9. Dal-Tex roof.
10. The county records building roof.
11. The county records building second floor.
12. The stockade fence on top of the "grassy knoll".
13. The cement retaining wall in front of the stockade fence.
14. In front of the cement structure on the knoll at the end of the stockade fence (northeastern end).
15. The railroad overpass.
16. A storm drain at the north curb of Elm Street.
17. The "umbrella man".
18. The "south knoll" (the grassy knoll on the south side of the plaza on Commerce Street

#11 Bernice Moore

Bernice Moore

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 452 posts

Posted 03 November 2014 - 11:43 AM

Comments relating to Michael Griffin's article posted above...# 8

There were three apparently contradictory copies of the Police

Radio Logs...there were 362 typewritten pages of the three versions.

of the same radio logs...all represented as recording the communications

relating to the crimes, that day..Both police channels were recorded that

day..so even allowing for well used equipment there cannot be any

explanation for the WC to be presented with such, as it was incomplete

info.and the fact also remains that they did not comment on such nor explain,

There was no way that a investigation could be conducted without this

basic record...let alone a fair one.....this and much is in Harold Weisberg's ..

"Whitwash..the Report on the Warren Report"...There is a March version,

( All Radio Logs including the Sherriff's and the State Police's are Exhibit

705.in Vol 17.on pages 361-494........The Police section begins on page 390,

and takes up 104 pages..)......On April 8/64 a dispatcher Gerald Dalton

Henslee, appeared and testified, (6H325-7)..one of the briefest appearances.

Exhibits A and B were introduced into evidence (21H388-400). In a dozen

pages he prepared a version of what was incomplete in the 104 pages, and

it was accepted without question .His version was also prepared without names,

but then at some point the names were added by longhand..It misidentified

some and failed to identify others..Finally, on the date of Aug.11/64 in response

to a Commission request, the FBI supplied the final version, Exhibit 1974

(17H361-495) ..to this report there are 216 sheets. Yet it also was incomplete..

It was not received until the WC was almost finished..."A book could be written

about the logs alone." H.W


Michael T. Griffith
@All Rights Reserved
Revised on 3/4/98

With the discovery that the single-bullet theory (SBT) is very probably a physical impossibility, it is perhaps appropriate to review the evidence of extra bullets and misses in Dealey Plaza. Since it now seems clear that the SBT is impossible, we can be very confident that more than one gunman fired at President Kennedy. We can also be virtually certain that, contrary to the lone-gunman theory, more than three bullets were fired during the shooting. This being the case, researchers need to take another look at the accounts of extra bullets striking in Dealey Plaza during the shooting, and to reconsider the implications of the subsequent finding of additional bullets and weapons in the area.

Extra Bullets and Weapon

#12 Bernice Moore

Bernice Moore

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 452 posts

Posted 03 November 2014 - 11:48 AM


Testimony of Eye-Witnesses Who Thought Shots Came From Other Than TSBD

#13 Bernice Moore

Bernice Moore

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 452 posts

Posted 03 November 2014 - 11:54 AM

A Post from Rich on some of his thoughts .....on a possible windshield hit...

FWIW, I and some others believe the windshield shot came from the south knoll
area not to exclude the larger storm drain. that drain was closed and sealed
over years ago for no apparent reason.

Consider 2 things:

1. DC police captain assigned to the White House, Nick Principe,
saw the windshield at the White House garage the evening of
11/22. He described to me a hole big enough to pass a pencil
through, beveled in such a way to indicate that it was made by
a bullet from the outside inward.

2. Dr David Mantik who viewed the autopsy materials at the Archives
with permission from Burke Marshall has said he noted tiny bits
of glass on JFK's face which he suspects were from that hole in
the windshield.

Dean, your 6 shot scenario is IMO short by 2 to 4 shots -- IOW
a total of 8 to 10 shots, not all of which were audible.

« Last Edit: March 10, 2009, 02:18 PM by Rich DellaRosa

#14 Bernice Moore

Bernice Moore

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 452 posts

Posted 03 November 2014 - 12:08 PM

To complete the possible windshield shot information, for those possibly interested a post from a very much missed and great researcher.imo ...who never had the chance to finish his book...he had worked so very long and with such a difficulty....gone too soon, God Bless him Doug Weldon......b

Douglas Weldon,

The Kennedy Limousine: Dallas 1963, included in ""Murder in Dealey Plaza"" (2000)

""There are many people who witnessed a hole in the limousine windshield on 22 November 1963 at Parkland Hospital. I consider some of these people heroic because considerable pressure was placed upon them to retract their observations. Several of these people, with whom I have talked directly, remain hesitant to this day to discuss their observations and continue to fear for their personal safety.

Richard Dudman, a reporter for The St. Louis Post Dispatch, for example, wrote in an article entitled "Commentary of an Eyewitness" that appeared in The New Republic (21 December 1963): "A few of us noticed the hole in the windshield when the limousine was standing at the emergency entrance after the President had been carried inside. I could not approach close enough to see which side was the cup-shaped spot that indicates a bullet had pierced the glass from the opposite side."

Dudman told interviewers that a Secret Service agent shoved him and the other reporters away when he tried to examine the hole to determine the direction from which it had been fired. It is interesting to note that Dudman became aware of no less than five bullets that were fired in Dealey Plaza that day. Dudman was also critical of the lack of security on the top of the triple overpass, noting that the standing Secret Service orders were to keep the overpass clear. That order was violated that day. He also wrote that: "The south end of the viaduct is four short blocks from the office of The Dallas Morning News, where Jack Ruby was seen before and after the shooting... No one remembered for sure seeing Ruby between 12:15 and 12:45. The shooting was at 12:30." Mr. Dudman has declined to discuss the assassination with anyone for many years, while his earlier commentary bears mute witness to his present silence.

Former Dallas Police Officer H.R. Freeman, who rode in the motorcade, noted in a 1971 interview by Gil Toff of his observation of the limousine at Parkland Hospital immediately after the shooting, "I was right beside it. I could have touched it. It was a bullet hole. You could tell what it was." And he was not the only police officer - a type of witness usually prized for his accurate and reliable observations - who saw similar damage to the glass. Dallas Police Officer Stavis Ellis, who was in charge of the motorcade escort through Dallas, remarked, in later interviews to reporters and on radio programs, "You could put a pencil through it." Over extensive interviews with this author, Mr. Ellis was unequivocal about observing the hole. His recollection was that the hole was lower in the windshield, but he is absolutely certain of its existence. He did describe the hole as being on the driver's side of the rearview mirror, which is consistent with other observations and the photographic evidence. He recalls actually placing a pencil in the hole. He recounted that there were numerous people and police officers at Parkland Hospital who viewed the hole. He vividly remembers that while he was observing the hole a Secret Service agent came up to him and tried to persuade him that he was seeing a "fragment" and not a hole.""


In the WC testimony of SS agent Roy Kellerman it is clear that the damaged windshield had been switched, at least twice...
between the assassination and when a windshield was shown at the WC hearing for Kellerman to examine...

Kellerman did believe there was a conspiracy, as in his testimony he states there had to be more than three shots...

Mr. KELLERMAN. I am going to say that I have, from the firecracker report and the two other shots that I know, those were three shots. But, Mr. Specter, if President Kennedy had from all reports four wounds, Governor Connally three, there have got to be more than three shots, gentlemen.
Senator COOPER. What is that answer? What did he say?
Mr. SPECTER. Will you repeat that, Mr. Kellerman?
Mr. KELLERMAN. President Kennedy had four wounds, two in the head and shoulder and the neck. Governor Connally, from our reports, had three. There have got to be more than three shots.
Representative FORD. Is that why you have described--
Mr. KELLERMAN. The flurry.
Representative FORD. The noise as a flurry?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That is right, sir.

But check on Specter here, as he gets Kellerman to admit that he didn’t actually recall hearing more than three shots.

Mr. SPECTER. Did you have occasion to feel the outside of the windshield?
Mr. KELLERMAN. I did on that day; yes, sir. (“That day” refers to Nov. 27, in the White House garage, the first time Kellerman noted the damage.)
Mr. SPECTER. What did you feel, if anything?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Not a thing; it was real smooth.
Mr. SPECTER. Did you have occasion to feel the inside of the windshield?
Mr. SPECTER. How did that feel to you?
Mr. KELLERMAN. My comparison was that the broken glass, broken windshield, there was enough little roughness in there from the cracks and split that I was positive, or it was my belief, that whatever hit it came into the inside of the car......

The windshield with no hole that Kellerman states he saw in the White House garage and that he described to the WC was not and could not have been, the original windshield, but that it had been replaced..

By a windshield and that it had been damaged by someone hitting it with something on the inside, thereby making no hole and leaving the outside smooth.

After it had been admitted into evidence:

Mr. SPECTER. Mr. Kellerman. I would like for you at this time to actually touch the outside (of the windshield) and tell me, first of all, if it is the same or if it differs in any way from the sense of feel which you noted when you touched it on or about November 27?
Mr. KELLERMAN. As I touch the outside on the impact, it would be the same as I noticed on the 27th of November.
Mr. SPECTER. What do you notice, if anything?
Mr. KELLERMAN. It is a smooth surface without any--
Mr. SPECTER. Without any--finish your answer.
Mr. KELLERMAN. On the inside.
Mr. SPECTER. No; before. It is a smooth surface without any what?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Without any crack lines.
Mr. SPECTER. On the outside?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That can be felt.
Mr. SPECTER. On the outside?
Mr. KELLERMAN. That is right; on the outside of the windshield.

What Specter in what follows.

Mr. SPECTER. Feel the inside and tell us, first of all, whether it is the same or different from the way you touched it on November 27?
Mr. KELLERMAN. On November 27, when I felt the inside of this impact area, I was convinced that I could - that I felt an opening in one of these lines, which was indicative to me that the blow was struck from the inside of the car on this windshield.
Mr. SPECTER. Does it feel the same to you today as it did on or about November 27?
Mr. KELLERMAN. As a matter of fact, it feels rather smooth today.
Mr. SPECTER. It feels somewhat differently today than it felt before?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes; it does.

Kellerman must have known then that the windshield had been switched.

Now this apparently was the second switch ( or more but two at least ) that had to have been made.
They got rid of the hole with the firts switch, why the second, so that both sides are smooth.....I have no idea..???


This was one of the replies that Doug Weldon made to Pamela McElwain-Brown , addressed to Dr.Jim Fetzer...and posted..

1. It is written that "A researcher named Doug Weldon, under the mentoring of Dr. James Fetzer, conducted an interview with a a man he describes as a "Ford Man" in 1993.

Response: I am not certain what is meant by the statement that I conducted an interview under your "mentoring." The interview was conducted several years before I met you. Though I have always had the highest respect for you I have never considered you to be my "mentor." We now know that the identity of the "Ford Man" has beeen revealed world-wide as "George Whitaker."

2. "However, this man and others heard stories about Vaughn Ferguson's experiences with 100x and interpolated them into their own."

Response: This is very interesting. For anyone interested I discuss the Ferguson memorandum in detail in MIDP. I believe that the Ferguson memo was written as an effort to provide a cover story to what really happened to the limo after the assassination. I do so most of all because Ferguson's account does not correlate with any account ever published. I did find one person who knew Feguson well. That was Willard Hess, the owner of Hess and Eisenhardt, who built and rebuilt the limousine. Hess smiled and referred to him as "Fergie." All I will state about that now is that Ferguson was an individual that would cooperate with the deception Furthermore, this is quite an off the wall statement, without any factual basis. The first question I would have is who are these "others." I conducted the Whitaker interview in 1993, years before the Ferguson memo was "discovered." I cannot think of any link between Whitaker and Ferguson and their accounts have nothing to do with each other. Why would Whitaker even want to insert himself into Ferguson's account anyway? Whitaker told his family the story immediately in November of 1963. He never shared the story with anyone outside the family until I spoke with him in August of 1993. He was very frightened by what he knew and I promised not to reveal the story during his lifetime. Therefore, not only did he not seek attention, he did everything he could do to avoid it. There was never any publicity or monetary compensation. For those interested, I would again allude to my chapter in MIDP. I would like to see any iota of proof that Whitaker or any "others." heard about Ferguson's experiences. Unsubstantiated supposition is meaningless. It was alleged and insinuated for a couple of years that the "Ford man" was not bonafide and the essay on a website still ignores the fact that he has been identified as George Whitaker and any researcher is welcome to verify his employment with the Ford Motor Company.

3. It is stated that the "B' Building had NO facilities for automobile repair. "The Rouge Complex B buikding would NOT have been a place that the 100x would have been taken, were it to come to Ford. The appropriate place would have been the Experimental Garage at the Proving Grounds..."

Response: The first statement is in error. In 1963 and before there was a small repair garage in the B building. Sometimes executives would take their vehicles there on weekends and they would be worked on even by off-duty union workers. In addition the B Building was in very close proximity to the glass facility that Whitaker described. I do not believe that there was a designated building that it was required for a vehicle to be brought to to cover up the assassination of the president. The limo may well have been in the Experimental Garage at a later time or could have been there also on 11/25/1963 but Whitaker's account stated it was in the B building. Mr. Whitaker worked for Ford for many years. If he wanted to fabricate anything or place himself in the story he would have been aware of the experimental garage and used that as part of his "story." He was unequivocal that it was the B building.

4. The essay later states that "...this lone mystery witness was actually a union employee..."

Response: It is disturbing to see George Whitaker continue to be referred to as a mystery witness. In addition, he was not a union employee nor has it ever been stated that he was such. This is a misrepresentation . He was a managerial employee that was not subject to any of the confines of being a union employee. (period) Again, I encourage anyone with any question about this statement read MIDP.

5. The essay also asks: Are we being distracted to think the Ford Motor Company is responsible for what happened to 100x after the assassination leaving the Secret Service blameless.

Response: Jim, I am incredulous in reading the statement. My chapter in MIDP is one of the most powerful indictments of the Secret Service's role in the assassination ever published. The information shows how the coverup could be facilitated because of the close relationship between the Secret Service and the Ford Motor Company at that time. Anyone can read the chapter and reach their own conclusions.

At one time the author of the essay argued over and over that the account at the Ford Company was impossible because November 25 was a day of mourning and noone would have been at the Ford plant. It is true that many businesses throughout the land were closed all day on November 25, 1963. The Ford Motor Company, for whatever reason, was not. Ford, the head of the company at that time, did despise Kennedy. Interestingly, the hours of the Ford Motor Company, on that day provided a perfect opportunity to provide for the account of Mr. Whitaker.

6. The writer of the essay states in the forum "I was discussing a misunderstanding by virtually all of those who claim to have seen a hole" in the windshield of 100x after the assassination that they for some reason seemed to believe the windshield was bulletproof."

Response: This is the most bizarre statement of all. I am not aware of anyone, and certainly not the people that I described seeing a hole in the windshield who thought the windshield was bulletproof. Noone that I interviewed ever claimed that the windshield was bulletproof. In fact, it would have been a contradiction. How could anyone see a through and through hole if the windshield was "bullet-proof?" The windshield was laminated, which was uncommon in 1963. I do acknowledge that there are questions that I have also that may never be answered. Why did those covering up the hole go through the process that was done with the windshield according to Whitaker. I do know that the Lincoln Continental was a fairly new vehicle and rather expensive for the time. There were not many thousands of them sold. I am doubtful that windshields were as easily replaceable as they are now. I am sure that they did not have the glass repair facilities that are so common everywhere now. I am also doubtful that Ford sales facilities would have stocked replacement windshields because it was a new car and windshield breakage was rather uncommon. Even today sales facilities do not commonly have spare windshields in storage. There has also been some criticism that the bullet hole was so "clean" without anyone accounting for fragmentation. Please understand that I am merely the historian of these accounts, not the creator. I did take a different approach however. I did not take the official records as "gospel." I have talked with as many people as I could that had information. I was fortunate in that I reached many of them before their passing. The people I spoke with, including Dr. Evalea Glanges (within weeks of her passing), Sgt. Stavis Ellis, Whitaker, and Officer Nick Prencipe all described the hole as clean and appeared about the diameter of a pencil. Everyone of these people, including the police officers, described this "clean: hole" as a bullet hole. Furthermore, the written account of Secret Service agent Charles Taylor, Jr., also appears to corroborate these observations. I would also note that the HSCA struggled with what happened to the limousine after the assassination and found discrepancies in Ferguson's account.

I encourage everyone to read my chapter in MIDP. I have accumulated much new information since the publication of MIDP and I am hopeful that it may all be organized to show that our nation has lived a lie about what happened on November 22, 1963. At this point, I believe it is a debt I owe to all these wonderful people I got to know (and the many that passed on) who I owe such gratitude that they were willing to share their trust in me in telling their accounts and each of them also wanting to know what exactly happened with that windshield and limousine after November 22, 1963.


Doug Weldon


Their last posts on the windshield hit as far as I know right now...sheesh..hope ALL THIS IS OF SOME INTEREST TO SOME NEWBIES AND PERHAPS A REVIEW TO OTHERS...thanks b

Doug Weldon is an outstanding researcher and a longtime
forum member. He is a very busy person. I would rather
he address the issue here, but failing that I will try and fill
in the blanks.

Nick Principe passed away a few years ago. Nick was an
amiable guy who was a DC police chief assigned to the
White House. Nick drove the lead car in the JFK funeral
procession on 11/25/63.

Nick had his picture taken with every President from FDR
onward until his retirement. Nick knew all the SS men on the
Presedential Protection detail. On the evening of the
assassination, while he was examining the limo, Greer and
Kellerman told him "they were shooting at us from all
directions Nick."

Nick confirmed to us in no uncertain terms that there was
a TNT hole in the limo windshield, not just a nick or a
crack. Although Nick posted here on the forum, I also
had a lengthy email exchange with him up until just a
few days before his death. I believe that Doug likewise
enjoyed an email correspondence with Nick.



Bernice asked me to reply. I am not sure what I might answer. I have many e-mails and talked with Nick Prencipe on the phone many times and have a number of recorded conversations. and e-mails Though Nick would elaborate much more, this is from one of his e-mails to me:
I am quite aware that Bill Greer was at Bethesda that night. But there
> came a time when he arrived on west executive ave. between the Executive
> office and the west wing of the W.H.
> This is where I was, most of the evening, it was a temporary command
> poat.
> I went to greet Bill and this is when he stated that they sure had
> "missed You Guys" today.
> When I conversed with him a bit more, he related that "bullets were
> coming from everywhere--one came thru the winshield and almost got me".
> Based on this and my Police curiosity, I went to the W>H> garage, where I
> verified what he had related.
> Nick

The man who worked at Ford was George Whitaker. I am trying to work very aggressively on my book. The volume of material that I am trying to organize has been more than a monumental task. Bernice and other people on this forum have been extremely helpful to me. I have the utmost respect for Jack White and David Mantik. I can only say beyond any reasonable doubt that a bullet entered the limousine through the front of the windshield with the "likely" result that it caused the entry wound to Kennedy's throat. Whether that wound was a result of the bullet or possibly a glass shard is still open to me. I have seen the possibility of damage to the back of the seat (I believe it might have been Raymond Marcus) of Kennedy. My approach to my book has been that which was the original intent of Lifton in writing "Best Evidence", that is to examine the evidence I have found in the context of my journey in discovering facts and evidence and intertwined with some historical background. I began that journey in 1978. I intend to also offer some opinions on certain matters. I profess to being an expert "on" my own opinion, not "in" my own opinion. The book will hopefully offer a great deal of never before revealed information but will also may be more readable to the less topic educated reader. The difficulty will likely be finding a publisher but the reason for my book is not for me, but as a debt I sincerely feel to people like Nick Prencipe, Stavis Ellis, George Whitaker, Evalea Glanges, Willard Hess, and many others who trusted me enough to share their accounts, with some being in literal fear for their lives. My desire has always been to find truth for myself and I am satisfied with the evidence I have been able to put together. If anyone on this forum has a copy of the televised trial in England involving Bugliousi and Gerry Spence I would be most interested in how I could purchase a copy. There is a portion that is useful for me. Debra Conway has been very helpful but I have not yet been able to secure a video copy. If I can answer any specific questions I would be happy to do my best. As Rich noted, I occasionally drop in on the forum but Rich, Bernice, or others can alert me. Finally, I came across this quote from Jim Garrison from his 1967 Playboy interview. It seems so appropriate in light of the state of our current administration: "Huey Long once said,'Fascism will come to America in the name of anti-fascism.' I'm afraid, based on my own experience, that fascism will come to America in the name of national security."

Doug Weldon

#15 Bernice Moore

Bernice Moore

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 452 posts

Posted 03 November 2014 - 12:52 PM

ok I really thought above was it, but I am trying not to leave any holes in the passed along information...that's my excuse and I am trying to hang onto it.. :rolleyes:.thanks for your time and patience best b..


This I believe may be what some cannot find.....A hole is a hole....
It does read as that he saw it...

Pass along as you see fit.....

This is all that is available on SSA Taylor....that I have .....his statement is not....so far..only the
Church report of what he said, and yada...which may be or not exactly as he described
the hole is a hole.....and I doubt it is..imo.....
..and which they dismissed, of course..

Church Com..SS Taylor..windshield


Best B.. 8-)

Title: Re: Bullet Hits within Dealey & Limo
Post by: Bernice Moore on April 18, 2009, 09:38 PM

I have been in touch with Doug Weldon ......

He has sent this email, his reply to one and all....

Bold mine...


Thank you for forwarding this. Particularly interesting is the Church committee report on Taylor. I believe he would have said "pen" not "pin." and I think this is deliberate distortion of the transcription. I believe this tactic of showing him the windshield again without a hole is a tactic of intimidation. They did the same thing to Richard Dudman and even flew him to Washington to show him that he was mistaken about seeing a hole. He wrote another article saying there was no hole but he had clearly been intimidated. I spoke with him a few years ago and he remains absolutely terrified and will not discuss the matter.

As for Taylor not seeing the windshield they fail to mention that he was in the passenger seat of the limo after it arrived in Washington D.C. while it was driven to the Secret Service Garage. He had a chance to see the windshield that entire time in addition to seeing it at the Garage. His report is clear and signed by him and Harry Geiglein. I am curious what the motivation of Josiah and others is.

The facts are the facts. There is no ambiquity about it being a through and through hole.. Taylor and Geiglen described exactly what Ellis, Freedman, Glanges, Dudman and others saw in Dallas and Whitaker and Prencipe did afterwards. They are all consistent and except for Taylor and Dudman and the other person from the St.Louis Dispatch (whose name escapes me at the moment) no one else know each other. I believe Michael Paine's testimony also indicates that there was talk in Dallas of a shot through the windshield. There is so much more that my book will show.

The most aware person in this exchange is Lifton and I cannot venture to guess why this is so threatening to some of these researchers unless there is an ulterior motive other than finding truth. I take this very seriously as some of these people I spoke with while they were in their 80's and 90's were literally afraid for their lives and the lives of their families. This includes others whose names are not listed above. This is an astonishing story that has the potential to change the whole perspective of the assassination. There appears to me an effort akin to those in the Bush presidency trying to rewrite the facts of what occurred during the Bush administration.I take this matter very seriously and with my background as an attorney for over 30 years and former assistant prosecuting attorney I have been very careful in evaluating the evidence. This is nothing about me. It is about the truth. I am not going to waste my time on posting to try to persuade those with an obvious agenda but you are welcome and I encourage you to post this as my response.

As always, My best,

Doug Weldon

""I believe Michael Paine's testimony also indicates that there was talk in Dallas of a shot through the windshield. ""

Mr. PAINE - Yes. But then I realized with subsequent people calling from all over the country, somebody had said it is only a single-shot rifle, and I recognize one little fact like that could alter my thinking entirely. Somebody else said there was a shot through the windshield of the car. We went down to the place and looked around, and he thought that--he had a theory that the man had been shot from a manhole in the street, so I recognized that my views could change with evidence.


B.... 8-)

Title: Re: Bullet Hits within Dealey & Limo
Post by: Bernice Moore on April 18, 2009, 10:43 PM


Abraham Bolden told the author: ( Vincent Palamara ) "I heard about that [hole in windshield] when I was in the Secret Service...the limousine was parked on the South Lawn of the White House...they did change the windshield".


B...... 8

#16 Bernice Moore

Bernice Moore

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 452 posts

Posted 03 November 2014 - 01:29 PM

Chapter 7b: More Pieces in the Plaza - www2



#17 David Healy

David Healy


  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 29 posts

Posted 07 November 2014 - 03:53 PM

excellent material (as always), B!


#18 Bernice Moore

Bernice Moore

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 452 posts

Posted 07 November 2014 - 09:45 PM

Hey Guy; where you been ?? It has been quite some time since I have seen you get into the forums, not neglecting to mention that I also took some time off, other things that needed doing, good to see you, hang around...take care best b.now back to the research subjects..

dated info but still very informative, especially for newbies or for reviews..thanks..


#19 Bernice Moore

Bernice Moore

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 452 posts

Posted 07 November 2014 - 10:05 PM

The mind set site has been bought up and seeing I cannot read oriental I assume, this information has disappeared as so very much has other than Deanie's old web site, some info is still available..this is a very long informative accumulated article well worth a read for any interested, I think it could have been meant as part of a book that Vince had been working on....I'm sure it is all within his latest, but as it is not on hand, I cannot verify that, but he does include all and whatever updated he can within his studies, regularly.....I will try to post in one post, if too much Greg then move it or whatever......thanks b..

Anatomy of a Threat..

Boring's Interesting ARRB Interview
By Vince Palamara
With a few notable, albeit largely overlooked exceptions1, Floyd Boring
was a relatively new name to the research community when this author wrote a
detailed article about this former #2 Assistant-Special-Agent-In-Charge
(ASAIC) of the White House Detail (WHD) entitled "Boring Is Interesting" in
the May 1995 "Fourth Decade (based off the author's 9/22/93 & 3/4/94
In October 1995, this author gave a presentation at the 2nd annual
Coalition on Political Assassinations conference and wrote a follow-up article
entitled "More Boring Details" which appeared in the Nov. 1995 "Fourth
Decade". However, it was from the author's COPA appearance that the name of
Floyd Boring perked the attention of Tom Samoluk of the Assassination Records
Review Board (ARRB)---Samoluk contacted the author, I donated all of my audio
tapes and correspondence from all of my Secret Service/ related interviews,
and the rest is history.3
Nevertheless, there is a twist: unbeknownst to me until the publication
of a recent book4, I had no idea that the ARRB actually followed through with
one of my suggestions (although they had followed up on two others5) and
interviewed Mr. Boring...but they did. On September 18, 1996, a mere 2 days
after I received the Deed of Gift from the National Archives regarding my
donations, Dr. Joan Zimmerman and Doug Horne of the ARRB interviewed Mr.
Boring at his home in Maryland. The interview was even audiotaped with Mr.
Boring's consent. The ARRB interview of Floyd Boring is in the ARRB's medical
documents and deposiions box released in July of 1998. It is MD 259. Actually, it�s a
summary of the interview not a transcript.
"Who? Me? Why?"
The interview begins with Boring exclaiming "I didn't have anything to do
with it, and I don't know anything." Let's replay that again: "I didn't have
anything to do with it"---what, the assassination or the Texas trip?
"I don't know anything"---he sure knew enough about the Texas trip to
tell Chief James Rowley via a written report 6 months after the assassination6
AND in his 1976 JFK Library Oral History, as well as his two talks with me!
Boring also claimed that "he had never spoken with anyone at all in the Secret
Service about any aspect of the Kennedy assassination", another statement that
is very hard to swallow, especially seeing that Boring founded the Retired
Secret Service Agent's Association in 1969.7
Pulling the strings in D.C.
In any event, Horne writes "Contrary to his disclaimer, the interview
proved to be worthwhile and interesting in a number of respects." Boring
confirmed that he had never been interviewed by the WC, the HSCA, or any other
government body in regard to the JFK assassination.8 Boring claimed that he
was enjoying a day off at his home on 11/22/63 when he heard the news of the
assassination on the radio.9
This ARRB interview provides startling new information, and that is that
Floyd Boring confirms that he was in charge of planning the Texas trip. It
also sheds light on the totality of Boring�s relationship with Texas trip
planning, especially questionable security matters.
First, author Jim Bishop revealed this fact in the 1960's in his book "The Day
Kennedy Was Shot":
p. 558 [1992 edition] "...(LBJ) called Secret Service Chief James Rowley.
�Rufe did a brave thing today,� he said. �He jumped on me and kept me down. I
want you to do whatever you can, the best that can be done, for that boy." He
hung up (this was 11/22/63). It had not occurred to him that Rowley, too, was
lonely. If there was any blame, any official laxness, it didn't matter that
(Emphasis added)
And, to the JFK Library in the 1970's:
"Part of my job at the White House during the entire President Kennedy
administration was to be in charge of the advance work."
To the Truman Library in the 1980's:
"I was on all the advance work out of there. I was assigned all the
advance work, sort of an administrator... I was second in charge [behind
Special Agent in Charge Jerry Behn]."
Finally, fellow former agent Sam Kinney (the driver of the follow-up car on
In regard to SAIC Gerald A. "Jerry" Behn's absence from the Texas trip,
leaving ASAIC (#2) Floyd M. Boring to be the agent in charge of the Texas
trip, Kinney said: "I'll tell you how that happened. We got, as agents,
federal employees, 30 days a year annual leave, but they couldn't let us
off...there was only " x " amount of agents back then in the whole country.
Jerry Behn probably worked three years without annual leave so he decided to
take some time off...Roy Kellerman was third in charge-he's qualified. Floyd
Boring stayed home- he could still handle what ever came about from his
house; there [was] very little correspondence between the agents in Dallas
because Win Lawson had the advance."
Back to the ARRB interview: "Boring independently recalled that he was
the person who assigned Winston Lawson as the S.S. advance agent for the
Dallas leg of the Texas trip10, but could not recall why or how "Win" Lawson
was given that assignment." So much for Boring's 'disclaimer' "I didn't have
anything to do with it, and I don't know anything."
A curious limousine inspection
Boring initially claimed that his activities on 11/22/63 "were limited to
going directly from his home to Andrews AFB to meet the (new)
President11---and that he escorted President Johnson on his helicopter from
Andrews to the White House, after which he went directly home"; the latter
part of this statement, that Boring went directly home, is NOT backed up by
the documentary record, nor by Boring's own admitted actions.
Horne wrote: "When asked who directed him to go to Andrews AFB, Mr.
Boring said that nobody asked him to go there---that he just did it on his
In about the middle of the interview, Mr. Boring remembered that he and
Mr. [Paul J.] Paterni had inspected the President's limousine and the Secret
Service follow-up car, but was unsure whether they had inspected them the
night President Johnson returned to Washington (11/22/63), or the next morning
(11/23/63)." Actually, Boring and Paterni inspected the limo from 10:10 p.m.
the night of 11/22/63 until 12:01 a.m., one minute into 11/23/63 (the FBI
inspected the limo afterwards, starting at 1:00 a.m.).12
Furthermore, "When asked who directed he and Paterni to search the
automobiles, he said that no one had; he said he thought it might be a good
idea and had suggested it himself to Paterni, and that they undertook this
search as independent action on their own initiative." Interestingly, they
also beat Chief Rowley and ASAIC Kellerman to the punch, as the record
indicates that they had also thought of the idea while at AAFB.13 (Just to be
clear, Rowley and Kellerman did not inspect the limousine at all.)
Continuing on: "After independently recalling that they had searched the
cars, Mr. Boring said that he had discovered a piece of skull bone with brain
attached14 in the rear of the follow-up car (the black Cadillac convertible
called the "Queen Mary"), in the footwell just in front of the back seat
bench. He said during follow-up questioning that the dimensions of this skull
bone-brain fragment were approximately 1" X 2". He said that he never picked
it up or touched it himself, but that he simply pointed it out to Mr. Paterni
(Mr. Paterni was Deputy Chief of the Secret Service)15 He said he did not
write a report about this, and he did not know whether Mr. Paterni had written
a report or not."16
What makes Boring's recollections of the limo inspection particularly
troublesome is the fact that he "made very clear during the [ARRB] interview
that this fragment was in the rear of the follow-up car, not in the rear seat
of the presidential limousine.
This would be the only known instance of anyone claiming to have found
JFK bone fragments in the Secret Service follow-up car.
Initially, ARRB staff members Zimmerman and Horne had misunderstood Mr.
Boring to mean that the bone-brain fragment was in the rear seat of the
President's limousine, and Mr. Boring took specific pains to correct their
misunderstanding during follow-on discussion of this matter.
However, Boring called Horne the next day to place a correction (and,
thus, a retraction) on the record: he now felt that the skull bone-and-brain
fragment he saw "must have been in the back seat of the President's limousine,
and not the follow-up car. He said that his stroke may perhaps have had
something to do with his error." (Boring had a stroke in the early 90's,
During his inspection of the limousine with Paterni Boring found bullet
fragments as well. These bullet fragments were turned over to Orrin Bartlett,
the FBI's liaison officer with the Secret Service (3H p. 435). Bartlet turned
them over to Robert Frazier in person in the FBI lab. These bullet fragments
became CE 567 and CE 569. (See - CD 80; RIF# 180-10001-10041; 2H p. 90
(Kellerman); 5 H p. 67(Frazier); 7 HSCA p. 389;)
Boring�s stroke may also explain why Boring now has NO recollection of
finding any bullet fragments at all in the limousine (only the skull
fragment), and also may explain why he could not remember, one way or the
other, the condition of the limousine's windshield and chrome strip.17
op-ed about his colleagues
The ARRB interview states, "When shown the HSCA summary of its interview
with Miami SAIC John Marshall, specifically Marshall's twice expressed opinion
that there may have been a Secret Service conspiracy18, Mr. Boring expressed
surprise at those sentiments and said he had never heard that opinion
expressed by SAIC Marshall, a personal friend of his from their previous
association as Pennsylvania State Troopers.
�When shown the HSCA interview summary with Miami field officer SA Ernest
Aragon, specifically Aragon's allegations of Secret Service security lapses
19, he said he would not agree with that statement, and expressed the opinion
that SA Aragon may not have known what he was talking about.
�Mr. Boring was asked to read and comment on several pages of the HSCA
6/1/77 interview transcript20 with former graduate student James Gouchenaur,
in which Gochenaur recounted a very long conversation he reportedly had with
SA Elmer Moore in 1970. Mr. Boring examined the portions of the transcript in
which Gouchenaur quoted Moore as saying that Kennedy was a traitor for giving
things away to the Russians; that it was a shame people had to die, but maybe
it was a good thing; that the Secret Service personnel had to go along with
the way the assassination was being investigated ("I did everything I was
told, we all did everything we were told, or we'd get our heads cut off"); and
that he felt remorse for the way he (Moore) had badgered Dr. Perry into
changing his testimony to the effect that there was not, after all, an
entrance wound in the front of the president's neck. Mr. Boring said that it
would be just like SA Moore to give such a lengthy interview, but that he
doubted very much whether agent Moore had really said those things."
In addition, "Mr. Boring was shown the HSCA interview of SA [George]
Hickey, and was asked to read the portion wherein Mr. Hickey stated that Mr.
Boring came down to the garage and told him statements were being collected in
the White House, and directed (or suggested) that he go and write down his
statement.21 His response to this was that he did not remember even seeing SA
Hickey in the White House garage, nor did he remember seeing SA Kinney, or any
other Secret Service agents, or FBI agents, during the automobile searches
[plural]. He did have some vague recollection of White House police being
Security Striping measure #1
Agents off the limo: a JFK order or an anecdote?
Evidence against Mr. Boring �not have anything to do with it�, meaning
his involvement in Texas trip planning include his participation, directly and
indirectly through subordinates personally selected by him of what can only be
called security stripping measures. The first of which involves removing
agents from the rear of the limousine.
"Mr. Boring was asked to read pages 136-137 of Clint Hill's Warren
Commission testimony [Vol. 2], in which Clint Hill recounted that Floyd Boring
had told him just days prior to the assassination that during the President's
Tampa trip on Monday, 11/18/63, JFK had requested that agents not ride on the
rear steps of the limousine, and that Boring had also so informed other agents
of the White House detail, and that as a result, agents in Dallas (except
Clint Hill, on brief occasions) did not ride on the rear steps of the
(Emphasis added).
I find this admission startling, especially because the one agent who
decided to ride on the rear of the limousine in Dallas anyway---and on at
least 4 different occasions--- was none other than CLINT HILL himself!
This also does not address what the agents were to do when the crowds
were heavier, or even what exactly constituted a "crowd", as AGENTS DID RIDE
(agents Donald J. Lawton, Andrew E. Berger, & Charles T. Zboril, to be
Furthermore, Clint Hill's written report (as well as his testimony) sure
conveys a more strict approach than one stemming from an alleged, kind
anecdote; in fact, Hill twice stated he DID NOT RECALL who the agent was who
told him, and the other agents, not to ride on the rear of the limousine:
"I, Special Agent Clinton J. Hill, never personally was requested by
President John F. Kennedy not to ride on the rear of the Presidential
WHOM I RECEIVED THIS INFORMATION. It was general knowledge on the White House
Detail, however, that President Kennedy has asked Special Agent in Charge
Gerald A. Behn, not to have Special Agents ride on the rear of the
Presidential Automobile [Behn denied to me that President Kennedy made such a
request. Films and photos from 1963 appear to confirm Behn�s story that JFK
Hill continues, "I was informed that on November 18, 1963, in Tampa,
Florida, President Kennedy had requested through Assistant Special Agent in
Charge Floyd M. Boring that Special Agents remove themselves from the rear of
So, what do we have exactly? Something allegedly happens on the Tampa
trip, or is attributed to the Tampa trip after the fact by Boring. Yet, no
one on the trip actually left the bumper or recalls being told to leave and
stay off the bumper per a presidential request. The Secret Service agents to
whom this order would apply to deny this happened. This story does exist
though, and spreads through word of mouth, by Boring to agents who were not
involved in the Tampa trip such as Clint Hill to whom it is stated as a new
policy to be implemented on the next trip, which would be Texas.
Well, who�s in this administrative office of the Secret Service�s White
House Detail? Boring. The �general knowledge� Hill speaks of would more
appropriately be coming from Boring, not Behn. Behn denied it outright.
Boring was on the Tampa trip from which this information is allegedly coming
Boring�s non-denial denial, that it was only an anecdote denoting the
kindness of JFK is refuted by Boring himself when Manchester pens the tale.
Floyd Boring categorically denied what William Manchester reports on pp.
37-38 of his book [1988 edition]: "Kennedy grew weary of seeing bodyguards
roosting behind him every time he turned around, and in Tampa on November 18
[1963], just four days before his death, he dryly asked Agent Floyd Boring to
'keep those Ivy League charlatans off the back of the car.' Boring wasn't
offended. There had been no animosity in the remark."
Boring told me "I never told him that".
As far as the merit of the quote, Boring told me: "No, no, no-that's not
true." When asked, point blank, if JFK had ever ordered the agents off the
rear of the limousine, including in Tampa on 11/18/63, Boring told me "Well,
that's not true. That's not true. He was a very nice man; he never interfered
with us at all."
In regard to Tampa, Floyd said "He actually- No, I told them...He didn't
tell them anything...He just- I looked at the back of the car and I seen these
fellahs (ZBoril and Lawton) were hanging on the limousine- I told them to
return to the (follow-up) car. He (JFK) was a very easy-going guy; he didn't
interfere with our actions at all".
Boring confirmed what he had previously told me on 9/22/93 and 3/4/94
when he wrote that "President Kennedy was a very congenial man knowing most
agents by their first name. He was very cooperative with the Secret Service,
and well liked and admired by all of us.[letter received 11/22/97]"
So, Boring would have you believe it was just routine, as agents would
sometimes hop back and forth from the rear of the limousine to the Secret
Service follow up car. However, again Boring does not really deny the story
as much as he puts a spin on it. All Boring said was he did not speak with
Manchester. The tenor and tone of the story are essentially the same. We
cannot check if Boring did speak with Manchester as Manchester�s materials are
withheld from the public.
So, while it is indeed being spread, as policy, Boring can say afterwards
it was only a harmless retelling of an anecdote. And he can deny it by saying
he never spoke with Manchester. However, Boring is the only one who admits to
any truth to the story, and the only one not to totally deny it. Remember,
Boring is admitting it came from him, and not JFK. Everyone else totally
denies it, it never came from JFK, not even as an anecdotal story.
Boring�s story, whether actual or not, whether anecdotal or not
somehow grows after the Tampa trip into policy. This verbal story is used as
policy, though never written down, for the preparation for the Texas trip,
something which had never occurred before.
Oddly, if this is new policy, it goes into practice only in Dallas.
Clint Hill does recall hearing it, as policy, though he can�t recall from whom
he heard it according to his written report. However, he named none other than Floyd Boring
as THE source during his Warren Commission testimony mentioned above" or words to
that effect. [It's important to note that Hill was twice coy about naming his source in his WRITTEN
statement, yet named the source---Boring---under oath to Arlen Specter
of the WC]. Hill does disobey it 4 times but that does not necessarily mean
the policy did not exist. He may have felt he should be obeying it as he does
not stay on the rear bumper for any appreciable lenght of time. And the other
agents do stay on the follow up car.
Interestingly, in viewing slow motion video footage of the Love Field
departure [WFAA/ABC TV video], one can see agent Henry J. Rybka [25H787]
attempt to get on the back of the limousine only to be recalled by none other
than Emory P. Roberts, who rises in his seat in the follow-up car and hand-
gestures Rybka to cease and desist. Giving Roberts the benefit of the doubt,
it a ppears that Borings' orders to not have any agents ride on the back of
the limousine were well taken.
After the assassination there are reports that JFK had previously made
such requests prior to the Tampa trip. Yet, photos from these trips prove
these statements to be false, as well as the lack of any record or document to
that effect.

The truth - JFK never ordered Secret Service agents off the limo
Gerald A. Behn, SAIC of WHD "I don't remember Kennedy ever saying that he
didn't want anybody on the back of his car. I think if you watch the newsreel
pictures and whatnot [sic] you'll find agents on there from time to time". As
just one of many examples, Behn cited the June 1963 trip to Berlin (There are
many others.)24;
Arthur L. Godfrey, ATSAIC of WHD: "That's a bunch of baloney; that's not
true. He never ordered us to do anything. He was a very nice
man...cooperative". Asked if whether Aide Ken O'Donnell did any similar
ordering, Godfrey said emphatically "he did not order anyone around". As just
one example, Godfrey was on the Italy trip and agents frequently rode on the
rear of the limousine- one of the agents was none other than Winston G. Lawson
25. In a letter dated 11/24/97, Godfrey stated the following: "All I can speak
for is myself. When I was working [with] President Kennedy he never ask[ed] me
to have my shift leave the limo when we [were] working it," thus confirming
what he had also told me telephonically on two prior occasions;
David F. Powers: " Unless they [the Secret Service] were 'running' along
beside the limo, the Secret Service rode in a car behind the President, so,
no, they never had to be told to 'get off' the limo."26
Samuel A. Kinney, WHD: "That is absolutely, positively false...no, no,
no, he had nothing to do with that (ordering agents off the rear of the
limo)...No, never-the agents say, 'O.K., men, fall back on your
posts'...President Kennedy was one of the easiest presidents to ever protect;
Harry S. Truman was a jewel just like John F. Kennedy was...99% of the agents
would agree...(JFK) was one of the best presidents ever to control-he trusted
every one of us".
In regard to the infamous quote from William Manchester, Kinney said,
"That is false. I talked to William Manchester; he called me on the book
[sic]...for the record of history that is false - Kennedy never ordered us to
do anything. I am aware of what is being said but that is false".
Finally, just to nail down this issue, I asked Kinney if an exception was
made on 11/22/63: "Not this particular time, no. Not in this case". Kinney
also told me that JFK had nothing to do with the limiting of motorcycles
during motorcades, and that Ken O'Donnell did not interfere with the agents,
"Nobody ordered anyone around"27;
Robert E. Lilley, WHD: "Oh, I'm sure he didn't. He was very cooperative
with us once he became President. He was extremely cooperative. Basically,
'whatever you guys want is the way it will be'."
Lilley also refuted the Manchester account, adding that on a trip with
JFK in Caracas, Venezuela, he and "Roy Kellerman rode on the back of the
limousine all the way to the Presidential palace" at speeds reaching "50 miles
per hour" (with the bubble-top on [which Lilley believed "might deflect a
Donald J. Lawton: When I told Lawton what fellow agent Kinney told me,
that JFK never ordered the agents off the rear of the limousine, he said "It's
the way Sam said, yes". (Meaning he agress with Kinney, it happened the way
Kinney said.)
Asked to explain how he dismounted the rear of the limousine in Tampa, he
said, " I didn't hear the President say it, no. The word was relayed to us-
you know, 'come back to the follow-up car'".
According to Lawton, JFK was "very personable...very warm".
Asked about the tragedy in Dallas, Lawton said, "everyone felt bad. It
was our job to protect the President. You still have regrets, remorse. Who
knows, IF THEY HAD LEFT GUYS ON THE BACK OF THE CAR...you can hindsight
yourself to death" (emphasis added).
And, from his letter to the author dated 11/22/97: "Since I am currently
employed by the Secret Service I do not believe it appropriate that I comment
on former or current protectees of the Service. If you spoke with Bob Lilley
as you stated then you can take whatever information he passed on to you as
Robert I. Bouck, SAIC of PRS: confirmed that having agents on the back of
the limousine depended on factors independent of any alleged presidential
Rufus W. Youngblood, ASAIC of LBJ Detail: Youngblood confirmed that
"there was not a standing order" from JFK to restrict agents from the back of
the limousine - the agents had "assigned posts and positions" on the back of
the President's car. On 2/8/94, Youngblood added: "President Kennedy wasn't a
hard ass...he never said anything like that. As a historian, he (Manchester)
flunked the course---don't read Manchester!31";
Abraham W. Bolden, Sr., WHD/ Chicago office: In reference to Kennedy's
alleged "requests", Mr. Bolden told the author that he "didn't hear anything
about that...I never believed that Kennedy said that"32;
John Norris, Uniformed Division of the Secret Service: Norris also joined
his colleagues in refuting the notion that JFK ordered the agents off the rear
of the limo33;
Maurice G. Martineau, SAIC of Chicago office: Martineau joined his
colleagues in refuting the Manchester story that JFK ordered the agents off
the rear of the car.34 Martineau said this to me in two telephonic interviews.
Cecil Stoughton, WH photographer: "I did see a lot of the activity
surrounding the various trips of the President, and in many cases I did see
the agents in question riding on the rear of the President's car. In fact, I
have ridden there a number of times myself during trips...I would jump on the
step on the rear of the [Lincoln] Continental until the next stop. I have made
photos while hanging on with one hand...in Tampa [11/18/63], for example. As
for the [alleged] edict of not riding there by order of the President- I can't
give you any proof of first hand knowledge."
Stoughton went on to write: "I am bothered by your interest in these
In a later letter, Stoughton merely corroborated his prior written
statements: "I would just jump on and off [the limo] quickly- no routine, and
Jackie had no further remarks to me."35;
It should be explained that according to Stoughton's book [see footnote
35], Jackie had told him to stay close to the limo in July 1963, and he did up
to and including the Tampa trip of 11/18/63 AND the Houston, TX trip of
11/21/63 (there are photos that Stoughton made from the follow-up car that
day, as well). Then, for some unknown reason, Stoughton was relegated to a
position further away from JFK.
Martin E. Underwood, DNC advance man: The advance man confirmed to this
author that JFK did not restrict agents from riding on the Presidential
limousine (He could not believe that Mr. Behn wrote his report with JFK's
alleged "desires", citing Clint Hill's actions on 11/22/63 as just one of
"many times" that agents were posted on the back of the JFK limousine)36;
Press Secretary Pierre Salinger: JFK had a good relationship with the
Secret Service and, more importantly, did NOT argue with their security
Jerry D. Kivett, WHD: "[JFK] was beloved by those agents on the detail
and I never heard anyone say that he was difficult to protect."38;
June Kellerman, the widow of Roy H. Kellerman, ASAIC WHD: "Roy did not
say that JFK was difficult to protect."39;
Jean Brownell Behn, widow of the late Gerald A. Behn, SAIC WHD (see
above): Jerry did not like William Manchester's book "The Death of a
President" and confirmed that she also did not believe that JFK had ever
conveyed to Jerry the idea of having the agents not ride on the rear of the
limousine. In a follow-up letter she stated that "The only thing I can tell
you is that Jerry always said 'Don't believe anything you hear and only half
of what you read'40;
Chief James J. Rowley: "No President will tell the Secret Service what
they can or cannot do."41
Charles T. Zboril, WHD, Lawton's partner on the rear of the limo in
Tampa on 11/18/63 was the only agent I spoke to who did not give me a straight
answer, one way or the other, : "Well, Don Lawton and I are just sub-notes
[sic] because somebody else testified in behalf of us about what happened in
Tampa"- this was Clint Hill, testifying to Arlen Specter about why agents were
not on the rear of the car during the assassination.
When I asked him if it was true that JFK had really ordered the agents
off the limousine four days before Dallas, which I already knew not to be
true, Zboril got emotional: "WHERE DID YOU READ THAT? I...If-if you read it in
the Warren Report, that's what happened...DO YOU WANT ME COMMENTING
OFFICIALLY? I'm speaking to someone I don't know... I gave you more than I
would give someone else". Zboril then gave me his address and requested that I
send him anything on this matter and he promised to respond to me...he never
Jim Bishop sums up the situation best: "no one wanted to weigh the
REAR BUMPER GOING DOWN ELM STREET, it would have been difficult to hit
President Kennedy (emphasis added)42"

FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover to President Lyndon B. Johnson, 1:40 p.m.,
11/29/63: "You see, there was no Secret Service man standing on the back of
the car. Usually the presidential car in the past has had steps on the back,
next to the bumpers, and there's usually been one [agent] on either side
standing on these steps...[ellipsis in text]...Whether the President asked
that that not be done, we don't know."43
In a letter dated 4/3/64, WC general counsel J. Lee Rankin had written to
Secret Service Chief James J. Rowley "requesting further information
concerning expressions by President Kennedy regarding the placement of Secret
Service agents on or near the car during the motorcade", obviously meaning THE
motorcade of 11/22/63.44 Since JFK was conveniently dead and there was nothing
in the record to indicate that Kennedy had said anything that morning, Rowley
mailed back five reports on 4/22/64 to try to "satisfy" the WC, who obviously
were not satisfied by the testimonies of Greer, Kellerman, Hill, or Youngblood
on March 9, 1964.45
These five reports- by agents Boring[dated 4/8/64]46, Roberts [dated
4/10/64]47, Ready [dated 4/11/64]48, Behn [dated 4/16/64]49 and Hill
[undated]50- make much of JFK's alleged comments to agent Boring on 11/18/63
about getting the agents who were riding on the rear of the limo the hell off
of there, as well as "general common knowledge" that this had happened before,
even before the Tampa motorcade.
However, as I uncovered during the interviews for my manuscript, and
which has been demonstrated so far, this was totally fabricated.51 Each and
every one of these reports is a lie, or used for a lie.
Boring already dodgey on Tampa, flat out lies about JFK's trip to Italy.
The ARRB's Doug Horne writes: "Mr. Boring remembered preparing his written
statement, and verified that the copy shown to him was indeed his statement.
"Although primarily about the 11/18/63 Tampa trip, Boring also mentions
another time---the July 1963 Italy trip---where JFK had also made an alleged
request to not have the agents ride on the rear of the limousine.�
However, as with the Tampa trip, agents DID ride on the rear of the
limousine, as recently discovered film from the JFK Library, obtained through
my efforts, reveals ("JFK's Trip to Italy, 7/2/63", courtesy of Jim Cedrone/
JFK Library. This footage was shown at COPA 1996).
Also, compare Boring�s statement here with Arthur L. Godfrey, ATSAIC of
WHD statements on the Italy trip above.
Roberts' report is merely a confirmation of hearing BORING over the radio
in the Tampa motorcade telling the agents to get off the rear of the
limousine-it says nothing of JFK's alleged "desires".
Now deceased, Roberts was the commander of the 7 other agents who rode in
the follow-up car with him in Dallas. Roberts had, according to the driver of
the follow-up car, Samuel A. Kinney, ORDERED THE AGENTS NOT TO MOVE AFTER THE
FIRST SHOT SOUNDED (author's interviews with Sam Kinney, 3/5/94 and 4/15/94)!
Roberts had recognized the first shot as a RIFLE blast (18H p.734-735), yet
recalled agent John D. "Jack" Ready who had begun to move in JFK's direction.
Ready was the agent who was ASSIGNED to JFK's side of the limousine (as Clint
Hill was assigned to Jackie's side[18H749-750]).
Roberts came to Ready's rescue in another report: "SA Ready would have
done the same thing (as Agent Hill did) if motorcycle was not at President's
corner of car"(!) [18 H 738]---- Strange, but this posed no problem at all for
Agent Don Lawton on November 18, 1963, in Tampa (but unfortunately, like
Rybka, Lawton was left at Love Field and was not in the motorcade detail).
This begs the question, were Rybka and Lawton the two agents who were
supposed to have rode the rear of the limousine?
Ready mentions the 11/18/63 Florida trip in his report but HE WASN'T EVEN
THERE! �Although I was not in Tampa, Florida, Monday, November 18, 1963, it
was known to me that President Kennedy requested, through Assistant Special
Agent in Charge Floyd M. Boring, that two agents be removed from the rear
steps of the presidential vehicle during a motorcade in that city.� (emphasis
There is reason to believe Behn did not even write his report as it has a
STAMPED (stamp pad) signature (similar to other reports contained in the WC
volumes and elsewhere; not hand-written). When one considers the fact that a
subordinate agent from the Miami office, SA Robert Jamison, signed a vital
Secret Service document as if he were the SAIC (in this case,John Marshall),
the possibility that someone else merely stamped this type-written report with
Behn's stamp pad signature is certainly not above the realm of possibility.
(Behn's office was shared with ASAIC's Kellerman and Boring).
And Hill�s report is undated.
Behn�s, Boring�s, and Hill�s are not even on any Secret Service or
Treasury Dept. stationary, just blank sheets of paper.
All are supposedly evidence of JFK expressing his desire to keep Secret
Service agents off the limousine in Tampa and previous to Tampa.
Security Stripping Measure #2
Noisy motorcycles reduced and placed rearward for conversational purposes?
The ARRB interview of Boring goes on to say, "When asked whether the
Secret Service had any standard procedures regarding size and placement of
motorcycle escort for the President's limousine in motorcades, Boring said to
the ARRB that there was no standard protocol for this, since local resources
were different from site to site. He then stated that the Secret Service would
place motorcycles wherever the local authorities would want them, and that the
Secret Service would not try to tell local law enforcement authorities where
to place motorcycles around the limousine---he said that if the Secret Service
had tried to do such a thing, that the local authorities would not have
listened anyway. He said that in regard to matters like this, local
authorities wouldn't take orders from the Secret Service, but instead had to
be coaxed. He also stated that placing motorcycles alongside the limousine
would not have been a good idea, since they were so noisy that the President
would not have been able to have a conversation with the car's occupants."
Now, for the real story:
On November 20th, with no secret service men present, it was agreed that
eighteen motorcycles would be used, some positioned along side the limousine
(similar to the plan used in the prior Texas cities of San Antonio, Houston,
and Fort Worth).
There was another meeting on November 21, 1963 in which those plans were
Captain Perdue Lawrence of the Dallas Police testified to the Warren
Commission that 2 days before the assassination he met with Chief Lunday and
Chief Batchelor and discussed the motorcycple plans for the motorcade. �I was
told that there would be these lead motorcycle officers, and that we would
also have these other officers alongside the President's car and the Vice
President's car, and some of the others that would be in the motorcade, and
approximately how many officers would be needed for the escort, and at that
time I had prepared a list of 18 solo motorcycle officers, this included three
solo sergeants.
�I was also instructed that about this motorcade--that when it reached
Stemmons Expressway, Chief Batchelor told me that he wanted a solo motorcycle
officer in each traffic lane, each of the five traffic lanes waiting for the
motorcade, so that no vehicles, on Stemmons Expressway would pass the
motorcade at all and he wanted these solo motorcycle officers to pull away
from the escort and get up there on Stemmons Freeway and block the traffic,
and some of these officers, he stated, would pull past the Presidential car.�
Then on November 21, 1963, a change occurs. �This was the first time
that I had attended any security meeting at all in regards to this motorcade.
At approximately 5 p.m. I was told to report to the conference room on the
third floor, and when I arrived at the conference room the deputy chiefs were
in there, there were members of the Secret Service--Mr. Sorrels, Captain
Gannaway, Captain Souter of radio patrol, and Capt. Glen King, deputy chiefs,
assistant chiefs, and Chief Curry, and one gentleman, who I assume was in
charge of the security for the Secret Service. This was the first time I had
attended any conferences in regard to the security of this escort, and I
listened in on most of the discussion and I heard one of the Secret Service
men say that President Kennedy did not desire any motorcycle officer directly
on each side of him, between him and the crowd, but he would want the officers
to the rear. This conversation I overheard as Chief Batchelor was using a
blackboard showing how he planned to handle this--how plans had been made to
cover the escort.�52
Remember, according to Boring, �the Secret Service would not try to tell
local law enforcement authorities where to place motorcycles around the
Secret Service Agent David Grant, who would have known of Kennedy's
alleged "desires" via Boring (Grant was an advance man for the Florida and
Dallas trips), attended this meeting, along with fellow advance man Win Lawson
(who received his assignment from Boring). 53
DPD Captain Perdue Lawrence testified that the Secret Service told them
to stay to the rear on the evening of 11/21/63.54
DPD Asst. Chief Charles Batchelor wrote in his report that "[DPD Captain
Perdue]Lawrence then said there would be four (4) motorcycles on either side
of the motorcade immediately to the rear of the President's vehicle [as borne
out by his 11/21/63 report]. MR. LAWSON Of THE SECRET SERVICE STATED THAT THIS
WAS TOO MANY, that HE thought two (2) motorcycles on either side would be
sufficient, about even with the rear fender of the President's car. (emphasis
DPD Captain Perdue Lawrence's report regarding motorcycle distribution
DATED NOVEMBER 21, 1963, the day before the assassination [handwritten
comments from 7/24/64]stated �In addition to DPD motorcycles officers B.W.
THE LEFT SIDE OF JFK'S LIMOUSINE. Also, in addition to DPD motorcycle officers
If that weren't enough, both DPD motorcycle officer's M.L. Baker and B.J.
Martin testified to the Warren Commission (and stated in private interviews)
that there was a last-minute change made at Love Field: they were told to STAY
Marion Baker told the Commission that he was told on November 22, 1963 at
about 8:00 a.m., �My partner and I, we received instructions to ride right
beside the President's car.� However, when he got to Love Field �When we got
to the airport, our sergeant instructed me that there wouldn't be anybody
riding beside the President's car.�58 Baker was advised of this 5 or 10
minutes before the motorcade left the airport.
Martin told the Commission, �They [plural=Secret Service]instructed us
that they didn't want anyone riding past the President's car and that we were
to ride to the rear, to the rear of his car, about the rear bumper.�59
Martin told Jean Hill, �.they told us out at Love Field right after
Kennedy's plane landed...Well, while Kennedy was busy shaking hands with all
the wellwishers at the airport, Johnson's Secret Service people came over to
the motorcycle cops and gave us a bunch of instructions...They also ordered us
into the damdest escort formation I've ever seen. Ordinarily, you bracket the
car with four motorcycles, one on each fender. But this time, they told the
four of us [Martin, Hargis, Chaney, & Jackson] assigned to the President's car
there'd be no forward escorts. We were to stay well to the back and not let
ourselves get ahead of the car's rear wheels under any circumstances. I'd
never heard of a formation like that, much less ridden in one, but they said
they wanted to let the crowds have an unrestricted view of the president.
Well, I guess somebody got an 'unrestricted view' of him, all right."60
Oddly, when these gentlemen were interviewed by the HSCA the story
changes to it was JFK who wanted no motorcycles alongside the car, and not the
Secret Service.61 One wonders whether they changed their stories, or if they
had their stories changed for them by the HSCA. We now know the HSCA lied
about the Bethesda witnesses supposedly all agreeing as to the nature of JFK�s
head wound. It would not be a stretch of the imagination if it turns out the
HSCA lied by changing what Baker and Martin had to say about no motorcycle
placement alongside the presidential limousine.

DPD Chief Curry testified to the WC62 about the matter---included in the
actual transcript is a bizarre error involving a clumsy edit (in italics):
Mr. Curry. In the planning of this motorcade, we had had more motorcycles
lined up to be with the President's car, but the Secret Service didn't want
that many.
Mr. Rankin. Did they tell you why?
Mr. Curry. We actually had two on each side but we wanted four on each
side and they asked us to drop out some of them and back down the motorcade,
along the motorcade, which we did.
Mr. Rankin. How many motorcycles did you have?
Mr. Curry. I think we had four on each side of him.
Mr. Rankin. How many did you want to have?
Mr. Curry. We actually had two on each side side but we wanted four on
each side and they asked us to drop out some of them and back down the
motorcade, along the motorcade, which we did.
Mr. Rankin. So that you in fact only had two on each side of his car?
Mr. Curry. Two on each side and they asked them to remain at the rear
fender so if the crowd moved in on him they could move in to protect him from
the crowd.
Mr. Rankin. Who asked him to stay at the rear fender?
Mr. Curry. I believe Mr. Lawson.
Mr. Rankin. The Secret Service man?
Mr. Curry. Yes, sir.

And what did Secret Service agent Winston G. Lawson have to say about
this, IN REGARD TO NOVEMBER 22, 1963? DULLES: "...do you recall that any
orders were given by or on behalf of the President with regard to the location
of those motorcycles that were particularly attached to his car?'
[emphasis added---Lawson would go on to say "it was my understanding that he
did not like a lot of motorcycles surrounding the car", something not borne
out by very recent prior motorcades from 11/18-11/22/63]63
The HSCA summed up the situation best:
"The Secret Service's alteration of the original Dallas Police Department
motorcycle deployment plan prevented the use of maximum possible security
precautions...Surprisingly, the security measure used in the prior motorcades
during the same Texas visit (11/21/63) shows that the deployment of
motorcycles in Dallas by the Secret Service may have been uniquely
insecure...The Secret Service knew more than a day before November 22 that the
President did not want motorcycles riding alongside or parallel to the
Presidential vehicle...(emphasis added)"64
And, as regards the Dallas Police, in keeping with all prior motorcades in
1963, DPD Captain Glen King stated that the Secret Service was primarily
responsible for the President's security, while the role of the DPD was a
supportive one.65

Security Stripping #3
Press & Photographers out of the picture (literally):
DMN reporter Tom Dillard---"We lost our position at the airport. I
understood we were to have been quite a bit closer. We were assigned as the
prime photographic car which, as you probably know, NORMALLY A TRUCK PRECEDES
PHOTOGRAPHIC PRESS RIDE WITH THE TRUCK. In this case, as you know, we didn't
have any and this car that I was in was to take photographs which was of spot-
news nature." [Emphasis added].66
Dillard forcefully said the same thing on C-Span on 11/20/93 telling the
TV audience that the flatbed truck was "canceled at the last minute" and they
were put in Chevrolet convertibles "which totally put us out of the picture."
[all previous trips, inc. Florida, has press/photographers very close in front
and behind JFK's limousine, inc. WH photographer Cecil Stoughton, who rode in
the SS follow-up car from July 1963 until 11/21/63.]67
Henry Burroughs, AP photographer (rode in Camera Car #2)---"I was a
member of the White House pool aboard Air Force One when we arrived with JFK
in Dallas on that fateful day. We, the pool, were dismayed to find our pool
car shoved back to about #11 position in the motorcade. We protested, but it
was too late." 68
Cecil Stoughton, WH photographer (rode in Camer Car #2)--- "I did see a
lot of the activity surrounding the various trips of the President, and in
many cases I did see the agents in question riding on the rear of the
President's car. In fact, I have ridden there a number of times myself during
trips...I would jump on the step on the rear of the [Lincoln] Continental
until the next stop. I have made photos while hanging on with one hand...in
Tampa [11/18/63], for example...I would just jump on and off [the limo]
quickly- no routine,..."69
Security Stripping #4
Will Fritz's men out of the motorcade:
Seth Kantor's notes----"Will Fritz's men called off nite before by SS.
Had planned to ride closed car w/ machine guns in car behind Pres." [which
could mean someplace behind JFK's car, as was the case in Chicago, IL, on 3/23/63 and in
New York on 11/15/63]70

Security Stripping #5
Other vehicle shuffling:
Milton Wright, Texas Highway Patrolman (driver of Mayor Cabell's car)---
"As I recall, prior to the President arriving at the airport we were already
staged on the tarmac. I do not recall what position I was in at that time but
it was not #1[the number taped to his car's windshield]. At the last minute
there was a lot of shuffling and I ended up in the 5th vehicle. My vehicle was
the last to leave downtown after the shooting because the police set up a road
block behind my car."71
Secret Service Agent Roger Warner stated in his report that, while at
Love Field during the forming of the motorcade, "I undertook duties to aid SA
Lawson...in lining up cars for the motorcade, passing out numbers for the
automobiles, and other general duties..."72
During an interview conducted on 9/27/92, Lawson confirmed his handling
of the automobile numbers and identification pins in Dallas on 11/22/63.
When we consider that a number of the vehicles - including the
Presidential limousine - were out of their original, numerical order, the
trail of suspicion leads to these two men.73 Lawson was in charge of the "car
numbers for the windows" at Love Field. 74
There was even more security stripping attributed to the Secret Service.
The Secret Service "prevented the Dallas Police Department from inserting into
the motorcade, behind the Vice-Presidential car, a Dallas Police Department
squad car containing homicide detectives. Agent Lawson didn't know who
canceled the Dallas Police Department car...
Security Stripping #6
Personnel shuffling: an addition, and subtracting people from where they
normally would be
General Godfrey McHugh (rode in VIP car)--- was asked to sit in a car
farther back in the motorcade, rather than "normally, what I would do between
the driver and Secret Service agent in charge of trip"- he admitted this was
"unusual";75 "Ordinarily McHugh rode in the Presidential limousine in the
front seat. This was the first time he was instructed not to ride in the car
so that all attention would be focused on the President to accentuate full
Lt. Col. George Whitmeyer (rode in pilot car)--- "Mr. Lawson acknowledged
that Lt. Col. George Whitmeyer, who was part of the Dallas District U.S. Army
Command, who Lawson said "taught Army Intelligence" and who rode in the pilot
car, "wasn't scheduled" to be in the motorcade. [as 17 H 615, Lawson's
scheduled motorcade list, bears out]. Mr. Lawson denied that the presence of
Col. Whitmeyer had anything to do with Lawson's prior service in the CIC, Army
Counter Intelligence Corps."77; "My father passed away in 1978 and therefore
the answers to your questions are somewhat based on personal recollection of
his information given to me. In regards to your first question, my father was
invited by Col. George Lumpkin (ret.) (deceased) to ride in the point [sic]
car of the motorcade. He was not a scheduled participant. I think that Col.
Lumpkin was with the Dallas Police Department at the time."78

Security Stripping #7
Motorcade route: largely kept secret, even from the Dallas police. Changes
made to it.
DPD Chief Jesse Curry---testified that he was not even consulted about
the motorcade route!79; learned of the route 11/21/63 via agents' Win Lawson
and Forrest Sorrels.80
DPD Asst. Chief Charles Batchelor---"From an administrative standpoint,
(DPD's Charles) Batchelor believed that the failure of the Secret Service to
inform the police adequately in advance of the exact route to be taken by the
president prevented them from adequately organizing their men and taking the
necessary security precautions."81

DPD Sergeant Samuel Q. Bellah, one of the three advance motorcycle
officers in the motorcade---"On the night before his assignment, Bellah
reviewed the planned route with his captain. The route was not the original
one that was to go straight through Dealey Plaza, but a revised route. The
original plan would have skirted the Texas Book Depository building by a
block, but the altered plan turned to pass directly in front of the
DPD motorcycle officer Bobby Joe Dale--- "Two or three days prior to the President's visit we'd ridden
with the Secret Service checking to see where the turns and problem areas might be. We had three possible
routes, but we didn't know which one we were going to take, and we were not briefed on it. But
by riding during the week, I kept hearing the phrase "escape routes," which dawned on me
later that should something happen to any part of the motorcade we had an escape route to either
Baylor or Parkland Hospitals...Once we were assembled and the President was ready to go, we
started the motorcade by going out a gate at the far end. At that time, we didn't know which
route we were taking; we had three: right, straight, or left. As we were leaving, the word came
over the radio that we would use the particular route that went left. ["No More Silence" by Larry Sneed
(1998), pp. 132-133]"
Governor John Connally---Stated that he was never informed about the
exact route to be used on 11/22/63.83
DNC advanceman Marty Underwood told Harrison Livingstone: "There were so many things that fell
through in Dallas. Any advance man who had any sense at all would never have taken him down that
route." When Livingstone commented that the route was changed, Underwood added: "YEAH, I KNOW.
You don't take a guy down a route like that."("High Treason 2", by Harry Livingstone, page 442: emphasis
SAIC Jerry Behn---(regarding his unpublished, executive session testimony
before the HSCA) Behn told the author that he was asked two things: first,
the details about the Florida trip of November 18, 1963; second, why the
motorcade route was changed for the Dallas trip! When the author inquired
about the second point since it is another crucial matter of security, Behn
responded: "I know it was changed but why - I've forgotten completely - I
don't know."84
Security Stripping #8
Overpass not cleared/ protected properly:
Winston G. Lawson----"I recall thinking we were coming to an overpass
now, so I glanced up to see if it was clear, the way most of them had been,THE
NOT...And I was looking for the officer WHO SHOULD HAVE BEEN THERE, HAD BEEN
REQUESTED TO BE THERE...and I made a kind of motion through the windshield
trying to get his attention to move the people from over our path THE WAY IT
SHOULD HAVE BEEN...we were just approaching this overpass when I heard a
shot." [emphasis added].85

Security Stripping #9
Buildings along the motorcade route not checked at all.

Lawson told both the Warren Commission and the House Assassinations
Committee that he could not recall giving instructions to watch building
windows, "although it was his usual practice to do so". Dallas Police Captain
Lawrence confirms that no instructions were given.86
Security Stripping #10
The most egregious lie, no active death threats against JFK to be found in the
PRS files of the Secret Service.
Boring was in charge of the advance for Chicago, Florida and Texas trip.
The Chicago trip planned for early November 1963 was cancelled. There
were two separate threats against JFK�s life involving arrests of several
The Florida trip revealed a threat against JFK�s life that was recorded
by a police informant.
Grant is there for all three trips.
Lawson�s check with the Service�s PRS for threats against JFK lands on
Boring�s desk. Boring is directly involved in 2 of the 3 known checks with
the PRS section.
The first check was made on November 8, 1963. Boring replied, "there
wouldn't be any information available of any consequence". The second check
is done by Kellerman two days later on November 10th. The agent later
admitted that it was "unusual" not to have found anything in the PRS files. (2
H 107 - 108). A third check was done by Rufus Youngblood on the morning of
November 22, 1963, again nothing.
Yet, Lawson knows nothing of any threat to JFK [see addendum below].

The common links to security stripping? Boring, Lawson, and Grant.
ASAIC Floyd Boring can be tied directly to at least 10 instances of
stripping security away from JFK.
The advance team of Secret Service agents' Winston G. Lawson and David B.
Grant, who worked hand-in-glove with ASAIC Floyd Boring, were the in-the-field
architects for the planning and implementation of security concerns (read
stripping) in Dallas. In fact, although Grant physically joined Lawson on
11/18/63, fresh from his participation with Boring on the Florida trip (inc.
the controversial Tampa stop)87, he was actually working with Lawson and
Boring earlier: Lawson's Final Survey Report of 11/19/63, includes this
statement: "This survey was conducted by SA Winston Lawson and SAIC Forrest
Sorrels, and assisted by SA David Grant, from November 13 through November 22,
And, as we know, Lawson and Grant had a hand in the motorcycle depletion
and realignment, the overpass security, or lack of it, the press' and
photographers (dis)placement, and the planning of the motorcade route.89
Does Mr. Boring think there was a conspiracy in the death of JFK?
Of course not.
"Mr. Boring made clear during the [ARRB] interview that he felt Lee Harvey
Oswald had shot President Kennedy acting alone, and that there was no shot
from the grassy knoll."
"...I concur 100 % with the Warren Report."90
"...I would go with the Warren Commission's report."91
At least on THAT point, Mr. Boring is remarkably consistent.
1.) 18 H 803-809; "The Death of a President" by Wiliam Manchester (Perennial,
1988 edition), p. 37
2.) See also "The Third Alternative-Survivor's Guilt: The Secret Service & The
JFK Murder" by Vince Palamara (1993/1997, Lancer), pp. 77-80. This article /
chapter has since been expanded upon: see the "1999 update" at "The Vince
Palamara Webpages":
3.) See pages xvii and 138 of ARRB's Final Report
4.) 1998 edition of "High Treason" by Harrison Edward Livingstone & Robert
Groden, pp. 432-433. The ARRB's interview of Floyd Boring is in the ARRB
medical documents and depositions released in July of 1998. It is MD 259
5.) DNC advance man Marty Underwood, interviewed by the author on 10/9/92, and
author William Manchester: see the ARRB's Final Report, pp. 112, 117,and 135
6.) 18 H 806
7.) see also pp. 66-67 of Boring's Truman Library Oral History. Readers will
recall from my May 1995 article "Boring Is Interesting" that Gerald Posner
contacted Boring during the writing of "Case Closed", although this was not
revealed in any way in the book (Boring told me that he merely relayed him on
to Hamilton Brown, the Executive secretary of the Former Agents' Assoc.---this
is duly noted on p. 503. For more on this matter, see the author's article in
the April 1998 issue of "JFK/ Deep Politics Quarterly."
8.) Although he did speak to Chief U.E. Baughman for "Secret Service
Chief"(1962/1963, pp. 68-69), and David McCullough for "Truman" (1992, pp.
364, 385, 434-435, 802, 808-810, and 908) regarding Pres. Truman. Other than
to the JFK Library (2/25/76 [released 1/98], the Truman Library (9/21/88), the
Discovery Channel program "Inside The Secret Service" (1995), PBS' "Truman",
and this author, no one else has ever interviewed Boring before (and only the
JFK Library, myself, and the ARRB went into any detail regarding the JFK
admin. and the assassination). Despite Manchester's QUOTE attributed to Boring
on p. 37 of his book (see above), Boring confirmed to me twice that he NEVER
spoke to Manchester.
9.) Boring said basically the same thing in both his presidential Oral
Histories cited above.
10.) see also 4 H 336, 337, & 342
11.) see Manchester, p. 389
12.) CD 80; RIF# 180-10001-10041
13.) "The Day Kennedy Was Shot" by Jim Bishop (Perennial 1992 edition), pp.
511-512; Manchester, 1988 edition, p. 390
14.) Sam Kinney found a piece of skull in the rear of the presidential
limousine while still on board the C-130 on the flight back to AAFB: see "The
Third Alternative-Survivor's Guilt: The Secret Service and the JFK Murder"
15.) Paterni was also a former member of the O.S.S., the predecessor of the
CIA, and was involved in other matters related to 11/22/63: see the author's
article "The Secret Service: In Their Own Words", Spring 1998 "Kennedy
Assassination Chronicles" journal (also available at "Vince Palamara's
Secret Service & General Research Files":
16.) see footnote 12: Washington Field Office SAIC Harry Geglein did write a
report about the limo inspection, mentioning Boring, Paterni, and Kinney,
among others.
17.) 2 H 90 (Kellerman); 5 H 67(Frazier); 7 HSCA 389; the two bullet fragments
retrieved from the front seat of the limousine and turned over to FBI SA
Frazier by Paterni & Boring were designated CE567 & CE 569
18.) RIF#180-10074-10393: 2/22/78 HSCA interview of Marshall
19.) RIF#10078-10450: 3/25/78 HSCA interview of Aragon
20.) RIF#180-10109-10310
21.) 18 H 761-765 (Hickey); see also 18 H 722-802 and 25 H 786-788: these are
all the Secret Service reports submitted to the WC
22.) see footnotes 12 & 16
23.) The "Tampa Tribune", 11/19/63 (downtown area picture w/ agents Lawton &
Zboril holding onto the rear handrails); Cecil Stoughton photo, taken from the
follow-up car, 11/18/63 (suburban area picture depicting same); short clip in
David Wolper's 1964 film "Four Days In November" depicting the start of the
Tampa trip: agent Zboril is running on the left-rear end of the limo, holding
onto the handrail, while agent Berger is riding on the opposite side; agent
Lawton is seen running along Berger's side; B & W photos discovered by Ian
Griggs and Frank Debenedictis.
24.) interview with author 9/27/92
25.) interviews with author 5/30/96;6/7/96;11/24/97-letter
26.) letter to author 9/10/93
27.) interviews with author 10/19/92, 3/5/94 and 4/15/94
28.) interviews with author 9/27/92;9/21/93;6/7/96
29.) interview with author 11/15/95; 11/22/97-letter
30.) interview with author 9/27/92
31.) interviews with author 10/22/92 and 2/8/94
32.) interviews with author 9/16/93 and 4/10/94; 9/10/93, 10/30/93, 12/13/93,
12/31/93, 8/94, and 1/97: letters and correspondence
33.) interview with author 3/4/94
34.) interviews with author 9/21/93 and 6/7/96; However, in his 11/23/97
letter to the author, he stated: "I have heard RUMORS as to his Dallas trip in
which he declined to use his armored car and/ or agents on the car's rear
platform (emphasis added)."
35.) 12/2/95 and 11/20/97 letters to author; rode close to Kennedy's car from
July 1963 until November 22, 1963, authorized by a specific request from MRS.
Kennedy [The Memories, 1961-1963, by Cecil Stoughton w/ Ted Clifton and Hugh
Sidey (1973), p. 160; see also Stoughton's motorcade films of the trip to
Italy (July 1963), as well as his still photos taken from the follow-up car in
Tampa, FL (11/18/63) and in Houston, TX (11/21/63) via the JFK Library
[unpublished; in author's collection]
36.) interview with author 10/9/92
37.) author's correspondence with Roger Peterson, 2/99 (based off Peterson's
very recent conversations with Salinger).
38.) letter to author dated 12/8/97
39.) letter to author dated 12/2/97
40.) interview with author 11/18/95; letter to author dated 11/28/97
41.) 5 H 470
42.) Bishop, 1992 edition, p. 558
43.) "Taking Charge: The Johnson White House Tapes, 1963-1964" by Michael R
Beschloss, editor, (Simon & Schuster), pp. 56-57
44.) 18 H 803-809
45.) 2 H 61-155
46.) Borings� report 18H p.806
47.) Robert�s report 18H p.807.

48.) Ready�s report 18H p. 808

49.) Behn�s report 18H p.804-805 [RIF # 180-10074-10393]
50.) Hill�s report 18 H p. 809
see above; why Hill's report is undated remains unknown
51.) 18 H 789 Grant does not mention the reduction of the motorcycles in
discussing the November 21, 1963 meeting;"JFK Assassination File" by DPD Chief
Jesse Curry (1969), pp.15-16. Curry does and records Grant�s pressence.
52.) 7 H 580-581
53.) 7 H 580-581
54.) 21 H 571
55.) Lawrence Exhibit #2 20H p. 489 (same as the HSCA's JFK Exhibit F-679)
56.) See also "No More Silence" by Larry Sneed (1998), p. 162 (based off
interview with McLain)

57.) 3 H 244; 10/98 letter to the author; "No More Silence" by Larry Sneed
(1998), p. 123 (based off interview with Baker); 11 HSCA 528
58. 3H244
59) 6 H 293; "Murder From Within" by Fred Newcomb & Perry Adams (1974), p.33
(based off interview with Martin); 11 HSCA 528
60.) From Martin's alleged paramour, Jean Hill: "JFK: The Last Dissenting
Witness" (1992), pp. 112-114 Hill, quoting Martin.
61.) Baker - 11 HSCA 528, 536-537, regarding Baker's 1/17/78 interview with
the staff of the HSCA (JFK document No. 014899)
Martin - 11 HSCA 528, 536, regarding Martin's 1/17/78 interview with the
HSCA staff, done on the same day as Baker's, above (JFK document no. 014372)
62. 4 H 171
63) 4 H 338
64.) 11 HSCA 527 & 529
65.) 20 H 453, 463-465; see also Curry, p. 9
66.) 6 H 163
67.) "The Memories, 1961-1963" by Cecil Stoughton w/ Ted Clifton and Hugh
Sidey (1973), p. 160; see also Stoughton's motorcade films of the trip to
Italy (7/63), as well as his still photos from the follow-up car in Tampa, FL
(11/18/63) and in Houston, TX (11/21/63) via the JFK Library (shown by the
author at COPA 1996)
68.) letter to the author dated 10/14/98
69.) letters to author dated 11/30/95 & 11/20/97
70.) 20 H 391; see also 4 H 171-172 (Curry); 11 HSCA 530; RIF#154-10003-10012: SS survey report,
Chicago, IL, 3/23/63
71.) 9/3/98 e-mail to the author
72.) Roger C. Warner�s report 25H 786-7 CE 2554
73.) 11 HSCA 530
74.) 17 H 618, 625; 4 H 322
75.) CFTR radio (Canada) interview 1976
76.) 5/11/78 interview with the HSCA's Mark Flanagan (RIF#180-10078-10465 [see
also 7 HSCA 14])
77.) 1/31/78 HSCA interview of Secret Service agent Winston Lawson
78.) letter to author from George Whitmeyer, Jr. dated 9/28/98
79.) 4 H 169
80.) CD 5, p. 4
81.) WC document---Griffin to Rankin re: Dallas PD (This is also HSCA RIF#
82.) "Fairfield (TX) Recorder", 11/17/88: based off interview with Bellah
[provided to the author by Bellah]
83.) "NY Herald Tribune", 11/29/63
84.) author's interviews with Behn, 9/27/92
85.) 4 H 351; see also 4 H 327 and 21 H 564
86.) Boring's JFK Library Oral History, 2/25/76, RELEASED JAN. 1998 via
efforts from the author
87.) 25 H 786; "Murder from Within" by Fred Newcomb and Perry Adams (1974),
pp. 37 - 39
88.) 17 H 618; 4 H 322
89.) "Mortal Error" by Bonar Menninger, 1992, page 233
90.) Boring's JFK Library Oral History, 2/25/76, RELEASED JAN. 1998
91.) "Mortal Error" by Bonar Menninger, 1992, page 233
HSCA document180- 10074-10394, an interview with agent Robert J. Jamison states
that "the threat of November 18, 1963 was posed by a mobile, unidentified rifleman with a
high- powered rifle fitted with a scope."
In addition, HSCA document
180-10083-10419, an interview with Lubert F. deFreese, states that "a threat did
surface in connection with the Miami trip...there was an active threat against the
President of which the Secret Service was aware in November 1963 in the period
immediately prior to JFK's trip to Miami made by a "group of people"
In addition to this threat information, and separate from the Joseph Milteer threat of 11/9/63, a CO2
PRS file, released to the HSCA on 5/3/78 and available to all of us only now
is the specific name of another individual who made a threat against JFK on
11/18/63: John Warrington (Sam Kinney also told the author of an unspecified
"organized crime" threat pertaining to this same trip).
And, as we know, Agent Lawson confirmed that a big, fat ZERO came
out of the Dallas check of potential threats to President Kennedy. This is
simply impossible, as the rabid right-wing environment, the "Wanted for
Treason" mug shots, and the October 24, 1963 attack on U.N. Ambassador Adlai
Stevenson make abundantly clear by themselves. When we also couple the
11/2/63 Chicago threats and the 1/9-11/18/63 Miami threats known to the
Secret Service before Dallas, we have to ask ourselves: was PRS SA Glen Bennett
riding in the follow-up car on 11/22/63 actively searching for these known


#20 Bernice Moore

Bernice Moore

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 452 posts

Posted 07 November 2014 - 10:14 PM

His archives on Deanies old site...




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Web Work by: XmasZen.com