[Please note:
The following essay was proofread and edited by researcher Jim DiEugenio prior
to it being published on this blog].
Previously, in the essay entitled “Gerald
Hill and the Framing of Lee Harvey Oswald”, this writer discussed the
likelihood that DPD Seargent Gerald Hill framed Oswald for the murder of
Officer J.D. Tippit during Oswald’s arrest at the Texas Theater (click here to read that essay).
What follows below is a discussion of the
possibility that the man who murdered Tippit was Curtis LaVerne Crafard, also
known as Larry Crafard. At the time of the assassination, Crafard was
purportedly employed at Jack Ruby’s Carousel Club as a multi-purpose employee.
His job allegedly consisted of being a handyman, clean-up man, part-time
bartender, and also answering the telephone (WCE 2250). Crafard was also
ostensibly living at the Carousel Club at the time of the assassination. According
to the official version of events, on the day following the assassination,
Crafard made a sudden departure from Dallas and allegedly hitchhiked to his
cousin’s home in Clare, Michigan (ibid). As this writer explains below, Crafard
was not only demonstrably mistaken for Oswald by several witnesses, but there
is a chance that he was the man who murdered Tippit.
Crafard’s Alibi
When Crafard was interviewed by the FBI on
November 28, 1963, he allegedly informed them that at the time of the
assassination, he was fast asleep in his room at the Carousel Club (ibid).
Crafard repeated this claim when he testified before the Warren Commission on
April 8, 1964 (WC Volume XIII, page 448). The man who provided Crafard with an
alibi was Andrew (Andy) Armstrong. Armstrong was employed at the Carousel club
as a bartender, and was also the assistant manager of the club. According to
both Crafard and Armstrong, after Armstrong learned that the President had been
shot, he awakened Crafard and informed him of this. However, there are many
problems with this claim. First of all, the reader should consider that during
his aforementioned interview with the FBI, Crafard allegedly claimed that
Armstrong awakened him by calling him on the phone at approximately 11:30 in
the morning, and that after he awoke, he went back to sleep.
But this is not what Crafard told the Warren
Commission. According to Crafard; “I guess [Armstrong] said he had called me or
something and I hadn’t [woken] up, I hadn’t [gotten] up or something.” (ibid,
page 449). Further on during his testimony, he added that “[Armstrong] said he
called me but I hadn’t [woken] up… I don’t know whether he called me by
telephone, he said he tried to call me by telephone or called me when he [came]
to the club or what.” (ibid, page
450). Not only do these statements by Crafard contradict what he allegedly told
the FBI during his aforementioned interview with them, but there is no
confirmation by Armstrong in either his interview with the FBI on January 22,
1964, or during his testimony before the Warren Commission on April 14, 1964,
that he had telephoned Crafard prior to his arrival at the club (WCE 2275).
Crafard told the Warren Commission that the door to his room was closed when
Armstrong arrived at the club, and that he “…closed it all the time.” (WC
Volume XIII, page 450). Armstrong, on the other hand, testified that the door
to Crafard’s room wasn’t closed. (ibid, page 327).
Let’s also take into consideration the
following contradictions between the statements of Crafard and Armstrong.
Crafard told the Warren Commission “Andy woke me that morning. He [came] in
early. Andy always put the beer [into the cooler] and he [would] come in early
to do that so he could have the rest of the day off.” (ibid, page 448). When
Crafard was asked by counsel Leon Hubert what time it was when Armstrong
arrived at the club, he explained “I think it was about 9:30 or something like
that.” (ibid). Bear in mind that this statement undermines his claim that
Armstrong woke him up by telephoning him at approximately 11:30 in the morning.
Further on during his testimony, Hubert asked Crafard how he knew that
Armstrong came into the club earlier. Crafard responded “The beer was all taken
care of, so I figured he had been in the club.” (ibid, page 449). Although
Crafard agreed that he wasn’t sure if Armstrong had put the beer into the
cooler when he was asked by Hubert, he then remarked that “Andy said something
about doing it, he had done it earlier, or something.” (ibid).
When Armstrong testified before the Warren
Commission, he was asked by Hubert if it was his job to “See that the beer was
kept on ice.” (ibid, page 327).
Armstrong claimed that it was, and after telling Hubert that he did this every
day, he claimed “That’s the first thing I did…When I came [to the club] in the
afternoon.” (ibid). Although this implies that Armstrong had taken care of the
beer prior to allegedly waking up Crafard, he told the Warren Commission that
after he arrived at the club, he had to use the rest room and that after he had
done so, he heard “a lot of sirens,” then found out that the President had been
shot by listening to his transistor radio, and subsequently woke up Crafard.
The reader should also bear in mind that during his interview with the FBI on
January 22, 1964, he claimed that he went into the men’s room after taking off
his jacket, and then woke up Crafard after learning that the President had been
shot (WCE 2275).
Keeping the above in mind, it is clear that
Armstrong didn’t take care of the beer prior to allegedly waking up Crafard;
with the implication being that Crafard was lying when he claimed that it had been
taken care of, and that “Andy said something about doing it, he had done it
earlier, or something.” We should
also bear in mind that Armstrong made no mention of taking care of the beer
after learning that the President had been shot and after allegedly waking up
Crafard. According to Crafard; “Andy, when he came [into the club] he should
have woke me up,” thus implying that
it was Armstrong’s duty to wake him up if he wasn’t already awake (WC Volume
XIII, page 449). But this is not what
Armstrong told the Warren Commission. When Counsel Leon Hubert asked Armstrong
if it was his custom/duty to wake up Crafard every morning, he remarked “No. If
he was asleep I didn’t even bother him. Usually he was awake, but there was
sometimes that he was asleep and I didn’t bother him” (ibid, page 328).
It is also perhaps worth keeping in mind that
Crafard told the Warren Commission that Armstrong told him (Crafard) that he “…called
me two or three times at that time when he woke me up there he called me two or
three times” (ibid, page 450). However, Armstrong told the Warren Commission
that he woke Crafard up by shaking him, and implied that he did this only twice
(ibid, pages 327 and 329). When Counsel Hubert asked Crafard if he had an
explanation for why it was difficult to wake him “that morning,” he remarked “None
that I can think of except that I probably was a little tired from the night
before when I went to bed” (ibid, page 451). When he was asked previously
during his testimony if it was unusual for him to have slept until the time
Armstrong allegedly woke him up on the day of the assassination, Crafard
explained “Not if I was tired and they didn’t call me, I’d sleep if they didn’t
call me” and then claimed “At the club a couple of times I slept until 1:30 or
2 o’clock in the afternoon before somebody woke me up” (ibid, page 449).
The reader may believe that the
aforementioned contradictions between the statements of Crafard and Armstrong
are simply due to faulty memory resulting from the passage of time. But there is
good reason to believe that the FBI (with help perhaps from the DPD and the
Secret Service), coerced Armstrong into providing Crafard with an alibi. On the
day of the assassination, DPD Officer Marrion L. Baker wrote an affidavit on
what had transpired after he entered the TSBD following the assassination. In
his affidavit, Baker wrote that he had encountered a man walking away from the
stairway on either the third or fourth floor, and described the man as “a white
man approximately 30 years old, 5’ 9,” 165 pounds, dark hair and wearing a
light brown jacket” (Dallas Municipal archives, Box 2, Folder 1, Item 4). When
the FBI interviewed Crafard on November 28, 1963, they took five colored
photographs of him (WCE 451, 453 to 456). At the time these photographs were
taken, Crafard was wearing a light brown/tan colored jacket (click here to view the colored version of
three of these photographs).
As far as this writer is aware, only two
witnesses who testified before the Warren Commission were shown these
photographs. One was the highly suspicious Ruth Paine (in whose garage, we
should remember, Oswald allegedly kept the Mannlicher Carcano rifle he
purportedly used to assassinate the President). The other was George Bouhe, a
member of the Dallas White Russian community who was acquainted with both
Oswald and his wife Marina (WC Volume III, page 95, WC Volume VIII, pages 377
and 378). Although Bouhe denied that he thought there was a resemblance between
Oswald and Crafard, Paine admitted that she thought there was. And as this
writer explains below, several other witnesses had mistaken Crafard for Oswald.
Whilst some researchers may believe that it was merely a coincidence that Officer
Baker wrote in his first day affidavit that he had encountered a man walking
away from the stairway wearing a light brown jacket, and that the FBI took five
photographs of Crafard wearing a light brown/tan jacket when they interviewed
him, this writer does not believe that was the case.
It is this writer’s belief that the FBI took
the aforementioned photographs of Crafard with the purpose of showing them to
Baker, and that Baker may have identified
Crafard as the man he had encountered walking away from the stairway. If Oswald was framed for the assassination--and
the evidence discussed by countless researchers demonstrates that he was--then
it stands to reason that the sniper shooting at the President from the sixth
floor of the TSBD would have somewhat resembled Oswald; with the hope that any
witnesses outside the TSBD who had seen the sniper would believe that he was
Oswald. As a matter of fact, Ronald Fischer; who had seen the sniper in the
so-called sniper’s nest window shortly before the assassination, told the DPD
that the man he had seen in the window looked like Oswald but that he wouldn’t
definitely state that Oswald was the man (Dallas Municipal archives Box 5,
Folder 5, Item 38, Dallas Municipal archives Box 3, Folder 13, Item 1). When Fischer
testified before the Warren Commission, he confirmed that he told the DPD that
Oswald could have been the man he had seen in the window, but that he couldn’t
be sure (WC Volume VI, page 197).
Most researchers are also familiar with the
fact that Howard Brennan, who had also witnessed the assassination, claimed
that the sniper in the sixth floor window of the TSBD resembled Oswald, and
subsequently identified Oswald as the sniper. Although dyed-in-the-wool
defenders of the Warren Commission such as David Von Pein uphold Brennan as a
credible witness, as researchers such as Gil Jesus have explained, Brennan is
by no means a credible witness (click here
to read Jesus’ discussion on Brennan). In addition to the fact that Officer
Baker had encountered a man wearing a light brown jacket walking away from the
stairway inside the TSBD; and the fact that the FBI photographed Crafard
wearing a light brown/tan colored jacket when they interviewed him six days
after the assassination, the reader should also consider the following:
On January 23, 1979, an article entitled “Cult
Leader is No.1 Suspect in JFK Assassination” was printed in the National Enquirer. The suspect was Ervil
LeBaron; a psychotic cult leader who was not only convicted for the murder of
his brother and said to have had his daughter strangled to death, but was also
wanted for questioning by the U.S. Secret service for death threats made against
President Jimmy Carter (the article can be read here). According to the article, through the freedom of information
act, the National Enquirer had
obtained a formerly classified memorandum from FBI director J. Edgar Hoover to
the special agent in charge of the Salt Lake City office of the FBI in Utah
(dated January 27, 1964), in which Hoover wrote that LeBaron and his followers are
“believed to have been responsible for President Kennedy’s death.”
From 1962 to 1967, LeBaron was the presiding
patriarch of the Church of the First Born of the Fullness of Times; which was
founded by his brothers in 1955. When Crafard testified before the Warren
Commission, he claimed that he was affiliated with the General Assembly and
Church of the First Born (WC Volume XIII, page 418). Although this writer is
unaware of any direct or indirect connection between the Church of the First Born
of the Fullness of Times, and the General Assembly and Church of the First Born;
or any direct or indirect connection between LeBaron and Crafard, it is
entirely possible that the reason Hoover and the FBI considered LeBaron a prime
suspect in the assassination was because they may have had good reason to
believe that there was a connection between LeBaron and Crafard. (This writer
should point out that according to Wikipedia; there was no affiliation between
the Church of the First Born of the Fullness of Times, and the General Assembly
and Church of the First Born).
The Oswald misidentifications
Although there is much debate amongst researchers
as to whether or not Ruby and Oswald knew each other; and whether or not Oswald
was ever at the Carousel Club, there can be no doubt that Larry Crafard was
mistaken for Oswald-- or believed to have looked like Oswald--by a number of
different witnesses. On November 24, 1963, detective Jim Leavelle of the DPD
wrote a memorandum to Captain Will Fritz in which he claimed that a man named
Don Stewart (Stuart); co-owner of the contract electronics store at 2533 Elm
Street, had telephonically informed him that Ruby had come into his store “about
a month ago” to check the sound
equipment in the Carousel Club, and that Ruby was with a man who he thought
looked “an awful lot like” Oswald (Dallas Municipal archives, Box 1, Folder 7,
Item 71). According to the memorandum, Robert Kermit Patterson; who co-owned
the store with Stuart, and an employee of the store named Charles Arndt, agreed
with Stuart that the man with Ruby looked like Oswald (ibid).
When Crafard was interviewed by the FBI on
November 28, 1963, he informed them that about three weeks ago he had
accompanied Ruby to an “electronics company”
(WCE 2250). According to Crafard; “…Ruby checked about some sound equipment for
the club” while they were there
(ibid). Crafard confirmed that he had gone with Ruby to the store when he
testified before the Warren Commission (WC Volume XIV, pages 69 and 70). When
the FBI interviewed Donald Stuart on November 26, 1963, he was shown a
photograph of Oswald, and according to the FBI he “…cannot be sure at this time
whether or not Oswald is identical to the person who accompanied Ruby” (WCD 4,
page 804). Stuart described the man with Ruby as being a white man in his 20’s,
weighing about 140 pounds, with a slight build, and dark brown hair which he
thought may have been thicker than Oswald’s (ibid).
When Charles Arndt was interviewed by the FBI
on the same day, he was also shown a photograph of Oswald, and claimed that he “…could
not definitely state whether or not Oswald is identical with the younger man
who accompanied Ruby” (ibid, page 807). Arndt described the man with Ruby as a
white male in his 20’s, 5 feet 7 inches tall, weighing 140 pounds or possibly
slightly more, with a slight build, and dark brown hair of average thickness
(ibid). As for Robert Kermit Patterson, he told the FBI that based on
photographs he had seen of Oswald in various newspapers, that Oswald was the
man with Ruby at the electronics store (ibid, page 798). Patterson described
the man with Ruby as an American white male in his 20’s, 5 feet 8 inches to 5
feet 9 inches tall, and not too heavy, but not too thin either (ibid, pages 798
and 799). Patterson also claimed that he thought the man with Ruby had a tattoo
on his left forearm (ibid, page 799).
What’s important to bear in mind is that Oswald
did not have a tattoo on his left forearm when he was shot. And according to
Dr. Earl Rose--the medical examiner who had performed the autopsy on Oswald--if
there had been a removal of a tattoo from Oswald’s forearm within a period of
two months prior to Oswald’s autopsy, he would have noticed it and made a note
of it in his autopsy report (WCD 1066, page 389). Although the FBI wrote in
their report concerning their interview of Crafard on November 28, 1963, that
Crafard didn’t have any tattoos; it is entirely feasible that Crafard had the
tattoo removed sometime prior to his interview with them (the greater
significance of Patterson’s observation of the tattoo is explained below).
This writer should also point out that
according to Patterson, after Ruby told him and Stuart that he would give both
of them passes to his Carousel club, Ruby gave the man with him what Patterson
described as a notebook and instructed him to write down Patterson’s and
Stuart’s names in the book, and that he (Patterson) observed the man do this
(WCD 4, page 797). After Ruby was arrested for Oswald’s murder by the DPD, the
DPD discovered permanent pass cards to Ruby’s Carousel Club under Patterson’s
and Stuart’s names, and a small notebook containing business receipt notations
with Patterson’s name in it (WCE 1322). This writer should point out that
contrary to Patterson’s claim that the man with Ruby wrote down Stuart’s and
his (Patterson’s) name in the notebook, both Stuart and Arndt claimed that it
was actually Ruby who wrote down their names (WCD 4, pages 804 and 807).
Furthermore, although Patterson claimed that the man with Ruby was wearing very
tightly fitted blue jeans and possibly a white T-shirt, Crafard told the FBI
that he was wearing a suit when he went with Ruby to the electronics store
(ibid, page 799, WCE 2250).
Despite this contradiction, the weight of the
evidence says the man who accompanied Ruby to the store was Crafard--and that
Stuart, Patterson, and Arndt all thought that he looked like Oswald. Another
good example of Crafard being mistaken for Oswald was at the Lucas B & B
restaurant, located in the same block as the Vegas club which was run by Jack
Ruby’s sister, Eva L. Grant. Mary Lawrence, who worked at the restaurant as a
waitress, informed the DPD that she had seen a man she thought was Oswald enter
the restaurant at around 2:15 am on the day of the assassination, and that
after Ruby entered the restaurant a short time later, the man went and sat with
Ruby, after which they both left the restaurant at approximately 2:45 am
(Dallas Municipal archives, Box 18, Folder 7, Item 24). Lawrence described the
man with Ruby as a white male, 5 feet 7 inches tall, weighing 140 pounds, and
with dark hair (ibid). This writer should point out that when Lawrence was previously
interviewed by the FBI on December 5, 1963, she claimed that the man she
thought was Oswald entered the restaurant at approximately 1:30 am (WCD 223,
page 367).
Although Pete Lucas, the manager of the Lucas
B and B restaurant, informed the FBI on November 25, 1963, that he told Ruby to
never come back to the restaurant, and subsequently told the DPD that Ruby was
forbidden from entering the restaurant, Crafard told the FBI that on the
morning of the assassination he had met up with Ruby at the restaurant, and
implied that this was at approximately 2:30 am (WCE 1224, WCE 2250), (Dallas
Municipal archives, Box 18, Folder 7, Item 25). Furthermore, although Lawrence
told the DPD that the man with Ruby had a small, deep scar on his left cheek,
she had previously informed the FBI that the man with Ruby had a small scar
near his mouth on either the left or right side (WCD 223, page 368). The
significance of this observation is that when the FBI interviewed Crafard, they
noted that he had a scar on the centre of his upper lip (WCE 2250).
It should be apparent to the reader that the
man Mary Lawrence thought was Oswald was in fact Larry Crafard. Let’s also
consider that on November 26, 1963, a salesman at the commercial tire company
named William Cooper told the FBI that Jack Wise; who worked at the tire
company as a bookkeeper, had information that a man who resembled Oswald was
seen in the Carousel Club by a piano tuner, and that “…from the manner in which
[the Oswald lookalike] was hanging around [the piano tuner] assumed he worked
there” (WCD 4, page 785). When the FBI subsequently interviewed Wise on
November 27, 1963, he informed them that the piano tuner’s name was Karl
Wahrmund, and that Wahrmund’s father had told him (Wise) that Wahrmund assumed
that Oswald worked at the Carousel Club (ibid, page 786). Although Karl
Wahrmund denied telling anyone that he had seen Oswald in the Carousel club
when he was interviewed by the FBI on November 27, 1963, his denial may have
been because he was threatened to keep silent about any possible association
between Oswald and Ruby (ibid, page 377). Despite what the reader may believe
about Wahrmund’s denial, as discussed above, multiple witnesses thought that
Crafard resembled Oswald.
Was Crafard at the Tippit murder scene?
The significance of the above is that if
Crafard was Tippit’s killer, the witnesses who identified Oswald as Tippit’s
killer may have done so because they also thought that Crafard resembled
Oswald. As this writer has also discussed previously, Crafard’s alibi for the
time of President Kennedy’s assassination is questionable. Therefore, his claim
that he was at the Carousel Club at the time Tippit was likely shot should also
be taken with a grain of salt (WCE 2250, WC Volume XIII, pages 451 and 452). As
discussed in Part 1 of this writer’s review of Dale Myers’ book With Malice (here), Tippit was most likely shot at approximately 1:06 pm (see
under the subheading IV: Murder on Tenth
Street). If Oswald was framed for Tippit’s murder by Tippit’s killer leaving
behind a mock-up wallet with identification for Oswald and his alleged alias,
Alek James Hidell (as discussed here
under the subheading IX: Hints and
allegations); and by Gerald Hill pretending to remove the gun (WCE 143)
most likely used to kill Tippit from Oswald during his arrest at the Texas
Theater, then it only makes perfect sense that the real killer was someone who
bore a resemblance to him and could be mistaken for him. With that said, let’s
now discuss the possibility that Crafard was Tippit’s killer.
First of all, let’s keep in mind that when
the FBI interviewed Crafard on November 28, 1963, they described him as a 22
year old white male; with a “medium”
complexion, 5 feet 8 inches tall, weighing 150 pounds, and with brown hair and
brown eyes (WCE 2250). The reader should note that this description of Crafard
is somewhat similar to the aforementioned descriptions of the man thought to be
Oswald by Robert Patterson, Donald Stuart, Charles Arndt, and Mary Lawrence.
Although the description of Tippit’s killer (understandably) varied from
witness to witness, according to the transcripts of the DPD radio recordings,
at approximately 1:22 pm, Officer Roy W. Walker broadcasted a description of
Tippit’s killer over the DPD radio (WC Volume XXI, Sawyer Exhibit WCE
705/1974). According to Walker’s broadcast, Tippit’s killer was a white male
about 30 years old, 5 feet 8 inches tall, with a slender build and black hair,
and was wearing a white jacket (ibid). The witness who gave Walker this
description was purportedly Warren Reynolds; who was employed as a salesman at
the Johnny Reynolds used car lot, which was located on the south east corner of
the Patton Street and Jefferson Blvd. intersection (With Malice, Chapter 5).
According to the same transcripts, at
approximately 1:37 pm, Officer Howell W. Summers informs the DPD radio
dispatchers that he has an “eye ball”
witness who observed Tippit’s killer, and that the killer was a 27 year old
white male, with a fair complexion, 5 feet 11 inches tall, weighing 165 pounds,
with black wavy hair, and was wearing a light gray “Eisenhower type” jacket (ibid). Although Dale Myers claims that
the witness who provided Summers with this description was Ted Callaway; who
was the manager of the Harris Bros. auto sales on Patton Street, as explained
in part 1 of this writer’s review of With
Malice, there is good reason to believe that Callaway never observed
Tippit’s killer (see under the subheading VII:
A bird in the hand). As this writer also explains, there is good reason to
believe that Sam Guinyard; who worked for Harris Bros. auto sales as a porter,
never observed Tippit’s killer as he claimed he did (ibid).
At the time Tippit was killed, the closet
witness to the murder was Domingo Benavides, who worked for Harris Bros. auto
sales as a mechanic (WC Volume VI, page 445). When Benavides testified before
the Warren Commission, he claimed that he was driving west on tenth street in
his pick-up truck, and that after he heard a shot fired at Tippit, he pulled up
to the curb almost next to Tippit’s squad car (WC Volume VI, page 447).
Benavides claimed that Tippit’s killer resembled Oswald, and described him as
being about 5 feet 11 inches tall, of average weight, and with a complexion
that was “a little bit darker than average”
(ibid, pages 450 and 451). However, after Counsel David Belin asked Benavides
if the complexion of Tippit’s killer was the same as his (Belin’s), Benavides
remarked “I would say he is about your complexion, sir. Of course he looked,
his skin looked a little bit ruddier than mine” (ibid, page 451).
The significance of Benavides’ initial claim
is that, as pointed out previously, when the FBI interviewed Crafard on
November 28, 1963, they noted that he had a “medium” complexion. In fact, the
colored photographs the FBI took of Crafard show that he had a slightly
brownish complexion; which is consistent with Benavides’ claim that the
killer’s complexion was “a little bit darker than average.” It is also curious
that Benavides remarked that the killer’s skin looked “a little bit ruddier” than his own. Although this writer is
unaware of what Benavides’ complexion looked like at the time he testified
before the Warren Commission in 1964, during a filmed interview with Eddie
Barker of CBS-TV in 1967, Benavides complexion appeared to be brownish; but not
what could be described as ruddy (click here
to view the footage). We should also keep in mind that Benavides told the
Warren Commission that the hairline of the back of the killer’s hair “sort of
went square instead of [tapering]
off” (WC Volume VI, page 451). Unfortunately, the photographs the FBI took of
Crafard do not reveal whether this was the case with the back of his hair.
Should the reader believe that Benavides was
simply mistaken about what the killer’s complexion appeared to be, then the
reader should also take the following into account. When Tippit murder witness,
Helen Markham, was interviewed by the FBI on the day of the assassination, she
claimed that Tippit’s killer had a “red” complexion (WCD 5, page 79). Although
Markham denied that the killer had a red complexion when she testified before
the Warren Commission, during a filmed interview shown on The Men Who Killed Kennedy series, she remarked that the killer had
a ruddy complexion (click here to
view the interview, see also WC Volume III, page 320). Furthermore, when Julia
Postal; the ticket seller at the Texas Theater, testified before the Warren
Commission, she claimed that when she called the DPD from the Theater, she
informed them that the man who ducked into the Theater was “ruddy looking” (WC
Volume VII, page 11).
Whilst there are problems with the
credibility of Benavides, Markham, and Postal as witnesses, as this writer
discusses below, there is evidence that an Oswald lookalike was arrested in the
balcony of the Texas Theater, and then placed into a DPD squad car at the rear
of the Theater (for a discussion of the credibility of the aforementioned
witnesses, see here under the
subheadings VI: Closing in and VII: A bird in the hand). Then there’s
Wilbyrn Waldon (Robert) Litchfield; an ex-convict who told the DPD that on
either a Tuesday or Thursday night in the first two weeks of November, he had a
meeting with Jack Ruby inside the Carousel club (Dallas Municipal archives, Box
5, Folder 7, Item 30). On June 18, 1964, Litchfield told the FBI that on the
night he had his meeting with Ruby at the club, he observed a man whom he
thought looked like Oswald (WCD 1193, page 240). Litchfield described the
Oswald lookalike as being in his mid-twenties, between 5 feet 7 inches and 5
feet 9 inches tall, with medium brown hair, and that his complexion was “somewhat
ruddy” (ibid). Litchfield also claimed that the man’s chin area was either
slightly pimpled or had “slight acne pockmarks,” and that he was dressed
sloppily (ibid).
During the same interview, the FBI showed
Litchfield the five colored photographs they had taken of Larry Crafard when
they interviewed him on November 28, 1963. After he carefully examined the
photographs, Litchfield allegedly told the FBI that he “could not state with
any degree of certainty” that Crafard was the Oswald lookalike he had seen in
the Carousel club on the night in question (ibid, page 241). However,
Litchfield also remarked that “The overall general appearance of [Crafard and
the Oswald lookalike in the club] are about the same, although [Crafard’s hair]
appears to be a bit more full than that of the individual he had seen in the
Carousel club” (ibid). The FBI noted that due to the passage of time since
Litchfield observed the Oswald lookalike in the club “…it is utterly impossible
for him to comment more specifically at this time” (ibid).
As the reader can see, Litchfield’s comment
implies that Crafard was the Oswald lookalike he had seen in the club. Although
the aforementioned photographs of Crafard do not show that he had what could be
described as a ruddy/red complexion, or pimples/acne pockmarks, the possibility
that Crafard was infected with a disease (such as Rosacea) which causes a
ruddy/red complexion; and what could be described as pimples or acne pockmarks
from time to time cannot be ruled out. This writer should point out that on
December 2, 1963; detective R.D. Lewis of the DPD gave Litchfield a polygraph test
to determine whether or not he was being truthful when he claimed that he had
seen Oswald at the Carousel club (Dallas Municipal archives, Box 5, Folder 7,
Item 31). According to Lewis, Litchfield was being untruthful (ibid). However,
Lewis and the DPD may have stated this in order to cover-up the possibility
that Oswald and Ruby were involved in a conspiracy to assassinate the
President; and that Ruby shot him to prevent him from revealing the names of
any conspirators.
This writer should also point out that on
June 19, 1964, the FBI interviewed J.W. Grubbs and Max Lewis; two of the men
with whom Litchfield was playing poker at the time he learned that Ruby had
shot Oswald (WCD 1193, pages 243 and 244). According to the interviews with
both men, Litchfield’s claim that he was acquainted with Ruby is not to be
believed (ibid). On the other hand, when the FBI interviewed Ernest Francis
Stoy; another one of the men with whom Litchfield was playing poker at the time
he learned that Ruby had shot Oswald, he claimed that he considers Litchfield
to be an honest man (ibid, page 242). Stoy was interviewed on June 17, 1964.
But despite what Grubbs and Lewis told the FBI with regards to Litchfield’s
credibility, as pointed out above, Litchfield implied during his interview with
the FBI On June 18, 1964, that the Oswald lookalike he had seen in the Carousel
club was in fact Larry Crafard; who was not only acquainted with Ruby, but also
worked at the club.
It is also important to bear in mind what
William W. Scoggins; the cab driver who allegedly witnessed Tippit being shot
whilst eating lunch inside his parked cab, told the Warren Commission with
regards to the killer’s complexion. When Counsel David Belin asked Scoggins
whether Tippit’s killer was a Negro or a white man, Scoggins replied that he
was “White, light complected, not real brown,” thus implying that he had a
slightly brownish complexion (WC Volume III, page 333). The reader should keep
in mind that not only is this consistent with Benavides’ claim that the killer’s
complexion was “a little bit darker than average,” but that as stated previously; the
colored photographs the FBI took of Crafard show that he had a slightly
brownish complexion. Although Scoggins identified Oswald as Tippit’s killer, it
is important to note that when the FBI interviewed Scoggins on November 25,
1963, he remarked that he couldn’t be sure if Oswald was the man who killed
Tippit (WCD 5, page 77). For more information on Scoggins, please refer to part
1 of this writer’s review of With Malice;
under the subheading VII: A bird in the
hand.
Let’s now discuss the Davis sister-in-laws;
Barbara and Virginia Davis. On the day of the assassination, the Davis
sister-in-laws were living inside a two story apartment house located on the
southeast corner of the Tenth and Patton Street intersection. Although both
women claimed to have witnessed Tippit’s killer walking across their front lawn
heading towards Patton Street, and identified Oswald as the killer, there is
good reason to believe that they were planted witnesses. Consider that one of
the names inside Larry Crafard’s notebook which contained the names and phone
numbers of Jack Ruby’s various contacts was Leona Miller (WCD 717, page 6, WCD
4, page 497). When Crafard was asked about Miller during his testimony before
the Warren Commission, he explained “I believe she was a girl that called in
connection with or in answer to an ad that Jack Ruby had in the paper for
waitresses” (WC Volume XIV, page 10).
Although Jack Ruby was acquainted with a Leona
Lane (whose maiden name appears to have been Miller), this writer is unaware of
any evidence that she had called Ruby in response to the advertisement for
waitresses (WCE 2282/2283). Furthermore, as researcher Greg Parker has pointed
out, Miller’s name and phone number (WH3-8120) was written in the part of
Crafard’s notebook which contained the names and phone numbers for regular
contacts (see here). The
significance of this is that when Barbara and Virginia Davis provided the DPD
with sworn affidavits as to what they had witnessed at the time Tippit was
shot, they wrote down their phone number as WH3-8120; the same number which was
written inside Crafard’s notebook for Leona Miller (Dallas Municipal archives,
Box 2, Folder 1, Items 21 and 22). In his book, Dale Myers writes that “Given
the transient nature of the occupants of the apartments along East Tenth Street
at the time, it would not be surprising to learn that [Leona] Miller might have
occupied the same apartment immediately before Barbara Jeanette and Virginia
Davis, and consequently had the same phone number, although there is nothing in
the record to indicate that such a thing occurred” (With Malice, Chapter
9).
Myers also writes that “…apart from the phone
number, there is no known connection between Leona Miller, Barbara Jeannette
and Virginia Davis, and Jack Ruby” and
that the Davis sister-in-laws and their husbands had moved into the apartment
located on the southeast corner of the Tenth and Patton street intersection “…around
the first or second week in November,
1963…” (ibid). However, let’s now
take the following into account. Contained within Larry Crafard’s notebook is
the reminder “Mr. Miller. Friday 15 people
Collins Radio Co.” (WCD 4, page
502, WCD 717, page 19). When Crafard was asked about this reminder during his
testimony before the Warren Commission, he remarked that “It would be somebody
called in for reservations for 15 people” (WC Volume XIV, page 32). As several
researchers such as William Kelly have noted, shortly following Oswald’s arrest
at the Texas Theater, T.F. White; a mechanic working at Mack Pate’s garage
located several blocks to the north of the Theater, observed an Oswald
lookalike acting suspiciously inside a car parked at the El Chico restaurant
car park across the street from the garage.
White approached the car, and wrote down the
license plate number, which was PP 4537 (WCD 205, pages 369 and 375). When the
FBI investigated White’s claim, they discovered that the license number was
assigned to a 1957 Plymouth which belonged to Carl Amos Mather; an employee of
the Collins Radio Company, and a friend of the Tippit family (ibid, pages 370
and 372). Although there is no record that the FBI interviewed Mather, when
they interviewed his wife on December 14, 1963, she informed them that Mather
left work at about 2:00 or 2:30 in the afternoon, after which they went to the
Tippit family home to express their condolences to Tippit’s wife and to “…assist
her in any way possible” (ibid, page 373). Several researchers have argued that
White’s claim of seeing an Oswald lookalike driving the car with the
aforementioned license plate number is not credible, because he first claimed
that the car was a red 1957 Plymouth and then claimed that it was a red 1961
Ford Falcon; whereas the FBI determined that the car was in fact a light blue
over medium blue 1957 Plymouth (ibid, pages 372 and 375).
But in spite of these discrepancies, it
defies belief that White identified the license plate of the car owned by a
friend of the Tippit family who worked at the Collins Radio Company. In this
writer’s opinion, the car observed by White was in fact Mather’s. It is also
this writer’s opinion that the significance of this connection is that, as
pointed out previously, a Mr. Miller from the Collins Radio Company had made a
reservation at the Carousel Club, and that a Leona Miller, who happened to
share the same phone number as two of the witnesses to Tippit’s murder, was
listed as one of Jack Ruby’s contacts in Crafard’s notebook. Although this writer
is unaware of the identity of Mr. Miller from the Collins Radio Company, or of
any direct connection between Mr. Miller and Leona Miller, it is nevertheless
this writer’s belief that Leona Miller was quite likely the real name of one of the Davis sister-in-laws,
and that they (the Davis sister-in-laws) were related to Mr. Miller from the
Collins Radio Company (for further information on why the Davis sister-in-laws
were likely planted witnesses, please refer to part 1 of this writer’s review
of With Malice under the subheading VII: A bird in the hand).
Readers are also strongly encouraged to read
through this blog post by William
Kelly concerning the connection of the Collins Radio Company to the
assassination. In an upcoming essay, this writer will be discussing further
possible connections between the assassination and people with the surname
Miller. As for the identity of the Oswald lookalike observed by T.F. White
driving what was by all likelihood Carl Mather’s car, it is this writer’s
belief that he was the highly suspicious and mysterious Igor Vaganov (see here for important information on
Vaganov by researcher Lee Farley). Most researchers are aware of the fact that
Tippit’s killer had discarded a light gray jacket (designated WCE 162) in the
parking lot located behind the Texaco service station on Jefferson Blvd.
Although Marina Oswald told the Warren Commission that her husband owned the
light gray jacket, as discussed in part 2 of this writer’s review of With Malice, this was most certainly a
lie (see under the subheading VIII: Proof
Positive).
According to researcher and investigative reporter,
Mark Groubert, the light gray jacket discarded in the parking lot by Tippit’s
killer and the jacket Crafard was wearing when he was photographed by the FBI
on November 28, 1963, were both made by the same manufacturer; namely Maurice
Holman from California (see the thread entitled The Stevenson Incident and the Assassination at Greg Parker’s
research forum). A photographic comparison of the two jackets shows that they
are somewhat similar in appearance. As a matter of fact, Groubert discovered a
zipper jacket on eBay made by Maurice Holman which is similar to both the light
gray jacket, and the jacket Crafard was wearing in the aforementioned
photographs. Groubert speculates that after Crafard discarded the jacket at the
parking lot; he brought another one as a replacement. Furthermore, according to
researcher Staffan H. Westerberg, Crafard owned a “…white cotton jacket with a
zipper, similar to the one found between the Tippit killing scene and the Texas
Theatre” (see the thread entitled Why JD
Tippit Had To Die at Greg Burnham’s research forum). However, this writer
has been unable to verify whether this claim is true.
One pertinent question concerning the jacket
is: Why did Tippit’s killer discard it? In his book, Dale Myers writes that, “Tippit’s
killer… was believed to have ditched his jacket under the car [in the parking
lot] in an attempt to change his appearance”
(With Malice, Chapter 8).
However, there may be another explanation for why Tippit’s killer discarded the
jacket. Consider that the wallet containing identification for Oswald and
Hidell was left inside one of its pockets when the killer discarded it; in
order to make it appear as though Oswald accidentally incriminated himself
whilst trying to alter his appearance. As several researchers (including this
writer) have pointed out, the DPD concealed the existence of this wallet. With
this in mind, if the wallet was in fact discovered inside one of the pockets of
the jacket, then this could explain why the officer(s) who discovered the
jacket was never identified by the DPD; and why the officer who reported the
discovery of the jacket over the DPD radio was not identified by his name in
the transcripts of the DPD radio communications (WC Volume XXI, Sawyer Exhibit
No. A), (WCE 1974). Of course, this writer cannot state with any degree of certainty
that the wallet was discovered inside one of the pockets of the jacket.
In conclusion, there is no solid evidence
that the light gray jacket belonged to Crafard. We should nevertheless keep in
mind the words of Earlene Roberts, the housekeeper of the rooming house at 1026
North Beckley Avenue where Oswald was allegedly living at the time of the
assassination. She told KLIF radio reporter Gary DeLaune on the day of the
assassination that Oswald left the rooming house, after he had allegedly
returned there half an hour following the assassination, wearing a “short gray
coat” (see here). But as this writer discusses below, there is good reason to
believe that it was actually Crafard who was living there; and whom Roberts saw
leaving with the jacket (WCE 162). This writer should also stress that the
reason why the FBI took the aforementioned photographs of Crafard may have been
to show them to the Tippit murder witnesses such as Helen Markham, who
apparently claimed that Tippit’s killer was wearing a brown jacket (Dallas
Municipal archives, Box 1, Folder 4, Item 5). In an interesting twist, Markham
worked as a waitress at the Eat Well cafe on Commerce Street, where Crafard
told the FBI he ate his meals (WCD 5, page 79, WCE 2250). Whilst some might
argue that Markham would have recognized Crafard as a regular customer at the
restaurant, like Robert Patterson, Donald Stuart, Charles Arndt, Mary Lawrence
and others, she may have confused Crafard with Oswald.
Was Crafard arrested at the Texas Theater?
As stated previously, there is evidence that
an Oswald lookalike was arrested in the balcony of the Texas Theater, and then
placed into a DPD squad car at the rear of the Theater. Although readers may consider
this to be a ridiculous assertion, there is good reason to believe that after
shooting Tippit, Crafard entered the Theater; and was the Oswald lookalike who
was put into the DPD squad car at the rear of the Theater. First of all, as
pointed out above, Julia Postal; the ticket seller at the Texas Theater, told
the Warren Commission that she told the DPD that the man who ducked into the
Theater without paying for a ticket was “ruddy looking.” Secondly, according to
the report by DPD detective L.D. Stringfellow to Captain W.P. Gannaway
regarding Oswald’s arrest, Oswald was arrested in the balcony of the Theater
(see here). However, Oswald was
arrested in the Orchestra section of the Theater.
Should the reader believe that this was
merely a mistake by Stringfellow, then the reader should also take the
following into account. In 1987, Bernard Haire, the owner of Bernie’s hobby
house located two doors east of the Theater, told author Jim Marrs that he had
seen DPD officers place a man into a squad car at the rear of the theater.
According to Haire; “The man was dressed in a pullover shirt and sacks. He
seemed to be flushed, as if he’d been in a struggle” (Marrs, Crossfire, page 354). The significance
of Haire’s claim that the man appeared to be
“flushed” is that it is consistent with Julia Postal’s claim that the man
who had ducked into the Theater was “ruddy looking.” When Marrs informed Haire
that Oswald was brought out from the front of the Theater following his arrest,
he stated to Marrs in bewilderment “I don’t know who I saw arrested” (ibid).
In the endnotes of his book, Dale Myers
acknowledges that Haire claimed that he had seen someone being taken out from
the back of the theater (With Malice).
However, he hides from his readers the fact that Warren “Butch” Burroughs, who
ran the concession stand inside the theatre, told author Jim Douglass during an
interview in 2007 that he witnessed a second arrest inside the Theater “three
or four minutes later” (Douglass, JFK
& the Unspeakable, pages 292 -294). Burroughs remarked to Douglass that
the second man who was arrested inside the Theater “looked almost like Oswald,
like he was his brother or something” (ibid). When Douglass asked Burroughs if
he could see the second man arrested as well as he could see Oswald, Burroughs
claimed, “Yes, I could see both of them. They looked alike” (bid).
Myers also hides from his readers the fact
that detective L.D. Stringfellow wrote in his report to Captain Gannaway that
Oswald was arrested in the balcony of the theater, writing instead in the
endnotes of his book that “…there is no evidence that anyone other than Oswald
was arrested at the Texas Theater” (With
Malice). The reader should bear in mind that during a filmed interview for The Men who Killed Kennedy series, Burroughs
stated that Oswald “slipped” into the Theater between 1:00 pm and 1:07 pm
(click here to view the footage). As
pointed out above, there is good reason to believe that Tippit was most likely
shot at approximately 1:06 pm. Therefore, if Oswald had entered the theater in
the time period described by Burroughs during his interview, Oswald couldn’t
have been Tippit’s killer.
Several researchers have argued that
Burroughs should not be considered credible on this point because he denied
that he had seen Oswald enter the theater, or that he had sold him popcorn,
when he testified before the Warren Commission (WC Volume VII, page 15).
However, if Burroughs had informed the DPD and/or the FBI that Oswald had
entered the Theater during the aforementioned period of time, he may have been
coerced into denying that he had seen Oswald enter the theater. During an
interview with Jim Marrs in 1987, Burroughs remarked that Oswald had entered
the theater “…shortly after 1 P.M.,” and that at approximately 1:15 pm, Oswald
bought popcorn from him at the concession stand (Marrs, Crossfire, page 353). We should also consider that Julia Postal
told the Warren Commission that Burroughs initially told her (Postal) that he
had seen Oswald, only to allegedly change his mind (WC Volume VII, page 13).
Burroughs also told Marrs that about 20 minutes after Oswald entered the ground
floor of the theater and sat next to a pregnant lady, Johnny Calvin Brewer; the
shoe store owner who allegedly observed Oswald slip into the theater, arrived
at the theater through the front doors (Marrs, Crossfire, page 353). On a further note, Burroughs informed Marrs
that somebody had slipped into the theater at approximately 1:35 pm (ibid).
Indirect corroboration for Burroughs’ claim
that Oswald entered the Theater much sooner than he allegedly did comes from theater
patron Jack Davis. In 1988, Davis was interviewed by Jim Marrs. As Marrs
explains in his book “…Davis found a seat in the right rear section of the
theater and recalled seeing the opening credits of the first film, which was
only minutes past the 1 P.M. starting time for the feature film. He said he was
somewhat startled by [Oswald] who squeezed past him and sat down in the seat
next to him… Davis said [Oswald] didn’t say a word but quickly got up and moved
across the aisle and took a seat next to another person. Then shortly, [Oswald]
got up and walked into the theater’s lobby. A few minutes later, Davis, whose
attention had returned to the movie, vaguely remembered seeing [Oswald] enter
the center section of the theater from the far side. After twenty minutes or so
after this incident, according to Davis, the house lights came on and when he
walked to the lobby to ask why, he saw policeman running in the front door” (ibid).
As the reader can see, Marrs’ account of what
Davis told him implies that Oswald entered the theater and sat next to him a
few minutes past 1:00 pm; which is consistent with Burroughs’ claim that Oswald
had entered the theater between 1:00 pm and 1:07 pm. Furthermore, Davis’ claim
that Oswald walked into the lobby of the theater shortly after he sat down next
to another person; and then returned a few minutes later, is consistent with
Burroughs’ claim that Oswald bought popcorn from him at about 1:15 pm. This
writer should point out that in the endnotes of his book, Dale Myers writes
that George Jefferson Applin; a patron of the Theater who witnessed Oswald’s
arrest, told the FBI that the movie started at approximately 1:00 pm with a
cartoon and newsreel, and that the main feature, War is Hell, didn’t begin until about twenty minutes later
According to Applin’s interview with the FBI, Myers’ claim is accurate (WCD
206, page 68). Myers also writes in his endnotes that “Newspaper ads confirm a
1:20 p.m. start time for the feature…” (However, we should keep in mind the
possibility that Oswald sat next to Davis before the opening credits of War is Hell, and that Davis’
recollection was in error.
It is also important to bear in mind that
according to the transcripts of the DPD radio recordings, at approximately 1:46
pm, the dispatchers announced over the radio that the suspect was allegedly
hiding in the balcony of the theater (WC Volume XXI, Sawyer Exhibit No. A), (WCE
705/1974). The person who allegedly informed the DPD of this was Julia Postal.
When Postal testified before the Warren Commission, she more or less explained
that the reason why she informed the DPD that the suspect was hiding in the
balcony of the theater was because Warren Burroughs would have seen the suspect
if he had gone past him (Burroughs) into the Orchestra section of the Theater,
but that he didn’t see him (click here
to view a diagram of the Theater’s layout), (WC Volume VII, page 13). However,
as discussed above, Burroughs claimed during his interview for The Men who Killed Kennedy series and
during his interview with Jim Marrs that Oswald entered the Theater shortly
after 1:00 pm.
With the above in mind, and based on the
layout of the theater, it stands to reason that a second man (Crafard) entered
the theater and went up the steps near the front entrance which led to the
balcony. Several researchers are of the belief that an Oswald lookalike had
lured Johnny Brewer to the Theater; by acting suspicious outside the front door
of Brewer’s store and then entering the theater, so that Brewer would inform
the DPD that the suspect was inside the theater. Although this writer believes
that this is certainly a feasible notion, as discussed in part 1 of this
writer’s review of With Malice, it is
this writer’s belief that Brewer was lured to the Theater by the two men inside
his store who were allegedly IBM employees (see under the subheading VI: Closing in). Once the DPD was
notified that the suspect was inside the theater, this would enable Gerald Hill
to frame Oswald for Tippit’s murder by pretending to remove the gun (WCE 143) most
likely used to kill Tippit from Oswald during his arrest inside the Theater.
Aside from Warren Burroughs, the notion that
an Oswald lookalike was arrested in the Texas Theater is supported by the
statements of John Franklin Elrod, who was arrested by the DPD at approximately
2:45 pm on the day of the assassination for walking along the railroad tracks
to the west of the TSBD (Dallas Municipal archives Box 3, Folder 20, Item 2).
According to Elrod, he was placed into the same jail cell as Oswald. Although
several researchers such as Ian Griggs have refuted this claim, there is good
reason to believe that Elrod’s cellmate was in fact Larry Crafard. When Elrod
was interviewed by the FBI on August 8, 1964, he informed them that his cellmate
told him about a meeting between five men at a motel where “…they had been
advanced some money under some type [of] contract,” and that one of the men at
the motel was Jack Ruby (WCD 1472, pages 117 and 118). Whilst there is no solid
evidence that Oswald knew Ruby or knew about his affairs, or that Crafard was
at the meeting in the motel described by Elrod, the fact is that Crafard was
not only acquainted with Ruby but was also someone who was demonstrably
mistaken for Oswald by multiple witnesses.
According to the same interview, when Elrod
was inside the jail cell with his cellmate, a man whose face was “smashed up”
was brought into the hallway where he and his cellmate could observe him; and
that his cellmate mentioned that he was one of the men he met at the motel with
Jack Ruby (ibid). Elrod further explained: “The man with the injured face had
received some money, and he was reported to have been driving a Thunderbird
automobile with a large quantity of guns contained therein” (ibid). Researchers
have identified the man with the smashed face as Lawrence Reginald Miller, who
was arrested along with Donnell Darius Whitter/Whittier by the DPD on November
18, 1963, for the possession of two machine guns and two automatic rifles which
had been stolen during a burglary at the National Guard Headquarters at
Terrell, Texas (WCD 847). Whitter/Whittier was driving a 1962 Thunderbird when
he and Miller were arrested by the DPD; and had once serviced Jack Ruby’s car
at the Texaco Service Station on Clarendon and Ewing Streets in the Oak Cliff
section of Dallas (ibid).
The reader should bear in mind that as
several researchers such as John Armstrong have explained, Ruby was involved in
illegally running guns to Cuba (see here).
Therefore, the aforementioned meeting at the motel could have been about the
theft of weapons from the National Guard Headquarters in Terrell, Texas. Although
Elrod denied during a filmed interview in 1993 with investigative journalists,
Ray and Mary LaFontaine, that he told the FBI anything about Ruby and guns, due
to the passage of time, and perhaps also due to the fact that he was an
alcoholic, he may simply have forgotten that he had done so (click here to view the interview). During his
interview with the LaFontaines, Elrod claimed “I can’t say for sure, but in my
mind I thought [Oswald] was bruised slightly some wheres around this…this…this
area in here,” whilst pointing out the area of his cheeks near his mouth.
Photographs and film footage of Oswald show
that he didn’t have bruises in the area of his cheeks near his mouth following
his arrest at the Texas Theater. However, let’s keep in mind that the man
Bernard Haire claimed he saw being put into a DPD squad car at the rear of the
Theater was “flushed.” With this in mind, could Elrod have
misremembered/misinterpreted the “flushed”
appearance of the Oswald lookalikes’ face as slight red bruises on his cheeks?
In this writer’s opinion, it is entirely possible that he did. When we also
take into account the fact that the man Wilbyrn Litchfield observed in the
Carousel club, and whom he described as having a “somewhat ruddy” complexion
and also described as having the same general characteristics as Crafard; the
man who was placed into the same jail cell as John Elrod was in by all
likelihood Crafard.
This writer should also note that in their
book Oswald Talked, Ray and Mary
LaFontaine write that DPD Officer H.R. Arnold; who was purportedly a personal
friend of Elrod and his brother Lindy, confirmed to Lindy that Elrod was placed
into the same jail cell as Oswald (LaFontaines, Oswald Talked, page 392). According to the DPD personnel
assignments booklet for November, 1963, Arnold was an officer working in the
Special Service Bureau under the command of Captain W.P. Gannaway (WC Volume
XIX, Batchelor Exhibit No. 5002). The LaFontaines write that “Today Arnold
claims he cannot remember either of the Elrods” (Oswald Talked, page
392). However, we should consider that Arnold may have only stated this because
he realized that his admission to Lindy Elrod would have created a huge
controversy involving him. According to the LaFontaines, both of the Elrods
claimed that John Elrod also shared a cell with a “kid from Tennessee who had
stolen a car in Memphis,” whose name the LaFontaines claim was Daniel Wayne
Douglas (ibid). The LaFontaines also claim that neither of the Elrods “…were
shown the Douglas arrest record or even told of its existence…” (ibid).
The records of the DPD show that Douglas, who
was 19 years old at the time, was indeed arrested (at approximately 2:30 pm) on
the day of the assassination, after he turned himself in to the DPD for Auto
Theft and Burglary offenses in Memphis, Tennessee and Birmingham, Alabama
(Dallas Municipal archives, Box 3, Folder 20, Item 3). This writer would also
like to point out that despite the fact that the records of the DPD show that
Elrod was arrested, the FBI claimed that “The
identification record of John Franklin Elrod… dated August 12, 1964… does not
reflect incarceration of Elrod in the Dallas City jail as claimed” (WCD
1472, page 119). The FBI also claimed that Elrod’s cellmate was “…a man whose identity he could not recall,”
and that “His arrest had nothing to do
with the assassination of the President” (ibid, page 117).
But during his aforementioned filmed
interview with the LaFontaines, Elrod claimed that he told the FBI that he was “…arrested
for the…for the murder down there and [that] I was in a cell with Oswald
and…that was it.” During the same interview, Elrod’s brother Lindy claimed that
“Oswald” told Elrod “I did not shoot no President.” If Lindy Elrod is to be
believed, and if Crafard was John Elrod’s cellmate, then it’s certainly curious
that Crafard would make such a statement. Although there is nothing amongst the
records of the DPD that shows Crafard was arrested at the Texas Theater, such a
record(s) would most likely have been destroyed (or amongst the still
classified assassination related documents) in order to conceal evidence that
Oswald was framed for Tippit’s murder and the assassination, and that there was
a conspiracy. In conclusion, there is absolutely no solid evidence that Larry
Crafard was John Elrod’s cell mate. However, given all of the above, there is
good reason to believe that an Oswald lookalike was arrested in the balcony
section of the Theater; and that he was placed into the same jail cell as
Elrod.
Why did Crafard leave Dallas?
As stated towards the beginning of this
essay, according to the “official” version of events, on the day following the
assassination, Crafard made a sudden departure from Dallas and allegedly
hitchhiked to his cousin’s home in Clare, Michigan. Crafard told both the FBI
and the Warren Commission that the name of his cousin was Clifford Roberts (WCE
2250, WC Volume XIII, page 483). This writer has been unable to locate any
interview of Roberts by the FBI. Crafard told the FBI that on the morning of
November 23, 1963 at about 8:00 am, he telephoned Ruby to tell him that they
needed food for the three dogs which Ruby kept at the Carousel Club, and that
after Ruby allegedly berated him for waking him (Ruby) up, he decided to leave
the club because he “did not want to take any other verbal abuse” (WCE 2250).
Crafard also claimed that his main reason for heading north (to Michigan) was
to recontact his sister, Corabelle Ingersoll (ibid).
When Crafard testified before the Warren
Commission, he explained that the only reason he left Dallas was because he
wanted to visit his sister, as he had not heard from her and became concerned
(WC Volume XIII, page 469). According to the FBI, Crafard was visiting his
sister when they interviewed him (WCE 2250). However, there are problems with
Crafard’s claim that he left Dallas because he wanted to visit his sister. On
June 5, 1964, the FBI interviewed Crafard’s cousin, Gale Ann Cascaddan (nee
Eaton). Cascaddan told the FBI that on November 26, 1963, Crafard visited the
home of her parents (where she was residing), and that on the very next day; he
hitchhiked to Kalkaska, Michigan, to visit his sister (WCD 1079, page 2).
Crafard confirmed this during his testimony before the Warren Commission, but
gave the impression that he was confused as to exactly which day he arrived at
his aunt and uncle’s home (WC Volume XIII, page 485).
According to Cascaddan, neither she nor her
parents could understand why Crafard left Dallas on the day following the
assassination (WCD 1079, page 3). In fact, Cascaddan told the FBI that when she
asked Crafard why he left Dallas, he never answered her question, and recalled
that he changed the topic of their conversation (ibid). Cascaddan added that
her parents were also unable to obtain an answer from Crafard as to why he left
Dallas (ibid). We should also bear in mind that Cascaddan told the FBI that in
her opinion, Crafard “…exhibited an indifferent attitude toward the
assassination of the President,” claiming
that whilst she, her parents, and her brothers, spent most of their time
watching television coverage of the assassination, Crafard “…seemed mildly
interested in these programs,” and
instead spent some time reading comic books (ibid). Cascaddan further explained
that Crafard “…seemed about as disturbed over the President’s assassination as
he would be ‘over killing a cat’” (ibid).
This writer should point out that Cascaddan
told the FBI that Crafard was “nuts” and made her “puke,” further explaining
that she didn’t want to be alone with him as he always wanted to put his hands
on her body, smell her hair, and kiss her (ibid, pages 4 and 5). Although the
reader may believe that Cascaddan told the FBI that Crafard never explained why
he left Dallas and “…exhibited an indifferent attitude toward the assassination
of the President” because she didn’t like him, the reader should keep in mind
that Cascaddan’s mother confirmed to the FBI that Crafard never explained to
her and other members of her family why he left Dallas, and that he “…expressed
relative unconcern over the assassination…” (ibid, page 5). This writer should
also point out that during an interview with Canadian researcher Peter Whitmey;
Crafard more or less explained that the reason why he didn’t watch television
coverage of the assassination (and President Kennedy’s funeral) was because he
didn’t want to show his emotions to his relatives (see here).
During his interview with the FBI, Crafard
claimed that he didn’t tell anyone that he was leaving Dallas (WCE 2250).
According to Gale Ann Cascaddan, Crafard claimed that he didn’t tell Ruby that
he was leaving was because he and Ruby were “buddies,” and that Ruby wouldn’t
want him to leave (WCD 1079, pages 3 and 4). However, when Crafard was asked
during his testimony before the Warren Commission why he didn’t call Ruby to
tell him that he wanted to visit his sister, Crafard remarked “I don’t know. I
haven’t got any idea” (WC Volume XIII, page 469). When Crafard was further
asked why he didn’t wait for Ruby to come into the Carousel Club to tell him
that he wanted to visit his sister, he remarked “I made up my mind to go, and
that was it” (ibid). We should also bear in mind that Crafard told the Warren
Commission that his decision to leave Dallas had nothing to do with Ruby
allegedly berating him for waking him (Ruby) up to ask about food for the dogs
which were kept at the club (ibid).
As the reader can see, Crafard’s failure to
explain to his relatives why he left Dallas is suspicious. On a final note,
Joyce Lee McDonald; who worked at the Carousel Club as a stripper under the
stage name Joy Dale, told the FBI that several days prior to leaving Dallas,
Crafard had indicated that he was “getting itchy feet” and was ready to move on
(WCD 4, page 518). Did the Warren Commission suspect that Crafard’s departure
from Dallas was suspicious? As it turns out, the answer to that question is,
yes they did. According to Peter Whitmey, former Warren Commission counsel Burt
Griffin; who interviewed Crafard along with Leon Hubert, told the HSCA in
November, 1978, that “one of the most
important issues we never resolved… is why Larry Crafard split town like he
did” and that he (Griffin) had “always been bothered by that very
much, the whole circumstance of it.”
Whitmey also writes that Griffin told him
(Whitmey) at a conference in Chicago in 1993 that he and Leon Hubert believed
that Crafard was holding back and wasn’t being honest about himself and his
activities while he was in Dallas. But perhaps the strongest indication that
the Warren Commission thought Crafard’s departure from Dallas was suspicious is
the fact that during his testimony before the Warren Commission, Counsel Leon
Hubert told Crafard; “I suggest to you that [your] real motivation for leaving
Dallas was that you had found out that Oswald had been in the [Carousel] club,
and that the matter was getting a little too thick for you and you wanted out
of it” (WC Volume XIV, page 51). Crafard denied that this was the case, but one
has to wonder why Hubert felt the need to suggest this to Crafard. In this
writer’s opinion, the most viable explanation is that he; and by implication
the Warren Commission, suspected that Crafard was involved in Tippit’s murder
and/or the President’s assassination.
It is also curious that, as researcher Walt
Brown explains (here), Crafard was
asked the second highest number of questions by the Warren Commission out of
all witnesses who were called to testify, namely 3,972. We should also consider
that when the FBI interviewed Crafard’s mother, Alice, on March 17, 1964, she
purportedly described him as being “very unreliable” (see here). Should the reader believe that this explains the
aforementioned contradictions between the statements of Crafard and witnesses
such as Andrew Armstrong (with regards to his alibi at the time of both the
President’s assassination and Tippit’s murder), and the inconsistencies between
Crafard’s own statements to the FBI and to the Warren Commission, the reader
should nevertheless consider that the FBI may have made up this statement in
order to try and explain any contradictions between the statements of Crafard
and Armstrong, and the inconsistencies between Crafard’s own statements.
Alternatively, Crafard’s mother may actually
have made the statement to the FBI
that Crafard was “very unreliable,” with the purpose of undermining any
suspicions the FBI may have had about her son.
Was Crafard living at 1026 North Beckley?
The overwhelming majority of JFK
assassination researchers are of the belief that, for several weeks prior to
the assassination, Oswald was living at the rooming house on 1026 North Beckley
Avenue which was owned by Amy Gladys Johnson and her husband, Arthur Carl
Johnson. Many researchers are also of the belief that on the day of the
assassination, Oswald returned to the rooming house where he allegedly
retrieved the revolver most likely used to kill Tippit (WCE 143) and then left.
However, in August, 2013, researcher Lee Farley began discussing the likelihood
that it was in fact Larry Crafard who was living at 1026 North Beckley Avenue,
not Oswald. This writer elaborates on this likelihood below. But before reading
through this writer’s discussion, the reader is strongly encouraged to first
read through Farley’s fascinating discussion (which can be read here) on Greg Parker’s research forum.
As discussed in previous essays on Gerald
Hill, it is this writer’s belief that Hill was one of the two officers inside
the DPD squad which the housekeeper, Earlene Roberts, claimed she observed in
front of the rooming house after Oswald allegedly returned to his room there. And
that Hill picked-up Tippit’s killer from the rooming house and then dropped him
off near the intersection of Tenth and North Marsalis streets. Although many
researchers have argued that Roberts’ claim is not credible, as this writer
discusses in the essay entitled “Gerald Hill and 1026 North Beckley”, the
arguments against Roberts’ credibility are rather narrow minded (click here to read the essay). Furthermore,
in the essay entitled “Gerald Hill and the Tippit murder scene – Part 1”, this
writer explains that Hill was most likely lying when he claimed that he went to
the Tippit murder scene with DPD sergeant Calvin “Bud” Owens and assistant
Dallas district attorney, William F. Alexander (click here to read the essay).
As the reader can see, towards the end of
that essay, this writer discusses the likelihood that Hill was the unidentified
officer who told DPD Captain Will Fritz that Oswald was living at the rooming
house at 1026 North Beckley Avenue. This writer would now like to elaborate on
why this was likely the case. First of all, consider that during his testimony
before the Warren Commission, counsel David Belin asked Hill, “To the best of
your knowledge, did anyone in the car in which you were riding down to the
police station [with Oswald] ever mention any Beckley Street address for the
suspect?” Hill replied “No” (WC
Volume VII, page 60). Hill was then asked “To the best of your knowledge, when
[Oswald] was brought into the police station, up to the time you left him with
Captain Fritz there, had anyone mentioned a Beckley Street address?” Hill again
replied “No” (ibid, page 61). Later on during his testimony, Hill was asked, “Where
did the police get ahold of [Oswald’s] address
on Beckley?” Hill claimed that he
didn’t know (ibid, page 62).
Let’s also take into account the fact that Hill
was then asked “If the suspect had told anyone his address from the time he was
apprehended until the time he was turned over to Captain Fritz, would you have
been in a position to hear that statement made?” To which Hill responded that
Oswald may have given his address to Officer Charles Walker; who was with
Oswald inside the interrogation room at DPD headquarters following his arrest,
without him (Hill) hearing it (ibid). Evidently becoming frustrated, Belin then
asked Hill, “Well, did you hear any
Beckley Street address mentioned?” Hill remarked that he didn’t hear anything
about a Beckley address until “probably” 7 or 8 pm on the evening of the
assassination (ibid). Following this question, Hill was asked if Walker ever
mentioned to him (Hill) any conversation which he had with Oswald inside the
interrogation room (ibid). One is at a loss to understand why Belin asked Hill
these questions; unless of course, he had information that it was Hill who told
Fritz that Oswald was living at the rooming house!
We should bear in mind that when Walker
testified before the Warren Commission (five days before Hill), he was not
asked a single question about Oswald’s address on North Beckley Avenue.
Furthermore, when detective Bob Carroll; who drove the squad car in which
Oswald was taken to police headquarters following his arrest, testified before
the Warren Commission, he was asked if he heard anyone say anything about
Oswald having an address on North Beckley Avenue (ibid, page 25). Carroll
claimed that he heard about this after they relinquished custody of Oswald
(ibid, page 26). It’s important to bear in mind that Carroll wasn’t asked about
the address to the extent that Hill was during his own testimony. The reader
should also keep in mind that, as this writer points out in the essay entitled “Gerald
Hill and the Tippit murder scene – Part 1”, researcher Lee Farley believes that
Oswald’s belongings may have been moved into the rooming house following the
assassination by certain DPD officers such as Harry Olsen; whilst all of
Crafard’s belongings were moved out. Let’s now look at additional evidence that
Crafard was living at the rooming house at the time of the assassination.
First of all, let’s take into consideration
the fact that on November 28, 1963, the Dallas office of the FBI received a
letter from a man named Armour E. Kreischer, who claimed that a close friend of
a lady named Mrs. Dan H. Foley operated a boarding house where Oswald was
residing (WCE 3007). According to the letter, at the time “Oswald” was residing
at the boarding house, he was “...known to have been employed (exact capacity
unknown) as a man of all work for one Jack Rubinstein, alias Ruby” (ibid). On
December 9, 1963, Mrs. Foley informed the FBI that she received this
information from her neighbours, Mr. and Mrs. Happy Brockman (ibid). Mrs.
Brockman telephonically informed Foley that this information had originated
with “…an employee of a Humble service station in about the 1000 or 1100 block
of Zangs Street” (ibid).
Although this writer is not aware if Mrs.
Foley was in fact a close friend of Arthur or Amy Gladys Johnson, the
significance of this information is that (as previously stated) Crafard worked at
the Carousel Club as a multi-purpose employee; with his job allegedly
consisting of being a handyman, clean-up man, part-time bartender, and also
answering the telephone. As for the identity of the employee of the “Humble
service station,” this writer believes it was John Laurel Ford; who worked at
the Enco service station at 1030 North Beckley Avenue (across the street from
the rooming house) which was operated by Gerald Duncan (WCD 205, page 228).
According to Google Maps, both Duncan’s service station and the rooming house
were within the 1000 block of North Zangs Blvd. When the FBI interviewed Duncan
on November 24, 1963, he informed them that about six weeks ago, “Oswald” went
out with John Laurell Ford to drink beer (ibid).
It’s important to bear in mind that Marina
Oswald told the Warren Commission that her husband didn’t drink beer; whereas Crafard
told the Warren Commission that he (Crafard) was a beer drinker (WC Volume I,
page 100), (WC Volume XIII, page 451). When Ford was interviewed by the FBI, he
allegedly told them that he didn’t believe he ever met Oswald (WCD 205, page
236). However, if we are to believe that this is truly what Ford told the FBI,
he may have only stated this because he may have thought that by telling the
FBI he was acquainted with Oswald, the FBI might suspect him of possibly being
involved in a conspiracy with Oswald to assassinate the President. The reader
should note that in the report of their interview with Ford, the FBI referred
to Duncan’s service station as the “Duncan-Humble service station” (ibid). The
FBI also interviewed a man named Ellijo Davis; who apparently worked at the
Gulf service station located on the corner of Beckley Avenue and Zangs Blvd.,
and reported that Davis could furnish no information with regards to Oswald’s
activities (WCD 5, page 360).
Most researchers of the assassination are
probably aware of the allegation that Oswald was living at the Beckley rooming
house under the name, O.H. Lee. Given that Oswald’s full name was Lee Harvey
Oswald; O.H. Lee could have been an abbreviation for “Oswald Harvey Lee.” Or if
one is to believe that Oswald used the name Hidell as an alias; O.H. Lee could
have been an abbreviation for “Oswald Hidell Lee.” Is there evidence that
Crafard used a name similar to “Oswald Harvey Lee?” As it turns out, there is. On
May 19, 1964, the FBI interviewed a resident of Grand Prairie, Texas, named
Mrs. James Willie Walker; who told them that on a Thursday night about seven
days before Halloween in 1963, she spent about two hours with a man who was
introduced to her as “Oswald Lee” at the home of a dope peddler and bootlegger
named Harold Zotch (WCD 1066, page 386).
A check of the calendar for 1963 reveals that
the Thursday seven days before Halloween was October 24. According to Walker, “Oswald
Lee” was identical to Oswald (ibid). Walker went on to explain that “Oswald
Lee” told her that he worked at either the TSBD or the Taylor book store; and
that he had been working there for only eight days (ibid). As the reader is
probably aware, Oswald commenced working at the TSBD on October 16, 1963.
What’s particularly significant is that “Oswald Lee” also told her that he “had
a room in Oak Cliff” (ibid). As we know, Oswald allegedly rented a room at the
rooming house at 1026 North Beckley Avenue in the Oak Cliff section of Dallas.
Walker also informed the FBI that Junior Biggs, the man who introduced “Oswald
Lee” to her, told her that she didn’t have to worry about “Oswald Lee’s” wife
as she lived in Irving (ibid).
Junior Biggs also told her that “Oswald Lee”
was writing a book; which “Oswald Lee” claimed was about life in Russia, where
he had allegedly been (ibid, page 387). Although the person whom Walker
described sounds like Oswald, there is good reason to believe that it was in
fact Larry Crafard. First of all, let’s consider that Walker claimed that “Oswald
Lee” had a tattoo of a dagger with a snake on his left forearm (ibid, page
388). As this writer has discussed previously, Dr. Earl Rose; the medical
examiner who had performed the autopsy on Oswald’s body after he was pronounced
dead at Parkland memorial hospital, told the FBI that if there had been a
removal of a tattoo from Oswald’s forearm within a period of two months prior
to Oswald’s autopsy, he would have noticed it and made a note of it in his
autopsy report. As this writer also discussed previously, Robert Kermit
Patterson; co-owner of the contract electronics store on Elm Street, informed
the FBI that the Oswald lookalike who accompanied Jack Ruby to his store (who
was most certainly Crafard) had what he thought was a tattoo on his left
forearm.
During her interview with the FBI, Walker
also described “Oswald Lee” as a 24 year old white male, 5 feet 5 inches tall,
weighing 140 pounds, with a medium complexion, dark eyes, dark brown hair which
was “slicked down,” and “wearing old clothes, clean and neat” (ibid, page 388).
The reader should keep in mind that the FBI described Crafard as a 22 year old
white male, 5 feet 8 inches tall, weighing 150 pounds, with a medium complexion,
brown eyes, and brown hair (WCE 2250). Although Walker’s description of “Oswald
Lee’s” age, height, and weight were slightly off, her description of his
complexion, and eye and hair color, is consistent with the description which
the FBI provided of Crafard’s complexion, and his eye and hair color. We should
also bear in mind that FBI agent Bardwell Odum; who interviewed Walker, noted
that when Walker was shown a photograph of Oswald (which was taken by the DPD
following his arrest), she informed him that she believed “Oswald Lee”
was Oswald, but asked him twice if he was positive that the photograph he
showed her was of Oswald (WCD 1066, page 388).
This suggests that Walker thought “Oswald Lee” was not actually
Oswald, but rather an Oswald lookalike. If Crafard killed Tippit in order to
frame Oswald for Tippit’s murder, then it is not ridiculous to believe that he
would be impersonating him, and would claim that he worked at the TSBD etc. It
is perhaps also worth keeping in mind that Mrs. Walker told the FBI that “Oswald
Lee” drank coffee (ibid, page 387). When Crafard testified before the Warren
Commission, he indicated that he was a coffee drinker (WC Volume XIII, page
473). Furthermore, Pauline Hall, who had worked for both Ruby and his sister
Eva Grant, Informed the FBI that she thought Crafard was “creepy,” and that in
effect he “looked like a bum” (WCE 2403). Bear in mind that Walker told the FBI
that “Oswald Lee” was wearing “old clothes.” On a final note, as researcher Greg
Parker has pointed out at his research forum, a Dallas businesswoman (who
refused to be identified) claimed that she thought she saw Oswald picketing at
the Dallas memorial auditorium, where ambassador Adlai Stevenson was giving a
speech on the night of October 24, 1963 (see here).
If the person the unidentified businesswoman
observed really was Oswald, it seems unlikely that he was at Grand Prairie on
the same night. Let’s now take into consideration the statements by Donald P.
Norton; a man who claimed to have been employed by the CIA from 1957 to 1966.
According to Norton, he was given the assignment by the CIA of delivering
$50,000 to a man named “Harvey Lee” (whom Norton thought was Oswald) at a hotel
in Monterrey, Mexico, in March, 1962 (see here).
Other sources claim that Norton made the delivery to “Harvey Lee” at the aforementioned hotel in
September, 1962 (see for example the first post by researcher William Kelly in this thread at the Spartacus education
forum; and also page 16 of this
digitized file at Baylor University). However, if the alleged delivery by
Norton occurred in March, 1962, then the man Norton claimed was “Harvey Lee”
could not have been Oswald; as Oswald
was still residing in the Soviet Union at this time.
As we have already seen, the man who was
introduced to Mrs. James Willie Walker as “Oswald Lee” was likely Larry
Crafard. This then raises the question of whether the man whom Donald Norton
knew as “Harvey Lee” was Crafard. In order to answer that question, let’s take
the following account. According to Norton, it was Clay Shaw who gave him the
assignment of delivering the $50,000 to “Harvey Lee” at the aforementioned
hotel in Monterrey, Mexico. As many researchers, such as Jim DiEugenio have
demonstrated, Shaw was most certainly working for the CIA (see the second
edition of DiEugenio’s book Destiny
Betrayed). In fact, Norton claimed that Shaw was not only the “CIA
recruiting chief for Puerto Rican,
Cuban, and Mexican personnel,” but
that Shaw told him that he (Shaw) personally knew the man known to Norton as “Harvey
Lee.”
But what evidence is there that Crafard and
Shaw knew each other? On December 11, 1967, researcher and attorney Mark Lane
interviewed Darrell Wayne Garner: a man who author Joan Mellen describes as a
pimp, an alcoholic, a thief, and a gunrunner. As the reader may already be
aware, Garner was also the prime suspect in the shooting of Tippit murder
witness Warren Reynolds. There are several things Garner told Lane which, if
true, are quite significant. For one thing, Garner told Lane that Jack Ruby and
Clay Shaw knew each other; and that Shaw discussed with him (Garner) the
possibility of assassinating the President. According to Garner, this discussion
took place in an office at the Carousel Club. Garner also told Lane that he
knew Oswald, and that Oswald and Ruby were both homosexuals who were having
homosexual relations with each other (click here to read through the transcript of Garner’s interview with
Lane).
Although the reader may believe that Garner
is a witness to Oswald and Ruby being acquainted, there is good reason to
believe that the man Garner thought was Oswald was in fact Larry Crafard. First
of all, Crafard and Ruby most certainly knew each other. Secondly, let’s
consider the fact that Garner claimed “Oswald” had been in Germany. As
researcher Greg Parker pointed out to this writer, there was a sketch of a
location in Germany by Oswald inside his notebook. But as far as this writer is
aware, Oswald never travelled to Germany. On the other hand, Crafard told the
Warren Commission that whilst he was in the U.S. Army, he was sent to Germany
in April, 1959 (WC Volume XIII, page 405). There is also good reason to believe
that Crafard was a homosexual. For one thing, as Greg Parker has pointed out,
the research by investigative reporter Mark Groubert suggests that Maurice
Holman jackets (which Crafard was likely wearing when photographed by the FBI)
were popular amongst the “young gay set” (see the thread entitled “The
Stevenson Incident and the
Assassination” at Parker’s research
forum).
Furthermore, Crafard’s cousin Gale told the
FBI that Crafard exclaimed that he “…got tired of watching naked women” at
the Carousel Club (WCD 1079, page 2). In this writer’s opinion, this is a
curious statement to make, which suggests that Crafard may have had homosexual
feelings. On a final note, Crafard told the FBI and the Warren Commission that
he received a general discharge from the U.S. Army; under “honorable”
conditions (WCE 2250), (WC Volume XIII, page 405). As Greg Parker has pointed
out (here), a general discharge from
the Army was given to homosexual/bisexual servicemen and women. This writer
should also note that, as several researchers have claimed, Oswald himself may
have had homosexual feelings. For example, Buell Wesley Frazier told the FBI
that Oswald “…spoke in a very light speaking voice, somewhat girlish…” (WCD 5,
page 319). Another thing to keep in mind is that Elena Hall, Marina Oswald’s alleged
friend, told the Warren Commission that Marina told her that she (Marina) and
Oswald had sex “very seldom” (WC Volume VIII, page 396).
Although the reader may believe that the
aforementioned statements by Frazier and Hall meant Oswald had homosexual
feelings, as both Greg Parker and this writer have discussed, Oswald was likely
an undiagnosed sufferer of Asperger’s Syndrome (see the thread entitled “Why
Oswald was More Likely to Have Suffered Asperger’s Than Dyslexia” on Greg
Parker’s research forum). In his online book on Asperger’s Syndrome, Dr. Tony
Attwood; a world renowned expert on Asperger’s Syndrome, writes that the
feminine characteristics and behaviour, and the lack of interest in sex of
certain men can be explained by Asperger’s Syndrome (Attwood, A Complete Guide to Asperger’s Syndrome,
pages 80, 305, 309, and 333). Another indication that the man Darrell Wayne
Garner thought was Oswald was actually Crafard is that, as Garner told Mark
Lane, he (Garner) drove “Oswald” to the Bull Pen in Arlington, Texas, which was
owned by Ruby’s friend, Ralph Paul.
When Paul testified before the Warren
Commission, he claimed that he never spoke to Crafard (WC Volume XIV, page
148). But when Crafard testified before the Warren Commission, he claimed that
Ruby had introduced him to Paul at the Carousel Club (WC Volume XIII, page
425). However, Crafard also indicated that he didn’t know Paul too well (ibid,
page 443). Paul’s denial that he had spoken to Crafard may have been because,
as Garner told Lane; “…this guy that owns the Bull pen, I didn’t know this here
till I’ve been talking to Jim [Garrison] , but the guy that owns the Bull Pen
had a finger all in this here assassination deal.” Suffice it to say, there is
no solid evidence that the man Garner thought was Oswald was actually Crafard.
In fact, let’s consider the following which casts doubt on the notion that the
man Garner thought was Oswald was in fact Crafard.
Garner told Mark Lane that he knew “Oswald”
before “Oswald” went to Germany. This therefore suggests that Garner couldn’t
have confused Crafard for Oswald. Although Crafard could have been
impersonating Oswald prior to April, 1959, we should consider the possibility
that Garner knew both Oswald and
Crafard, and that in this particular instance, he was confusing the two.
Although the reader may also believe that Garner’s claim that Ruby and Shaw
knew each other was a lie, we should keep in mind that Cuban exile Emilio
Santana; and the reverend Clyde Johnson, both claimed that Ruby and Shaw were
acquainted (DiEugenio, Destiny Betrayed,
2nd edition, page 217). Furthermore, Thomas Edward Beckham; who
allegedly worked for the CIA and was acquainted with David Ferrie, also claimed
that Shaw and Ruby knew each other (Baylor University, John Armstrong research
collection, tab entitled Thomas Edward
Beckham).
In assessing Garner’s credibility as a
witness, it is also worth keeping in mind that author Joan Mellen writes in her
book on former New Orleans district attorney, Jim Garrison, that Darrell Wayne
Garner claimed Emilio Santana “…was with Jack Ruby a lot,” and also claimed
that Santana was undoubtedly the man who shot Tippit murder witness Warren
Reynolds (Mellen, A Farewell to Justice,
page 260). Mellen also writes in her book that Richard and June Rolfe, public
relations people who had worked for Cuban exile Sergio Arcacha Smith and who
were witnesses for Jim Garrison, testified to Garner’s credibility (ibid, page
261). According to Mellen, Rolfe observed Ruby put his arm around Garner, and that
Rolfe thought Garner was a “totally honest person” (ibid). Returning now to
Donald Norton, the CIA denied that Norton worked for them, and according to a
dispatch from the chief of the Western Hemisphere division of the CIA “Norton
has a record of psychiatric problems and received a medical discharge from the
Armed services for these reasons” (see
here).
Given the fact that Norton claimed that the
man he thought was Oswald was acquainted with Clay Shaw (whom, we should keep
in mind, worked for the CIA), this is precisely the sort of things we would
expect the CIA to state with regards to Norton. This writer should also point
out that there is also a good chance that the man Norton thought was Oswald was
in fact Oswald. According to the information posted by researcher William
Kelly, Norton noted that “Harvey Lee” refused to look him in the eye; which is
a characteristic of people with Asperger’s Syndrome. As researcher Greg Parker
has pointed out, Oswald could not make eye contact with Ruanne Kloepfer; a friend
of Ruth Paine who visited Oswald in September, 1963 (see the thread entitled “Why
Oswald was More Likely to Have Suffered Asperger’s
Than Dyslexia“ on Parker’s research forum).
Although this writer is not aware if Crafard
was in the habit of not looking at people in their eyes whilst speaking to
them, when we take into account the likelihood that Crafard was the man who was
introduced to Mrs. James Willie Walker as “Oswald Lee,” and that it was Crafard
who was living at the rooming house at 1026 North Beckley Avenue as “O.H. Lee,”
it is also more than likely that Crafard was the man who was known to Donald
Norton as “Harvey Lee” and not Oswald. Let’s now consider the following
evidence that Crafard was impersonating Oswald. On April 18, 1975, Allen L.
Capwell; the Sheriff of Wyoming county, New York, related the following
information to the FBI which he had received from a man named Richard Monroe
Margeson/Magison on April 14, 1975. According to Capwell, Margeson/Magison;
whom he had known for the past five years and considered to be “stable,” told
him that he met a man named “Tex” who arrived from New Orleans in either late
1962 or early 1963, and who he (Margeson/Magison) described as a “hit man” in
his late 20’s, 5 feet 6 inches to 5 feet 9 inches tall, with a slender build,
and weighing 135 pounds (Baylor University, John Armstrong research collection,
tab entitled Lawrence Howard). The
reader should keep in mind that Darrell Wayne Garner told Mark Lane that
“Oswald” had been inside Wanda’s bar; a homosexual hang out in New Orleans.
Margeson/Magison also told Capwell that “Tex”
was a man with a “rotten disposition” and former military service, and that he (“Tex”) furnished his name as “Lee Harvey”
(ibid). During his interview with Peter Whitmey in December, 2001, Crafard
confessed to Whitmey that he had been a hit man in San Francisco in the early
1960’s before he went to Dallas. According to Whitmey, Crafard’s older brother,
Edward Crafard, “appeared to confirm” to
him (Whitmey) during a telephone interview that Crafard had been a hit man.
Whilst some might believe that Crafard would not have confessed to being a hit
man if he was the man who shot Tippit, we should bear in mind that if Crafard
was insane enough to shoot a policeman in broad daylight in a suburban street,
then it stands to reason that he was also insane enough to confess to a
researcher that he had been a hit man. Furthermore, it is perhaps worth keeping
in mind that Crafard’s cousin, Gale, told the FBI that Crafard was conceited
and frequently bragged about his muscular strength and physique (WCD 1079, page
4). Thus, this might also explain why he confessed to being a hit man.
As this writer has pointed out previously,
Crafard served in the U.S. Army. As this writer has also pointed out
previously, his cousin Gale described Crafard as a pervert during her interview
with the FBI, and that Pauline Hall told the FBI that Crafard was “creepy,” and
that in effect he “looked like a bum.” Therefore, if Crafard was the man whom
Margeson/Magison knew as “Tex/Lee Harvey,” then this could explain why he
(Margeson/Magison) claimed that “Tex/Lee Harvey” had a “rotten disposition.” Significantly, Margeson/Magison
claimed that one of the people through whom he met “Tex/Lee Harvey” was
Lawrence Howard. As many researchers have pointed out, Howard was a Mexican
American who was involved in activities against Cuban dictator, Fidel Castro.
As author Joan Mellen writes in her book, Darrell Wayne Garner had engaged in a
“skirmish” with Howard at the Carousel Club (Mellen, A Farewell to Justice, page 261). Therefore, Howard and Crafard
could very well have been acquainted.
In assessing the likelihood that Howard and
Crafard were acquainted, we should also take into account the following.
According to Richard G. Lubic, a man named Stephen Jaffe related to him that
Lawrence Howard was a member of a group given $10 million to locate “…appropriate
individuals to carry out the assassination of John F. Kennedy” (Baylor University, John Armstrong
research collection, tab entitled Lawrence
Howard). Betsy Palmer of the HSCA noted that this was a similar story to
the one which they received from a person named Lila Hurtado (ibid). In a
memorandum to Robert Tanenbaum; the former deputy chief counsel of the HSCA,
Counsel Kenneth D. Klein wrote that Margeson/Magison remarked that after the
end of the CIA’s operation Mongoose, Howard claimed that “…they were going to
do ‘something very bad that will make the U.S. invade Cuba’” (ibid). As many researchers have
argued, Oswald was being set-up as a Castro sympathizer. Thus, by blaming the
assassination on Oswald, the conspirators may have hoped that this would have
forced the U.S. to invade Cuba.
It is also noteworthy that Margeson/Magison
claimed that in 1959/1960, Howard bought a light blue or green Nash Rambler. As
many researchers are aware, Dallas deputy Sheriff Roger Craig claimed that he
observed an Oswald lookalike enter a Nash Rambler station driven by a man whom
Craig described in his report to Sheriff Decker as a “dark complected White male” (see here). During his testimony before the Warren Commission, Craig
remarked that the driver of the Rambler was “very dark complected” with “real
dark short hair”; and in and his own
manuscript When They Kill a President,
Craig claimed that the driver was a “husky looking Latin, with dark wavy hair”
(WC Volume VI, page 266), (click here
to read Craig’s manuscript). When the FBI interviewed Lawrence Howard on
September 20, 1964, he described himself to the FBI as 29 years old, 5 feet 11
inches tall, weighing 222 pounds (200 pounds in September, 1963), with black
wavy hair, and a medium olive complexion (Baylor University, John Armstrong
research collection, tab entitled William
Seymour).
On a final note, Thomas Edward Beckham told
L.J. Delsa and Jonathan Blackmer from the HSCA that about two weeks prior to
the assassination, at the behest of David Ferrie, he delivered a package
containing photographs of buildings and maps of streets to Lawrence Howard at
the Executive Inn Motel in Dallas (Baylor University, John Armstrong research
collection, tab entitled Thomas Edward
Beckham). If Beckham’s claim is true, one has to wonder what Howard would
need the photographs and maps for. We should also keep in mind that in the
aforementioned memorandum from Kenneth D. Klein to Robert Tanenbaum, Klein
wrote that it had been revealed that “Tex” was in fact William Seymour; a
friend of Howard’s who was also involved in activities against Fidel Castro.
However, it is not stated in the memorandum how this was allegedly revealed.
According to the memorandum, Margeson/Magison
claimed that “Tex” told him that he worked for the CIA, and showed him a piece
of paper with the name “E.H. Hunt” and a phone number on it. If
Margeson/Magison is to be believed, “E.H. Hunt” was by all likelihood E. Howard
Hunt; the CIA officer who is not only suspected by many researchers of being
involved in the assassination, but who actually confessed to being involved in
the assassination (click here to
view Hunt’s confession). However, this writer has doubts about the legitimacy
of Hunt’s so-called confession. In this writer’s opinion, Klein (and his fellow
investigators) may have only claimed that it had been revealed that Seymour was
“Tex” to cover up the fact that Larry Crafard and Lawrence Howard were
acquainted. We should also take note of the fact that Klein wrote in his
aforementioned memorandum that “Magison, it
should be noted, is very well versed in this case” and that “It appears that [Magison] has read most of the prominent
literature about the assassination. For this reason, it is difficult to tell
how much of his story is true and how much is speculation based on his
readings.”
In conclusion, Klein wrote that “It also
should be noted that Magison wants to work for this committee as an
investigator.” Suffice it to say though, based on everything discussed above,
there is good reason to believe that “Tex/Lee Harvey” was Larry Crafard; and
that not only was he acquainted with Lawrence Howard, but that both he and
Howard were involved in the assassination; and by implication, Tippit’s murder.
Before concluding the discussion of the likelihood that Crafard was
impersonating Oswald and living at the rooming house at 1026 North Beckley
Avenue, this writer would like to discuss the following. On December 2, 1963,
Edward A. Brand; who owned the Tower Insurance Agency at 1045 North Zangs
Blvd., telephonically informed the FBI that about two weeks before the
assassination, a man who identified himself as “O.H. Lee” entered his office
enquiring about automobile liability insurance (WCD 6, page 195).
According to Brand, “O.H. Lee” told him
(Brand) that he lived directly across the Street in a rooming house owned by “A.C.
Johnson” (ibid). He also told him that he had just moved from San Antonio,
Texas, to Dallas and that he didn’t own a car but that he “intended to buy one
in the near future” (ibid). The FBI noted that Brand was of the opinion that
the only identification of “O.H. Lee’s” which he had seen was a Texas driver’s
license, and that he believed the surname on the license was “Lee” (ibid). The
FBI further noted that Brand “…concluded by saying he did not immediately
recognize Lee Harvey Oswald’s photograph in the Dallas newspapers, or on
television, until after reading Oswald had in the past used the name Lee, at
which time he did recognize Oswald’s photograph as being the individual who
contacted him regarding insurance under the name of O.H. Lee” (ibid). This
writer should point out that one of the tenants at the rooming house was named
Herbert Leon Lee. However, the reader should keep in mind that Lee told the FBI
that he moved out of the rooming house on November 1, 1963 (WCD 206, page 140).
As far as this writer is concerned, there is no evidence that Herbert Lee had
recently been in San Antonio, Texas.
On the day following the assassination, DPD
detective Paul Bentley claimed during a filmed interview with WFAA-TV that he
removed what he thought was a driver’s license from Oswald’s wallet following
his arrest at the Texas Theater (click here
to view the footage). However, there is no evidence that a driver’s license was
found amongst Oswald’s belongings; let alone a license with the surname “Lee”
on it. Let’s now consider the following evidence that Crafard was the man who
visited Brand’s office. When Crafard testified before the Warren Commission, he
was asked if he ever drove Jack Ruby’s car. Crafard remarked “No. At the time I
was working for Ruby all I had, the only license I had, was a restricted
motorcycle operator’s license” (WC Volume XIII, page 500). Although this writer
cannot offer a definitive opinion as to why Crafard would intend to buy a car
in the near future if he was going to kill Tippit as part of the frame-up
against Oswald (though he may not have known at the time he visited Brand’s
office that he would be killing Tippit), the reader should take into account
the following evidence that Crafard had been in San Antonio, Texas.
On December 2, 1963, Stanley Moczygemba; a
resident of San Antonio, Texas, informed the FBI that on or about October 5,
1963, he picked-up a hitchhiker whom he thought may have been Oswald in the
outskirts of San Antonio, Texas, as he was leaving San Antonio en route to a
farm he owned in Leming, Texas (WCD 71, page 22). Moczygemba claimed that the
hitchhiker said very little, and indicated that he had come to San Antonio from
Laredo, Texas, and that he was returning to Leming, Texas (ibid). Moczygemba
described the man as being about the same age as Oswald (24), about 5 feet 8
inches tall, weighing 150 pounds, with dark hair, and wearing a hat and a heavy
coat (ibid). Moczygemba claimed that he didn’t take a good look at the
hitchhiker’s face, but by looking at a profile view of Oswald, he thought that
Oswald was the hitchhiker (ibid).
As far as this writer is aware, Crafard never
claimed that he had been in Leming, San Antonio, or Laredo. However, by his own
admission, Crafard was a hitchhiker; and Moczygemba’s description of the
hitchhiker is similar to the FBI’s description of Crafard (WCE 2250). It is
also interesting to note that the time period in which Moczygemba claims that
he picked-up the hitchhiker corresponds to the time period in which Oswald was
allegedly returning from his so-called trip to Mexico City. As the reader may
be aware, on September 27, 1963, Oswald allegedly registered at the Hotel Del
Comercio in Mexico City under the name “Lee, Harvey Oswald” (Warren Report,
Appendix XIII, page 733). In others words, Oswald allegedly registered as “Harvey
Oswald Lee” or “H.O. Lee,” which, as the reader can see, is similar to the name
“O.H. Lee.” Upon his alleged departure from Mexico City on October 2, 1963,
Oswald allegedly boarded the Transportes del Norte bus No. 332 from Mexico City
to Laredo, Texas, under the name “H.O. Lee” (ibid, page 736). He then allegedly
travelled to San Antonio, Texas, on greyhound bus No. 1265 (ibid), (WCE 2129).
Given all of the above, it is entirely
possible that it was Crafard who registered at the Hotel Del Comercio, and who
travelled by bus from Mexico City to Laredo, Texas and then to San Antonio,
Texas. Although the man impersonating Oswald at the Cuban embassy in Mexico
City was described as having blond hair by the secretary, Sylvia Duran, and the
consul, Eusebio Azcue Lopez, it is possible that Crafard dyed his hair blond
and then changed it back to brown (DiEugenio, Destiny Betrayed, 2nd edition, page 349). In conclusion, there is
no solid evidence that Crafard was living at the rooming house at 1026 North
Beckley Avenue under the name O.H. Lee. When Amy Gladys Johnson testified
before the Warren Commission, she was asked about the rooming house register on
which Oswald, according to Johnson, wrote the name O.H. Lee (WC Volume X, 294).
If Oswald wasn’t living at the rooming house, the name O.H. Lee may have been
forged onto the so-called register in Oswald’s handwriting (click here to view the register).
Whilst there is no proof that Crafard was
Tippit’s killer, based on everything this writer has discussed above, it is
nevertheless this writer’s belief that Crafard likely was the killer. It is
perhaps worth keeping in mind that, as Joan Mellen writes in her book, Jim
Garrison suspected Crafard of being a professional killer (Mellen, A Farewell to Justice, page 260). As
Mellen also writes in her book, Crafard’s older brother Edward claimed that
Crafard was “heavily involved in the assassination,” that Crafard knew Ruby and
Oswald were acquainted before the assassination, and that Crafard didn’t leave
Dallas until after Ruby shot Oswald
(ibid). But as Peter Whitmey writes in his aforementioned essay, during a
telephone interview with Edward, Edward was “…quite vague about his brother’s
activities in Dallas, but suggested he was merely an observer and not a
participant.” Whitmey also writes that Edward “…also seemed indifferent to
Prof. Mellen’s comments.” If Crafard was Tippit’s
killer (and the man who shot the President from the sixth floor of the TSBD) it
seems unlikely to this writer that he would wait until November 24, 1963 to
leave Dallas. In fact, it would make more sense if he left Dallas on the day of
the assassination; and this is precisely what Whitmey claims Crafard and
Crafard’s second wife (Shirley) told him. On a final note, Whitmey writes that
Jim Garrison “wondered if Craford had shot Tippit, whom (he) now admits to
knowing.” If this claim is accurate, and if Crafard was Tippit’s killer,
he may have made this admission so that people wouldn’t suspect him of being
the killer.
The Larger Conspiracy
But what about Crafard’s so-called knowledge
that Ruby and Oswald were acquainted with each other? Crafard told the Warren
Commission that he thought that before he left Dallas, Andrew Armstrong had
made the statement that Oswald had been in the Carousel Club (WC Volume XIV,
page 45). However, Armstrong denied telling Crafard (and anyone else for that
matter) that he had seen Oswald in the Club (WC Volume XIII, page 343). In this
writer’s opinion, Crafard probably claimed that Armstrong made the statement
that Oswald was in the Club to make it look like Oswald and Ruby knew each
other; and that they could have been involved in a conspiracy to assassinate the
President. Let’s also consider the following. On August 21, 1964, the FBI
showed Crafard photographs of Bernard Weissman; the Jewish right wing activist whose
name was on the infamous black boarder advertisement (WCE 1031) in the Dallas Morning News newspaper on the day
of the assassination denouncing President Kennedy. The FBI noted that Crafard “…recalled
the photographs as being of a man he recognizes as having been at the Carousel
Club… on a number of occasions” (WCE 2430).
The FBI also noted that Crafard “…has heard
Ruby refer to Weissman by the name of ‘Weissman,’ and on several occasions has
served Weissman drinks at the Carousel Club” (ibid). In a subsequent interview
with the FBI on August 27, 1964, Crafard claimed that he “…has a very vague
recollection of having heard either Ruby or the man in charge of the Carousel
Club in Ruby’s absence, whose name is either Andy Alexander or Andy Armstrong,
mention the name Weissman” and that Crafard “…does not remember in what connection
[Weissman’s] name was mentioned, unless possibly it was simply an order to
serve Mr. Weissman. Crafard believes
he served such a ‘fellow’ two or three times at the bar at the Carousel Club in
the late evening and that he was a detective from the Dallas, Texas, Police
Department” (ibid). According to the FBI, Crafard was “inclined” to think that
Weissman’s first name might have been “Johnny” (ibid). This writer should point
out that according to the DPD personnel assignments booklet for November, 1963,
there was no officer with the surname Weissman (WC Volume XIX, Batchelor
Exhibit No. 5002).
As far as this writer is aware, no other
employee of the Carousel Club has ever claimed that Ruby and Weissman were
acquainted; or that Weissman had been in the Club. As a matter of fact, Andrew
Armstrong, and Nancy Powell and Karen Bennett Carlin, both of whom worked at
the Club as strippers, all told the FBI that they never saw Weissman at the
Club or with Ruby prior to the assassination (WCE 2984). Weissman himself
denied having known Ruby or ever being at the Carousel Club when he testified
before the Warren Commission (WC Volume V, page 514). Ruby also denied knowing
Weissman when he testified before the Warren Commission (ibid, page 203). In
this writer’s opinion, the significance of Crafard’s claim that Weissman knew
Ruby (a fellow Jew) and was in the Carousel Club is that those responsible for
President Kennedy’s assassination wanted to implicate the Jews as being
involved in the assassination. This writer should note that when Crafard was
asked during his testimony before the Warren Commission if Weissman had been in
the Carousel Club, he remarked “I don’t remember any indication of that,
either” (WC Volume XIV, page 69).
But before discussing the possibility that
the conspirators wanted to implicate the Jews as being involved in the
assassination, this writer would like to point out that when attorney Mark Lane
testified before the Warren Commission, he claimed that he had information from
a confidential informant that Weissman had a meeting with Ruby and J.D. Tippit
at the Carousel Club, on the evening of November 14, 1963 (WC Volume II, pages
57 and 58). As researcher Robert Howard explains, the FBI had information that
Lane’s informant was a man named Paul Bridewell a.k.a. Phil Burns (see the
thread entitled “Ruby, Tippit and Weissman at the Carousel Club” at the Education
Forum). During his aforementioned interview with the FBI on August 21, 1964,
Crafard claimed that he was “quite certain” that he was at the Vegas Club on
the night of November 14, 1963. Furthermore, Crafard denied that he had any
information about a meeting between Ruby, Weissman, and Tippit.
When Weissman was interviewed by the FBI on
December 5, 1963, he informed them that the decision to use his (Weissman’s)
name on the black border ad was made by him and Larrie Schmidt. The latter was the leader of the
ultra-conservative/right wing organisation known as Conservatism USA (CUSA)
which Weissman was a member of, in order to “offset”
anti-Semitic charges made against the “conservative movement” in Dallas (WCE
1052). Schmidt also made this claim during his own interview with the FBI on December
3, 1963 (WCE 1815). One of the most interesting members of CUSA was a man named
Larry Jones. As researcher Greg Parker explains, there is good reason to
believe that Jones may have been involved in the assassination (see here). The reader is also encouraged to
read page 691 of WCD 7 in addition to the information discussed by Parker.
During his testimony before the Warren Commission, Weissman was asked the
following question by Senator John Sherman Cooper; “Would you state now to this
Commission the idea of printing this [black border] ad was conceived by you and
Larry Jones – what is the others name?" Weissman remarked that it was Larrie
Schmidt (WC Volume V, page 510).
The significance of Weissman’s response is
that despite the fact he claimed that Jones had left Dallas before he
(Weissman) arrived in early November, he failed to contradict Cooper, thus
indicating that Jones was involved in placing the black border ad into the Dallas Morning News newspaper (ibid, page 498). As this writer explains at Greg
Parker’s research forum, Jones (according to Larrie Schmidt) was closely
associated with a man named Warren Hasty Carroll (see the thread entitled “Warren
Hasty Carroll” at Parker’s research forum). As the reader can see by reading
that thread, Carroll was not only once employed by the CIA’s anti-communism
division as a Communist propaganda analyst, but was also employed by H.L.
Hunt’s ultra-right wing radio show, Life-Line,
as a script writer. As several researchers have pointed out, Hunt had
anti-Semitic beliefs. In fact, in an article for the Washington Post entitled “H.L. Hunt Accused by Ex-Aides”, Jack
Anderson and Les Whitten write that Hunt’s former personal assistant John
Curington, and Hunt’s trusted corporate aide John Brown, accused Hunt of
furnishing money to “a leading anti-Semitic propagandist…with instructions for
the funds to be used to create an unfavorable image for Jews” and that Hunt
“‘spent huge sums of cash’ to mail out ‘an attack on John F. Kennedy and the Roman
Catholic Church’” (click here to
read the article).
Curington has also claimed that the day
before Ruby shot Oswald, Hunt ordered him (Curington) to “spy on Police
security surrounding Oswald” and that Hunt was “elated” to learn that it was
lax (see here). Whilst this writer
does not advocate that the allegations by Curington and Brown are necessarily
true, it is nevertheless significant to this writer that one of the financial
contributors to the black border ad was Hunt’s ultra-right-wing/conservative
son, Nelson Bunker Hunt; who was affiliated with the right-wing intelligence
network known as ”The International Committee for the Defence of Christian
Culture”, founded by an ex-Nazi (WCE 1885). Bunker Hunt told the FBI that the
advertisement “…was a criticism of President Kennedy in a dignified way”
(ibid). This writer should point out that another person who was responsible
for the placement of the black border advertisement into the Dallas Morning News newspaper was Joseph
P. Grinnan; an independent oil operator whom Weissman described as “the
volunteer coordinator for the John Birch Society” when he testified before the
Warren Commission (WC Volume V, page 504). The reader should bear in mind that
as several researchers have noted, H.L. Hunt was also a member of the John
Birch Society.
When Grinnan was interviewed by the FBI on
April 24, 1963, he informed them that the reason the ad was placed into the
newspaper was because “…he and the other individuals responsible for this
advertisement considered it a dignified way of protesting the policies of [the]
President… with due respect to the office of the President” (WCE 1882). We
should bear in mind that during his testimony before the Warren Commission,
Weissman claimed that “too many” members of the John Birch Society were “anti-Jewish”
(WC Volume V, page 500). We should also bear in mind that both Weissman and
Larrie Schmidt told the FBI that it was Schmidt’s idea to place the
advertisement into the newspaper (WCE 1052, 1815). However, they may have only
made this claim after being coerced by the FBI to do so, in order to cover-up
the possibility that there was a conspiracy to assassinate the President; and
to lay the blame on the Jews by placing Weissman’s name onto the advertisement.
Returning now to Bunker Hunt, whilst some
might argue that it is ridiculous to believe that he (Bunker Hunt) would have
admitted to the FBI that he contributed funds for the purpose of placing the
advertisement into the newspaper if he was involved in trying to implicate the
Jews as being involved in the assassination, we should consider the possibility
that Hunt may have believed that if he lied to the FBI by telling them that he
didn’t contribute any money, he would come under suspicion of trying to pin the
blame for the assassination on the Jews. As for Crafard, there is no way of
knowing for sure whether he was involved in trying to pin the blame for the
assassination on the Jews. It is also curious that Andrew Armstrong, whom, we
should bear in mind, was the man who provided Crafard with an alibi for the
time of the assassination, told the Warren Commission that he once worked at
the Holiday Hills Apartments in Dallas which was owned by the Hunt Oil Company
(WC Volume XIII, page 304).
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank researchers Greg
Parker, Mark Groubert, Jim DiEugenio, and Lee Farley for all the help they have
provided me. I would also like to thank the fantastic team of researchers at
the Reopen Kennedy Case forum for all the support and encouragement they have
given me to complete this essay. On a final note, I would like to thank Jim
DiEugenio for taking the time to proofread this essay prior to it being
published on my blog.
The reader may also be interested in reading through the discussion of the essay (here) at Greg Parker's research forum.
The reader may also be interested in reading through the discussion of the essay (here) at Greg Parker's research forum.