Hat tip to David Reitzes who did an amazing job on the Julia Mercer story. Here is the complete Julia Mercer story. I know it's long, but I wanted to include all the relevant documents so that researchers can easily access everything. This story is even crazier than we thought. Right after the assassination, Julia Ann Mercer gave a statement to the FBI: Mercer said that "along the back side of the truck were what appeared to be tool boxes." She did "not see too clearly" the man who was "under the wheel of the car and slouched over the wheel," [what?] The other man took out "what appeared to be a gun case." The FBI Questioned Mercer the very next day: A few days later, Mercer was questioned again: Mercer was shown a picture of Oswald and she was clear that he was not the man "who had taken the rifle from the truck." A few days later, the FBI again questioned Mercer: Mercer said, "the person in the truck had a rather large round face similar to RUBY's, but she could not identify him as the person." The FBI then went searching for air-conditioning trucks that might have stopped on Elm Street: In early December, the FBI caught a break when they talked to Dallas policeman E. V. Brown: Here is a more complete report: There is corroboration for Officer Murphy's report. Here is an excerpt of the transcript of the Dallas Police radio transcripts for November 22, 1963: Less than ten minutes later Murphy calls in again: There really was no need to further investigate Julia Mercer's story. She couldn't identify the two men with the truck, and it certainly seems strange that a grassy knoll gunman would arrive by truck over an hour and half before the motorcade, and in full view, walk with a gun case up the grassy knoll. And Officer Murphy's corroborated report explained what actually happened. Julia Mercer's affidavit (shown above) was printed in the 26 volumes of evidence, and Mark Lane opened his book, Rush to Judgment, with her story: (starting on page 29) "Miss Mercer signed an affidavit for the Dallas Sheriff's office on November 22, describing the incident in detail, and it was published in the volumes of evidence by the Warren Commission. Yet the Commission did not call her as a witness. Neither was she questioned by a Commission investigator, nor did any reference to the event appear in the Commission Report, not even her name. The Commission did not try to identify the three police officers so as to question them or to locate the truck which Miss Mercer had described." Josiah Thompson also discussed the Julia Mercer story in his book Six Seconds in Dallas. He took a very different approach by debunking the incident. He notes: (page 219) "Officer Joe Murphy was immediately questioned by FBI Agents Henry J. Oliver and Louis M. Kelly. Their report, reproduced at left [see above], effectively puts to rest any lingering doubts about the pickup truck seen by Julia Ann Mercer." In early 1968, according to Jim Garrison, Julia Mercer's husband contacted his office and he met them at the Fairmount Hotel: (page 217 in On the Trail of the Assassins) "... I handed her copies of her statements as they had been printed in the Warren Commission exhibits. She read them carefully and then shook her head. 'These have all been altered,' she said. 'They have me saying just the opposite of what I really told them.'" I find it hard to believe that she had never looked at her statements. Garrison then wrote her amendments to her statements and had her sign them: Her notation reads as follows: (1/18/68) "The signatures on this affidavit (which is entitled "Sheriff's Department. County of Dallas, Texas") are not mine but are very good imitations - except that the Capital "A" is not close. I did not sign anything of this kind and, furthermore, there was no woman present at any time when I was questioned. It is not true that the truck had "Air Conditioning" printed on the side. I clearly stated that there was no printing on the sides. I did not say that I did not see the driver too clearly. The fact is that I looked right in his face and he looked at me twice. This is why I was able to recognize him when I later saw him shoot Oswald on T.V." Her notation reads as follows: (1/15/68) "Four pictures were selected by me as the driver of the truck. One of them was Jack Ruby. I remember seeing his name on the back of the picture when they turned it over. I again recognized Jack Ruby when I saw him shoot Oswald and I said to my family, who were watching TV with me, "That was the man I saw in the truck." When they showed me the pictures and I picked out Jack Ruby's picture, this was on Saturday morning, the day after the President's assassination and the day before Ruby shot Oswald." Her notation reads: (1/15/68) "It is not true that the above truck had "Air Conditioning" printed on the driver's door. Every time I was questioned - which included at least two times by the F.B.I. -- I clearly stated that there was no printing on the truck. Furthermore, even before Ruby shot Oswald, when the FBI agents showed me pictures I selected Jack Ruby's picture as one of those which appeared to be the driver. When one of the agents turned the picture over, I saw "Jack Ruby" on the back." Julia Ann Mercer On the side of the document, she wrote: "Nov. 23, 1963 was when I picked out the picture of Jack Ruby." A few weeks later Jim Garrison sent Julia Mercer this letter: I don't have the photograph that Garrison sent to Mercer. However, it was probably a picture of a laundry truck from New Orleans. Richard Sprague had identified a laundry truck on a side street during the motorcade and Garrison believed it "had been driven from New Orleans to Dallas and was used in the assassination." (Wegmann conference with Gurvich, August 29, 1967) Here is the statement that Garrison had typed up: Now Mercer says she saw the actual rifle wrapped in paper. At the end of January 1968, Jim Garrison appeared on the Johnny Carson show and he brought up Julia Mercer's story: There were a few problems with Julia Mercer's so-called identification of Jack Ruby as the driver of the car. First, he couldn't have been there. He was at the office of the Dallas Morning News. Journalist George Lardner spoke to Hugh Aynesworth on February 1, 1968. Here is an excerpt from his notes: Gladys Craddock worked in the advertising department of the Dallas Morning News, and she also said that Ruby was there at 11 am: Warren Commission Exhibit 1479, Volume XXII, page 900 And, of course, Ruby himself said he was at the Dallas Morning News Offices that morning: C. Ray Hall Exhibit 3, Volume XX, page 49 The other problem with Julia Mercer's identification of Ruby is that she initially said that "the person in the truck had a rather large round face similar to Ruby's ..." The mug shot she was shown was from 1954: Gary Mack sent an email to David Reitzes in 2002 saying "Find [Jack Ruby's 1954 mug shot -- which is the only one the DPD had in 1963 -- and you'll see a heaver, round-faced Ruby. Ruby had aged nine years and lost a lot of weight, so Mercer could not have seen the real Jack Ruby." Jim Garrison published A Heritage of Stone in 1970, and he included the revised Julia Mercer story: (page 43) "About one hour before the assassination, Julia Ann Mercer, a 23-year-old resident of Dallas, driving a rented white Valiant automobile, was held up in traffic and observed a man dismount from a truck at the foot of the grassy knoll with what was obviously a rifle wrapped in brown paper. The driver of the truck, as she subsequently informed uninterested federal investigators, was Jack Ruby." Later on, on page 170 Garrison writes: "As she pulled to a stop, she noticed on her right a green, unmarked pickup truck parked next to the curbing. To her considerable surprise, she saw a young man dismount from the truck and remove a rifle. The rifle was wrapped in brown paper, but its outlines were quite unmistakable." Garrison also writes that "when asked if the young man resembled Lee Oswald, whose face already was being hammered into history as the lone assassin, she replied that he did not resemble Oswald in any way." Of course, "Had the FBI taken action on the Mercer identification of Ruby at Dealey Plaza, Ruby would have been arrested on Saturday, and he could not have killed Oswald on Sunday." In July 1977, Jim Garrison sent this letter to investigator Jonathan Blackmer, of the House Select Committee on Assassinations: Here are the relevant paragraphs about Julia Mercer: "I also enclose the statements of Julia Ann Mercer. These were dictated to me by her, written by me on the falsified Bureau and Sheriff's Office statements and signed by her. I cannot emphasize the potent integrity of her as a witness, a highly intelligent ... one sufficiently intelligent to know the danger of her position from what she saw. I probably made a mistake not calling her as witness (to confirm the existence of a conspiracy) at the Shaw trial but I thought we could make it without exposing her. The full meaning of what Julia Ann Mercer said (+ of its concealment by authorities) will grow upon you, I am sure. For one thing, it puts into the proper perspective the real Jack Ruby (and his anti-Castro activities, as a member of the Mafia branch of the Agency in the late '50's and early '30's). For another, it clarifies how - by the time Sunday came - Ruby had been maneuvered into a posture, from which he could not extricate himself, when he was told to eliminate Oswald. And finally, it provides a lead for one of the men on the grassy knoll who is, as well, an excellent candidate as the man who killed Tippitt (sic) (with an automatic, needless to say, and not a revolver). You might want to photostat the Mercer statements and cross-file the copies under Laverne Crafard - wherever he is now." Garrison believed that the Julia Mercer story was relevant to his suspicions that Larry Crafard, who worked for Jack Ruby at the Carousel Club, might have been a grassy knoll assassin, or the man who killed Tippit. Jim Garrison actually named Larry Crafard as a grassy knoll gunman to journalist Ron Rosenbaum. The HSCA said that they were "unable to locate Ms. Mercer for further examination of the reports." Julia Mercer talked to author Henry Hurt in 1983 and once again embellished her story: (page 115 of Reasonable Doubt) "On Sunday morning, the day after Miss Mercer made the identification, she was watching the assassination coverage on television with friends and saw Ruby shoot Oswald. Instantly, she shouted that they were the two men she had seen on Friday and had identified for the FBI. Ruby, she said, was the driver and Oswald the man with the rifle." Of course, this is nonsense. Oswald was at work in the Texas School Book Depository at 11 am. Jim Garrison included the Julia Mercer story in his 1988 book, On the Trail of the Assassins: "Julia Ann Mercer, an employee of Automat Distributors, was driving west past the grassy knoll on Elm Street. Caught in a traffic jam, she found herself stopped alongside a pick-up truck parked way up along the curbing. She saw a young man, with a rifle in a case, dismount and clamber up the steep incline onto the knoll." Garrison then writes: "Long before, I had learned that Julia Ann Mercer had seen a man carrying a rifle case up the grassy knoll an hour before the assassination. Police officers standing on the nearby overpass observed what was happening and made no move to interfere." Garrison was alarmed about what happened to Mercer's statements: "But to me the responses to her statements were even more chilling. They proved that law enforcement officials recognized early on that a conspiracy existed to kill the President. Both local and federal authorities had altered Mercer's statements precisely to conceal that fact." Bizarrely, Garrison adds this footnote: "There was a coda to the Julia Ann Mercer story. In the late 1970s, when I was in private law practice, the House Select Committee on Assassinations convened. Because I had seen too much critical material disappear in the hands of the federal investigation, I was not enthusiastic about sending the committee anything." But he did write the HSCA about Mercer and he sent them her statements. Garrison then complained about the HSCA not finding Mercer: "Because of the exceptionally high casualty rate among important assassination witnesses, I described her only by her maiden name, which she had signed on her statements. In an accompanying letter, I explained the reason to the committee and said that if they intended to call her as a witness and would assure me that there would be a serious offer to protect her, I would be happy to send her married name and present address." Garrison wrote that "Julia Ann Mercer [was] possibly the most important witness we encountered during our investigation ... What Mercer had seen virtually added up to a prima facie case of conspiracy." Despite her importance, Garrison did not call her to the witness stand during the Clay Shaw trial: "However, her testimony would be peripheral to our case against Clay Shaw, who was only a small part of the overall conspiracy. Considering the number of witnesses who had been murdered or otherwise disposed of by "accidents," I decided that we could not needlessly endanger her life. For the same reason, I continued not make available to the press or the federal government her married name or her residence." The letter Garrison sent is above, and there is no mention about how to find Julia Mercer. Unless, of course, there is another Garrison letter to the HSCA that I don't have. Since Julia Mercer was Garrison's "most important witness," how could Oliver Stone resist putting her story in his film JFK? (page 117 in JFK: The Documented Screenplay) HOTEL SUITE - NEW ORLEANS - (1967) Julia Ann Mercer, 28, looks at Jim with sincere eyes. Her husband, a prosperous Republican businessman, watches from the corner. Jim - along with Al - has her testimony in front of him. JIM: ... in the sheriff's report, Mrs. Mercer, it says you were at Dealey Plaza two hours before the assassination but that ... MERCER: Yes, it was about 11 in the morning. I was driving west on Elm Street, toward the Triple Underpass, in a rented car -- a blue Valiant. I'll never forget that day. FLASHBACK TO Dealey Plaza in 1963. It's a normal scene -- cars, traffic, people starting to arrive for Kennedy's appearance. We catch a glimpse of Julia Ann Mercer, 23, driving, then stopping in traffic. MERCER: (voice-over) ... there was quite a bit of traffic and I was stopped alongside a green pickup truck. It was very noticeable because it was blocking traffic and it was parked with two wheels on the curb. When I saw the gun, I thought -- the Secret Service is not very secret. She glances over at the man in the driver's seat. It's Jack Ruby, wearing a green jacket. Then she sees a young white man in his mid-20s, in gray jacket, brown pants, plaid shirt and wool stocking hat, getting out of the passenger side, going to the rear of the van, opening a tool compartment and removing a package that looks like a rifle wrapped in paper. He walks up the embankment in the direction of the picket fence. Ruby looks over and stares at Julia Ann, who turns away and notices three police officers standing near a motorcycle on the overpass bridge. Her eyes lock with Ruby's a second time and as the traffic moves, she drives. on. MERCER: (voice-over) The next morning, Saturday, I went to the FBI office and the agents showed me the photographs ... In the Dallas FBI office, Mercer sits at a table looking at photos. Two FBI agents stand near her showing her photos. She shakes her head "no" several times, until they put a shot of Jack Ruby in front of her. She holds it up. MERCER: (voice over) I picked out three pictures that looked generally like the driver of the truck and then ... MERCER: That's the man. FBI AGENT: (to Second Agent) Jack Ruby. SECOND AGENT: What about these others? You said they might be him. MERCER: They look a little like him. But no, (holding up the Ruby photo) I'm sure this is the man. Back in the present, Jim continues to question Mercer. JIM: You mean you identified him on Saturday, the day before Ruby shot Oswald? MERCER: That's right. When I saw him on TV, I was shocked. I said to my family, "that was the man I saw in the truck." JIM: (skeptical) ... but you didn't seem nearly so sure in your statement to the Warren Commission. MERCER: That's what bothers me, Mr. Garrison. You see, they've been altered. My statements ... Jim is silent. Mercer picks up the report and finds the pertinent paragraphs: MERCER: This says, "Mercer could not identify any of the photographs as being identical with the person she had observed slouched over the wheel of a green Ford pickup truck. "That's not true. I recognized him and I told them so ... They also said it was a dark green air conditioning truck, which it was not. And here ... (she goes to another report) ... on the Dallas Sheriff's report. This is really strange. See that notarized signature on the bottom of the page? That's not my signature. And there was never any notary present during any of my questioning. (she hands the papers back to Jim) I guess that's all ... JIM: Mrs. Mercer, as a former FBI man, it's difficult to accept this. MERCER: I know, but Mr. Garrison, the FBI is just not doing their job. Husband: I'm a Republican, Mr. Garrison, and I don't go in for this kind of government bashing, but I must tell you something's not right when they don't even bother to call Julia in front of the Warren Commission. JIM: They didn't call a lot of people, Mr. Mercer. I think it's now safe to say the Warren Report is a work of fiction. Later on in the film there is a scene set in Garrison's office in 1968: (page 131) AL: We haven't tried to get Julia Anne Mercer in? JIM: No, she could get hurt. If you believe what's happening to these other people. NUMA: She's the best damn witness we have! JIM: I just don't want to do it. What else? The Julia Mercer story was also too good to leave out of James DiEugenio's book Destiny Betrayed. He recounts her story and adds: (page 214) "In other words, if this is accurate, Ruby should have been brought in for questioning on that day. The day before he shot Oswald. But also, this provided Garrison the rationale for why Ruby did what he did on the 24th in the basement of the Dallas jail. Garrison now theorized that Ruby must have been asked to do this job since he had such close ties to the Dallas Police. But further, if he hesitated, he would be reminded that he had played an earlier role, and if he refused, that earlier role could easily be revealed." James DiEugenio again brings up Julia Mercer in his book, The JFK Assassination, in his section "Ruby's Busy Day." (page 352) He notes the Mercer sighting at 11:00 and then adds: "Ruby is seen at the offices of the Dallas Morning News at about the time of the assassination. An employee said he disappeared for a 20-25 minute span, and then returned after. This was only four blocks from Dealey Plaza, and there is more than one photo taken at the Plaza which resembles Ruby. Was Ruby trying to arrange an alibi for himself while monitoring what happened at the crime scene?" DiEugenio ignores the Dallas Morning News employees who saw Ruby at the offices at 11:00 am (see above). His footnote for Ruby's so-called disappearance is Henry Hurt's book Reasonable Doubt (page 184). Here is what Hurt writes: "Among the few certainties is that Jack Ruby was in the offices of the Dallas Morning News around the time of the assassination. However, one reporter who knew Ruby told the FBI that Ruby was "missed for a period of about twenty to twenty-five minutes" before reappearing shortly after the assassination." His source is Warren Commission Document 4, page 672: Interesting that James DiEugenio would not say that the information came from Hugh Aynesworth. Ruby was moving around the offices and it's not surprising that people might not be able to account for every minute while he was there. However, James DiEugenio does not mention this witness: In fact, Newnam had watched the motorcade and had returned to his office at 12:40 PM: Newnam was not the only one to see Jack Ruby in the advertising department: It amazes me that so many people believe Julia Mercer's story. And it kept on getting better and better. As Vincent Bugliosi notes: (page 884 of Reclaiming History) "But why presidential assassins, hired by the CIA or mob or anyone else, would deliberately draw attention to themselves by parking illegally and blocking traffic on a busy street in the presence of three Dallas police officers as well as lay witnesses like Miss Mercer is not known. Of course, conspiracy theorists never let common sense get in the way of their hallucinatory theories."

Sergio Arcacha Smith, an anti-Castro Cuban, was sent to New Orleans from Miami as a delegate to the Cuban Democratic Revolutionary Front. In the 1950s, he had been a Consul for Cuba in Madrid, Rome, Mexico City and Bombay (now Mumbai). New Orleans States-Item, December 22, 1960 Arcacha then started the Crusade to Free Cuba (New Orleans States-Item of December 1, 1961). For the last three months in 1961, he had an office at 544 Camp Street in New Orleans. Here is an excerpt from the statement of Sam Newman (who owned the building) to Garrison on January 18, 1967: Arcacha Smith left New Orleans in 1962 after being suspected of stealing money from the organization. He moved to Miami, and then Houston (where he sold advertising), and ultimately settled in Dallas, where he was selling air conditioners. He was not in Dallas then JFK was assassinated. Here is a letter form his employer in Dallas. However, Arcacha Smith was a person of interest to Jim Garrison who suspected a connection with Lee Harvey Oswald. After all, a few of Oswald's pro-Castro pamphlets (from the Fair Play for Cuba Committee) handed out in August 1963, bore the same address, 544 Camp Street, that Arcacha's organization had back in 1962. And Garrison had two witnesses, Jack Martin and David Lewis, who had seen Oswald and Arcacha together in 1963 at Mancuso's restaurant at the corner of the building. There were two problems with that theory - first, Martin and Lewis were crackpots, and second, as we have shown above, Arcacha had left New Orleans and was living elsewhere. This hasn't stopped conspiracy theorists from believing that Arcacha was involved in the assassination. James DiEugenio, in an essay entitled "Rose Cheramie: How She Predicted the JFK Assassination," makes the case that "Arcacha's involvement [in the assassination] was likely operational" (page 237 in The Assassinations, edited by James DiEugenio and Lisa Pease). Here is his evidence (page 235): My head hurts from reading that paragraph - all sourced from other conspiracy books - but, as DiEugenio says, "If this is true, it provides a nexus point between Dallas and New Orleans, not just for the Cheramie story, but also for the assassination itself." What is the evidence that "Smith got into the lucrative drug and prostitution business that ran interstate from Miami to Dallas"? But, given his involvement in drugs and prostitution, it would have been "natural" for Smith to hook up with Jack Ruby, right? As they in the television ads, but wait, there's more! Emilio Santana was a burglar in New Orleans who was of interest to Garrison because he was friends with Miguel Torres, his partner in crime. Torres was of interest because he once had dinner with Sergio Arcacha Smith - and well, propinquity comes into play. Here is an excerpt of Garrison's first memo on propinquity dated February 10, 1967. Garrison questioned Santana who told him he was a CIA agent. Santana was involved with the CIA - first reports state that he started work in December 1960 and left in October 1963.. . There is more detail in this document: But, a review by JM/WAVE revealed the true dates of him employment: But, as DiEugenio tells the story, Santana moved to Miami. And in Miami lived Bernardo de Torres, who helped Garrison in the initial stages of his investigation. DiEugenio believes de Torres was an infiltrator, and that he "has pictures of Dealey Plaza in a safe deposit box. These pictures were taken during the assassination of JFK." DiEugenio says that quote comes from an HSCA report, but no further details are provided, and I cannot find that report. DiEugenio has two more pieces of incriminating evidence against Arcacha Smith. The first comes from Richard Case Nagell, who was a patient at the Medical Center for Federal Prisoners in Springfield Missouri. He told a Garrison investigator that he had a secret tape. Here is an excerpt of William Martin's report to Jim Garrison (memo dated April 18, 1967): That tape has never been found. But to DiEugenio, the fact that Nagell said Arcacha was part of the plot is enough to incriminate him. DiEugenio also believes that "Q" refers to Carlos Quiroga, another anti-Castro Cuban living in New Orleans. The last piece of incriminating evidence comes from an HSCA interview of State of Louisiana police officer Francis Fruge. Here is an excerpt from his interview on April 7, 1978: When I first read this, I thought well, clearly Fruge has no direct knowledge of any of this, he's just repeating a rumor. But, to DiEugenio this is important information (page 237): So, there you have it - the sewer map, the never-ever-seen De Torres photos, and the never-before-heard Nagell tape, are all the evidence you need to incriminate Sergio Arcacha Smith in the assassination of JFK. But wait, there's more. Why are the maps of the Dallas sewer system important? It's because DiEugenio wants to support the Garrison theory that there was a shot from the sewer on Elm Street. The shot from the sewer was impossible. See my post here.

In his book, The JFK Assassination, James DiEugenio challenged the premise that the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle would not have left residue on Oswald's right cheek: (page 112) "Former FBI agent Bill Turner did not buy FBI agent Cortland Cunningham's testimony about no residue escaping into the gunman's face. Writing for the magazine American Jurisprudence, Turner conducted his own tests with Vincent Guinn (who, as we have seen, Bugliosi trusts in other matters). Turner and Guinn found that the weapon discharged nitrates in abundance." The footnote for this paragraph says, "Letter from Turner to Gary Aguilar, July 17, 2007." This blog post discussed the sourcing for the claim and found there is no evidence that any such article ever existed. Fortunately, my friend Paul Hoch did manage to find a relevant study by Vincent Guinn, which offers a very helpful narrative of what actually happened. The quotation from DiEugenio's book implies that Vincent Guinn and Raymond Pinker's testing of a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle came after Cunningham's testimony to the Warren Commission. In fact, their tests were conducted shortly after November 22, 1963. Bill Turner was not involved in any testing. Here is an excerpt: It's important to note that Guinn's comprehensive report was written after Turner reported on their conversation. The report covers the company's neutron-activation analysis work through May 31, 1968, and the draft report was not finished until mid-1970. Some comments about the above excerpt from Guinn's article: Guinn wrote that "It was generally recognized that the dermal nitrate test was essentially useless," and that "its use might remove any traces of Ba (barium) and Sb (antimony) possibly present." It was possible that not all the Ba and Sb might have been washed away, and so Guinn decided to do some tests. Raymond Pinker of the Los Angeles Police Department obtained a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle. It was fired and they obtained two sets of casts. One was treated with the dermal nitrate test, and of the eight casts, only one "gave a clear-cut 'positive' test for nitrates. The dermal nitrate tests "washed away essentially all of the Ba present," with only a partial loss of the Sb. Guinn contacted the FBI and asked that the inner surface of the casts be analysed by neutron-activation analysis for antimony. He felt that there still might be enough antimony to indicate if Oswald had fired a rifle. The FBI took the casts to the Oak Ridge National Laboratory for testing. Significant levels of Ba and Sb were found on all three of Oswald's casts. Unfortunately, the Ba and Sb were found in both the outer and inner surface of each cast. This indicates that the casts had been contaminated and no conclusions could be drawn. Testing of the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle at General Atomic found that it "did deposit small, but significant, amounts of Ba and Sb on both hands and cheeks of a person who fired the rifle." DiEugenio is wrong when he writes that "the weapon discharged nitrates in abundance." It discharged a "small, but significant" amount of nitrates. What's more important is that the dermal test, as used by the Dallas Police department, would not necessarily have detected the nitrates. True scholarship would have found the actual Guinn article and discussed his findings. Instead, we have a lame attempt to put words into Vincent Guinn's mouth -- words that he never uttered. Update James DiEugenio responded on Facebook to my blog post about his scholarship: Of course, my criticism related to DiEugenio's citation of an article that doesn't seem to exist, not of Bill Turner. But yes, perhaps it is "somewhat unkind to do this type of thing to someone who cannot answer or explain." That certainly describes James DiEugenio.

The paraffin tests on the hands and cheeks of Lee Harvey Oswald have been the source of controversy since the early books on the assassination by Mark Lane and Harold Weisberg. A key question is whether the tests were decisive enough to determine if Oswald fired either his pistol or his rifle on November 22, 1963. Here is what the Warren Report says about the paraffin test: As can be seen the paraffin test was negative for nitrates on Oswald's right cheek. However, when subjected to neutron-activation analysis, it was found that barium (Ba) and antimony (Sb) were present on the both the inside and outside surface of the paraffin casts. While the test found that there was "more barium and antimony present on the casts than would normally be found on the hands of a person who had not fired a weapon," the bottom line is that the paraffin tests were indecisive. However, James DiEugenio has challenged the premise that the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle would not have left residue on Oswald's right cheek. He writes on page 112 of The JFK Assassination: "Former FBI agent Bill Turner did not buy FBI agent Cortland Cunningham's testimony about no residue escaping into the gunman's face. Writing for the magazine American Jurisprudence, Turner conducted his own tests with Vincent Guinn (who, as we have seen, Bugliosi trusts in other matters). Turner and Guinn found that the weapon discharged nitrates in abundance." The footnote for this paragraph says, "Letter from Turner to Gary Aguilar, July 17, 2007." Let me get this straight. DiEugenio mentions Turner's article in his book, but yet his footnote doesn't even cite the actual article! Or quote it. Or even quote Bill Turner. Or even quote Gary Aguilar. Is that scholarship? Here is what Bill Turner writes in his book, Invisible Witness: The Use and Abuse of the New Technology of Crime Investigation, published in 1968: (page 76) "The FBI did not think so. "A rifle's chamber is tightly sealed," testified FBI ballistics expert Cortland Cunningham, "and so by its very nature, I would not expect to find residue on the right cheek of a shooter." This explanation seemed so implausible that I contacted Dr. Vincent Guinn of General Atomics, who pioneered the development of the NAA process. He said that he and Raymond Pinker of the Los Angeles police crime laboratory were also curious about the Cunningham testimony, and ordered an Italian Carcano rifle such as Oswald supposedly fired from the same mail order house in Chicago. They fired the obsolete weapon a number of times -- some gun experts think it is likely to blow up -- and tested their cheeks by NAA. Nitrates from the blowback were present in abundance." Turner also mentioned this in his article "The Inquest" in the June 1967 issue of Ramparts Magazine: "This explanation seemed so implausible I contacted Dr. Vincent Guinn of General Atomics in San Diego, who pioneered the development of the NAA Process. He said that he and Raymond Pinker of the Los Angeles police crime lab were also curious about the test, and ordered an Italian Carcano rifle such as Oswald supposedly fired. They fired the obsolete weapon, which some authorities think is liable to blow up, and tested their cheeks. Nitrates from the blowback were present in abundance." There is no claim that he, alone or with Guinn, wrote this up for a magazine. It appears that Turner just spoke to Guinn about his tests. I decided to search for the supposed article in American Jurisprudence, which turns out to be a legal encyclopedia, not a journal. I did manage to find that there is a Journal of American Jurisprudence. "The American Journal of Jurisprudence is an international journal publishing critical discussions of the moral foundations of law and legal systems, exploring current and historical issues in ethics, philosophy of law or jurisprudence, and legal (including constitutional) theory." It doesn't look like the kind of publication that would publish a forensic study of neutron activation analysis. I searched for Turner and Guinn and came up empty. It's not the quantity of footnotes that count. It's the quality. This is a good example where Mr. DiEugenio falls short.

When we first went to New Orleans, Andrew and I took a walking tour of gay highlights in the French Quarter. One of the stops was at the memorial plaque to Clay Shaw on Governor Nicholls Street. Nor surprisingly, our tour guide at the time, and this was back in 2005, took a very dim view of Jim Garrison and his persecution of Clay Shaw. New Orleans Times-Picayune, June 3, 1994. You can still book LGBT tours of New Orleans. Here I am at the plaque for Clay Shaw: Here is a picture from the September 30, 1976 edition of the New Orleans Times-Picayune. Please click on the tags below for more information on the so-called Garrison investigation and homosexuality.

This is a story of false identification and the fact that many people, in any large investigation, come forward with stories that are just not believable. In this case, a Mr. Cedric Rolleston told Garrison investigators that he saw Clay Shaw with Lee Harvey Oswald in 1963. Clay Shaw's legal team had to run down the lead and eventually Mr. Rolleston recanted. Yet, even today, conspiracy books don't quite tell you the whole story about Mr. Rolleston. Mr. Rolleston enters our story in 1963 when he contacts the FBI regarding Lee Harvey Oswald. Here is the FBI report which is included in Warren Commission Document 205 - they unfortunately spelt his name wrong which makes it hard to find. But, in 1967 Rolleston contacted Jim Garrison's office. Garrison sent Andrew Sciambra to Alexandria to investigate. Despite finding no evidence to corroborate their story, he still flew the Rollestons to New Orleans to be interviewed. This short piece is from the Emporia Gazette of July 19, 1967. Here is the statement Rolleston gave to Garrison: Apparently, he told Garrison a lot more than this statement. Here is an excerpt from Hugh Aynesworth's book, JFK: Breaking The News: Clay Shaw's defense team had to run down the lead. Edward Wegmann sent a letter to Hugh Aynesworth: Here is the reply from Aynesworth: Clay Shaw had an alibi - he was in New Orleans. A week after the Martin Luther King assassination, William Gurvich, an investigator for Garrison, contacted the FBI because he believed that Rolleston had been in Memphis. Ultimately, Rolleston had a change of heart and said that Shaw was not the man with Oswald. This is from the Opelousas Daily World from June 13, 1968. Mr. Rolleston had a lengthy history of impersonation. This is from Madison Capital Times from March 2, 1950. And, then there is this from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch of February 25, 1952: Well, Rolleston kept on going. Here is an excerpt from a New York Times article from October 20, 1975. The article about about growing criticism of the Warren Report, and the movement for a new inquiry. The sentence above reads, "Mr. Von Rolleston was wearing a large red button in his lapel with the legend "I believe in elves." So, how do conspiracy authors treat Rolleston? Joan Mellen tries to use Rolleston as a corroborating witness to either multiple Oswalds or the real Oswald being in Alexandria. Mellen doesn't tell you that Rolleston WAS unreliable. And, of course, Garrison wanted Oswald in Alexandria. It would help with the Clinton witnesses. In the summer of 1967, Garrison was interviewed by Playboy Magazine. He couldn't have all of his "evidence" in print, and so privately informed Eric Norden, the Playboy interviewer, of other important information in his possession. Norden wrote a couple of memos to Playboy about this information. Here is one of them: Edward Jay Epstein believed that Rolleston was one of those witnesses described in point 2. And, James DiEugenio uses Rolleston as a foil to bash reporter Hugh Aynesworth. No mention that Rolleston might be unreliable. Don Carpenter writes in his book, Man of a Million Fragments, that Rolleston "wrote a bizarre letter" to the HSCA "with yet another story about the assassination." Unfortunately, he died soon after.

This memo reflects some strange conspiratorial thinking... Steve Jaffe is the person who wrote a letter to Jim Garrison telling him that Bradley was one of the tramps. He also believed Reverend Raymond Broshears. And that Dallas policeman Gerald Hill was involved in the assassination. He also believed that JFK was shot from the sewer. Jaffe also interviewed David Kroman about Richard Case Nagell. I don't believe a word of Jim Rose's story. His "pilot associate" told him that "he had flown Edgar Eugene Bradley on government missions." I believe Rose and Jaffe were just feeding back to Garrison exactly what he would like to believe about Bradley. Jim Rose [his real name was Carl McNabb] was a shadowy character who did some work for Garrison on the west coast. McNabb had a code name while working for Garrison -- Winston Smith. As you can see from the two Harold Weisberg letters below, Garrison had Rose working on some sort of S&M ring in California. Here is a letter describing Rose's practice of garbology:: Here is an excerpt of a letter that Weisberg wrote to Ellen Ray: I will be writing more about Jim Rose. Stay tuned. Previous Blog Posts on Edgar Eugene Bradley Edgar Eugene Bradley Writes Jim Garrison Was Edgar Eugene Bradley One of the Three Tramps? Why Jim Garrison Indicted Edgar Eugene Bradley for Conspiracy to Kill JFK, Part Two... Why Did Jim Garrison Indict Edgar Eugene Bradley for Conspiracy to Kill JFK? Edgar Eugene Bradley - Another Garrison Victim Jim Garrison Finds Another JFK Assassination Conspirator! Reverend Raymond Broshears Tells Even More in New Orleans! Broshears talks about Edgar Eugene Bradley Jim Garrison Discusses The Three Tramps Was Edgar Eugene Bradley one of the three tramps?

I just received my copy of Alecia Long's new book, Cruising for Conspirators: How a New Orleans DA Prosecuted the Kennedy Assassination as a Sex Crime. What a great treat for a long weekend. I strongly urge everybody to buy a copy of Alecia's book. This is an important addition to the literature on the so-called Garrison investigation. Click here to buy a copy.

Martin J. Kelly, Jr. has written a terrific review of Alecia Long's new book, Cruising for Conspirators: How a New Orleans DA Prosecuted the Kennedy Assassination as a Sex Crime. It's rare to see important new books on the JFK assassination, but Alecia Long has come up with an innovative way of examining Jim Garrison's so-called investigation. She uses the lens of homosexuality, and as any reader of this blog knows, Garrison had an inordinate interest in homosexuality. Money quote from Martin Kelly's review: "Professor Long navigates through the capricious human contingencies that launched and supported the action against Clay Shaw. She intensifies the previous revelations of Garrison’s rash crusade as a kind of “Emperor’s New Clothes” by meticulous documentation and a fresh look at homosexuality as a factor in Clay Shaw’s prosecution. Her historical analysis of homosexuality in the Garrison context creates an indelible impression of the complexity of a case that turned out to have no evidentiary foundation. While she makes no psycho-historical leaps about Garrison, or his personal psychology, a salient attitude about sadistic gay men as perpetrators of baroque violence is unmistakably present in identifying Clay Shaw as a suspect and persists until his acquittal by a jury in 1969. And, in the course of her exposition, Professor Long sketches out the perilous atmosphere enclosing gays in New Orleans in the ‘60s: because homosexuality was illegal, all sorts of options for defense against charges were more difficult to muster." Listen to Alecia Long discuss Cruising for Conspirators here. I wrote my own review on Amazon: Please take my advice and buy a copy today. Or buy two copies.

Please add this important website to your bookmark list. Steve Roe is a terrific researcher and his new blog is essential reading. Some of Steve's posts: Did General Edwin Walker plot to kill President Kennedy? Did Lee Harvey Oswald go to Mexico? The General Walker Bullet - Real or Fake? Oswald’s Revolver Here is a link to Steve's important article on Earle Cabell.

Here is lead #4 from Garrison's November 1967 leads memo: This lead was followed-up and here is the memo from Richard Burnes, who is one of the great memo writers. I'm amazed they transcribed this phone call, and even at the end, Burnes is determined to go back to the informant for more information. When you go back and read the various "leads" memos from Garrison, it's amazing how many were just rumors.

More European shenanigans from our favorite 'intelligence asset' Richard Case Nagell: Bonus document, a routing sheet from April 1970: Previous Richard Case Nagell Blog Posts A Wrap-Up of the Richard Case Nagell Story The Importance of Richard Case Nagell to Some Conspiracy Theorists Was Richard Case Nagell the "Most Important Witness There Is"? Jim Garrison and a few conspiracy theorists think Nagell is a very important witness. But is he really? Genesis of the Richard Case Nagell story Did David Kroman Crack the JFK Assassination Conspiracy? David Kroman met Richard Case Nagell at the Springfield Medical Center for Federal Prisoners. Stephen Jaffe, a Garrison volunteer, wrote a memo, relating Nagell's story through the eyes and ears of David Kroman. Richard Case Nagell Shoots Up the State National Bank in El Paso... Nagell was convicted of armed robbery and was sentenced to ten years, but his conviction was overturned because of startling new evidence. Richard Case Nagell and the JFK Assassination Did Richard Case Nagell Have Foreknowledge of Oswald and the JFK Assassination? There is no credible evidence that Nagell had any foreknowledge of either Lee Harvey Oswald or the JFK assassination. Did Richard Case Nagell Meet Lee Harvey Oswald? Nagell claims he met Oswald in Japan, Texas, Mexico City, and New Orleans. There is no credible evidence that he ever met Oswald. Did Richard Case Nagell Warn Fidel Castro about the Assassination? Nagell went to Cuba and met with Fidel Castro and even played ping-pong with the man. Insane Conspiracy Theories about Richard Case Nagell Who was Leon Oswald? Richard Case Nagell said that he knew the two Oswalds - Lee Harvey and Leon. Some conspiracy theorists believe this madness. Richard Popkin Melds the Second Oswald Theory with the Richard Case Nagell Story Combine one part crazy and one part ridiculous and what do you come up with? An early attempt at a unified conspiracy theory of the JFK assassination. Two Smoking Guns of the Richard Case Nagell Story Is this Document the Smoking Gun on the Richard Case Nagell Story? Nagell sent conspiracy theorist Dick Russell one page of a military intelligence file which seemed to indicate that he was monitoring Oswald and his wife on behalf of the CIA. But does the whole document really show that? Dick Russell's Second Smoking Gun on the Richard Case Nagell Story Did Richard Case Nagell had an Oswald Military ID in his possession when he was arrested in September 1963? Richard Case Nagell and Jim Garrison Why Didn't Richard Case Nagell Testify at Clay Shaw's Trial? Richard Case Nagell believes that he wasn't called to testify at Clay Shaw's trial because his testimony would have blown up Jim Garrison's case. Jim Garrison Discusses Richard Case Nagell At a conference in September 1968, Garrison and his investigators discuss his face-to-face meeting with Nagell in New York City. Richard Case Nagell Sends Jim Garrison on a Wild-Goose Chase William Martin, an Assistant District Attorney working for Jim Garrison, tried to retrieve a tape that Nagell said contained the voices of three JFK assassination conspirators. Richard Popkin Writes Garrison About Richard Case Nagell Richard Popkin, author of "The Second Oswald," writes Jim Garrison about Richard Case Nagell. Garrison staffer Tom Bethell thought the Nagell lead was useless. Richard Case Nagell's Mental Health Richard Case Nagell's Fight for a Disability Pension Nagell won a full disability pension in 1982 and the 60+ page court case provides complete details on his mental problems. Why Did Richard Case Nagell Shoot Up the First National Bank of El Paso? Richard Case Nagell told a psychiatrist why he shot up the bank in El Paso in 1963. Richard Case Nagell's Family Speaks about his Mental Health The FBI spoke to Nagell's ex-wife, his mother, his sister, and one of his friends. They all agreed that Nagell had significant mental health problems. Richard Case Nagell Visits Europe in 1969... Nagell visited the American consulates in Zurich and Barcelona in 1969. He was a deeply disturbed man. Richard Case Nagell's Evidence Richard Case Nagell's Nonexistent Evidence None of the so-called evidence that Nagell promised would materialize on his death has shown up. Did this evidence ever exist?