You.
Chilly Effect is sponsored by Wallstreet, Window dot Com and listeners.
Liking Yeah now the most ervated noise in our media check.
Fourth day of February twenty twenty six, allegedly according to that thing we call a calendar, and your humble host is here despite you know it taking I don't know two months to find two broken bones in an exam. But I'm not gonna talk about those details tonight. I got something better to go over. I've had some emails recently about the jfk assassination, and I'm going to cover those in a news program soon. So hold on, three of you coming at me from three distinct angles about
a question that I'm not even going to cover tonight. Instead, we're gonna go over something very different with Larry Hancock. Of course, Larry is the author of many, many books, but the most relevant ones for tonight would be the Oswald Puzzle primarily, but also someone would have talked, okay, gee, what else comes to mind here? Well, there could be a few others of Larry Hancock's you know, repertoire of books out there that will go along with this jfk assassination.
If you don't know about Larry's stuff. There will be a link there, and I also want you to check out his blog obviously, but we're going to focus on something specific that I find strange because factually we've learned over time quite a bit about Lee Harvey Oswald and how he was handled, how he was arrested, how he was put into lineups, and I find some of that
work fascinating when it goes further. But some people have been asking me questions where it's like, will you please go and read some of the stuff that existed for a long time that nobody has taken down, because initially there was speculation we didn't have a lot of stuff from the Dallas police archives. At first, we had hearsay, We had reports given by a few people, and you know, the primary person in the room was dead, that being
leeg Oswald. That was a problem. And then you had dishonest agents in there of various types, whether they be local or federal in my estimation, So you had these weird, scattered reports, and then you had what survived in the Warren commissioned volumes, and over time people did develop stronger, you know, much better back to evidence to explain what happened.
When Oswald was being ushered in and out on live television while the hallways were filled chaotically with newspeople and Jack Ruby along with a whole bunch of other people right that were just filing in and out of the Dallas Safety Building there. You saw it on live TV, but you didn't see the interrogation in the Robbery and
Homicide division. And Will Fritz with his note cap you know, his note taking capabilities that you know, people are still arguing over the fragmented, nearly illiterate, you know, notes of Will Fritz sometimes and who did take good notes, the guy who came from the post office, who by the way,
was part time FBI guy. You know, the interrogation is interesting, but first get the groundwork out of a way, and then let's talk about what actually happened, because even the people that noted and quoted and everything else didn't seem to get all of that straight. And Larry's been writing recently about this and about the specifics and really giving you a sober look without getting into hyperbole or trying to fill out an agenda, to tell you about what
was going on there. And again, this is only one aspect. This doesn't like definitively prove this or prove that, or just because Oswald said this, anybody could be lying, misrepresenting gaming the city situation, and you have to take all of that into account, given the chaos that was inside that room and just outside of it. But again, don't take it from me. Let's talk to Larry Hancock again.
You know, if you want to take a look at the various works of Larry's on the case, fine, if you want to go look at his blog, if you want to look at the fact that almost anybody who's sane in the JFK community respects anything Larry has to say when he analyzes this stuff. What can I tell you? But anyway, Larry, there will be a link there and a link to your books and probably a link to the Oswald puzzle, which the update is coming pretty soon, right.
Update should be out in April April excellent.
Which, by the way, we're going to start doing a little video aspect to this show in April if I get my way, No big pressure. I mean, you know, if you want to hold up your books or something on camera, I think it'll be helpful though, And we're definitely going to go with Rumble as the main platform, just because YouTube just has too many rules and I want to be able to speak freely. So I may be on Rumble with the video thing in April, but
no big deal. You'll just either decide if you want to turn on your camera or not, Larry, and then they'll just have to stare at me. Lucky Lucky then So anyway, always happy to have you. But but okay, so in April we'll see the Oshold Bustle updated.
Yeah, sorry, go ahead, I'd say, no problem.
I've done Rumble before seemed to be fine, so I'll look forward to it.
There you go.
No no big pressure or anything. So all right, where should we Let Let's let's again go for the context here. Okay, what are we talking about when it comes to interrogation and why is this relevant? Just to get us warmed up, Larry, I mean, let's let's go at it, you know, like as if we're actually studying something properly.
Go ahead, Yeah, And although I mean, we do have several sources now that we can combine that we didn't have in the early days. We have Fritz's testimony to the Warrant Commission. We have a handwritten copy of his notes, which made me feel good about my writing.
His is worse.
We have the FBI report of the interrogation. We as you said, we have several sources, so we can kind of see what was common to all of them.
But what we I think, what.
We know, and what we're kind of looking at and what I'm looking at now is what did the interrogation look like? From Oswall's perspective. We always look at it from the other side. But if you step back and ask the question, what was he shown in terms of evidence against him? How strong a case did they make there right in front of him. Why was it with all the evidence they had in hand, they didn't.
Push it on him.
Why was it Fritz apparently did not push him to sign a confession the same way he did Frasier. Why was it that they did not read the charges against him to him to help force the confession standard procedure. A lot of things that you would expect from Fritz, which are typically Fritz. Everybody in Dallas said, you know, he did hard nosed interrogations, He pushed for confessions.
He was really strong.
And the interesting thing is, if you look at it from Oswell's perspective, maybe you get a different view as to how strong a case he thought.
He had against him.
And if you think Oswald didn't didn't do it, and was sitting there knowing he didn't do it, what's.
Going through oswell it?
Right, So let me interrupt you with just a few things that I think I would love to hear you touch on, which is, primarily, let's not forget the district's attorney, Wade is outside the door talking to the media right while this guy's being interrogated. He's certainly got to have
some sort of influence on it. And as we've studied his record posthumously, you know, we find that maybe there was a little you know, tipping of the scales with a thumb now and then with this guy just saying if you take a look at the overturned convictions, et cetera, and the fact that he was saying, look, every time I go for the death penalty, I get it. And he's telling the media this, Okay, you know clearly right away that's interesting. What is his influence on the circumstance,
one would wonder number one. Number two, the conspiracy advocate often points to this whole thing with the backyard photographs. Right, Oswald was shown this photograph. Well, there's a process by which that photograph was created. It had to be retrieved
from the pain's house. So there's a timing element here that I think is completely You know, whether people want to argue for or against the backyard photographs, they often skip this entire episode or they try to utilize it in order to bolster their case one way or another. And I do mean that's everything from Boogliosi to you know, God help me. I think Judy Baker mentions it in her book. I mean, you know, here we go, there's something to this that I think a sober look at
that photograph. Was it presented, how was it presented, When was it presented? And lastly, a very common element here, regardless who the suspect is, regardless who the police are, what about the interrogation technique itself. It's very lengthy. Some would say because of the importance of the injured parties. Okay, the importance of the murder victims. Therefore his interrogation is lengthy.
But that lengthy interrogation is a technique in and of itself, and I don't often hear a real analyzation of the technique used to interrogate Oswalt, which is extremely important for his mindset, whether he's guilty or not, whether he thinks he's clever, whether he thinks he's an agent on assignment, or whether he's you know, the idiot that tried to
get himself in the history books. As you know, Jero Posner likes to say, you know, either way, we have to look at this from a psychological perspective, because interrogation is a strategic, psychological and very often, you know, quite regulated sort of technique of an interaction where the cops have a way of doing things. They specifically do things, whether it's to put you in a chair with uneven legs, or to deny you water, or to make you ask for water, or to put pressure on you, or to
offer you food. Every one of these is meant to be a strategic chess piece being moved on a board. And I don't often hear anybody talk about that. So those three elements, Larry, what do you think, am I you know, you know, just grasping a crazy straws here or or These are the things that have been lacking for quite a long time when people discuss this.
Well, let's take them one at a time.
The first Wade, you know, the district attorney talking to the press, is totally out of line for one thing, but again we are in Dallas, so okay. But I think the most interesting thing is the question of what evidence Wade would have seen at that point in time. Because he is talking so early in the process, that's there's no sign that he had talked and gone through the crime scene evidence that he had talked with the
crime scene people. There's just no evidence at all that he had any body of materials to put into a charge. And that's a really important question because normally, when a DA you know, writes a charge, there's a reference to
a body of information to support it. We actually know that the apparent, the original and this was tossed out charge against Oswald was simply going to be uh, killed the president in conjunction with the conspiracy against the government, you know, the conspiracy was going to be right there
in the charge, and that was thrown out. So for one thing, we've got, we've got charges being written with no indication that there was a rigorous process, you know, a normal legal process of going what do we have let's write this into it how firm a case. Now, He's just out there talking, and that's Wade, that's what he does, right.
But Wade is not speaking from a one percent fabricated imaginary position either. He's describing some evidence which has been collected to the press before he's even really had a chance to look at it. And on the other hand, in my estimation, he's speaking out a turn on the timeline, like literally speaking about having proof of him fired a weapon before the paraffin test was even performed, it seems like to me, or before you know, maybe when it
was collected, but not when anybody tested anything. And that is interesting because he says, obviously he fired a rifle that day, which is based on what you know, what it's based on now. But the thing is, at the time he first makes that statement to the press, he couldn't possibly have seen the collected and analyzed evidence. On the other hand, he's not like making stuff up out of thin air. He's assuming you know, the positive or
the you know, probative. In other words, he's presuming that he's got useful pieces of information out of tests that are still in progress, which is amazing to me. According to what I see on the timeline. But then again, I think at best we could say that Wade is not the most reliable measurement of the chronological events here when he's giving him to the press and what's actually been collected or confirmed behind the scenes. Is that fair?
That's fair?
And that's what I was really getting at is he's making affirmative statements out of some things that have been collected but not tested, and that could have been a real problem for him in a trial because the attorney could very well challenge, you know, let's look at the basis of your charge that you wrote. This man was charged, and we have you on tape making all these claims that now you can't prove, So let's just toss this out. You really didn't have the evidence that you said you
had to charge him in the first place. Could have been a real problem if it had gone to trial. With him talking, he's talking about items of evidence that aren't provable at that point in time.
They've just been collected.
He thinks they're going to be proved, but as we now know, there are issues with almost all of them.
So yeah, I agree, Chuck.
He's he's way ahead of his time, and it could have been a problem in a real trial.
Now the counter, Now the counter, I'm sorry, Larry, but the counter to that is very simple because it was proven later on through the Innocence Project that on many occasions the people in Wade's office either withheld or manufactured or lost, you know, evidence that they should have given to the defense because it would have been you know, if it undermines your case and you collected it, you have to offer it to the defense.
Right.
That's just you know, it's typical. There's a way of putting that. I forget how to put that in legal ease, but I mean, the fact is this guy manipulated the evidence on more than one occasion. That's why there were death penalties overturned posthumously, you know, after Weed was out
of office and his successor was gone. Even so you got to say that it may be that he had confidence in it because he knew that even if it didn't fit, he'd make it fit, you know, which is a weird way to look at it, but true.
Basically just standard practice.
I mean, basically, I've done this before. This is the way we do things here, and we make it work. And in truth, you know, speaking if it were just a Texas crime, just stay Dallas crime and nothing else, there'd been no state level investigation, no federal you know.
That's that's a good point.
And maybe he just he wasn't thinking far enough the head to say think that he wasn't going to get away with his standard practices.
Right right now.
I just wanted to point that out. I mean, Larry, I'm sorry, but it's relevant because, like I said, after the long after the fact, long after the DA has his you know, stellar record with his death penalty convictions, et cetera. You know, here we go. Now, some people have bargained, well, he knew that he would never get the trial. I don't think Wade had any idea he
would never get the trial, you know. But but Wade might have thought that he had control of things enough that one way or another, I'm going to get enough in there to convict this guy. It's a done deal. Now, what he was basing that on would be pure speculation on anybody's part. But I just point out that he is literally making public statements that you can line up to the you know what, the events as they're unfolding behind the scenes, and it's inconsistent all over the place.
So you know, don't take Henry Wade's statements to try and prove something did or did not happen by the time he made that statement, is all I'm trying to establish here. Would you agree to that?
Oh yeah, Wade is just doing what he always does.
And I think that's an important point to make in all of this.
People, the Dallas Police did what they normally did standard practice. They didn't necessarily do what we like for them to have done. They didn't necessarily do what we would consider acceptable practices today. They just did standard practice for the Dallas Police, which and you'll recall you probably recall this, Sherry Feist, who's a crime scene specialist and evidence specialist, took a look at their protocols and basically reached that
same conclusion. No, it's not at all what would be acceptable to day, but it was standard practice for that day in time.
Fair enough. But again, you got to put it in its place. That's when it happened, that's where it happened. So we were dealing with those circumstances. And the reason why this is relevant to the interrogation, by the way directly is because guess what that Robbery Homicide Division had behaved this way with that DA, with that regime, with that atmosphere in that place in time. So this is how they're handling Oswald. I'm just saying, it's a matter
of posture. It's a matter of patterns of behavior that you wind up seeing and saying yourself, well, that doesn't quite seem right. You got to know what circumstances was occurring in and all of the previous standard operating procedure is relevant to this, right.
Yeah.
And another thing when we're talking about this, we also have to remember Oswald was in custody for quite a long time. Actually, I mean he was in custody for several hours.
The evening assassination.
He was in custody and subject interrogation the complete day of Saturday.
And evening of Saturday.
It was in custody and received further questioning on Sunday morning. So there's really plenty of time to bring us much pressure on Oswald as you want to. You know, It's not like I think sometimes people collapse this and say, well he was.
Killed, well, not quickly.
There was plenty of time for the interrogation process to be to be pursued, and I think put plenty of time to wear him down, to feed him evidence bit by bit, you know, building the case in front of him, which is often the police practice.
You know, you don't you don't have to do everything at once.
But as you remarked earlier, the one big variable that seems to be in play is that Fritz did not interrogate Oswald in the same fashion that matched his reputation. It was not a hard press. In fact, if you looked at at most of his questions, the vast majority of his questions, our background questions, there are questions that would lean more towards mode.
Then they would Okay, we know you did this.
Here's here's the rifle, here's the bag, here's the bullets. You know, here's the fingerprints signed the confession, which which is the way apparently they handle Frasier did not handle Oswell in nearly the same fashion.
Right, and they had almost twelve hours in between his capture and the time that they hauld him before a judge to formally charge him. I think with Kennedy right, because it's at like one am or something where they at local time, I think where they actually had the charge read to him, where his response, I think was this is ridiculous, and then they haul them away, you know when they tell him that, and they had him in custody all that time. They're asking him questions like
whose car is this? Why were you staying at a rooming house? You know, what time did you leave work? What time did you go into work? I mean, this is literally what's going on for these twelve hours, Like they're going back over seemingly unconnected questions just to establish a whole bunch of facts and see if they can trip them up and get them to lie about something stupid like you know, how often did you go to the painshouse? I mean, is that not a fair characterization?
Or am I reading a role that is not a criminal investigation where you lay the rifle down and say, look, here's the picture of you with this rifle.
Here's the rifle. Your prints are on the rifle.
We've verified that by the way you carried it to work in a bag. Here's the bag. Your prints are on the bag. Sign the confession, you know, but you know that would be typical Fritz. But if you list make a list of what was not shown to Oswald, they show a picture of the rifle, him holding a rifle in the photo. They don't show on the rifle. They don't say, clearly, this is the rifle in the picture. Okay, fess up, it's yours. How can you deny it? You know,
that's the sort of thing they don't do. They don't show in the bag. They don't talk to them about print matches. They don't talk to them about the paraffin test. They don't talk to him, you know, they don't talk to them about literally any of the crime scene evidence.
The only thing that's done.
That's you know, typical, is they put put him in some lineups.
Okay, that's typical.
But they don't come back in the room and say, all right, you know, four people have identified you in that window with a rifle, which might not be true, but again would not be out of line for standard hard nos. Okay, that's we're going to break him. You know, we're going to show them all this. We've got witnesses assign the confession.
You know that. They don't do that.
And that's and they the materials didn't.
All leave Dallas that quickly.
There was plenty of time to do everything I just described. That night and to set him down and read him the charges and show him how all the charge the charges were justified, and again try to break him, which was Fritz's classic MO.
Well, the other part of Fritz's classic MO if you even trust you know, part of the discussion about the interrogation of Buell Wesley Frasier, would be to exaggerate what they have.
Right.
Let's just say, for instance, they had Howard Brennan. Okay, let's just say they had him, and they were certain of his statement already, and he was certainly identified him, you know, from six floors down without his glasses on across the street. Okay, But either way, let's just say they thought they had him and he was a reliable witness. Howard Brennan could turn into four witnesses. We got four
people that saw you in that way. Now, and you know, you break down Howard Brennan's story a little bit because you trust it, and you say, this guy saw you, he saw this. Another guy says, you definitely had the gun in your hand and it was poking out the window about four inches, you know what I'm saying. Like, and they would turn it into four witnesses, which would be to you know, look, overwhelmingly, we've already got you, and you know what, we're waiting on the lab to
come back and just tell us the bullet matches. That's all we're waiting on. So you might as well get this over with. That would have been the way that Fritz would handled it, and that's exactly what he did to Fraser, literally like, look, we got your rifle. We know there was this kind of rifle used, which was an endfield. By the way, the endfield that was reported by the press is having been taken into custody by the police, and it was Fraser's rifle, and they said,
you got a rifle. We know you were working with this guy. You might as well tell us something. Now. Fraser didn't give in, but that's the tactic to put the pressure on him. And I don't see this with Oswald unless I'm missing it.
No, that's exactly what I was getting at. Is totally inconsistent. As you said, this long, lengthy discussion, which is which is the night of the assassination, but could have occurred anytime, you know, the hard press could have aturred any time. It's true that the rifle was taken out to Dallas. But that doesn't prevent you from saying, Oh, the FBI is doing one war test on the rifle. You know, we've got your prints on it. We know what yours.
Don't lie to me, kid. There's plenty of time to do that, and there's no record of any extended effort to break him as a matter of fact, which you would think that Dallas police would be desperate to do. I mean, they've already been embarrassed. Do they really want to leave this ay crime for the FBI asol? I don't think so. They should have wanted to do this. But I think my other big point, Chuck, that I don't want to miss is what's Oswald thinking?
I mean, if you assume Oswald did not.
Do it, okay, what are they showing him to really con him this? Well, we've all speculated for a long time that Oswald's remarks over that weekend to his wife, to his brother, you know, he's talking about, don't worry about it. Don't believe what they say. I didn't do it. They have nothing against me. You know, did you get shoes for the baby yet?
And no? You know I made any of a lawyer later.
I need to look into it all reflect someone who sounds like they feel innocent and they don't feel there's really a case against them. And I guess, in stepping back through the whole process and look at it from Oswell's perspective, which we usually don't, I've got to be thinking he may well have felt that they didn't have a case against them because they really didn't show it to him.
But meanwhile, he's also aware that the press is all over this because they're clogging the hallways, you know, and they're they're screaming question him, and he gets to make his I'm just a patsy and also yelling from inside of a room, I committed no acts of violence and all this stuff. So he's well aware that he's able to communicate with the press and that the press is
all over it. So this must be a big deal, even before again, before he's even charged and then hauled into the you know, the famous midnight press conference where it's obvious that the media is interested. He knows that already too. So you know, I'm just saying, unless you're thinking he's a complete idiot and he's just going to scream out all kinds of crazy things, and oh, By the way, if he was somebody who wanted to take credit for this, perfect opportunity would have been that's right.
I killed him because he was a communist, you know whatever. I was right there with the TV camera in his face and everything else. So you know, you got to look at the mindset here. Is he just nuts? Is he? I don't know. He didn't seem too crazy to me. And he's answering questions.
He's got every opportunity to stake his claim if he did it for political reason and to go down in history, good, bad, or and different. If you want to paint this as a him, this guy who wants to go down in history.
He had every opportunity. He didn't do it. But I still go back.
To his very first assertion, His very first assertion is they've just picked me up because I worked in that building and I've been in Russia, and that's why they're going to blame this on.
Me, because you know, that's it.
I think his mindset is just and you've got to realize that.
For the last you know.
Better part of a year since his return from Russia, he's been interviewed by the FBI repeatedly.
He's had his mail intercepted.
He's you know, he has been harassed from his perspective, and he he has been interviewed many times about being a communist, recently in New Oral. It's like everybody is against me because of my sans and I've said that's all out there in public. The press has heard it, and they're just going to take this opportunity to set me up. That would be that would be classic Oswald thinking. And that seems to me to be consistent with the
fact that he's pushing back. He pushes back against France because I don't think he is again, if you assume he's innocent, I don't think they're making a case to him that he is anything more than suspicious because he's married to a Russian and he's been in Russia, and he works in the building.
Right right, And like I said, they're asking him a lot of peripheral questions too, you know, where he gets involved. You know, at one point, more than when the author's pointed out, he has a little outburst. Why he says, I leave missus Payne out of it, you know, because they're asking him a lot of questions about her and what he's doing at her house when he's got a rooming house and he separated from his wife, but he goes to see his wife. You know, they're asking him
a lot of questions like that for hours. This is not you know, the first twenty thirty minutes of like, let's get some background. This is hours of this. So yeah, okay, fair enough, we might have stopped that one into the ground, but I want to make that point good.
Yeah, which also makes you think again from her perspective, it's sort of like, if they're going into that sort of trivia again, they're setting me up because of my background. They're not given crime scene stuff, you know, they're collecting all this miscellaneous information because they're trying to build a case off what you know. I think that would just reinforce the view that you know, I know I wasn't there.
I know I didn't shoot the rifle. And they're telling me nothing to tell to show me that they've got a case. They're just asking me all these nonsense, peripheral questions. So I think they're just trying to build something against me when they don't really have.
It well right, And the other thing is the pain question in Oswald's mind, again, assuming that he is believing in his own head he's innocent. Look, he could just look at it as you know, what they're trying to do there is just prove that this woman speaks Russian to me and they're going to try and get you know, did you speak in code to her? You know, are you speaking in Russian? Maybe she has information? And he basically says, don't evolve her, don't even involve her carr
in the situation. You're right, you know, so, Yeah, it's weird. I'm just sure it's a Russian agent.
Yeah, absolutely, It's more like they seem to be worried about this Russia connection more than anything else. Right, missus Payne speaks Russian. They trying to bring her into all of this. And I would add you talked about outburst. I mean we have another outburst when Hosty is the Hosty is in the room and he really jumps at
Hosty for harass seen Marina. Now, I've got to ask you if you're sitting there and you know you've been through what you just described, chuck dragged in front of reporters, dragged.
Out, you know you've been beaten around a little bit.
You do have bruises and contuitions and that sort of stuff, and you're sitting in the room and you know, they haven't even I'm not even sure at that point in time that they've you know, you know, did you you killed the president? We know you killed the president. I don't even know if they've.
Gone through that routine.
And suddenly what he's concerned about is Hosty harassing his wife. I mean, if would that be the first thing on your mind? To me that that again reflects that he's not that concerned. He he knows he didn't do it, and that they're really but jumping to Hosty over visiting Marina is just very peripheral thing for him to get excited about. If they're making the case against them that he accepts right.
The only thing that I would say they might have said to him that was serious is, you know, when he says, I think I'm being accused of killing a policeman, when he says that in public, because I think they did lay that pressure on him for a minute, and he brushed it off as I didn't kill a cop. What are you talking about? And the thing is did he or didn't he? I don't know, But I'm just saying one way or another. That might be the hardest
concern is that some cop here. And the funny thing is that doesn't even mean they mentioned the cops name to him yet or anything, you know what I mean, just you killed one of ours, you know, And maybe that's the excuse for giving him an extra elbow in the car on the way over, you know what I mean, this kind of thing, which I guarantee you they took extra shots at him when people weren't looking, you know, your cop chiller.
That's a good point too, because how much of that interrogation was about Tippett.
Admitted he had a gun.
Did they come back immediately say, yeah, we know he had a gun son and we've just matched the bullets to those that killed the police.
How much time do they spend on Tibbot right in the interrogation.
Which was primarily which is.
An iron clad case apparently because they've got his gun and they've got bullets. You know, it would be easy to push him on that one and say, look, you know you're going down for this already.
But it's almost like they ignore that, which is what you.
Know, which you just brought up, and I look back against going wow, they just seem to have ignored the poor police officer entirely, right.
And I tie it back to my point that it takes them twelve hours to charge him with Kennedy because initially they're holding him on the Tippet murder. Basically, even though the rest of the world is being told we think we got the presidential assassin, initially they're holding him for Tipot. So that should be the questions he's being asked, right.
Yeah, those should be the first questions. That should be the case they're making, right you know. And and by the way, in the reality of the world, if they've got a case on Tippett, he's gonna he's gonna he's going to be electrocuted. You know, that's a death penalty right off. You know, that's the first case they're going
to pursue. And obviously to the Dallas police minds, you know, that's a fellow officer, as you said, so they just it's totally inconsistent in terms of the questions they're asking in regard to the evidence they apparently have in hand, which just seems strange.
It does, So what else do we we have to look at here? You know, like I said, some of this information was available early on, and the biggest complaint
being why didn't anybody absolutely record this interrogation? Well, you know, the initial problem is they probably didn't think they needed to with the Tippitt charge, but they still we have vague, vague documentation on this at best, you know, outside of again the notes from the guy who came over from the post office, right, I mean he took pretty good notes. But other than that, what do we have actually documented?
Well, and I you know, this is kind of over time, it leaves my mind. Where are the Tippet charges? Where's the indictment for Tippett? Where's the charge for Tippett? Or where's for its interrogation about Tippet?
Right, which would have to be a separate charge which would have to be separately proven in court. So yeah, exactly where's the documentation for that, the thing that he was really picked up for, You're right, you know it was so that that leads me to the question, really, was it never documented or was it destroyed? Because that
would be where I'd go with this. Either we don't need this, you know, whatever problems come up in that Tippit investigation, trash it because it's no longer necessary, especially after he's dead, but before that even well, the presidential assassination is going to take priority. Here where does that leave us. It's amazing that we don't have a here's actually the case for Tippitt. Forget about Kennedy, here's tippit because it's a separate issue, it's a separate occurrence, it's
a separate crime. That again, like you said, he fries for in Texas for sure, so you know where is it?
Yeah, and that leads me to a question I don't think really as much been discussed, and that is what was the political.
Pressure on Fritz himself?
Right?
You know, we know that Fritz is a city we know, and I've had friends in Texas that talk to me about basically the entire city council of Dallas, including the mayor, went out of town that they kind of left, and it's kind of like, you know, this is really embarrassing. I don't want to be answering questions about what you know, the police did or didn't do, and how this happened in my city.
You know where the focus immediately.
Was on the killing of the president and the inherent guilt of Dallas as a city I.
Mean that the city fathers would have had that view.
Don't know if any of them talked to to Fritz. What we also don't know is we don't have any record of the exchanges between the district attorneys, either the DA or the ADA and Fritz. I mean, normally there is a paper trail where the police report to the DA their investigation, their evidence in hand, and then the DA writes the charges.
Where is that? I mean, legally that's supposed to be there.
The FRIZ doesn't just lean over and lean outside the door and say, you know.
Mister Wade, go ahead and charge him.
That's again that that would not have gone down well in court as well as procedures.
So where's that paper trail? What?
What did they really you know, what was the report the exchange between the DA's office and the Dallas police as far as the legal process. But the but the other question I have to do look at this, that I have to think about is the fact that obviously so much time was spent talking about Russia and about Russian connections and about you know, obviously Communist connections with Oswald that I almost wonder if someone was pushing them to come up with a conspiracy, a communist inspired conspiracy,
and that that wasn't. For example, we know that there was a lot of dialogue, there was a lot of political orientation that wanted to point this at Oswald, but not just at Oswell, but at Cuba, at Russia, at the communist as Oswell being a communist tool. So I have to wonder if there's some dialogue that we don't know about to Fritz that says, you know, what you really need to do is dig into his Russian connections and his Communist connections, because you know, we don't want this.
To be Dallas.
We don't want this to be about radicalism in Dallas. We don't want this to be a local thing. We want this kid to be a commedi tool.
Well.
And by the way, we've already readen up some charges like this, and we know those charges you most went into play until Johnston anum quashed.
See, now there you go.
Is there some dialogue? Yeah?
See, there you go. There's the element that I think is missing and why it's missing. Remember this in context, Not only are we talking about Lyndon Johnson, who would have exerted influence over this, because he's still you know, going on Air Force one, according to reliable reports, is sitting there wanting to do a duck and cover and wondering where the hell the bullets really came from, you know, and and all this. But he's going to exert influence.
And don't forget the governor of Texas is, you know, in surgery being saved because he was shot too. Okay, So John Connolly's a factor, and so is LBJ. I think people forget this, and this is important not to point I'm not one of these LBJ did it guys. I'm just saying that let's just assume the most benign possibility here where it's like, holy crap, somebody killed Kennedy and I didn't know about it. Johnson's a little bit
freaking out, and he was, according to many accounts. And you have the governor of Texas nearly murdered in you know, in this action too. So you got a local police officer, you got the governor of Texas severely wounded. I mean his lung collapsed, for Christ's sake, you know, he had two of his ribs destroyed. The guy was not in great shape, and you have LBJ going, what the hell
is going on? So benign if you don't want to involve anybody in the conspiracy and you just want to think completely above boards here, somebody figure out what this Russian connected you know, pos is doing here, because if this guy's the guy who shot at us, obviously we got a Russian problem. That makes Fritz's interrogation make a lot more sense, doesn't it.
I think it does, And I think it's also maybe it would be a Oswald may have been right. You know, it was the mood of the time that if anything dramatic happened, the Communists had to be behind.
It, right, you know, I was there.
I remember that when when Robert Kennedy was killed in Los Angeles, within twenty four hours the mayor Maryority was talking to the press saying, clearly, the Communists did it.
The Communists killed them.
This is just a common meme that America is at risks from the Communist if something happens, you know, it's you need to look for the communists first. And so that just may have been another thing that goes along
with that. Would what would be easier for Fritz and the Dallas police to accept the fact that there was a smart, well planned Communist enabled conspiracy to kill the president in their city, or that this quor kid just stumbled in with one rifle and did it, you know, all by himself, and you know, all their all their security and all their protections. Who's who's a better villain, the communist the world communists conspiracy or Leigh Oswell and his rifle.
You know there could have been.
I'm not saying, but there there's a clear tendency to immediately elevate this because it's the president, and because the Communists are bad guys, and to start immediately looking for ties to a communist conspiracy, a Russian conspiracy that that might explain princess probing not not my main concern. We've got this guy, There's there's no question about that. We've got him, so I don't even need a confession. What I need is to find out what was really behind this.
So in that case we go to was a communist inspired or Communist directed which is you know, there's your two choices, because those are going to be very effective in eliminating sympathy for this guy in court, so that we guarantee Fries there's no question, and there you go. And that speaks to exactly what by the way, da Wade was saying to the press, you know, look, how many times have you gone for the death penalty? Twenty six? You know, twenty six? How many times you got it
twenty five? You know what I mean? Like that whole thing whatever he said there, I might be misquoting slightly, but the point of that discussion to the press was to say, we got him dead to rights. And then if you throw on top of it, oh, by the way, he's a comedy or he's a comedy sympathizer. Oh, hell, fry him. I mean, he don't even count. I mean, just put him down. Victory for America in fact, right, I mean this is literally a tactic. Good.
Sorry, And it's also consistent with what they kept doing for the next twenty four hours.
Right.
They went out and pulled in.
The financial officer for the school book Depository, who they claimed was a communist. Remember, and because he was a member of a Spanish speaking veterans group, right, you know, they actually brought him in and it sounds like we're threatening to charge him with conspiracy as well. You know, they were looking for anything that could tie a communist conspiracy to Oswald.
The Dallas police were Washington, d C.
Not so much, but in Dallas they continued kind of on that tangent for the better part of the next day.
Well, right, because it would have worked, like I said, it would have you put, you know, again, a jury in front of this guy and you say, oh, by the way, we can also prove he's a communist those murder charges, and you know, putting him to death is going to get a lot easier for that jury. I mean, I'm just saying nineteen sixty three, no offense. But that's the way it was.
No, we're done now, okay.
I mean, no, no need to continue.
Yeah, the Jets can just send the jury for a deliberation.
They'll be right back.
Yeah. We might stay around long enough for lunch, you know, but anyhow, just just some free lunch, not because we need to talk about anything, but okay, anyhow, It's just it's remarkable to think of it this way because I don't see anybody breaking it down this way. And obviously you made efforts. I mean, tell us a little more about this, because I've already kept you here for like forty
five minutes going over these things. But I think this is a little different from what people usually get, which is the look the sinister conspiracy against Oswald, you know, was that to convict him. But you know, there might be more reasonable explanations for some of the strangeness, you know, those lineups being as stupid as they were and everything else.
I mean, if you know that you're going into a game with a loaded pair of dice, you know, what do you care what happens before or after you show up or what it looks like. That's another thing to keep in mind here. But my commentary aside, what else do we need to look at Larry Well again?
I think to step back and look and nobody I don't think really has done a good job of this recently, to look at exactly what Oswald you win about the shooting, about the death of the president, about to really timeline in detail and respect his behavior, because the only two of yous have been that he's absolutely innocent and we want to prove that, or he's absolutely guilty and we
want to prove that. Nobody's really looked at it for just the what did Oswald know when and what caused him to behave the way he did during those brief two and a half days he was in custody. And that's that's what I'm stepping back to and looking at again and revisiting, and I think it makes a lot more sense. His behavior, his remarks, make a lot more sense and actually defend the position that he was innocent.
And I'm talking about totally innocent. I mean, he has no clue how far up the river he really is. And that's my that's my take on the matter, is that only increasingly during the course of the weekend does he begin to think that he might actually be at risk because he knows he wasn't he didn't do it. He didn't you know, he may have sold his right. He knows nothing about what's been taken in evidence and what's been set up under those conditions. A lot of
what he does makes perfect sense otherwise. Let's take an example. We know that he raises a fuss about the lineup, like everybody else's in suits and ties and I'm in a T shirt and I'm banged up. Who's gonna yeah, who's going to pick me? Everybody hold up your hands. But if you had just shot the president and left your rifle that you owned and registered and you bought laying at the scene, of the crime. How stupid would
you be to be making this kind of fuss. I mean, either you just you need to assert your claim as to why you did it and take credit for it, or you just need to kind of be talking with your wife about you know, worried about your wife and family because you're done. But to raise a fuss about something like that says to me, he doesn't know. He knows that he's innocent and he's being radded, so he's concerned that he's being set up in alignemup that does
not detail with him being guilty. So a lot of his behavior begins to make a sense to me, and looking at it from his perspective of not knowing that he's a patsy or that kind of knowing, there's two different pat season play. One it's just because he was in Russia. Two it's because he was really set up with crime scene evidence and he doesn't know it and
the police aren't showing it to him. It is utterly insane in my view that Fritz would not lay down that rifle on a table in front of him, hold up the picture and say we took this from the school book depository. Mister Oswell now you explain it us why you didn't have it.
They're shooting the president.
Is there anything that would throw him off base more than that?
Yet that wasn't done fair enough.
Larry. I think that's a perfect place to conclude, because this, to me is extremely important. And you know, over the years I've kind of like, you know, not embraced the whole is he innocent you know situation, because I think we don't have definitive proof one way or the other. But on the other hand, when you look at these behaviors and you put it through this lens, you know, the stuff that they often say, look a look at
how much of an arrogant? You know, they you know, vacillate between calling them an arrogant, you know, cool collected customer who is associopath and you know, having him just be the crazy, confused kid. And that is amazing to me. Anyway, we'll leave it at that for tonight. Check out Larry Hancock's work online. Obviously there will be links in the
show notes. And that's this one for this Wednesday, and I'm planning on doing another later night podcast to catch you up on the news or as it stands anyway, kind of chaos and crazy, but I want to make some points, and I'll even have a little JFK thing in the news round up coming up, because three of you sent me the same information, and uh, you know that's the way it is. We're gonna go over that in another podcast after.
So I am merely o'celly.
Wall dot com, Wall Street, Window dot com dot com.
Michael Swanson, the brilliant author of the War State, gives.
You the benefit of his knowledge.
Wall do dot go there, now, go there, now, go there now.
In Denial Secret Wars with air Strikes and Tanks by Larry Hancock. Secret wars became a staple of US covert operations and are still happening today. Larryhancock's book In Denial rips the cover off many of them, using new files. It exposes things about the Bay of Pigs that no one has ever written about before. It shows why it really failed and why the United States did not.
Earn from it. It also shows why other countries today are doing secret operations with more success. This is the book that puts what some want to deny into the light. In Denial, Secret Wars with air Strikes and Tanks Larryhancock For more information, go to Larry hyphen Handcock dot com. Pick up your copy of In Denial at Amazon dot com in digital or physical nuclear holocaust.
You know what uranium is right?
Think called nuclear.
Weapons and other things like lots of you know what uranium is right?
Bad things. The viuse expressed by caller schools there anyone else who happens to get on the air of jelly dot com do not necessarily reflect the views of the Jelly dot Com or chuell and we are not responsible for any stupidity which might exsue.
Thank you.
The Wars State by Michael Swanson explains the great national transformation that took place and put the Kennedy presidency in the context of the times, and reveals never before published information about the Cuban missile crisis. President Kennedy would not have been assassinated if he had been president two hundred years ago. His assassination took place in the context of the Cold War and the rise of the national security state.
Before World War II, the United States was a continental republic. In the decade that followed, it became an imperial superpower. Generals such as Curtis LeMay not only wanted to invade Cuba, but knew that there were short range missiles on the island aren't with nuclear warheads that they could not destroy because they were on mobile launchers. Their invasion could have led to a Third World War, and they wanted to
go to war anyway. The War State by Michael Swanson reveals why and will show you what President Kennedy was up against. For more information, The Warstate dot Com.
Will now rhythmic curse, no corns placed by other bolted grasses.
Chaos rings, no soul can pass.
Feel the crush, the skies collide, heavy storms and the sound defied blues bleed.
Out grass creams, bous blues and raft eternal shroud swing.
The axe cruse takes slight of fury, dances in the nut hit off roofs swift blue state clash, conal storms.
Turn post to ash Chili dot Com corns of brass tyetoo. The wind chaos leaves no way
To mend, writes the Chaine ignite, the fier rhythms clash, the air destroyed fails