16-09-2015, 04:42 PM
Jim Hargrove Wrote:It seems likely that Baker would consider other possibilities for the two sightings instead of considering them the same man, though I doubt an Intelligence operation involving doubles would immediately be one of them <g>.
The scenario is Baker is rushing to possibly encounter a presidential assassin. His witnessing of two Oswalds happens in the process of quickly eliminating suspects on the way to the upper floors. He listens to Truly and moves on quickly. The fact the man on the 4th floor landing was identical to the man in the lunch-room is secondary and exists in his mind behind the first need to find the shooter. He doesn't reconcile this until he gets back to the police station where Baker himself may have been clued to Oswald's spook status. It doesn't really matter when it clicked with Baker. All that matters is when it came time to record the event he omitted the lunch-room Oswald and preferred the anonymous man on the 4th floor landing, in effect covering up CIA operative Oswald. I say a plausible incentive for doing this gross violation of the record was his first hand awareness of seeing two identical men within a few floors of each other. I think Baker would be smart enough to realize the man who was getting special treatment at the police station was not an identical twin. Besides, it is also common police procedure to not reveal unique evidence until it is resolved.
Meanwhile, in real time, and at the same time Baker was eliminating one Oswald, there was another Oswald double encounter witnessed by Roger Craig. There was also a double encounter at the Texas Theater witnessed by Bernard Haire and captured on Stringfellow's report. It's not like this Baker event was an isolated thing.
Jim Hargrove Wrote:If this did happen the way you speculate, do you think Truly vouched for both Oswalds? If so, that sure seals his guilt. Truly's affidavit, signed on the 23rd, just refers to the second floor encounter.
That's the obvious question isn't it? The key to this is why Truly didn't identify the innocuous employee seen walking away from the 4th floor landing? This man was in a prime spot for fleeing from the Sniper's Nest. It doesn't make sense that there would be no police or Commission interest in this person or any attempt to identify him.
I believe the reason Harvey stayed in character in the police station is because he was given some kind of promise that this would all be sorted out and he would be exonerated by being seen in the lunch-room. Harvey was probably a disciplined behind the iron-curtain spook and wouldn't break cover anyway.
One thing is certain. Both Truly and Baker must have known there was no way for the Oswald seen in the lunch-room to get out ahead of them and be coming down to the 4th floor from above in their quick dash up the only set of stairs. Again, Baker had to be aware there was a problem. If Truly was a cooperating handler it would make sense that he would not name the second Oswald. It could even be Truly who informed Baker of the CIA jurisdiction controlling what he had just witnessed. This would completely explain Baker's actions.
Jim Hargrove Wrote:I mentioned your theory to John A. late last night, and he said that with only a few seconds to think about it, his first thoughts were that you might be right. He said the timing issue for Truly, Baker and Mrs. Reid was critical, but since everything occurred in mere seconds, its hard to pin down. Then he talked about Roy Truly.
Unlike certain thuggish trolls, Mr Armstrong is a highly intelligent man who recognizes signs of covert intrigue when he sees it.
Jim Hargrove Wrote:Albert--I've been on vacation some the last few weeks and may have missed your main description of this theory. I looked back in this thread and didn't see it. Can you point me in the direction of it?
This is it right here. It makes sense to me. Doubters would have to explain the two Oswalds seen leaving the Depository or the strange lack of identification of the man on the 4th floor landing. If it was a regular employee why did they shut-up about it? Why did the Commission not pursue a man in a perfect position for a fleeing assassin?