20-08-2021, 07:47 PM
The FBI must have insisted that suborned witnesses stay in touch, and the record is replete with contacts from them. On 7/9/64 Mary Brock called "seeking advice as to whether or not she should consent to an interview" with George Nash, eventual co-author of The Other Witnesses (10/12/64). The memo states, "she was advised that any interview to which she might consent was strictly a decision she would have to make." This was admirable advice if actually given. The Brocks do not appear in the article, reason unknown.
Sam Guinyard called later the same year (10/29/64) seeking FBI protection from "four armed men," describing himself as "the individual who identified OSWALD as the man that killed Dallas Police Officer TIPPITT [sic]." The FBI declined, referring him to the attention of the DPD, even going so far as to relay the information to the Deputy Chief of Police.
Moving on, Warren Reynolds called on 4/6/66 to report that he had been duped into an interview by Mark Lane, who had misrepresented himself as Robert Blake. Reynolds sought "advice as to what action he should take." supervisor Gemberling, who was something of a subornation handler-in-chief, "advised that no advice could be given." Water under the bridge.
Of greater significance was a call from Benavides on 2/27/67 regarding a meeting he had had with Igor Vaganov, who may have been the man in the red Ford Benavides saw at the Tippit murder scene. The 3/1/67 FBI memo refers to "his statement to the FBI on the date of the assassination" inadvertently exposing Benavides' role as a suborned witness.
No such FBI statement exists. Neither does the DPD affidavit Benavides gave the same day. His WC testimony was cut from whole cloth by Gemberling & company at least up to his return from the strange interlude in the alley [6H449], and a major eyewitness bites the dust.
The 3/1/67 memo refers the matter "to supervisor ROBERT P. GEMBERLING for action deemed appropriate by him." It is unknown what action Gemberling took, if any, but the bureau slipped badly in letting this cat out of the bag.
Sam Guinyard called later the same year (10/29/64) seeking FBI protection from "four armed men," describing himself as "the individual who identified OSWALD as the man that killed Dallas Police Officer TIPPITT [sic]." The FBI declined, referring him to the attention of the DPD, even going so far as to relay the information to the Deputy Chief of Police.
Moving on, Warren Reynolds called on 4/6/66 to report that he had been duped into an interview by Mark Lane, who had misrepresented himself as Robert Blake. Reynolds sought "advice as to what action he should take." supervisor Gemberling, who was something of a subornation handler-in-chief, "advised that no advice could be given." Water under the bridge.
Of greater significance was a call from Benavides on 2/27/67 regarding a meeting he had had with Igor Vaganov, who may have been the man in the red Ford Benavides saw at the Tippit murder scene. The 3/1/67 FBI memo refers to "his statement to the FBI on the date of the assassination" inadvertently exposing Benavides' role as a suborned witness.
No such FBI statement exists. Neither does the DPD affidavit Benavides gave the same day. His WC testimony was cut from whole cloth by Gemberling & company at least up to his return from the strange interlude in the alley [6H449], and a major eyewitness bites the dust.
The 3/1/67 memo refers the matter "to supervisor ROBERT P. GEMBERLING for action deemed appropriate by him." It is unknown what action Gemberling took, if any, but the bureau slipped badly in letting this cat out of the bag.