Familiar Faces in Dealey Plaza

[Jack White]

Jim Fetzer remains adamant that the Altgens photo in question shows CIA spook Lucien Conein rather than Robert H. Adams, the person Allan Eaglesham and I believe is pictured.

To help resolve this controversy, I called Frank Caplett, special ed teacher, the man who contacted Allan a few years ago with new information that convinced Allan the photo shows Adams, not Conein, whereupon Allan changed his "familiar faces" website identification from Conein to Adams. I hit if off with Frank in our conversation of nearly two weeks ago, partly because we both are Green Bay Packer fans with our respective Wisconsin connections, and I found him completely convincing. He supplied me with the photos he had of Adams and explained that in 1999 he embarked on an auto trip on Memorial Day weekend with Edith Ellis, a teaching colleague, and they stopped in Dallas to visit Edith's aunt, Imogene Adams, as part of their Texas itinerary. Frank recognized the famed, framed photo (not "plaque" as he initially mislabeled it) with "newspaper" caption on a wall in Imogene's house. Since Frank was a lifelong JFK assassination buff, he was excited at this discovery but waited to learn more while Edith and Imogene enjoyed their visit. In response to Frank's eventual question, widow Imogene replied, "Yes, that's my husband." After many years of marriage, Robert H. Adams died of lung cancer and Imogene never remarried. She is a retired nurse, 86 years old. She added, "His friends called him the next morning when they saw his picture in the paper."

Nine years later Frank happened to see Allan's website and contacted him about the mistaken identification of Conein for Adams, an innocent spectator on the day of the assassination who was on his lunch break from his postal job at the facility nearby. Convinced by the photos and story from Frank, Allan changed his website to account for the new information. So this account depends upon two "serendipity" events: 1) Frank's visit to Imogene Adams' home and unplanned discovery of the framed photo, and 2) discovery of Allan Eaglesham's website nine years later and motivation to initiate a correction of what he believed was a mistaken identification.

Yesterday I called Imogene Adams to hear what she had to say. She lives a few blocks from Love Field and is listed in the Dallas white pages, address and all. Initially she was suspicious about who I was and why I was calling. As the conversation rolled on, she relaxed. She confirmed the visit by Edith and Frank over a decade earlier and I asked if the framed photo with caption was on a wall in her house: "Yes, it was." What about the "newspaper" caption? She said it was a corrected caption to "mention my husband." So you made the caption? "Yes." What about the wrong day and date? "I did have the wrong date." Did you make the caption yourself? "I took it to a print shop and they made it for me." So this was a matter of family pride that your husband was in a famous newspaper photo at an historic event, the assassination of president Kennedy? "Yes."

Conclusion? It is Robert Adams in the Altgens photo by all common sense standards. I find Imogene Adams the most improbable conspiracist/Langley contract agent I can imagine.

I like Jim Fetzer and Jack White but must point out they are both "invested" if only mildly in the Conein picture misinterpretation. Perhaps an eagerness to prove CIA presence at the event has clouded their judgment and driven them to endorse a far-fetched conspiracy theory involving Imogene Adams. Such speculation aside, we find that on p. 65 of "The Great Zapruder Film Hoax" edited by James H. Fetzer, Ph.D., in an article authored by Jack White, ""Mysteries of the JFK Assassination: The Photographic Evidence from A to Z," pp. 45-112, the following:
"Lou Conein was famed for his CIA exploits in Southeast Asia...Prouty claimed that the JFK assassination had all the complex marks of being an operation planned by Conein. Records exist that Conein was in Fort Worth on 21 November. Prouty claimed that Conein was in Dealey Plaza the next day to see his plan in action.
It appears that Prouty was right. The Altgens photo above shows at the corner of Main and Houston a man who is the spitting image of Conein. He was not the only operative there to see the plan carried out."
White also mentions Conein in a boxed "W is for Whodunnit?...coup command" on p. 108 with eight individuals plus the CIA, etc.: Dulles at the top, then Johnson, Nixon and Hoover on the next line, then Phillips, Hunt, Lansdale and Conein. Mentioning Conein as a suspected perp is warranted but we can no longer rely on the Altgens photo for support.
Fetzer writes:
On The Deep Politics Forum, for example, I pursued the identification of Lucien Conein in comparison with an alternative, Robert Adams, whose credentials were bolstered by means of a faux plaque <http://www.deeppoliticsrforum.com/forums...-2191.html> given to him for appearing in a photograph in Dealey Plaza. Not only did a comparison by Jack White establish a closer degree of resemblance to Conein than to Richards, but the plaque includes a news clipping congratulating him for appearing in this image taken on "Thursday, 23 November 1963"! The weight of the evidence shifts perceptibly when you discover that the arguments for one candidate are shoddy, while those for the other are not. CIA documents proving that Conein was not in town at the time to provide an alibi are easy to produce. And the same is true for other ops working for the government.
http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2010/10/...or_22.html
And:
At about 1.5 hours into my presentation, a series of slides [attached: link here <http://religionandmorality.net/multimedi...Slides.ppt> ] was missed, where I explained that a controversy has arisen over the identification of a man in Dealey Plaza who has been IDed as Lucien Conein, a notorious assassin for the CIA. Allan Eaglesham <http://radiofetzer.blogspot.com/2009/02/...ation.html> , who has done good work on "Familiar Faces in Dealey Plaza <http://www.jfkresearch.com/faces.htm> ", had posted a notice that this person was not Conein but a local resident named Robert Adams, who allegedly had been presented with a plaque for having been in the photograph. Jack White <http://www.jfkstudies.org/> and I found this puzzling, so I asked him to study the images of these persons so see what he could determine. The facial features of Adams and the man were quite different, where Adams has a long face, a long chin, and his left ear top-in. Conein and the man, by contrast, both have a square face, short chin, and left ear top-out. He established further differences, including that the Adams supranasal ridge is twice as wide as that of the man and of Conein. The plaque turned out to be an obvious fake, which shows that promoting misinformation on JFK is alive and well to this day!
http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2009/12/httpdotsub.html
And http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index....opic=16811

If Jim and Jack want to pursue this further, I suggest that Jack call Imogene Adams for a personal interview since he is less than an hour by auto from her house. Frank Caplett also lives in the DFW area east of Mesquite, so he would be easy to interview face-to-face.

The irony of all this to me is that CIA guy Hemmings IMO is in the background in the same picture yet goes overlooked. Of all the "familiar faces" photos in Dealey Plaza that morning, Hemmings is the "ringer" I would be most comfortable to ID as CIA before a jury of disinterested citizens, but that is another debate.

Thanks, Morgan, for the excellent work. I can find no fault with
your investigation.

However, as I have pointed out frequently, I find the photo matches
of the man to both Adams and Conein to be INCONCLUSIVE based
on photos alone. To me it remains a minor mystery WHICH HAS
LITTLE BEARING ON WHETHER CONEIN PARTICIPATED IN THE EVENT.

I point out that my Duluth presentation which you quote was done
many years ago and was based on the ID of the man by Eaglesham,
long before Adams ever surfaced. I have forgotten the other researcher
who found registration at a Fort Worth hotel for Conein on November 21.

I also strongly am influenced by Fletcher Prouty, who said Conein was
involved. Therefore, it is IRRELEVANT whether the Altgens photo
shows Conein or not. It would be IMPORTANT if it did, but I repeat,
neither Conein nor Adams can be positively identified by available photos.

This is much like the Altgens MAN IN THE DOORWAY issue, whether
Oswald or Lovelady. If it was Lovelady, it is irrelevant. If it was Oswald
it is important. Likewise, if the man on Main is Adams, it is irrelevant;
if it is Conein, it is important.

Thanks.

Jack