A Game-Changing Document

[Gerry Down]

So, Cadigan just supposedly quietly added this allegedly deleted testimony to the archives in 1966 after saying nothing about it for the previous couple of years? And then said nothing about adding it to the archives afterwards? Then this was eventually discovered by Blunt many years later?

Apparently so. Blunt says the original testimony which was to be deleted had the word "delete" written on it. Blunt says he is familiar with Allen Dulles handwriting and that the word "delete" is in Allen Dulles handwriting.

This way it looks like the FBI were eager to get the evidence on Nov 22nd 1963 so they could remove any evidence that connected LHO to the FBI (ie most likely LHOs contact with DeBrueys earlier that summer in New Orleans). The DPD then wanted the evidence back for their records and so the FBI gave back the evidence on Nov 24th. Then the FBI took the evidence again when Johnson said the FBI were to take control of the investigation.

That is my reading of the situation.

[Charles Collins]

Apparently so. Blunt says the original testimony which was to be deleted had the word "delete" written on it. Blunt says he is familiar with Allen Dulles handwriting and that the word "delete" is in Allen Dulles handwriting.

This way it looks like the FBI were eager to get the evidence on Nov 22nd 1963 so they could remove any evidence that connected LHO to the FBI (ie most likely LHOs contact with DeBrueys earlier that summer in New Orleans). The DPD then wanted the evidence back for their records and so the FBI gave back the evidence on Nov 24th. Then the FBI took the evidence again when Johnson said the FBI were to take control of the investigation.

That is my reading of the situation.

Where is this so called “original testimony” with the word delete written on it? Does Blunt provide a copy for us?

[Gerry Down]

Where is this so called “original testimony” with the word delete written on it? Does Blunt provide a copy for us?

Not that I know of. But Blunt is considered trustworthy. So if he says something its pretty much true.

[Charles Collins]

Not that I know of. But Blunt is considered trustworthy. So if he says something its pretty much true.

I am not familiar with Blunt and had to look him up to find out who he is. I also found that Cadigan died in 1977 if I remember correctly. Did Blunt find this “original testimony” after Cadigan died? If so, how does Blunt determine that it was Cadigan who put the “original testimony” in the archives? Or is Blunt just speculating on some of his ideas?

[Gerry Down]

I am not familiar with Blunt and had to look him up to find out who he is. I also found that Cadigan died in 1977 if I remember correctly. Did Blunt find this “original testimony” after Cadigan died? If so, how does Blunt determine that it was Cadigan who put the “original testimony” in the archives? Or is Blunt just speculating on some of his ideas?

That i don't know. But he first started going to the National Archives in the mid-1990's and has been studying the documents ever since. He was friends with Pete Bagley (of the CIA Soviet Russia division around the time of Oswald) and got his insights on the whole assassination.

[Charles Collins]

That i don't know. But he first started going to the National Archives in the mid-1990's and has been studying the documents ever since. He was friends with Pete Bagley (of the CIA Soviet Russia division around the time of Oswald) and got his insights on the whole assassination.

Here is what Vincent Drain, the FBI agent that the DPD trusted to take and return the items, had to say to Larry Sneed in an interview:

Earlier in the evening, about 8:00 o’clock, the division chief had talked to me on the telephone and informed me that the FBI in Washington demanded that we bring to them for examination the rifle, the revolver that was used to kill Tippit, as well as the different paraphernalia such as identification cards and other small items that Oswald had on him. I discussed it with the police chief and told him that we’d keep the chain of evidence intact and that I would pick them up there myself and wait for them until they were examined in Washington then bring them back. So it was turned over to us. By the time we got it all boxed up, it was near midnight. Meanwhile Washington was calling down about every fifteen minutes wanting to know where the material was. All of a sudden I learned that neither American nor Braniff had any flights to Washington out of Dallas after midnight. We were told that the FBI in Washington wanted the material by morning if we had to walk it up there. That’s being facetious, but . . .

Now, I really don’t try to tell others who they should believe. But I do encourage others to ask themselves if they have a bias against the authorities. And in this case I encourage others to ask some simple questions about conspiracy theory authors like Blunt, similar to the ones that I asked and received zip for answers. It appears to me that none of Blunt’s allegations make any sense. You appear to have jumped to some conclusions regarding the FBI trying to hide some things.

If folks would just allow themselves to consider that it is possible that the authorities connected to this case were honestly doing their jobs as best as they knew how. And that it is possible that the conclusions that they came to are correct. Then approach the case with an open mind. Then the evidence speaks for itself.

[Gerry Down]

Here is what Vincent Drain, the FBI agent that the DPD trusted to take and return the items, had to say to Larry Sneed in an interview:

Earlier in the evening, about 8:00 o’clock, the division chief had talked to me on the telephone and informed me that the FBI in Washington demanded that we bring to them for examination the rifle, the revolver that was used to kill Tippit, as well as the different paraphernalia such as identification cards and other small items that Oswald had on him. I discussed it with the police chief and told him that we’d keep the chain of evidence intact and that I would pick them up there myself and wait for them until they were examined in Washington then bring them back. So it was turned over to us. By the time we got it all boxed up, it was near midnight. Meanwhile Washington was calling down about every fifteen minutes wanting to know where the material was. All of a sudden I learned that neither American nor Braniff had any flights to Washington out of Dallas after midnight. We were told that the FBI in Washington wanted the material by morning if we had to walk it up there. That’s being facetious, but . . .

Now, I really don’t try to tell others who they should believe. But I do encourage others to ask themselves if they have a bias against the authorities. And in this case I encourage others to ask some simple questions about conspiracy theory authors like Blunt, similar to the ones that I asked and received zip for answers. It appears to me that none of Blunt’s allegations make any sense. You appear to have jumped to some conclusions regarding the FBI trying to hide some things.

If folks would just allow themselves to consider that it is possible that the authorities connected to this case were honestly doing their jobs as best as they knew how. And that it is possible that the conclusions that they came to are correct. Then approach the case with an open mind. Then the evidence speaks for itself.

What you've said here doesn't negate what I or Malcolm blunt have said. The fbi were in an awful hurry to get the evidence on the evening of the assassination, then lies were told about just how much evidence they took.

The fbi had no jurisdiction in this case. They didn't behave this way for other murders that took place in Dallas.

[Gerry Down]

The sequence is bizarre. The fbi took the evidence and then gave it back to the dpd. That's not normal. I think there was stuff in that evidence the fbi did not want the dpd cataloging.