Truly's False Roll

[Rick Plant]

…if it is demonstrated beyond doubt that Truly lied about the roll call,…


Two people, who were there, state that there was a roll call and have been pointed out in this thread. There is no reason whatsoever to believe that Truly lied about the roll call.

Buell Frazier has stated several times a roll call did take place and Oswald was the only person not present. 

[Charles Collins]

From the book: “JFK Assassination, The Reporters’ Notes”:

Inside cover note:

In May of 1964, the top editors of the Dallas Morning News decided to collect the recollections of all staffers who took part in covering the Kennedy assassination.

A part of the Kent Biffle notes in the appendix (photos of the original typewritten pages):

“The building superintendent showed up with some papers in his hand. I listened as he told detectives about Lee Oswald failing to show up at a roll call.
My impression is there was an earlier roll call but it was inconclusive inasmuch as several employees were missing. This time, however, all were accounted for but Oswald.
I jotted down all the Oswald information. The description and address came from company records already examined by the superintendent. The superintendent would recall later that he and a policeman met Oswald as they charged into the building after the shots were fired.”

Emphasis added by me.

[Richard Smith]

"It makes no sense for Truly to fake a roll call when there was nothing to preclude him from having a roll call."

There is an incredibly simple point being made in this thread that you do not know how to deal with.
Truly lied to Fritz and his men about taking a roll call in which it was discovered Oswald had left the building.
You cannot provide any credible evidence that such a roll call took place.
That evidence does not exist.
It's enough that not one of the warehouse men who testified made any mention of anything like a roll call conducted by Truly.
But when we examine Truly's testimony it is clear that no such roll call took place:

"When I got back to the first floor, at first I didn't see anything except officers running around, reporters in the place. There was a regular madhouse."
"Then in a few minutes--it could have been moments or minutes at a time like that--I noticed some of my boys were over in the west corner of the shipping department, and there were several officers over there taking their names and addresses, and so forth."

Baker and Truly arrive back on the first floor around 10-15 minutes after the shooting to find "a regular madhouse".
I believe Tom Alyea takes footage of the two men stood talking with others shortly after they arrive on the first floor.
After an indeterminate amount of time Truly states that he notices some officers taking the names and addresses of some of his "boys". Frazier alludes to this in his WC testimony:

"...we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper information where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more..."

Truly continues:

Mr. Truly: There were other officers in other parts of the building taking other employees, like office people's names. I noticed that Lee Oswald was not among these boys.
So I picked up the telephone and called Mr. Aiken down at the other warehouse who keeps our application blanks. Back up there.
First I mentioned to Mr. Campbell--I asked Bill Shelley if he had seen him, he looked around and said no.

Mr. Belin: When you asked Bill Shelley if he had seen whom?

Mr. Truly: Lee Oswald. I said, "Have you seen him around lately," and he said no.
So Mr. Campbell is standing there, and I said, "I have a boy over here missing. I don't know whether to report it or not." Because I had another one or two out then. I didn't know whether they were all there or not. He said, "What do you think"? And I got to thinking. He said, "Well, we better do it anyway." It was so quick after that.
So I picked the phone up then and called Mr. Aiken, at the warehouse, and got the boy's name and general description and telephone number and address at Irving.

Not only is it abundantly clear that no roll call took place, Truly makes the decision that Oswald is missing even though he "had another one or two out then" and he "didn't know whether they were all there or not".

He didn't know whether they were all there or not !!

For some reason known only to himself Truly rings up Aiken for Oswald's details. Somehow he has discerned that Oswald has left the building and is the only employee missing.
It is clear you want to jump ahead to make your argument that the invented roll call has no relevance but it is down to the evidence to determine the correct opinion and not, as you would have it, down to your opinion to determine the correct evidence.
So I'll keep it simple and to the point of this thread:

1) Do you agree there was no roll call taken by Truly?
If so:
2) Do you agree Truly invented this roll call?
If so:
3) Do you agree this invented roll call was used to single out Oswald as a person of interest to the police?

Keep to the subject of the thread rather than trying to reverse engineer your own entrenched position to try and deal with this issue.

Again, I'm not sure that there is enough available evidence to determine what form any "roll call" took.  As pointed out, there is evidence that it did occur.   However, the details are likely beyond confirming at this point.  What we are left with is to consider whether it makes any difference.  And it does not.   Whether there was a roll call or not is only relevant as to whether Oswald was present at the TSBD.  We know without any doubt whatsoever that Oswald was gone.  That conclusion is not dependent on Truly's roll call.   Lastly, I believe it is an outlandish and baseless claim to suggest that Truly was involved in a conspiracy into the assassination of JFK.  That is far out Bigfoot stuff.  But if you believe, as you have insisted here, that the evidence confirms that Truly lied and therefore must have been involved, why not take your evidence to the NY Times or some respected media outlet and seek their opinion?  I'm not sure why CTers who are convinced they have evidence that proves a conspiracy limit themselves to an Internet forum.  If I honestly believed that I had such evidence, I would present it to NY Times or DPD.

[Bill Chapman]

I have to assume the two people you're talking about are Frazier and Karen Westbrook Scranton.
Firstly, Scranton is talking about a roll call taken on the second floor of the office workers there and has nothing to do with any roll call that may or may not have taken place on the first floor. Unless you're aware of a roll call where everyone in the building was taken to the same room and checked.
Secondly, Frazier has already been dealt with. I can't find any mention of a roll call in the interview you posted although it does contain Frazier's claims that after the shooting, instead of going straight back into the TSBD and down into the basement as he stated in his WC testimony, he walked towards the railroad yard where he encountered an impeccably dressed man with a rifle which was placed into a car. He then walked to the corner of Elm and Houston where he saw Oswald walking up Houston street toward him! It is these kind of claims that have undermined his credibility as a witness and the reason why his earlier statements should be accepted. I came across this excerpt from an interview with Frazier in 2002 - https://app.box.com/s/1rtitsd5catfh496qbdaxjrc96zhsp87


BUELL WESLEY FRAZIER -- "Mr. Shelley got us together--he and Mr.
Truly--and we had a roll call."
GARY MACK -- "And where did this take place?"
FRAZIER -- "Outside Mr. Shelley's office."
MACK -- "Did they actually read off names? Or did they just ask you guys,
'anybody missing'?"
FRAZIER -- "No, they read names off and you had to answer."
MACK -- "Okay. And who was missing?"
FRAZIER -- "The only person missing was Lee Oswald."

There are a number of problems with this.
'1) Frazier never mentions any kind of roll call in his WC testimony even though he talks about hanging around the area outside Shelley's office.
2) Not one single person working under Truly testifies to anything even remotely like this.
3) Truly himself never mentions anything even remotely like this.
4) Givens is also absent at this time.

Obviously, when witness testimony disagrees with what you think it's "he said, she said" crap but Frazier's later, completely unsubstantiated claims about a roll call decades after the event is all you need.
In the excerpt of the interview I've posted Frazier clearly states that the only person missing was Lee Oswald. This is from his WC testimony:

Mr. Frazier: Yes, sir; I told them and naturally Mr. Shelley and Billy vouched for me and so they didn't think anything about it.
Mr. Ball: Did you hear anybody around there asking for Lee Oswald?
Mr. Frazier: No, sir; I didn't.
Mr. Ball: At any time before you went home, did you hear anybody ask for Lee?
Mr. Frazier: No, sir; I don't believe they did, because they, you know, like one man showed us, we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper information where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more, and then we went on up to a little bit more to the front entrance more toward Mr. Shelley's office there with another man and stood there for a little while and told us all that was there could go ahead and go home.

If you believe the roll call happened, present the evidence.

Living History with Karen Westbrook Scranton

27:40-ish
'They took a roll call to make sure everyone was there' -- Scranton

[Bill Chapman]

"It makes no sense for Truly to fake a roll call when there was nothing to preclude him from having a roll call."

There is an incredibly simple point being made in this thread that you do not know how to deal with.
Truly lied to Fritz and his men about taking a roll call in which it was discovered Oswald had left the building.
You cannot provide any credible evidence that such a roll call took place.
That evidence does not exist.
It's enough that not one of the warehouse men who testified made any mention of anything like a roll call conducted by Truly.
But when we examine Truly's testimony it is clear that no such roll call took place:

"When I got back to the first floor, at first I didn't see anything except officers running around, reporters in the place. There was a regular madhouse."
"Then in a few minutes--it could have been moments or minutes at a time like that--I noticed some of my boys were over in the west corner of the shipping department, and there were several officers over there taking their names and addresses, and so forth."

Baker and Truly arrive back on the first floor around 10-15 minutes after the shooting to find "a regular madhouse".
I believe Tom Alyea takes footage of the two men stood talking with others shortly after they arrive on the first floor.
After an indeterminate amount of time Truly states that he notices some officers taking the names and addresses of some of his "boys". Frazier alludes to this in his WC testimony:

"...we had to give proper identification and after we passed him he told us to walk on then to the next man, and we, you know, put down proper information where he could be found if they wanted to see you and talk to you any more..."

Truly continues:

Mr. Truly: There were other officers in other parts of the building taking other employees, like office people's names. I noticed that Lee Oswald was not among these boys.
So I picked up the telephone and called Mr. Aiken down at the other warehouse who keeps our application blanks. Back up there.
First I mentioned to Mr. Campbell--I asked Bill Shelley if he had seen him, he looked around and said no.

Mr. Belin: When you asked Bill Shelley if he had seen whom?

Mr. Truly: Lee Oswald. I said, "Have you seen him around lately," and he said no.
So Mr. Campbell is standing there, and I said, "I have a boy over here missing. I don't know whether to report it or not." Because I had another one or two out then. I didn't know whether they were all there or not. He said, "What do you think"? And I got to thinking. He said, "Well, we better do it anyway." It was so quick after that.
So I picked the phone up then and called Mr. Aiken, at the warehouse, and got the boy's name and general description and telephone number and address at Irving.

Not only is it abundantly clear that no roll call took place, Truly makes the decision that Oswald is missing even though he "had another one or two out then" and he "didn't know whether they were all there or not".

He didn't know whether they were all there or not !!

For some reason known only to himself Truly rings up Aiken for Oswald's details. Somehow he has discerned that Oswald has left the building and is the only employee missing.
It is clear you want to jump ahead to make your argument that the invented roll call has no relevance but it is down to the evidence to determine the correct opinion and not, as you would have it, down to your opinion to determine the correct evidence.
So I'll keep it simple and to the point of this thread:

1) Do you agree there was no roll call taken by Truly?
If so:
2) Do you agree Truly invented this roll call?
If so:
3) Do you agree this invented roll call was used to single out Oswald as a person of interest to the police?

Keep to the subject of the thread rather than trying to reverse engineer your own entrenched position to try and deal with this issue.

If you believe the roll call happened, present the evidence.

Living History with Karen Westbrook Scranton

27:40-ish
'They took a roll call to make sure everyone was there' -- Scranton

[Bill Chapman]

Again, I'm not sure that there is enough available evidence to determine what form any "roll call" took.  As pointed out, there is evidence that it did occur.   However, the details are likely beyond confirming at this point.  What we are left with is to consider whether it makes any difference.  And it does not.   Whether there was a roll call or not is only relevant as to whether Oswald was present at the TSBD.  We know without any doubt whatsoever that Oswald was gone.  That conclusion is not dependent on Truly's roll call.   Lastly, I believe it is an outlandish and baseless claim to suggest that Truly was involved in a conspiracy into the assassination of JFK.  That is far out Bigfoot stuff.  But if you believe, as you have insisted here, that the evidence confirms that Truly lied and therefore must have been involved, why not take your evidence to the NY Times or some respected media outlet and seek their opinion?  I'm not sure why CTers who are convinced they have evidence that proves a conspiracy limit themselves to an Internet forum.  If I honestly believed that I had such evidence, I would present it to NY Times or DPD.

I suggest Fox News; they'll believe anything

[David Von Pein]

FYI / FWIW....

For those who think there was positively no roll call performed at the TSBD following the assassination, I offer up the two newspapers linked below. Both of these papers are dated Saturday, November 23, 1963. The words "roll call" can be found within the highlighted blue box that I have drawn in on each paper.

Also take note of the photograph of an alleged "Assassin's Bullet" that appears in the upper-right corner of the Fort Worth newspaper below. You'll no doubt note, as I did, that there's nothing at all in that photograph that comes even remotely close to resembling a "bullet":





More "Roll Call" talk here:
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2016/06/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1142.html

[Richard Smith]

I would present it to NY Times or DPD.

ROFLMAO

Has your brain been deprived of oxygen lately?

Another typical Otto contribution.  No substance - check.  Personal insult - check.  In which we learn that if someone has what they believe to be evidence in the assassination of the US President, it is not reasonable for them to present that "evidence" to a national media source or law enforcement agency instead of spending their time on an Internet forum.  What does this reveal to us?  That CTers don't actually believe their own nonsense.