From - Wed Oct 30 16:37:07 1996 From: jmcadams@homer.thenet.net (John McAdams) Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy.jfk,alt.conspiracy.jfk.moderated Subject: Phony SS Agent on the Knoll? Date: 30 Oct 1996 13:58:16 GMT Organization: CompuServe Incorporated Lines: 697 Approved: lho@foxvalley.net Message-ID: <556vfp$o8r@hil-news-svc-6.compuserve.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: homer.thenet.net Content-Type: text X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82 Content-Length: 35509 Status: O Path: mcadams.posc.mu.edu!news.primenet.com!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!howland.erols.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in1.uu.net!trellis.wwnet.com!news.thenet.net!jmcadams Research Note #4: Phony Secret Service Agents in Dealey Plaza Some witnesses said they encountered Secret Service agents in Dealey Plaza moments after the assassination. These reports continue to be the subject of much controversy. Why? Because it has long been established that there were no genuine Secret Service agents on the ground in Dealey Plaza until later that afternoon. This fact suggests there were phony Secret Service agents in Dealey Plaza, and that they were there to help the assassins escape. Says David Scheim, After the shooting, Dallas Police officer Joe M. Smith encountered another suspicious man in the lot behind the picket fence [on the grassy knoll]. Smith told the Warren Commission that when he drew his pistol and approached the man, the man "showed [Smith] that he was a Secret Service agent." Another witness also reported encountering a man who displayed a badge and identified himself as a Secret Service agent. But according to Secret Service Chief James Rowley and agents at the scene, all Secret Service personnel stayed with the motorcade, as required by regulations, and none was stationed in the railroad parking lot [behind the grassy knoll]. It thus appeared that someone was carrying fraudulent Secret Service credentials--of no perceptible use to anyone but an escaping assassin. (Scheim 30-31) Not only were there no Secret Service (SS) agents stationed on or behind the grassy knoll, but there were no FBI or other federal agents stationed there either. Officer Smith was not the only witness who encountered an apparently phony federal agent. Malcolm Summers ran to the knoll moments after the shooting. He related the following in the 1988 documentary WHO MURDERED JFK?: I ran across the--Elm Street to right there toward the knoll. It was there [pointing to a spot on the knoll]--and we were stopped by a man in a suit and he had an overcoat--over his arm and he, he, I saw a gun under that overcoat. And he-- his comment was, "Don't you all come up here any further, you could get shot, or killed," one of those words. A few months later, they told me they didn't have an FBI man in that area. If they didn't have anybody, it's a good question who it was. (Anderson 14) Lone-gunman theorist Gerald Posner dismisses all reports of phony SS agents. Says Posner, Outside the Depository, some witnesses later claimed they ran into Secret Service agents. Since there were no Secret Service agents at Dealey until 1:00 P.M., when Forrest Sorrels returned from Parkland Hospital, could that mean that somebody was impersonating Secret Service agents, indicating a conspiracy? Most of the witnesses later admitted they were mistaken. And immediately after the assassination, different groups of law enforcement officials (most of them having been there to watch the motorcade from nearby government buildings) spread out in Dealey Plaza--they included Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) agents, postal inspectors, officers from the Special Service Bureau of the Dallas Police, county sheriffs, IRS agents, and even an Army intelligence agent. . . . The author has reviewed the 1963 badges for the above organizations, and found that several look alike. Any of those law enforcement officials could have been confused with Secret Service agents. (Posner 269) I find this explanation inadequate for a number of reasons. For one thing, the various "spectator" government agents mentioned by Posner could not have reached the parking lot behind the grassy knoll so quickly after the shooting; none of them could have been there in time to be encountered by Officer Smith. Furthermore, although Officer Smith did not specifically say so, it seems reasonable to infer from his testimony that the man he met identified himself VERBALLY as an SS agent--I doubt that the man merely held up his badge and said nothing. In addition, Posner does not address the fact that Officer Smith himself later became suspicious of the man he had seen, nor does Posner mention Smith's reasons for doubting the man's identity. Explained Officer Smith, He looked like an auto mechanic. He had on a sports shirt and sports pants. But he had dirty fingernails, it looked like, and hands that looked like an auto mechanic's hands. And afterwards it didn't ring true for the Secret Service. At the time we were so pressed for time, and we were searching. And he had produced correct identification, and we just overlooked the thing. I should have checked that man closer, but at the time I didn't snap on it. (Summers 50) None other than former Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry stated in 1977 that the man encountered by Officer Smith "must have been bogus." Said Curry, I think he must have been bogus--certainly the suspicion would point to the man as being involved, some way or other, in the shooting, since he was in an area immediately adjacent to where the shots were--and the fact that he had a badge that purported him to be Secret Service would make it seem all the more suspicious. (Summers 51) As for Mr. Summers' account, Posner notes that Summers said nothing about encountering an armed federal agent in his 11/22/63 affidavit (Posner 259). But this is understandable since Summers had no reason at the time to think it was unusual or noteworthy that an armed federal agent would be stationed on the grassy knoll. He apparently assumed that the man was an FBI agent. It wasn't until later that Summers learned there were no FBI agents stationed in that area before or after the shooting. Posner further notes that "no one else saw" the man Summers said he encountered. However, even if no one else saw the man, this does not prove that Summers' account is false. Nor can we be absolutely certain that no one else saw the man. The most that can be said is that there is no known report that another witness saw him. Often overlooked in discussions on phony SS agents in Dealey Plaza is the disturbing account of Sergeant D. V. Harkness. (Posner, for example, does not even mention it.) Sergeant Harkness went to the REAR of the Texas School Book Depository Building within a few minutes of the assassination. When he arrived there, he encountered several "well-armed" men dressed in suits. These "well-armed" men TOLD Harkness they were SS agents (Hurt 110-111). It's not hard to understand why the presence of the armed, well-dressed men at the rear of the Book Depository did not make Harkness suspicious. Police officers were beginning to seal off the area, and just six minutes after the shooting Harkness himself identified the Depository over the radio as a possible source of gunfire. The problem, of course, is that the men encountered by Harkness could not have been SS agents, nor is it credible to suggest that Harkness somehow "misunderstood" what they said to him. Did Officer Smith Encounter A Real Secret Service Agent? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Having just read Chris Mills' article "The Man Who Wasn't There" in the December 1995 issue of THE ASSASSINATION CHRONICLES (pp. 58-62), I would like to note some of the weaknesses that I see in his theory. Mills believes that Secret Service agent Thomas "Lem" Johns was the man encountered by Officer Smith. I realize that Mills believes that if his theory is correct, it constitutes evidence that Johns believed shots came from the knoll. However, I have several problems with Mills' theory. Here are a few of them: * I find Mills' explanation of Smith's statement about the man's clothing to be unconvincing. Mills simply dismisses the statement, partly on the basis that it was made 15 years later, "by which time Smith was well aware of the controversy his original statement had caused." What is Mills saying here? That Smith embellished his story because he knew how much controversy his original account had caused? But wouldn't Smith have therefore watered down the account, instead of adding troubling features to it? In essence, Mills is saying that either Smith's memory was egregiously mistaken or he deliberately embellished his story. * Mills goes on to note that Officer Smith did not mention that the man was wearing a sports shirt in his WC testimony. This, however, proves nothing. Smith recounted in his testimony that he had seen other law enforcement officers in civilian clothes, i.e., not in their normal attire, right after the shooting. So, at the time, Smith could have assumed that the man was an SS agent in casual civilian clothes, and thus would have had no reason to mention that the man was wearing a sports shirt (and sports pants). And what about the fact that Officer Smith also said the man was wearing sports pants? Mills does not address this point. * Mills deals with Smith's recollection that the man had dirtied hands by suggesting that Johns had dirtied his hands between exiting the car and allegedly meeting Smith ("on the fence, dusty cars, etc."). But would Johns' hands have become so noticeably dirty that Smith would describe them as "hands like a mechanic"? This statement implies that the hands were quite dirty, with dirt or grease readily visible on them. What's more, there is zero evidence that Johns jumped over the picket fence to get behind it, assuming he was ever behind the fence at all. (There is, in fact, no evidence whatsoever that Johns went behind the fence.) Would the fence have been THAT dirty anyway? And why would Johns have touched any cars? Even assuming he casually put his hands--not just one hand, but both hands--on a few cars, were these cars so dusty that they could have dirtied someone's hands to the point that they would be described as looking like a mechanic's hands? Would Johns' hands have been markedly dirty after hurriedly jumping the fence and then touching a few cars? I don't think so. In connection with this, it should be pointed out that Smith noted that the man's fingernails were dirty as well. It is this kind of specific detail that, in my opinion, gives Smith's account to Summers the ring of truth. And, if the mystery man was Agent Johns, how could he have so dirtied his fingernails that they would be noticeably dirty to a policeman during a brief encounter? The logical assumption is that Agent Johns showed up for duty that morning properly cleaned and groomed. After all, he was about to participate in a presidential motorcade. The idea that he would have reported for duty with noticeably dirty fingernails strikes me as highly unlikely. Could he have dirtied his fingernails during the motorcade? It is hard to see how he could have done so, since all he was doing was riding in a car. Even assuming that he touched a dirty seat or something, would that have so soiled his fingernails as to make them visibly dirty? Such a scenario is extremely improbable. * Mills suggests that Wiegman and Johns were behind the picket fence at the same time. But Wiegman said nothing about going behind the fence. Instead, his account strongly indicates that he and Agent Johns were near or behind the end of the western wall of the pergola. Also, Wiegman didn't say anything about Johns being challenged (or even approached) by a police officer, nor about Johns' then producing Secret Service ID in response, and Smith, in turn, said nothing about an unknown man (i.e., Wiegman) being next to or near the man he challenged. * When Wiegman stopped filming and ran down the knoll to reach his car, Johns might have already been on the street (see Richard Trask, PICTURES OF THE PAIN, p. 374). Said Wiegman, When I came back down the hill Lem Johns didn't have a ride and I said, "Come on, get in our car. Here it is." This seems to imply that when Wiegman came back down from the knoll and approached his car on the street, Johns was already nearby. If such was the case, are we to believe that Johns just happened to come down from the knoll in time to be near the road when Wiegman approached his car? However, one could also read Wiegman's account to mean that Johns accompanied Wiegman back down the slope. We know from Wiegman's account that he and Johns were fairly close to each other when they were near or behind the end of the western wall of the pergola. It is not illogical to suppose that Johns followed Wiegman down the hill and that Wiegman then offered him a ride in the camera car. * If Agent Johns had been in the parking lot, presumably he would have been in the act of searching, and this would have been obvious to anyone who saw him. Why, then, would Officer Smith have even approached him? What's more, Johns was wearing a coat and tie, which makes it even harder to understand why Officer Smith would have approached him if he had been the man in question. * Confronted with the fact that Agent Johns said nothing in his report (or later) about being challenged behind the fence by a police officer, Mills suggests that Johns omitted this event because he was embarrassed over having become separated from Vice President Johnson and/or because his actions indicated he believed shots came from the right front. But why would Johns have remained silent in subsequent years when WC critics repeatedly and loudly pointed to Smith's encounter as evidence that a phony SS man was stationed on the knoll? And, was Johns alive during the HSCA investigation? If so, given the attention that Smith's encounter received during that inquiry, wouldn't Johns have come forward to clear up the matter then? If Johns had been the man Smith saw, one would think that Johns would have shared this historic fact with at least a few of his closest friends and family, and, if this were the case, surely one of them would have long since disclosed this information by now. * The Select Committee investigated Smith's story and determined that no SS men were behind the picket fence at the time of the encounter (cf. Blakey and Billings 101). * From my reading of Smith's and Wiegman's accounts, I seriously doubt that Johns could have been in the parking lot behind the grassy knoll at the time Smith encountered the man with dirty hands wearing a sports shirt and sports pants. * Mills assumes that Johns could have been the man seen by Officer Smith because Johns does not appear in certain photos of the knoll. However, the photographic record of the knoll during the time in question is neither continuous nor complete. Agent Johns could have been just out of sight a little farther north on Elm Street. Or, he could have been behind the end of the western wall of the pergola. Wiegman's account clearly indicates that he saw Johns in this general area, either near the end of the wall or just behind it--or both, for that matter, though obviously not at the same time (Trask 372-373). But, this is a far cry from getting Johns in the parking lot, much less getting him there in time to be seen and then challenged by Officer Smith. * Mills' theory appears to be refuted by the photographic evidence. Photos and film footage taken by Wiegman, Malcolm Couch, and Richard Bothun, for example, indicate that Wiegman's press car left the plaza--WITH AGENT JOHNS IN IT--no more than 60-70 seconds after the final shot, and possibly as early as 45-55 seconds afterward (cf. Trask 156-157, 374-376, 426-427). Bothun photo 4 was taken about 30 seconds after the last shot. In it we see Wiegman pointing his camera at an oncoming patrolman, Clyde Haygood. This was AFTER Wiegman had filmed the Newmans and the Hesters (Trask 157). Wiegman stopped filming a few seconds later. Then, about 15-20 seconds after that, Wiegman raced to catch his car after running down the grassy slope toward another woman who was lying on the ground (Trask 374). So Bothun photos 4 suggests that Wiegman's car left the plaza about 50-65 seconds after the shooting. In the Couch film we see what appears to be Agent Johns and newsman Tom Atkins running to the street to catch a ride, and Johns is seen to vault over the trunk of Wiegman's camera car (Trask 425-427). When did Couch capture this scene on film? Approximately 45-65 seconds after the last shot was fired. In short, Johns did not have enough time to do all the things required of him by Mills' theory. Richard Trask has reached the same conclusion, as Mills candidly acknowledges in a footnote. To judge from the available evidence, Officer Smith encountered the mystery man--again, keep in mind, in the parking lot behind the knoll--about 25-40 seconds after the shots were fired. Smith indicated the man was already among the cars when he saw him (Summers 50). Not only was the man already there, but the man apparently did not rush off right after the encounter, as Johns would have had to do in order to catch his ride with Wiegman. If the man had suddenly run off, one would think Smith would have mentioned this in his WC testimony or in his interview with Summers. After the man showed Smith what appeared to be Secret Service identification, Smith continued to search among the cars. The logical implication is that the man remained in the parking lot for a while. In addition, it stands to reason that the mystery man did not suddenly arrive to the parking lot just a few seconds before Officer Smith saw him, since one would suspect that Smith would have mentioned this as well. In other words, it seems reasonable to assume that the man was in the parking lot well before Smith began to search around the cars. Moreover, Officer Smith's encounter with the mystery man appears to have occurred at roughly the same time that Wiegman saw Agent Johns near the end of the western wall of the pergola. The parking lot was a good 40 feet from this area and was separated from it by the picket fence. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Michael T. Griffith, 1996 Bibliography ------------ Anderson, Jack, AMERICAN EXPOSE: WHO MURDERED JFK?, New York: Journal Graphics' Transcript, 1988. Blakey, G. Robert and Richard Billings, FATAL HOUR, Berkley Books Edition, New York: Berkley Books, 1992. Hurt, Henry, REASONABLE DOUBT: AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE ASSASSINATION OF JOHN F. KENNEDY, New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1985. Posner, Gerald, CASE CLOSED: LEE HARVEY OSWALD AND THE ASSASSINATION OF JFK, New York: Random House, 1993. Scheim, David, THE MAFIA KILLED PRESIDENT KENNEDY, London: Virgin Books, 1988. Summers, Anthony, CONSPIRACY: THE DEFINITIVE BOOK ON THE JFK ASSASSINATION, Updated and Expanded Edition, New York: Paragon House, 1989. Trask, Richard, PICTURES OF THE PAIN: PHOTOGRAPHY AND THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT KENNEDY, Danvers, Massachusetts: Yeoman Press, 1994. I would like to reply to some of Chris Mills' rebuttal arguments concerning my article "Phony Secret Service Agents in Dealey Plaza" (THE ASSASSINATION CHRONICLES, March 1996, pp. 14-17). Mills repeated his belief that Officer Smith embellished his original story when he was interviewed by Anthony Summers. Among other things, Mills said, Surely if the "agent" had been dressed as Smith described he would have had some suspicions as to his authenticity. (p. 18) But Officer Smith gave a perfectly plausible explanation for his action at the time: The man, this character, produces credentials from his hip pocket which showed him to be Secret Service. I have seen those credentials before, and they satisfied me and the deputy sheriff. . . . And afterwards it [the man's appearance] didn't ring true for Secret Service. At the time we were so pressed for time, and we were searching. And he had produced correct identification, and we just overlooked the thing. I should have checked that man closer, but at the time I didn't snap on it. (Summers, CONSPIRACY, p. 50) Officer Smith's actions were entirely understandable under the circumstances. The mystery man produced seemingly valid Secret Service ID as soon as Officer Smith approached him. In addition to being pressed for time and being convinced by the identification, Officer Smith might have also had in the back of his mind the thought that SS agents sometimes worked under cover, i.e., they didn't always dress in a suit and tie, and that the grassy knoll was a logical place to station such an agent. The bottom line is that I don't think we can question Officer Smith's veracity simply because he didn't check out the mystery man further after the man showed him what appeared to be valid SS identification. With regard to the minute details in Officer Smith's account to Summers, such as the mystery man's "mechanics hands" and dirty fingernails, Mills said, . . . it . . . implies a dereliction of duty on Smith's part. If he was so observant as to note the man's fingernails and somewhat bizarre attire, surely he realized that this was unlikely to be a genuine Agent. He did nothing--why? (p. 18) Again, Officer Smith himself answered this question: He didn't investigate further because he was rushed and because he was fooled by the seemingly genuine SS identification that the man produced. Also, Smith told Summers that after the assassination it occurred to him that the man's appearance did not "ring true" for a genuine SS agent. In referring to my use of quotes from David Scheim and from former DPD Chief Jesse Curry, Mills cited Dave Wiegman's statement that Agent Johns was "up there" on the knoll, and then added, This statement by Wiegman must change the way we look at the ensuing meeting between Officer Smith and the Agent. We cannot continue to quote previous authors as though this new evidence had never come to light. (p. 18) But this "new evidence" doesn't prove anything, and it certainly doesn't put Agent Johns in the parking lot. As I pointed out in my article, Wiegman's account makes it crystal clear that he and Johns were near and/or behind the end of the southern/western wall of the pergola. There is no evidence that Agent Johns went behind the picket fence, much less that he ever went into the parking lot. I see several problems with Mills' arguments on the issue of why Officer Smith would have even bothered to approach Agent Johns in the first place. In reply to my point that Johns would have been in the act of searching and thus probably would not have been challenged by Officer Smith, Mills said, Why would Johns be in the "act" of searching? Standing, surveying the sea of cars perhaps. (p. 18) This is part of what I had in mind when I suggested that Johns would have been in the act of searching. But if Agent Johns believed shots had been fired from the knoll, as Mills opines, wouldn't he have also checked for people hiding in or under one of the cars in the parking lot? But let's assume for the moment that all Agent Johns did was to scan the area (assuming, of course, for the sake of argument, that he was in the parking lot at all). What area would Agent Johns have been scanning? Obviously, the area of the parking lot and the railroad yard leading away from the grassy knoll. Why would Officer Smith have bothered to approach a man dressed in a suit and tie who was standing there scanning the area leading away from the grassy knoll, who was obviously engaged in the act of looking for a fleeing assailant? I find Mills' answer to this question unconvincing. Said Mills, Why would Smith approach him [the mystery man]? This seems too obvious to require an answer. (p. 18) I don't follow Mills' logic here. The natural assumption would have been that the grassy knoll gunman would either be hiding or attempting to flee the area, as would any of his accomplices. One would presume that Officer Smith was thinking along these lines when he hurried to the parking lot behind the knoll. It seems difficult to imagine why Officer Smith would have focused on a neatly dressed man who was standing in the parking lot scanning the area leading away from the apparent source of gunfire. (I might add that there's no hint in any of Officer Smith's statements that the man he saw was scanning the area, as one would expect Agent Johns to have been doing.) I'm not saying such a scenario is wildly unlikely, but it does strike me as improbable. Mills appealed to the fact that Agent Johns did not mention in his sworn statement that he ran to the grassy knoll. However, as the photographic evidence clearly establishes, Johns was only on the knoll for approximately one minute at the most (and quite possibly for as little as 20-30 seconds). Since he spent such a short time on the knoll, he might have felt that his brief presence there just wasn't worth mentioning. As for the crucial issue of the timing problem that I raised, Mills opined that since Wiegman was able to do everything he did and still return to the car "well before Agent Johns," then "Johns MUST have had time to do more" (p. 19, original emphasis). For one thing, on what basis does Mills assume that Wiegman returned to the car "well before" Agent Johns did? This assumption is by no means established by the evidence. I would say that Wiegman beat Johns back to the car by no more than 5-7 seconds. Mills still has not really addressed the full scope of the timing problem. He still has not explained how Johns could have done everything he would have had to do in the time limit established by the photographic evidence. Nor has he furnished any evidence that Johns went behind the fence and into the parking lot. Wiegman's own account clearly indicates that he saw Johns near or behind the end of the southern/western wall of the pergola, and he said nothing about seeing Johns go behind (or jump over) the fence. Additionally, in order to catch his ride with Wiegman, Johns would have had to literally dash off right after being challenged by Officer Smith, which surely would have made Smith suspicious. Finally, Mills argued that I erred with regard to the geography of Dealey Plaza. In an apparent reference to my comment that the end of the southern/western pergola wall is "a good 40 feet" from the parking lot, Mills said, The parking lot extends right up to the fence, which at its closest point is only a few feet from the western end of the pergola. It takes only a few seconds to leave the knoll and enter the lot. I know, I've done it, as I am sure many of your readers [sic]. (p. 19) In point of fact, the accuracy of my observation can be verified by consulting any number of diagrams and photos of the grassy knoll area. It should be remembered, too, that we're talking about the END of the pergola's southern/western wall. The end of the southern/western pergola wall is nearly 30 feet from the nearest point on the stockade fence (see, for example, Richard Trask, PICTURES OF THE PAIN, inside cover diagram of Dealey Plaza, and p. 56). This fact can readily be seen in photos as well (see, for example, Harrison Livingstone, KILLING THE TRUTH, fourteenth photo page; J. Gary Shaw, COVER-UP, Second Edition, pp. 128, 131, 139, 147; Matthew Smith, JFK: THE SECOND PLOT, p. 107; cf. Robert Groden, THE KILLING OF A PRESIDENT, pp. 211, 213). The distance from the end of the southern/western pergola wall to the closest spot in the parking lot where a man could stand beside a car is right around 34-37 feet. Note that I'm assuming here, for the sake of argument, that Smith encountered the man at the closest possible point from the end of the western pergola wall. If the encounter occurred even just a few feet farther into the parking lot, or a few feet farther to the north or south along the fence, we're talking about 40 feet easily. It is true that Agent Johns could have been several feet to the left (west) of the pergola wall, and that he also could have been a little farther north from the end of the wall, in which case the distance would have been reduced accordingly. Wiegman's statement, however, does indicate that Johns was very close to the end of the wall. Moreover, Officer Smith's story would seem to suggest that the encounter did NOT occur on the spot that was closest to the end of the southern/western pergola wall; and, again, Wiegman said nothing about Johns being behind the fence or in the parking lot. What about Mills' implied claim that Agent Johns could have reached the parking lot in "a few seconds"? This all depends on what Mills means by "a few seconds." If he means 3-6 seconds, then the claim is plausible only if we assume that Agent Johns literally sprinted from the end of the southern/western pergola wall to the nearest point in the parking lot. In order to reach the parking lot, Agent Johns would have had to either jump over the stockade fence or run around it. The end of the southern/western pergola wall is a good 40 feet from the northern end of the fence. And, at the risk of being a little redundant, I would again observe that Wiegman said nothing about seeing Agent Johns jump over the fence, nor did he report seeing him run around it. Indeed, as I opined in my article, Johns appears to have been near Wiegman near the southern/western pergola wall at around the same time Officer Smith had his encounter with the mystery man in the parking lot. Let's remember, too, that the mystery man was STANDING by a car when Officer Smith approached him in the parking lot (Summers, CONSPIRACY, p. 50; Smith, JFK: THE SECOND PLOT, p. 110). Given the speed with which Smith reached the parking lot (he and the accompanying deputy sheriff have always been credited with being the first ones to arrive to the area), how could Agent Johns have gotten there so much earlier than Smith that Smith didn't see him run into the parking lot and didn't see him suddenly stop by the car? The timing just won't work. In my opinion, the weight of the evidence indicates that the mystery man encountered by Officer Smith was a bogus SS agent. And it stands to reason, in my view, that the man was either one of the shooters or an accomplice. Since the plotters took care to station some phony SS agents at the rear of the Book Depository, it is logical to assume that they had at least one phony agent behind the grassy knoll as well. Mike Griffith In reviewing the HSCA Report, I came across this interesting statement: Agent Thomas "Lem" Johns left Vice President Johnson's follow-up car in an effort to reach the Vice President's limousine, but he was left behind momentarily in Dealey Plaza as the procession sped away to Parkland Hospital. The footnote cited is footnote 107, which gives the source of this statement as follows: 107. Interview of Thomas Lem Johns, Aug. 8. 1978, House Select Committee on Assassinations, pp. 2, 3 (JFK Document 010695) So the Committee did in fact interview Johns, among several other SS agents who took part in the motorcade, and based on Johns' statement the Committee said he was only left behind "momentarily" in Dealey Plaza after jumping out of Johnson's limo. "Momentarily" implies a very short amount of time, and agrees with my view that he was in Dealey Plaza for a very short time, as the photographic evidence strongly indicates. Isn't Johns' HSCA interview further evidence that Johns was not in Dealey Plaza long enough to perform the actions that Mills' theory has him performing? Mike Griffith >Before I make too much comment, I will endeavour to get a full copy of >this interview and read it in its entirety. > >The initial reading of it makes one wonder why Johns is deliberately >misleading the HSCA by saying that he was "momentarily" left in Dealey >Plaza. We KNOW this to be the case because by no stretch of the >imagination can the time he spent there (the time between him leaving >his vehicle and Camera Car 1 leaving, Johns being the last on board) be >described as "momentarily". I see it exactly oppositely. The photographic evidence shows that Johns could have been on the knoll for as little as 40-50 seconds, as I discussed in detail in my two rebuttals. He might have even been there for as little as 30 seconds. Certainly, he was there for less than one minute. I can understand why Johns might have viewed this rather brief diversion as "momentary" in nature. When I was first exposed to this issue, it occurred to me that he didn't mention it in his SS report because it was so short that he didn't see any need to say anything about it. And I can't see how it could be posited that he had enough time to get behind the fence, be spotted by Officer Smith, be asked about his identity, take out his SS identification, show it to Smith, and then casually walk off (since Smith said nothing about the man suddenly bolting away from him--if nothing else, Smith's account clearly implies that the man remained in the immediate area for a few seconds until he was out of Smith's view). >I would think it is likely that in 1978 Johns still had no idea of the >controversy caused by the Smith encounter and saw no reason to alter his >original statement, which I consider may have been made to protect both >himself and the SS. Although I have not seen the full interview, I would >guess that the HSCA did not ask any direct questions about Smith, the >knoll etc., and simply accepted John's word without further probing. Again, I see it completely differently. I don't see how you can believe he wasn't aware of the controversy about the man Smith encountered. This was brought up during the hearings. Blakey mentioned it on national television during one of his narrations. The Committee specifically ruled out any genuine SS agents being in the parking lot at the time Smith encountered the bogus/mystery agent. Presumably, this was one of the issues about which the Committee questioned the SS agents whom it interviewed, including Johns, and this would explain the firmness with which the HSCA presented its finding that the man encountered by Smith could not have been a genuine SS agent. Mike Griffith ---------------------------------------------------------------- Michael T. Griffith. Check out my JFK Assassination Web Page at http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/MGriffith_2 . "No other success can compensate for failure in the home." David O. McKay ----------------------------------------------------------------