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
----------------------------------------------------------------