> "Jason Burke"<Burke_Ja...@comcast.net>  wrote in message
> news:jneneq$17o$1@dont-email.me...
>> On 4/27/2012 10:02 AM, Research wrote:
>>> "Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)"<hsienz...@Aol.com>   wrote in message
>>> news:be0a0123-e589-4f3a-8aaf-e67ab2baabca@v2g2000vbv.googlegroups.com...
>>> On Apr 26, 10:24 am, markusp<markina...@yahoo.com>   wrote:
>>>> http://www.mandatory.com/2012/04/24/10-strangest-unsolved-american-my...

>>>> IMO, it's generally accepted in this group that Beverly Oliver was not
>>>> the
>>>> Babushka Lady. Does everyone believe the WC made enough effort to
>>>> determine her actual identity? Doubtful because they certainly
>>>> demonstrated very little interest in securing the testimony of very
>>>> close
>>>> eyewitnesses to the limo.

>>>> ~Mark

>>> Hi Mark,

>>> I believe the Warren Commission generally made little to no effort to
>>> procure additional witnesses, as the previous poster said, they pretty
>>> much relied on the public coming forward to report what they saw, if they
>>> believed they had anything of value. Mostly they worked off the list of
>>> witnesses who gave first day accounts to the DPD or Sherriff's Office.

>>> Asking for additional witnesses would be inviting the crazies to come out
>>> of the woodwork with their versions of events - folks like Beverly
>>> Oliver,
>>> Ed Hoffman, and Gordon Arnold. I'm not sure publishing an open invitation
>>> for them would be the best approach ;D

>>> But they did have secure the testimony or statements of Bill Newman and
>>> his wife, some of the motorcade police escort, some of the people in the
>>> followup car of the Secret Service escort service, James Altgens, Abraham
>>> Zapruder, all the survivors of the presidential limo, one of the men
>>> standing on the knoll steps, the men on the overpass, Jean Hill and Mary
>>> Moorman, and a few others whose names escape me at the moment. Other than
>>> the Babuska Lady, whose primary interest would be in her film or photos,
>>> I
>>> can't think of any close witnesses whose statements weren't taken (other
>>> than the two guys on the steps and maybe Marilyn Sitzman).

>>> The Newmans were interviewed. They both made statements that the shots
>>> came
>>> from behind them. They certainly would know if they heard shots from
>>> behind
>>> them. They were roughly 200 feet from the dep. The sounds and the
>>> direction
>>> of the shots would have been much clearer from their position. Not
>>> mentioned
>>> was the Willis's. They told reporters they thought the headshot came from
>>> the knoll. Their postion was directly across the street from the dep. And
>>> they would certainaly know if the sound of the headshot came from the dep
>>> or
>>> the knoll.
>>> But the commission didn't want to know anything but 3dep shots. Just like
>>> the justice department ordered. Three shots, Oswald alone.

>> Which, sadly, is what happened. Unless the CT crowd suddenly comes up with
>> yet another hypothesis. One that actually holds water.

>> But after almost 49 years, I'm kinda thinking that's not likely.

> Your right there. The case was covered over like Kennedy's grave. The Warren
> agenda was to overlook all the evidence that did fit the lone profile. Even
> though we are still discussing the event. There is no new evidence. And the
> public is apathic. They don't care. The young people are so misled and
> ignorant about history. Most don't even know who Kennedy was. Those who do
> know his face just think he was the man who slept with Marilyn Monroe.
> Thanks to Hoovers slanders.