The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy – part 8: Falsified Photographs and the Adventures of Three Casings
Reading time: 19 minutes
Reading guide: Together with the captions the pictures provide the essence of the story
The discovery of the sniper’s nest
It was not clear where the shots came from that fatally wounded President Kennedy on November 22, 1963. Many officers first ran to a grassy knoll, where Kennedy’s car drove past when the shots were fired. But almost instantly many of them went to the nearby Texas Schoolbook Depository building. Initially, Officer Luke Mooney had also run to the grassy knoll, but after a few minutes he was ordered to go to the Texas Schoolbook Depository building. In the building he discovered three rifle casings in the southeast corner of the 6th floor. They were on the floor in front of a window, hidden behind stacks of book boxes: in the ‘sniper’s nest’ (Fig. 1). Mooney remained there until Captain Will Fritz (Head of the Homicide Division) arrived. Fritz ordered two other officers, Montgomery and Johnson, to guard the casings until Lt. Carl Day arrived.
Captain Fritz picks up the casings
When the Warren Commission (which investigated the assassination of President Kennedy) interrogated officer Mooney about the discovery of the sniper’s nest, he stated that Captain Fritz “… was the first officer that picked them up as I know, because I stood there and watched him go over and pick them up and look at them.” That was entirely wrong in a police investigation: after all, no photos had yet been taken. But David Belin, staff member of the Commission who led the interrogation, did not respond to Mooney’s statement. A few minutes later, Mooney repeated: “After Captain Fritz and his officers came over there, Captain Fritz picked up the cartridges and began to examine them, of course I left that particular area.” Again no response from Belin was forthcoming. This shows that he probably knew about Fritz’s blunder, but did not want to dicuss it. Things got even stranger when Mooney was asked by Senator Cooper (one of the Commission members) whether he had changed the position of the casings. “No, sir; I didn’t have my hands on them”, Mooney answered. A month later, Captain Fritz was interrogated by the Commission. In line with Belin’s ignoring Mooney’s comments, picking up the casings did not come up in the interrogation.
On November 22, cameraman Tom Alyea had been present in the Texas Schoolbook Depository building since a quarter to one, and had also participated in the search of the building. He too stated that Captain Fritz had picked up the casings immediately. But Alyea was not interrogated by the Commission and only years later did he come forward with his statement:
“… and saw three shell casings laying on the floor (…) No shell casings were touching the wall or the inside of the barricade. (…) I held the camera over the top of the barricade and filmed them before anybody went into the enclosure. (…) Fritz then walked to the casings, picked them up and held them in his hand over the top of the boxes for me to get a close-up shot of the Shell cases in Captain Fritz’s hand. (…) I don’t recall if he placed them in his pocket or returned them back to the floor.”
Source: Connie Kritzberg, Secrets from the Sixth Floor Window (1994), p 39-46 see also: https://www.jfk-online.com/alyea.html (retrieved September 23, 2023).
Three casings in an unsealed envelope
At twelve minutes past one, Lt. Carl Day, together with his assistant Robert Studebaker (who had been in training at the Crime Scene Section for six weeks), arrived at the Schoolbook building and was directed to the 6th floor. In the southeast corner he encountered officers Montgomery and Johnson, who were guarding the casings.
Day and Studebaker said they had taken three pictures of the casings. When they were about to start, Officer Sims called them: photographs had to be taken of the gun that had just been found (also on the 6th floor). Sims assisted Day by picking up the casings. The official method was to circle the casings with chalk, while they were still on the floor, label each casing with a number and photograph it. In this way it would be possible later on to determine where each casing had been. Then the casings had to be put in separate, numbered bags. But Day did it differently. He had Sims pick up the casings and examined them for fingerprints. The casings had not been numbered while still on the floor and no chalk circles had been drawn. Nor were they packaged separately, but put in an envelope together. And the envelope was not sealed.
Who witnessed the taking of the photographs?
The Warren Commission felt it was important to determine at what time the pictures of the casings had been taken. According to Day’s January 1964 report, this was not an issue: the pictures had been made immediately after his arrival.
Yet, the Commission was not satisfied with Day’s report. On April 6, Commission staff members Ball and Belin interrogated four police officers about this issue, first of all Richard Sims. Initially, Sims stated that he had seen Day and Studebaker taking pictures, but in the course of the interrogation it appeared to be a bit more complicated. Fritz had left two officers to guard the casings and, together with Officers Sims and Boyd, Sims went to another part of the 6th floor. As the gun had been found, Sims went to Day and asked him to photograph it. Joe Ball asked Sims if he had actually seen Day taking pictures of the casings at that time:
Sims: “No, sir; he was making pictures during that time.”
Source: Hearings Warren Report, Volume 7, p. 162; interrogation on April 6, 1964.
Ball did not ask Sims to clarify his statement. Sims probably meant that he assumed photos had already been taken before he got there. After Sims, officer Elmer Boyd was interrogated.
Ball: “Now, did you see any pictures taken of the hulls [casings], photographs taken of the hulls?”
Boyd: “Well, let’s see, Detective Studebaker and Lt. Day, I believe, came up there and they were taking pictures over there at the scene of the hulls.”
Source: Hearings Warren Report, Volume 7, p. 122; interrogation on April 6, 1964.
That sounded a bit doubtful, and for good reason. Boyd and Sims had been in the company of Captain Fritz (all day long, by the way). Fritz and Sims had not waited for Day’s arrival, and had therefore not been able to observe Day taking pictures. So, how had Boyd been able to witness that? Again Ball did not ask questions about this issue. Thirdly, Marvin Johnson, one of the two officers who had stayed near the sniper’s nest until half past two, was interrogated. But compared to the way Sims and Fritz had been questioned, Johnson’s interrogation by David Belin was very superficial.
Belin: “Were you there when Lt. Day and Studebaker came in to take pictures?”
Johnson: “Yes, sir.”
Source: Hearings Warren Report, Volume 7, p. 103; interrogation on April 6, 1964.
Belin should have asked Johnson whether he had observed the actual taking of the pictures. In Johnson’s case that was all the more important, since he had stated that the casings had been closer together than in Day’s pictures. Had Day and Studebaker moved the casings? But Belin did not ask this question. The interrogation of Johnson’s colleague, officer Montgomery, started in a different way. He mentioned the photographs, when he was asked by Ball whether he had given someone a paper bag (possibly used by Oswald to carry the weapon) which had allegedly been found in the sniper’s nest.
Montgomery: “Yes, let’s see – Lt. Day and Detective Studebaker came up and took pictures and everything and then we took a Dr. Pepper bottle and that sack that we found that looked like the rifle was wrapped up in.”
Source: Hearings Warren Report, Volume 7, p. 97; interrogation on April 6, 1964.
But because Day and Studebaker had failed to take a picture of the paper bag while it was still on the floor, it would have been worth while to ask in what way the photography had actually been carried out. However, Ball did not pursue this matter. Finally, on April 22, Chief Inspector Fritz was interrogated about this issue.
Ball: “Do you know whether he [Day] took pictures or not?”
Fritz: “I feel like he did, but I don’t know because I didn’t stay to see whether he could.”
Ball: “You don’t know whether he took the pictures or not?”
Fritz: “I went on searching the building. I just told them [Montgomery en Johnson] to preserve that evidence and I went right ahead.”
Source: Hearings Warren Report, Volume 4, p. 205; interrogation on April 22, 1964.
A strange question and answer game: Ball did have the pictures, didn’t he? And of course Fritz himself would have seen them several times. Why make such a fuss about it? Did the Commission, after all, surmise that the pictures had not been taken immediately at half past one? Anyway, it is obvious that the Commission could not find one witness who was absolutely sure the pictures had been taken at half past one.
Studebaker demolishes the sniper’s nest
Having taken pictures of the rifle, Day immediately took it to the police station. As a result, he was absent between two and three o’clock. Day having left, Studebaker started searching for fingerprints on the boxes of the sniper’s nest. To do so he had to remove the boxes. But in order to put the boxes back in their proper places, Studebaker should first have made a map, together with photos and a description of exactly where and how the boxes had been located. But the young and inexperienced trainee had apparently not been instructed by Day and failed to do so.
Studebaker was unaware that his activities were captured on camera by photographer William Allen of the Dallas Times Herald. Judging by Fig. 4, Studebaker had placed a stack of boxes of the sniper’s nest on the floor in front of the window. One box was even placed in the windowsill of the next window. Figure 5 shows two stacks of boxes on the floor or on the windowsill. Thus, the sniper’s nest had been taken asunder. Many years later, Tom Alyea, who had been present in the building all the time, provided the accompanying text for Allen’s photographs:
“Detective Studebaker was alone at this site until after Lt. Day left the building with the rifle. We in the search team went to the sniper’s site. The barricade had been completely dismantled and the boxes from the west-side of the barricade had been removed and placed in various locations around the site. We did not realize at the time that Studebaker had not recorded on film the original placement of the boxes in the barricade. He also had removed the shooting support boxes on the window ledge and stacked them on top of the other on the floor inside.”
Souce: https://www.jfk-online.com/alyea.html (retrieved September 23, 2023); emphasis added. See also: Connie Kritzberg, Secrets from the Sixth Floor Window (1994), p. 40-46.
According to Alyea, not only had the boxes of the sniper’s nest been removed, but some boxes adjacent to the sniper’s nest as well. The amateurish approach of Dallas Police was evident in Studebaker’s modus operandi, but also in allowing a civilian (Alyea) to participate in the search of the building.
A curious mistake: three pictures of Houston Street
Between 3 o’ clock and a quarter past 3, Day, having returned to the Schoolboek building, took three pictures from one of the 6th floor windows overlooking Houston Street. One of them is in the Exhibits of the Warren Report (see Fig. 6). The website The Portal to Texas History also features the other two almost identical photos. On comparing these pictures it appears that Day did not take them in quick succession. The lady on the left in Fig. 6, who was walking behind the carelessly parked car, is no longer there in the other two pictures. So, some time elapsed between the three photos.
interrogated Day about CE 722, one of three photos Day had taken of Houston Street.
Belin: “Do you know when it was taken?”
Day: “About 3 or 3.15, somewhere about there, on November 22.”
Belin: “When 722 was made, you —-“
Day: “I did not know the direction the shots had been fired.”
Belin: “All right. I’m going to hand you what I have already marked as 724. What about that one?”
Day: “This was made, 724 was made, some 15 to 20 minutes after 722 when I received information that the shooting actually occurred on Elm Street rather than Houston Street. The boxes had been moved at that time.”
Source: Hearings Warren Report, Volume 4, p. 264-265; interrogation on April 22, 1964.
The windows from which Day had taken the photos were close together near the sniper’s nest, as shown in Figure 8. At two o’clock Day had taken the rifle to the police station for safekeeping. At three o’clock, when Day had returned to the School Book Building, the sniper’s nest had already been cleared away by Studebaker. As so often in the course of the interrogations conducted by Belin and Ball, no further questions were asked. This also occurred in the course of Day’s interrogation. Who had told him that he had been taking pictures from the wrong window? Surely, when Day took the pictures of the casings around half past one, he must have known that this was the actual window where the sniper had been. He had even picked up the casings and checked them for fingerprints. So, how on earth was it possible that, less than two hours later, he could not remember from which window the sniper had fired?
Peeking through the windows
There is more in the Commission’s evidence to make one raise an eyebrows. Even though Day probably did not realize it, Houston Street had already been photographed by him before. By his own admission, he had taken picture CE 715 (Fig.2) at half past one. This photo also grants us a view of Houston Street, as does CE 722, one of three photos taken by Day almost two hours later.
Figure 9 and 10 are enlargements of CE 715 (Fig.9) and of CE 722 (Fig.10). The idea is that there was almost a two-hour time gap between the two pictures, and yet they show the same configuration of cars. The white van immediately catches the eye: it is in the same location in both photos, just like the car in front of it (a fire truck?) and the cars next to it. Almost two hours later, even the carelessly parked car on the sidewalk is still there. But this may not be of great significance. After all, there are also differences: there is a large group of people on CE 715, while Day’s other picture (Fig. 11) does not show any. But if CE 715 had not been taken at half past one, as Day stated, but at half past three (i.e. almost half an hour after the three photos of Houston Street had been made), these people may have been journalists and photographers waiting to be allowed to enter the Schoolbook building at four o’clock. Technical examination of the shadows could provide a clue about the time difference between the photos.
Time pressure
Day and Studebaker had to work under time constraint. This is apparent when we take a closer look at the timeline. At 12 minutes past one they had arrived at the School Book Building. A minute before their arrival, Inspector Sawyer, who had been interviewing witnesses in front of the building, had reported the discovery of the casings over the police radio:
“1.11 p.m. – 9 – On the 3rd floor of this book company down here, we found empty rifle hulls and it looked like the man had been here for some time. We are checking it out.”
Source: Transcript of Channel 2 (CE 705) in: Exhibits Warren Report, Volume 17, p. 467.
Day and Studebaker then had to walk to the elevators at the back of the building, carrying two suitcases (including photo equipment). There was a delay because the elevators were out of order, so they had to take the stairs all the way to the 6th floor. As one can imagine, Day (at 50, he was a lot older than Studebaker) possibly grumbled and handed both suitcases to his assistant. On the way up, they may have talked with one of the numerous officers who were searching the building. According to Day, Sawyer had told him the casings had been found, but instead of mentioning the 6th floor, Sawyer had stated over the police radio that the casings had been found on the 3rd floor. As a result, Day and Studebaker may first have gone to the wrong floor, unless someone had directed them to the right floor after all.
Arriving on the 6th floor, they may have talked briefly to Fritz or to someone else who could tell them where exactly they had to be: after all, the floor measured 95 by 95 feet. They put their suitcases on a stack of boxes near the southeast corner of the building. Day and Studebaker may have had little or no contact with Montgomery and Johnson when Sims asked them to take pictures of the newly discovered rifle. Day did have the presence of mind to have Sims pick up the casings and check them for fingerprints. Then, they were placed in an envelope by Day and the time at which this happened had been written on it: 23 minutes past one.
Having done that, Day and Studebaker hurried to the location where the rifle was waiting for them and made two pictures of the gun. Then, securing the murder weapon was Day’s priority: he took it to the police station. Given the limited time available to them, it is conceivable that they did not get around to taking photos of the casings.
The peculiarities at a glance
The peculiarities discussed so far do not rule out the possibility that the photos of the casings were not made until half past three. We will summarize them briefly:
• The Commission could not find witnesses who were absolutely sure that the photos were made at half past one.
• After three o’clock, Day took three photos from the wrong window. So, at that time he did apparently not know from which window the shots had been fired. That is difficult to understand if, at half past one, he had already made pictures of the sniper’s nest.
• Two pictures show cars that had apparently been parked for nearly two hours in exactly the same spot.
• Day and Studebaker had to work under time pressure: they could not have arrived on the 6th floor earlier than a quarter past one (probably a little later), and shortly afterwards they were directed to take pictures of the gun.
A picture tells more than a thousand words
Between four and six o’clock, William Allen (earlier that same afternoon he had recorded Studebaker’s activities) took a photograph of the sniper’s nest as reconstructed by Day and Studebaker. We will compare that picture with CE 715, which, according to Day, was taken at half past one, before the sniper’s nest had been demolished. Since CE 715 should show the sniper’s nest as it had been originally, the two pictures must be different. After all, no map had been made of the stacks of boxes around the sniper’s nest, nor had a description been made of the actual locations of the stacks. Judging by the number of times their memory failed them in the course of their interrogation, Day and Studebaker did not have a photographic memory. It is therefore impossible that they would have been able to remember exactly where the boxes had originally been. We will now compare the two pictures.
In both pictures there is a row of boxes separating the sniper’s nest from the rest of the southeast corner. The top box shows a wide adhesive paper strip; the box below shows a kind of bruise and there is an uneveneness at the bottom of the adhesive strip. In both pictures the three boxes are in exactly the same place: halfway the adhesive strip on the bottom most box. The third box in the stack is situated an inch forward and the box on top (with the wide adhesive strip) is also an inch forward. In both pictures, the second box from the bottom shows exactly the same traces of the powder that Studebaker had used searching for fingerprints. The only significant difference is that CE 715 shows two of the three casings. Further similarities speak for themselves: the stamp on the bottom box is identical, as is the one on the box in the right corner. Allen’s photo also shows a very small part of the box on the windowsill.
In short, we have two almost identical pictures. The first one was allegedly taken before the sniper’s nest had been tampered with and the second one shows the reconstruction of the sniper’s nest. One may venture the conclusion that Day and Studebaker took the photos at half past three, having put back the boxes haphazardly and having put the casings on the floor. Back in the 1990s, Tom Alyea had already stated this, without being able to provide evidence:
“The actual positioning of the barricade was never photographed by the police. Its actual positioning is only on my motive footage which was taken before the police started dismantling the arrangement. (…) I personally would like to know what they were doing back at the scene unless it was to reconstruct shots they had failed to take during the primary investigation. But this evidence had been destroyed and they were forced to create their own version. The photo I have seen of the barricade wasn’t even close.”Source: Connie Kritzberg, Secrets from the Sixth Floor Window, p. 39-46 and also: https://www.jfk-online.com/alyea.html (retrieved on September 23, 2023).
Unfortunately, the video Alyea made of the sniper’s nest has disappeared, so we do not know what it had actually looked like.
No chain of evidence: three casings in an unsealed envelope
We are left with one more issue: if Day and Studebaker had taken the pictures of the casings at half past three, they must then have possessed the casings. But Day’s January 8 report (Fig.3) claims that Sims had taken the casings. And at two o’clock, Sims went to the police station. So, how could Day have photographed the casings at half past three? Somehow he must have had access to the casings.
On April 6, 1964, Sims stated he had not taken the shell casings, but two days later he was interrogated again. On April 8, the only issue was whether or not he had taken the casings to the police station. Sims said he had conferred with Captain Fritz on April 6 or 7, so after the first interrogation. At that time Fritz had reminded Sims that on November 22 he had told him to take charge of the casings. Incidentally, that was not the real reason why he went back to the sniper’s nest. According to Sims he was ordered to tell Day to take pictures of the gun. Anyway, Sims revised his initial statement and on April 8 he said he now remembered having taken the casings with him. All in all, it is not very convincing.
The extensive Dallas Police report does not mention who took possession of the casings in the School Book Building. Although Montgomery and Johnson were present at the sniper’s nest until half past two, the Warren Commission did not ask them who had taken the casings. Given Sims’ shaky statement, the most likely option is that Day had kept the casings. The other option is that Day had obtained the casings from Sims at the police station before half past two, before returning to the School Book Building. In terms of time, that is possible: at a quarter past two, Sims, Boyd and Fritz had returned to the police station.
Ball and Belin in trouble
A photograph of the sniper’s nest, similar to the one made by William Allen, was printed in Four Days, a picture book about the death and funeral of President Kennedy, published in January 1964. This was the first book about Kennedy’s assassination. Ball and Belin must have seen the book. A month after the book was published, they wrote their preliminary report, which included references to the pictures Day and Studebaker had taken of the sniper’s nest.
It is no surprise that the similarities between CE 715 (Fig.12) and the photograph in Four Days (Fig.14) escaped researchers’attention. Very early on a lot of books were published about Kennedy’s assassination. Four Days provides no analysis or further details about the murder and was therefore quickly discarded, also by me.
However, as early as February 1964, Ball and Belin must have noticed the astonishing similarity to CE 715. “How on earth is that possible?” they must have thought. And immediately afterwards: “What next? How do we handle this?” Did they have to put in their final report that no photos had been made of the actual sniper’s nest? But in that case they also had to reveal that Dallas police had tampered with the evidence. That would have destroyed their entire case against Oswald.
Both gentlemen made a cautious attempt to find witnesses who had actually seen the photos being taken. That did not work. Ball and Belin must then have decided to leave it at that. Perhaps they tried to reassure themselves a bit by interrogating Sims again and getting him to remember – after prompting by Captain Fritz – that he was the one ho had taken the casings. At least that part of the problem seemed to be solved.
This course of affairs also explains why CE 715 was not included in the 888 pages of the Warren Report (published in September 1964). Ball and Belin were probably afraid to take the risk that the resemblance between the two pictures would stare people in the face. Of course, CE 715 had to be included in the Hearings and Exhibits, but these were not published until November 1964: 26 thick volumes in all. Ball and Belin must have secretly hoped that CE 715 would not stand out among several thousands of pages. And in that hope they were not disappointed.
Conclusions
The Warren Commission has failed to establish what happened on the 6th floor during the police investigation. Although the Commission had tried to find witnesses who knew at what time the photos had been made, they (coincidentally?) only interviewed those who could not know! Montgomery and Johnson (who did, or could know) were not asked the questions that really mattered. Did they know for sure that Day and Studebaker had taken the photos at half past one? And: who had taken charge of the casings?
One may wonder whether these are mistakes that are made in every investigation, but since Ball and Belin must have known that the photos of the casings were flawed, there was malicious intent. This also applies to Belin’s playing dumb when Mooney twice stated that Fritz had picked up the casings. Fritz was not confronted with this issue, nor were Sims and Boyd, who were in Fritz’s company all day. The Commission’s modus operandi proves – at least in this respect – that it did not much care about the truth.
In the course of the interrogation, Day twice stated that the envelope had not been sealed. Because Day had been honest in this regard, Ball and Belin were unable to establish a chain of evidence. Thus, a mix-up of the casings may have occurred, possibly to put the blame on Oswald. The Warren Commission skillfully solved that problem by ignoring the open envelope in its actual Report. This kind of deception does not make the Warren Report any more reliable.
Judging from the identical photos (CE 715 and Allen’s photo), the casings were not photographed by Day and Studebaker at half past one, but at half past three. So they must have committed perjury in their interrogation. On the one hand, in a way, this course of action is understandable: Dallas police had already cut a sorry figure when Oswald was murdered at the police station in the presence of 70 officers. They could not afford any more mistakes to come into the open. But if Dallas police played a trick on the truth to mask their shortcomings, how reliable then is the evidence they had gathered against Oswald?
Sources
Literature: Warren Report (1964), p. 79, 557 and 566; Four Days: The Historical Record of the Death of President Kennedy (1964); Connie Kritzberg, Secrets from the Sixth Floor Window (Tulsa 1994); Sherry P. Fiester, Enemy of the Truth: Myths, Forensics, and the Kennedy Assassination (Southlake 2012), p. 1-56, however, she does not address the issue when the pictures of the casings had been taken.
Hearings: Luke Mooney (3H 281-291 – March 25, 1964); Robert Studebaker (7H 137-149 – April 6); L.D. Montgomery (7H 96-99 – April 6); Marvin Johnson (7H 100-105 – April 6); Richard Sims (7H 158-186 – April 6 and April 8); Elmer Boyd (7H 119-137 – April 6); Gerald Hill (7H 43-66 – April 8); J. Herbert Sawyer (6H 315-325 – April 8); J.W. Fritz (4H 202-249 – April 22); J.C. Day (4H 249-278 – April 22). The interrogations are also available on the internet.
Police Reports: Police Report by Sims en Boyd in: Hearings and Exhibits Warren Report, Volume 24, p. 195-404 (CE 2003). Police Report by Carl Day: Hearings and Exhibits Warren Report, Volume 26, p. 829-831 (CE 3145).
Photos 6th floor Texas Schoolbook Depository building: Hearings and Exhibits Warren Report, Volume 17, p. 213-226 and p. 499-510. The photos included here are courtesy of the University of North Texas’ excellent database: The Portal to Texas History. The digital renderings are far better than the photographs printed in the Exhibits of the Warren Report. The three photographs by William Allen are also from this site: they have not been published in the Exhibits of the Warren Report.
Sources Photographs:
Fig. 1: Dallas (Tex.). Police Department. [Texas School Book Depository [Print]], photograph, 1963~; (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth49604/m1/1/?q=%22Dallas%20Police%20Department%22: University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Dallas Municipal Archives.
Fig. 2: https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338712/m1/1/: University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Dallas Municipal Archives.
Fig. 4: Allen, William. [Dallas Police Detective Robert L. Studebaker in alleged sniper’s perch], photograph, November 22,
1963; (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth184823/m1/1/: University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza.
Fig. 5:
Allen, William. [Exterior of the Texas School Book Depository], photograph, November 22, 1963; (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth184816/m1/1/: University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza.
Fig. 6:
https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338859/m1/1/?q=%22sixth%20floor%22:
University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Dallas Municipal Archives.
Fig. 7: Dallas (Tex.) Police Department. November 22, 1963,
https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337079/m1/5/?q=%22sixth%20floor%22: University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Dallas Municipal Archives.
Fig. 11: Dallas (Tex.). Police Department. November 22, 1963,
https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338859/m1/7/?q=%22sixth%20floor%22: University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Dallas Municipal Archives.
Fig. 13: William Allen, November 22,
1963; (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth184779/m1/1/: University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza.
Plan for the next parts
- part 9: The hidden gun and Oswald’s alibi. (scheduled release date: January 2024)
- part 10: Warren Commission’s reconstruction of the time it took Baker and Truly to reach the 2nd floor lunchroom. (February 2025)
- part 11: Reconstruction of the time it actually took Baker and Truly to reach the 2nd floor lunchroom. (March 2025)
- part 12: Warren Commission’s reconstruction of the time it took Oswald to get from the 6th floor to the 2nd floor lunchroom.
- part 13: Reconstruction of the time it must have taken Oswald to get from the 6th floor to the 2nd floor lunchroom.
- part 14: Discovery of the paper bag (in which the rifle would have been carried by Oswald) on the 6th floor.
- part 15: The missing hour: Oswald at the Dallas police station between 2 and 3 o’clock on Friday afternoon, November 22, 1963.
- part 16: Interrogation of Oswald on November 22, 23 and 24, 1963.
translated by Ite Wierenga
