JACK RUBY, WES WISE, MAL COUCH,
AND THE DISHONESTY OF MARK LANE....
MARK ULRIK SAID:
Unfortunately for Ben, Couch also makes it clear that the person who saw Ruby in Dealey Plaza was Wes Wise.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Excellent post, Mark, on the Wise/Couch/Ruby matter. I'm coming in late on this topic about Couch and Wise, and I'm not entirely sure what Mark Lane wrote in his book about this matter, but from the posts in this [Amazon.com] thread, it would seem as if Lane was trying to utilize Mal Couch's Warren Commission testimony to leave the readers of his pro-conspiracy book with the distinct impression that Jack Ruby had, indeed, been seen by someone in Dealey Plaza just "moments" after JFK was murdered.
But Mark Lane is most certainly not telling his readers the whole (truthful) story, because as Mark Ulrik quoted from Couch's WC session, Mr. Couch positively says who it was who supposedly saw Ruby coming out of the Depository on 11/22/63 -- it was Wes Wise.
And since we know for a fact that Wes Wise was NOT in Dealey Plaza when the President was shot (Wise was reporting from the Trade Mart for KRLD), and since we also know that Wise only saw Ruby in Dealey Plaza ONE TIME that weekend in November '63 -- and it was on SATURDAY, not FRIDAY -- then it becomes fairly obvious that Mark Lane is doing what he has done many other times in his book and during his college lectures and interviews --- he is deliberately not telling people the whole story in a desperate and determined effort to get people to believe that something "fishy" occurred, when, in fact, the only thing "fishy" and underhanded is the way Mark Lane tries to deceive the public on many matters concerning the assassination of JFK.
BTW, there is audio proof that Wes Wise was located at the Dallas Trade Mart just after the assassination on Friday. You can hear Wise reporting live from the Trade Mart for KRLD-Radio here.
Would some conspiracy theorist like to suggest that I have "faked" the above audio recordings of Wise's voice? Mark Lane might like to think so.
BEN HOLMES SAID:
Couch also makes it clear what day this was.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Sure. But the person from whom Couch got that information was obviously wrong about the day. Wise didn't talk to Ruby in Dealey Plaza "moments" after the assassination. Wise talked to Ruby on Saturday. And Mark Lane surely HAD to have known that fact.
So it's a complete non-issue that Lane evidently wants to pretend isn't solved. He wants his book readers to think that Ruby was, in fact, in Dealey Plaza on 11/22 talking to Wes Wise. But Wes Wise was at the Trade Mart speaking into a microphone for radio station KRLD.
So, as stated previously, Lane is deliberately misleading his readers. (Par for the Lane course, of course.)
Now, if I have misrepresented what Mark Lane said in his book, "Rush To Judgment", I'll gladly retract my last two posts and say I was wrong. But, generally speaking, I have no qualms at all in placing more faith (and truth-telling) in any post written by an "LNer" than I do in anything uttered by a "CTer" any day of the week. Because it goes pretty much without saying that most conspiracists are dead wrong way way more often than any LNer regarding the JFK case. Just think "Jim DiEugenio, Ralph Cinque, Bob Groden, Ben Holmes". That pack of CTers rarely gets anything right.
BEN HOLMES SAID:
Game, Set, and Match. Sorry you lost...try again later.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Come now, Benji. Be a nice little conspiracy kook and respond to my WHOLE argument. Here's the part you conveniently chopped off:
"But the person from whom Couch got that information was obviously WRONG about the day. Wise didn't talk to Ruby in Dealey Plaza "moments" after the assassination. Wise talked to Ruby on Saturday. And Mark Lane surely HAD to have known that fact. So it's a complete non-issue that Lane evidently wants to pretend isn't solved. He wants his book readers to think that Ruby was, in fact, in DP on 11/22 talking to Wes Wise. But Wes Wise was at the Trade Mart speaking into a microphone for radio station KRLD. So, as stated previously, Lane is deliberately misleading his readers. (Par for the Lane course, of course.)"
-- DVP; 7/23/13
BEN HOLMES SAID:
And, by the way, you *ARE* lying about Mark Lane "deliberately misleading his readers".
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Once more we're treated to Holmes springing to his keyboard to call someone a liar.
I didn't lie at all in this matter, Ben. I just now looked up the relevant portion of text in Lane's book "Rush To Judgment" (it's on page 263; see it for yourself right here) and, just as I expected, Mr. Lane is not telling his readers the entire story regarding the key question relating to Wes Wise, Jack Ruby, and Mal Couch -- with that key question being:
Did Wes Wise see Jack Ruby in Dealey Plaza shortly after JFK was shot on 11/22/63?
If Mark Lane had any real interest in telling his RTJ readers the COMPLETE story regarding Wes Wise and Jack Ruby, Lane would have certainly offered up the information supplied by Mr. Wise in CE3039 (at 26 H 582-585), which is a Commission Exhibit mentioned by Mark Ulrik previously in this Amazon thread (thanks, Mark, for citing it too).
In that December 1, 1963, FBI interview that we find in CE3039 (and Mark Lane could certainly have found it too, because it's not hidden; it's right there in Volume 26 of the Warren Commission's set of published volumes), we find some very important information, with the FBI report going into considerable detail concerning Wes Wise's encounter with Ruby near the Depository on Saturday, November 23rd. The report even says how Wise saw Ruby approaching his car "from the rear of the Texas School Book Depository along Houston Street on the east side of the building", which perfectly matches the testimony of Mal Couch. Couch said he had heard that Wise had seen Ruby "coming around the side of the building, coming around the east side going south".
Therefore, in the Warren Commission volumes themselves, Mark Lane has the key to answering the question of whether or not Wes Wise actually observed Jack Ruby in Dealey Plaza right after the assassination on Friday. And the undeniable answer to that question is: No, he did not. And can any sensible person really believe that CE3039 is talking about a SECOND Wise/Ruby encounter, with one encounter taking place "moments after the shooting" on Friday and the second one occurring on Saturday--with Wise (both times) seeing Ruby approaching him along Houston Street on the east side of the TSBD? Come now.
Plus, Lane could have also utilized Wes Wise's testimony at Jack Ruby's trial (also mentioned by Mark Ulrik in his earlier post concerning this matter; another tip of the hat to Mark for finding all kinds of references to the Wise/Ruby meeting on 11/23/63, any one of which could also have been used by Mark Lane in his 1966 book, but evidently they weren't). Wise's Ruby Trial testimony was published by the Warren Commission in Volume 25 (as CE2413), beginning on page 498.
Now, you can argue that Mr. Lane was just not very thorough when it came to this Wise/Couch/Ruby matter, and perhaps Lane never looked at CE3039 or CE2413. But I doubt that type argument will garner very much support, knowing (as most of us do) the way Mr. Lane scoured all 26 WC volumes between 1964 and the time when his book was published in 1966.
So, we're left with this text to mislead the "Rush To Judgment" readers:
[RTJ Quote On:]
"Malcolm Couch, a cameraman for WFAA-TV in Dallas, told Commission counsel that 'Wes Wise, who works for KRLD', saw Ruby near the Book Depository soon after the assassination.
Couch: Yes--saw him moments after the shooting--how many moments, I don't know--5 minutes, 10 minutes--coming around the side of the building, coming around the east side going south, I presume.
Question: Did you ever talk to Wes Wise as to whether or not he actually saw this, or is this just hearsay?
Couch: No; I didn't. This is just hearsay.
Question: Let me ask you this: Is there any observation, other than hearsay, that you have about this entire sequence of events that you have not related here?
Much of the testimony taken by the Commission consisted of hearsay, of course, as did all of the interview reports upon which it relied; much of it was irrelevant as well. In this instance, however, counsel precipitately invoked the hearsay rule and prevented further discussion of a relevant subject--Ruby's presence in Dealey Plaza. The rule regarding hearsay testimony was designed not to stifle evidence but to assure its reliable presentation. In a trial situation, where the rules of evidence are strictly adhered to, with certain exceptions, Couch would not be permitted to testify regarding the observations of another person, since the original source could be called as a witness. The Commission did not call Wes Wise." -- Mark Lane; Page 263 of "Rush To Judgment" (c.1966)
[END LANE BOOK QUOTE.]
And in addition to the above batch of crap concerning Mal Couch and "hearsay testimony", Lane also says the following on that same page of RTJ:
"Possible corroboration for Miss [Vickie] Adams is provided by a photograph taken minutes after the assassination. It shows a man who looks just like Ruby standing at the place where Miss Adams recalled seeing him. As we shall see, this photograph was published by the Commission only after it had been cropped in such a fashion that the man's face was partially removed."
[END LANE BOOK QUOTE.]
Now, as we all know, Mr. Lane was undoubtedly referring to this picture linked below [click to enlarge]:
And as we all also know, the man on the far right-hand side of the above picture (wearing the dark glasses) is not Mr. Jack L. Ruby. And the photo below, which shows the same man in dark glasses from a different angle, proves that it is not Ruby:
EDIT: Here's another photo showing the same man in sunglasses, and it's obviously not Jack Ruby [click to enlarge]:
Now, I have no idea exactly when those last two pictures first surfaced. They might have only become available after Lane published his book in '66. So, if that's the case, Lane wouldn't have seen the verifiable proof that the man in the first picture was not Jack Ruby. But Mr. Lane can use no such "It Wasn't Available At The Time I Wrote My Book" excuse when it comes to Commission Exhibit No. 3039 and that December 1963 FBI interview with Wes Wise....because CE3039 has been available to the public in Volume #26 since late 1964. And the same can be said of CE2413 too. It's been available since 1964 as well, in Volume 25.
Plus, Lane could have also easily called up Wes Wise on the telephone to confirm the fact that Wise could not possibly have seen Ruby in Dealey Plaza around 12:30 on November 22, seeing as how Wise was a few miles away at the Trade Mart at that time. I doubt that Wes would have hung up on Mr. Lane.
In short -- Mark Lane doesn't WANT his readers to read the WHOLE story about many of these purported "unknowns" revolving around the murder of JFK. Lane would much rather have his readers finish reading his book with the idea swirling in their heads that maybe Wes Wise REALLY DID see Jack Ruby in Dealey Plaza within "moments" of the President being shot....even though the truth of the matter rests elsewhere....specifically on pages 582 to 584 of Warren Commission Volume No. 26. Too bad Mark Lane didn't share that information with his readers.
David Von Pein
July 23-24, 2013
July 24, 2013
August 6, 2017