Posted on 04/19/2002 3:07:46 PM PDT by OKCSubmariner
Copyright 2002 by Patrick B. Briley
A librarian from Kansas was driving south down interstate I-35 when she witnessed near Perry, OK the pullover of Timothy McVeigh in his yellow Mercury Marquee (in the north bound lane) by OK State Highway Patrol trooper Charles Hanger. The pullover occurred on the morning of April 19, 1995 less than two hours after the OKC bombing. Hanger has testified that McVeigh was not speeding but was pulled over because he had no plates on his car.
The librarian who witnessed the pullover is certain there was a second vehicle pulled over with the Mercury Marquee. And the librarian has said that the second vehicle pulled over may have been a pickup truck. The librarian has not been interviewed before by anyone but her description of the event is consistent with the known facts of location and time about the pullover.
The librarian observed Hanger’s lights flash on and then the Mercury and the second vehicle pull over. The impression given to the librarian was that Hanger had stopped both vehicles at the same time. The librarian made her observations over a long (but closing) distance and significant period of time from her lane on the opposite side of I-35 as she was traveling south.
A lot is learned from a review of testimony given by Charles Hanger found in transcripts from the McVeigh trial and in published accounts about Hanger’s testimony before the OK County Grand Jury. Some have written that Hanger was evasive, not fully forth coming and contradictory when giving answers about a second vehicle that was pulled over with McVeigh.
Hanger said he was distracted and did not know if a second vehicle pulled over. When asked about the video camera he first said he did not know if it was working properly, then he said he did not know if he had turned it on. He later admitted that he took the video home and reviewed the video. But when asked what was on the video he said he did not look at enough of it to know and had turned it over to the FBI. The FBI to this day has not been asked formally in court about what was on the video.
The FBI still maintains along with prosecutors that no John Does were known to have traveled with or helped McVeigh or Nichols. A pickup truck pulling over with McVeigh when stopped by Hanger would imply that a John Doe was traveling with and helping McVeigh especially since Hanger says there was no speeding involved.
The librarian’s account is especially important either if Hanger’s video camera did not capture the second vehicle or if Hanger or the FBI is lying about what is on the video.
The Houston Chronicle reported in May 1995 that a second vehicle, an old brown pickup truck, also pulled over in front of McVeigh at the same time. The Chronicle further reported that a video camera in Hanger’s patrol car had recorded the pickup and the plates on the vehicle. Other articles in the Dallas Morning News and the New York Times in May 1995 also referred to the pickup and stated that the plate and truck had been allegedly traced to a Steve Cobern. Cobern was a chemist who had experimented with bombs he blew up in the Arizona desert before the OKC bombing.
Steve Cobern lived in Oatman Arizona near Michael Fortier in Kingman, Arizona. McVeigh was introduced to Cobern by Roger Moore and his woman friend Mrs Anderson. Moore is the gun dealer that the FBI testified was robbed in Arkansas to finance the OKC bombing. Testimony about the robbery of Moore’s guns revealed that a very strong man resembling Cobern (he is known to have carried refrigerators around on his back) had blind folded, bound up and dragged Moore around in his house.
A note was found in the Arizona desert from McVeigh addressed to Steve Cobern. Neighbors of Cobern and Fortier interviewed by local Arizona newspapers reported that Cobern and Fortier left about two weeks before the OKC bombing and did not return until a few days to a week after the bombing.
Fortier’s next door neighbor and drug dealer, James Rosencrans also reportedly left Kingman about the same time and returned about the same time as Cobern and Fortier. Rosencrans fenced and sold at a Kingman pawn shop the guns stolen from Cobern’s friend, Roger Moore. Oddly enough Roesencrans testified twice before the Federal grand jury implicating McVeigh in the use of drugs. Rosencrans was considered reliable enough for the Federal Grand Jury even though he brandished a rifle in front of FBI agents sent to give Fortier a proffer agreement written by Clinton’s personal FBI legal advisor in the White House, Howard Shapiro. And the Federal Grand Jury was not told by the FBI or prosecutors about the four witnesses interviewed by the FBI at the Travelers Aid near the Murrah Building who have identified Rosencrans with a group of John Does driving McVeigh’s Mercury on April 18, 1995.
If the Houston Chronicle, New York Times and Dallas Morning News are correct then the librarian is not only correct but the second vehicle was likely a brown pickup truck.
Some witnesses reported seeing an old brown pickup truck at the EZ Mart in Newkirk (see Part 1) on April 18, 1995 when Nichols and a John Doe was there in Nichols blue pickup truck and with a Ryder truck. And witnesses have reported seeing an old brown pickup truck with McVeigh and a street person in OKC at a Total gas station the morning of the OKC bombing. There is a surveillance video (which the FBI confiscated) of the McVeigh visit to the Total gas station. The FBI took the street person in custody for questioning about the brown truck and his visit with McVeigh.
It is possible that the vehicle pulled over in front of McVeigh by Hanger and seen by the librarian could be the same vehicle seen in Newkirk and at the Total gas station by numerous witnesses.
The information is known to the FBI and prosecutors. Was the information adequately recorded in FBI interview reports? If so were the reports withheld from the courts, defense and public or even destroyed (as recently reported by the DOG Inspector General to the Senate Judiciary Committee two weeks ago) so there would not be a basis to think there was a John Doe traveling with McVeigh in a pickup truck pulled over when Charles Hanger stopped McVeigh on I-35?
Copyright 2002 by Patrick B. Briley
Please explain.
Dan Day, I doubt you'll get a response. VA Advogado still CLAIMS that Ron Brown's body was autopsied ... despite having been shown repeatedly via numerous citations from credible sources (like statements from the pathologists who EXAMINED the body) that there was no autopsy. He does that because he is a shill whose sole purpose on this forum is to spread disinformation and dismiss ANY accusation that might actually lead to justice where the Clintons and DNC are concerned. And he is chummy with some of the biggest "move-on'ers" around, if you haven't noticed.
Please elaborate. I'm not familiar with it.
So what kind of spell check are you familiar with?
Reporters rely on computer spell checkers.
This is a total crock!! The cop didn't know how many vehicles were on the side of the road?
A friend of mine pulled to the side of the road one evening when she recognized my son who had just been involved in an auto accident. She was immediately approached by an officer and told to leave the scene--apparently he didn't have a problem knowing how many vehicles were in the vicinity.
I have confidence in the librarian. What is new about this story is that there has not been a witness identified before who has come forward to talk as she now has done with me. She has not been interviewed by the FBI nad therefore has not been pressured by them not to talk or to cahnge her story. And as she has seen the story of the OKC bombing case unfold she knows now that the official version is not correct.At the right time and place her name can be used say if she testified before Congress.
I interviewed the librarian at length. She had very good recall because she witnessed history in the making. SHe remembers the yellow MArquee vividly and knew from news reports that came out very soon (days)after the bombing about the very day she had witnessed , that a highway patrol officer had pulled McVeigh over near Perry where she had driven. She said she watched with interest as she read about and heard the contoversy about the second vehicle.This further reinforced in her memory (so she would not forget it)what she had seen because she knew it was significant.
Most people notice when a highway patrol car pulls over two cars at the same time and will rember it if they hear news account about it shortly therafter and realize the signifcance of what they saw.
She also was a frequent traverler on the I-35 route as she was commuting between Kansas and the University of Oklahoma to get her Masters Degree. She has a wealth of knowledge and info and has found some very significant articles and documents for me. SHe loves history and has been following this story since 1995.She has kept up with current events just like I have because of the significance and because she loves history. She is almost a news junkie and has excellent recall of what she has read. She is an avid reader and as a librarian she has a mind for detail and for searching articles and docs.
This lady is also talented and very intelligent in my opinion. You know many people like her still have vivid memories of what they saw and heard on April 19, 1995. Psycologists say that people tend to remember better if there is an emotion or a seriousness of the signifance tied to the event they witness. This applies to all my best witnesses.
Ha! Tell us when a pathological examination of a dead body is NOT an autopsy? You're just a paid shill for Judical Watch.
There is a huge difference between an examination and a full blown autopsy.
Like?
I think you are asking me to reason from a false hypothesis.
McVeigh was held without any charge, or connection to the Murah bombing for 29 hours (or somthing like that). When he was finally charged, I doubt the State Police called the "librarian" to let her know.
The posted story is a croc.
ML/NJ
For the record, I neither work for JW in any way nor know anyone associated with JW.
Now you tell us how one can do an autopsy of a skull without opening that skull up ... especially when the possibility that the skull was penetrated by a bullet was vocalized during the exterior examination.
And you tell us why you can't name ONE source that says an autopsy was done (other than that website caption to a picture which came from a source that says no autopsy was done) while I can quote (and have quoted on numerous occasions) half a dozen experts who were directly involved in the Brown case, including the officer who actually did the examination, who say NO AUTOPSY WAS EVER PERFORMED.
What people need to understand is that you are claiming this to shut down demands that an exhumation and autopsy now be done. THAT is a clear sign that you are a shill here to protect someone or some organization that was involved in a MASS MURDER and the subsequent coverup.
What people need to know is that you are chummy with some of the most ardent "move-on'ers" on this forum. They need to know that I've argued the Brown case with many of those move-on'ers and in each and every case they have either claimed that Brown was not murdered without providing any basis, have distorted the facts like you are now doing, or have simply RUN from the facts like democRATS tend to do.
What people need to know is that on one occasion you said you believed Brown was murdered in order to sound credible but since then have shown up repeatedly in Brown discussions to support those who argue that he was not murdered.
In short, you are a PROVEN LIAR, VA advogado. That is what readers need to know in evaluating anything you have to say.
Your wasting your time, marktwain. You'll get nothing sensible out of VA advogado since he simply ignores all the quotes from those who performed the examination who state unequivocally that no autopsy was ever performed.
Since this didn't happen, the car must have pulled over to back up the trooper and prevent McVeigh's escape.
It would also explain why McVeigh didn't use his gun. Apparently the party in the other car approached McVeigh first and McVeigh assumed he was going to shoot the trooper. That party then turned the gun on McVeigh and McVeigh never had a chance to shoot...
The aims of death investigation are to answer the following questions: Who died? (identification of the deceased) Where? (place of death) When? (time of death) Why? (cause of death) How? (manner & mechanism of death)
Autopsy is only one part of death investigation. Body, History and Scene are equally important (diagnostic triangle).
Each of the three aspects of the death investigation process are equally important (like a three legged stool, which will fall over if one leg is removed or even shortened!)
1. Scene: Attendance by police officers, CID, family doctor, police surgeon, forensic pathologist, forensic scientists. The aim is to collect the maximum of information with the minimum of disturbance. Potential for professional conflicts. Photography, videos, trace evidence.
2. History: Social - from relatives, friends, police. Medical - from GP, hospital notes. Often indicates the likely cause of death Psychiatric - from GP, hospital notes. May indicate possibility of suicide.
3. The medico-legal autopsy: The medico-legal autopsy differs from the hospital autopsy in two major respects:
Purpose:- What happened? to Who, When, Where, Why, and How.
Technique:- The external examination assumes much greater importance, special dissection techniques and examinations, evidential materials, report formulation or commentary. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The witnesses at Travelers Aid also saw the car on April 18, 1995 in OKC in front of their building and it was distinctive to them and they vividly remembered the car just as the librarian. Both of these are real stories and the witnesses are very credible.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.