"Very broadly speaking, there are 3 possibilities:
1. Shipman was completely innocent, and—for some reason—“stood in the way”
2. Shipman became aware, either because of A or B
2A: Shipman was “pitched” and turn down some kind of offer; and so that’s how he became aware that something was afoot.\\
2B: Somehow Shipman learned that something was afoot. (But we don’t know how)
3. Shipman was “dirty” and was causing a problem (demanding more money, etc.)
Based on your own interviewing (and that 3rd party researcher, “G” something), I tend to reject 3. Shipman was not dirty.
I doubt #1, because then there would be no need to murder Shipman.
So that leaves #2 (2A or 2B).
I believe that it was from Tyler Newcomb that I learned that the Washington Post published a small article on Shipman’s death in the Washington Post of 10/14 or 10/16. (Similar to item in Frederick Maryland newspaper). In fact, I was actually sent that article.
But Vince, here’s what you did not say, and that is focusing on a circumstance that is utterly incongruous (to me, anyway;
(a) This was a motorcade assassination; and so. . :
(b) How was it possible for the Washington Post to publish an article on the death of a Secret Service driver, and not have that brought to the attention of the Warren Commission by the FBI?
I find that absurdly improbable. So. . IMHO, the “fix” was in, with regard to suppressing that piece of news, the publication of which was surely considered a serious blooper by those involved.
Regarding “those involved”: it his highly unlikely thither could be a “motorcade assassination” without the following 3 top level officials being complicit:
(a) The Secret Service Chief
(b) The head of the White House Detail
(c ) One or more of the two ASAICs—which, in this case, would mean Kellerman and/or Boring.
Almost certainly, a key person involved was Kellerman.
I have more to say on all this, but, another time.
IMHO: The death of Shipman —and the suppression of that published news item from any mention in the FBI’s Summary Report --are indicators that this was a radioactive situation.
The fact that the death occurred at Camp David, and the fact fact that Sam Kinney discovered the body is another indication.
So is the evidence that was adduced that a quick burial was urged.
The fact that Shipman indicated he would “pull out of line” if anything happened is another indication of his exposure to some kind of “foreknowledge”.
Shipman’s body should have had the whole array of standard toxicology tests. But none of that took place.
Thanks again for providing the link. This is definitely a radio-active loose end, and I have thought so for years.
Many thanks.
DSL [David Lifton, author of Best Evidence and the upcoming Final Charade]
P.S. Re CD 3 (and most importantly, CD3/Appendix A): this was one of the very earliest documents that I ever ordered from the National Archives —circa 1967.
A wonderful source of very important information —especially, Appendix A, which details the decision making which led to the Trade Mart as the luncheon site.
Also keep in mind: if the SS wagon the up-and-up, the death of Shipman would definitely have been reported in CD 3.
Again: many thanks."
![VINCE PALAMARA [remember to scroll all the way down!]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSZ-Z_puqnjl3UgdiJxBenMyIMaFhmBD-PYQUsxCtFS4UF7dJQB6n32rt9a0ZqFRPmuBoukhrMZxv6LOD9GoUGPiaShO3wj_8xL98obRAsUbIf0mXutzbq7jKDrCp8Y-Y0k9rnS5ARjQQ/s1600/11.jpg)
![CHAPTER 8 OF ARRB FINAL REPORT [I AM IN THIS REPORT, AS WELL]...HMMM---THE SECRET SERVICE DESTROYS](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimGbOuG69gW-cgAbsfjd8p8PD-subznIjcsQXUSFq560o_kiXunf9TcH0fkOqmWuK73id6m5TyVMhWcfBrPUEee6JLbvqNZKdIVQa5Drcz568Ue6GZdf_PUtLuLwPDcucv3gOn5KGBZPw/s1600/DSCF0462.JPG)
