JFK Pontiac ambulance up for auction

[Mike Doll]

Just out of curiosity, would the Mass Registry of Motor Vehicles have been involved in the title transfer? It is (was) after all still a car.

I realize that it was probably transferred as an artifact and not a street-legal vehicle, but if so there may be paperwork somewhere. Just wondering.

Government owned vehicles generally aren't registered with any MVA. In most cases the registration number on the side of the vehicle is also the tag number. Even id the tag number is different, it is still a US Gov tag on it that is used mainly for ID purposes. They also usually don't have a title.

Years ago I was riding on a Navy fire truck that was involved in an accident while on a mutual aid call with the local jurisdiction. The driver of the fire truck was charged with operating a vehilce on a state road that was not registered, because we had no registration card and only the USN tag and vehicle number on the side. That charge was later dropped but not before creating a administrative nightmare for the guy that was driving.

 

[Todd Merrifield]

Tammy Allen made it VERY clear she was not interested in knowing if it is the real deal or not. Not sure I liked the way they presented the Professional Car Society making us look more as a bunch of kooks that just stirred this whole thing up.

Don't worry Barrett-Jackson, Tammy has your back!!!

Wow, did you watch the same video as me???

It sounds like she knows what she is doing, and it also sounded like she would like as much information on it as possible. I didn't hear anyone say anything negative about the PCS. She didn't come on and totally dismiss the idea of it being fake, like a lot of other people would to try to preserve the value of it. She basically said it is what it is, a car that may or may not be THE car, and an interesting draw for her museum.

The guys on there are right, too. She has already gotten more than $120K worth of press for her museum out of this. You couldn't even buy a series of local primetime commercials for that. So in the big scheme of things, would you say a perfect fake replica of the JFK ambulance is worth...free? I think she bought it right, based on her intended use. She's not really out anything now, and if it somehow pans out that it is the real car, she's waaaaay ahead of the game.

Smart girl.

 

[Steve Lichtman]

I am new to your website as of this week. I signed up to post this info, but I'm not a member of PCS. I am just an employee of one of the Big 3 who just loves cars. I also love a good debate/discussion, and this one seems incredible. I have carefully compared the two letters (Hogan/Shields) that were supposedly FOIA'd to verify the numbers of the JFK car. Either the offices of these two men had identical typewriters, or both letters were typed on the same machine! Most people don't think about that in this MSOffice age. I cut-pasted several common words from the two letters into a single image. They are nearly identical, even considering the differences in contrast. In my purely amateur opinion, these letters are fake. That would also explain how the Admiral was retired by the date of his letter...

David, that is a very astute observation and a great comparison. Apparently, there aren't a lot of old typewriters available today. Another point we had not considered. Thank you very much for that.

 

[John ED Renstrom]

sounded to me like Ms Allen got the car with a who cares if it's real or not it's dirt cheap (for her) and people will flock to Grand Junction just to see it. the exposure is worth it for her. didn't hurt us any eather. now if the Library can just prove that the right car was crushed and she gets her man on tracing the Hx of the car she has. we my piece together a vary interesting story on it. the story on her car is what she is after. if it turns out real OK if not, that's OK. she has her draw to her car museum. Just what the kennedy Library did not want. if BJ and Dr.J will open up to her on the Hx of her car. it may get resolved simply. the big it's a hoax flag that popped up was there failure to do that at the time. so Grand junction is about a 8 hr drive for me. she is going to have the car displayed in a glass cage so I can't get in. maybe if I contacted her first I could make arrangements to see the car up close. anyone else up for a road trip. :drive2:

 

[Paul Steinberg]

David, that is a very astute observation and a great comparison. Apparently, there aren't a lot of old typewriters available today. Another point we had not considered. Thank you very much for that.

I still have the typewritter that I used back in 1962 while in college. I am certain that it still doesn't spell words any better now, then it did back then.. :14_6_12:

 

[Kent Dorsey]

Paul, what kinda typewriters were around when you were in school in 1862?

 

[Daniel Scully]

This Kind.

 

[Russell Street]

Brian Austin posted...

"You may have noticed on the Jalopnik blog some readers are getting impatient with the constant updates of the situation. I hope the developments continue to be discussed here."

Well for my money the folks over there can get as impatient as they feel they need to. Last time I checked they have no control over anything that goes on here.

I hope we keep digging, and challenging until we come up with a very definitive answer that is satisfactory to all of us. JMHO (politically incorrect as I can make it).

 

[Kevin Frederiksen]

Hi Guys, I just wanted to say it has been a heck of a read going on here ,I belive you have more than done due diligence on proving the bj car was a fake. wonderful work..The thing that concerns me is the photo's from the kennedy libary.....the back of the ambulance seems photshopped to me. the pixals are out of whack, and i did read on one of the coments on the news site that that reader seemed concerned about the photoshopping, I downloaded the pics and put them through jpegsnoop and the 3 photos all come up edited, now if that was because of loading onto your board I do not know. but what made my question, this is when the car is in the chrusher, even with the passenger door dented you cannot see the white paint.and even with the white paint in the pre crushed pic does not look like it belongs to the car, and the passenger side view just looks blurry in many strange places.I have delt with photos quite a bit in my pro life but it is still just an amutuer opinion,I think only the larger size pics will tell the better story.This still may not be the origanal car, many mysteries surround this tragic day, and it seems they may never be answered,but to close thanks again for the good read, keep up the good work guys.

 

[Todd Merrifield]

I was going to bring up the artifacting in the back door photo, but I figured with as much as I have stirred up already, I would wait for a second opinion on that one. That was the first thing I thought when I saw that picture, but I didn't want to go down that road given where the information was coming from, and who found it. It didn't make sense to call that type of information into question right off the bat after it was posted. I would like to see the original sized photo though, or better yet, the original photo itself. If somebody at the JFK Library were to find those rolls of film and scan in the negatives that would eliminate some of the skepticism and most certainly answer a lit of questions. I think people are working in that direction.

But yeah, long story short, the photo posted on our website does look like it has been edited, just from what I know about digital photography. Hopefully there is a good reason for it, or a better quality photo available.

 

[Steve Lichtman]

I received these scans of the contact sheet of the entire negative package yesterday. Since you asked, here they are.

The photos were taken by Allan Goodrich, who was an Archivist with the Kennedy Library (recently retired), and I got an e-mail from him yesterday evening. Some of the pictures show the ambulance in a warehouse. Apparently, this was a GSA warehouse, where it was physically stored prior to being scrapped. (At one point the Kennedy Library was controlled by the GSA, it's now part of the National Archives). With some information Mr. Goodrich sent me, I'm going to make some contacts next week to determine where this was, how long, etc. to follow the chain of "custody" back.

All of the photos are in the order in which the pictures were taken. I do not know why a police car appears in some of the photos, perhaps for additional security.

I will post the large size photo of the back door later, it's too large for me to post here from my computer. All of the photos I posted originally were reduced in size to allow me to upload them (forgive me, all, I have dial-up at home). So if they look edited, that's because I reduced them in size to be able to post them. Not a conspiracy, just a limit in my internet access.

As far as not seeing any white paint, there's no white paint to be seen. The ambulance was gray.

 

[Chris Bamford]

...the photo posted on our website does look like it has been edited, just from what I know about digital photography. Hopefully there is a good reason for it, or a better quality photo available.

Interestingly, the Library photo of the rear of the car that B-J displayed at the auction does not show any lettering on the back of the car.

(As I do not have posting permission for attachments, I submitted to the PCS Forum administrators my screen shot of the auction preamble which showed the Library picture, as presented by B-J, without the rear door lettering. It would be helpful if Paul or Robert could post this screen shot to the thread.)

 

[Mike Adams]

As someone else who's been following avidly but who isn't a member...

A couple points:

First, as far as the authenticity of the two letters goes, just on their appearance I'd have to say if they're fakes they are very, very well done. In the first place, they most definitely are from two different typewriters. While the fonts are indeed close, the ones on the Shields typewriter have slightly bigger serifs than on the Hogan one. And the numbers are clearly different. Look closely at each number in each sample and it's obvious they are not the same. They were both also obviously produced on typewriters, as they are both mono-spaced font. Further, I'd attribute the difference in contrast between the two to one being an original, and one being a carbon copy. And that's as they should be. Note also that the Hogan letter--which appears to be a carbon copy--appears never to have been folded, while the Shields letter does. Also as would have been correct.

(A puzzlement to me though is why Hogan would have signed a file copy. That does seem a little too pat.)

Further still, it was common in that period for companies to mass-run their letterheads via litho-printing, and then for individuals who rated personalized stationary, they'd "crash imprint" the name and title via letterpress. Of course from a copy on a screen it's impossible to say if the Shields letter was crash imprinted, but the font and placement are sure correct, and if I had to bet, that's the way I'd go. So it certainly does look period correct.

It may well be these are forged, but if they are, someone sure knew their stuff. To me it's amazing they'd think that all through so well and then get the size and font of the lettering on the car wrong.

Second, while the numbers on the back of the car in the library photo are the same size and font as the photo of the car leaving Andrews, and are on the same vertical plane, they are not in precisely the same place. I did a little manipulating in Photoshop, and by overlaying an image of the junkyard rear door over the Andrews car, and aligning the top, bottom, sides and handle, it's obvious that the numbering is about the width of one character shifted to the right on the junkyard car. Since they're not in the same place, then they can't be the original lettering. So they can't be used as verification the junkyard car is the Andrews car.

I'm not saying yes and I'm not saying no. Fascinating discussion, and just a couple points I thought I'd toss in.

(Edited to add: I meant to say regarding the letters that all of my observations are of course just about the physical qualities of the letters themselves. Obviously none of that explains why Hogan would have been involved two years past retirement. But it's also a puzzlement to me how a forger who would go to such lengths as to make these this well would have also made such a major blunder as that.)


Mike Adams

 

[Brian Austin]

Hi Guys, I just wanted to say it has been a heck of a read going on here ,I belive you have more than done due diligence on proving the bj car was a fake. wonderful work..The thing that concerns me is the photo's from the kennedy libary.....the back of the ambulance seems photshopped to me. the pixals are out of whack, and i did read on one of the coments on the news site that that reader seemed concerned about the photoshopping, I downloaded the pics and put them through jpegsnoop and the 3 photos all come up edited, now if that was because of loading onto your board I do not know. but what made my question, this is when the car is in the chrusher, even with the passenger door dented you cannot see the white paint.and even with the white paint in the pre crushed pic does not look like it belongs to the car, and the passenger side view just looks blurry in many strange places.I have delt with photos quite a bit in my pro life but it is still just an amutuer opinion,I think only the larger size pics will tell the better story.This still may not be the origanal car, many mysteries surround this tragic day, and it seems they may never be answered,but to close thanks again for the good read, keep up the good work guys.

What's "out of whack" regarding the rear view? Could you be more specific?

I can see the white paint on the side door in the crusher photo...it's faint but it's there.

And while I'm at it, my question regarding the Mass. RMV would apply to when the Library took posession of the car. An out of state friend suggested the possibility of there being RMV documentation, but I'm skeptical. I thought it worth asking.

I wonder how the discussion might go if we had the new owner, B-J and the Kennedy Library all contributing directly.

 

[Kevin Frederiksen]

What I was refering to was around the lettering on the back it looks to me to be almost a shadow or dicloreration surrounding. It just looks out of place. I also found it strange that the doors are "whited" out,(which is the white paint I reffered to) and not the back door,But hey I can be tottaly wrong on this. looking at the negative spread shows quite alot, It would be interesting to see that blown up.

 

[Mike Doll]

And while I'm at it, my question regarding the Mass. RMV would apply to when the Library took posession of the car. An out of state friend suggested the possibility of there being RMV documentation, but I'm skeptical. I thought it worth asking.

Since the Kennedy Library was under GSA and then the National Archives, both government agencies, there would be no need to involve the Mass. RMV. The ambulance would have only been stricken from the Navy's property books and reassigned to the next agency, GSA or NA property book.

 

[Mark Livingood]

Second, while the numbers on the back of the car in the library photo are the same size and font as the photo of the car leaving Andrews, and are on the same vertical plane, they are not in precisely the same place. I did a little manipulating in Photoshop, and by overlaying an image of the junkyard rear door over the Andrews car, and aligning the top, bottom, sides and handle, it's obvious that the numbering is about the width of one character shifted to the right on the junkyard car. Since they're not in the same place, then they can't be the original lettering. So they can't be used as verification the junkyard car is the Andrews car.

Can you share a screen shot of your overlay comparison?

FWIW... If you compared the Nov 22, 1963 video still capture taken at an oblique angle by a vintage live video camera with a long-lens to the photo taken at the salvage yard straight-on with what was probably a 50mm lens, you'd be hard-pressed to compensate for the skewing in the video still capture using Photoshop. In fact, what you describe as being "off" a bit is what I'd expect you'd see from that type of a comparison.

 

[Mike Adams]

I can't post it because they don't allow newbies here to post images.

FWIW... If you compared the Nov 22, 1963 video still capture taken at an oblique angle by a vintage live video camera with a long-lens to the photo taken at the salvage yard straight-on with what was probably a 50mm lens, you'd be hard-pressed to compensate for the skewing in the video still capture using Photoshop. In fact, what you describe as being "off" a bit is what I'd expect you'd see from that type of a comparison.

That's a reasonable point, but I did take that into account. The key is the distance between the door handle and the first letter. There's not going to be a whole lot of skew in that small a distance, and the displacement is then consistently off by equal measure all the way across the door.

There's that, and if you'll note, the numbers don't appear quite the same in any event. The numbers on the junkyard car appear to be running slightly downhill, whereas the 9 and the 6 on the Andrews car appear to be--if anything--a bit higher than the others.

Add that to the grey surround of the whole area that others have spoken of, which looks to me like paint, and I'm convinced by the two images that the number was repainted at some point. Which I'm not saying proves anything at all other than that the rear door number can't be used to positively prove the junkyard car as the Andrews car.

Mike Adams

 

[Todd Merrifield]

Ok, NOW it's crushed!

That's what I meant about where the information was coming from and who gathered it. I figured it was from a reliable source, but I can see where someone would question that rear-view picture.

I'd like to see a nice scan of that VIN number/door jamb picture, just to add to my file what the VIN was on the crushed car.

By the way, I have a huge file of all pictures and video touched upon in this thread, that I will make available to people at some point. It includes all the videos that were linked here, since they probably won't be around forever.

 

[Todd Merrifield]

The reality is that at this point, nobody knows for sure what the real VIN number was on the car Kennedy's body was in. Really the only options we have now are having somebody start from scratch with the Freedom of Information Act and try to find out that way, OR examine the documents that Dr. Jensen has relative to the search he did to prove or disprove the validity of the Hogan-Shields letters. This is why I was going on about "not burning bridges". I don't know if Dr. Jensen would be willing to talk to anybody at this point, but it sure would be nice to take a look at whatever he has to prove his case.

One path to follow is to be friendly with the new owner, in the hopes that some or all of this information stayed with the car. If she really wants to know one way or another I think we should volunteer our services, in a nice way, to get a look at any of the documentation that remains with the car, or that the new owner posesses. I don't know if she got the presentation boards that BJ put together for when the car was auctioned, but there appeared to be quite a bit of information on them that we didn't get to see. Maybe someone like us photographed all that stuff and will post it on the internet.

Without the VIN nobody can say anything for sure. It looks like the best we can do at this point with the information out there is either prove the BJ car IS the real deal, or have the real cars whereabouts remain a mystery. I understand a car was crushed, but unless more documentation comes along we'll never know for sure if the real one was crushed, only that the library crushed a car that they BELIEVED to be the real one.