Presidential security

[Rhatkinson]

After reading so much about how Lincoln had to practically be begged to let guards protect him, I was under the impression that no prior presidents utilized guards to any great extent. However, in reading the excellent book "The President's House" by Seale (which I highly recommend), I read this may not have been the case.

To wit, in the chapter on Mornroe, Seale notes that Monroe, "In response to the assassinations of political figures taking place across Europe" did the following to protect himself:

- hired guards in civilian dress for ALL public events. Monroe said that he would have used uniformed soldiers except that this was seen as "un-republican" at the time;

- a guard was posted at the front door of the White House day and night "with ready access to arms" in order to protect the President;

- on public days where the White House was opened to the public (July 4th, New Years Day) the number of civilian guards was greatly increased (but hidden among the grounds so as not to be visible) and sharpshooters were placed on the White House roof, hidden behind the roof balustrade.

I realize this was protection at the White House, and Seale doesn't mention protection that traveled with Monroe (although he mentions that Monroe was the most traveled acting President by far of the time, so the omission may not mean there was no protection.) still, it surprises me the level of protection afforded the President some 47 years before Lincoln was assassinated.

Does anyone have more information on presidential security during this time?

Heath

[Anita]

Here's "A Brief History of Presidential Protection" that may be of interest. http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/war...ndix7.html

[RJNorton]

I am curious how people feel about John F. Parker. Personally I differ from some of the top assassination experts on his role that fateful night. Several experts whom I admire greatly are willing to give Parker a pass, saying his role that night was simply to accompany the President to Ford's Theatre. Once Lincoln and party were seated Parker's job was over, and he was on his own until it was time to return to the White House. I have trouble with this. Parker was a Washington police officer; I feel his assignment that night was to protect the President throughout the evening. He blew off his assignment. Any thoughts?

[BettyO]

I've never had much appreciation for Parker. Sure he was a cop - but obviously not a good one. He had a duty to perform; accompanying the President as well as protecting him. He didn't do a good job. Granted, when JWB presented his card, Parker couldn't have known that the famous actor was a killer. Still, he should have questioned JWB's motives for admittance into the President's box. Just my opinion.

[J. Beckert]

(11-25-2013 06:04 AM)BettyO Wrote:  I've never had much appreciation for Parker. Sure he was a cop - but obviously not a good one.

I agree. I don't think anyone makes excuses for Parker, but I don't buy the line that his function was to protect the White House and it's furnishings. That totally excuses him for a need at Ford's. He wasn't sent there to protect anything other than the President. Booth would have gotten by him one way or the other, but his absense speaks to his character and his dismal record shows he had none.

[Anita]

Why was Parker assigned to guard the President in the first place? His prior record of service with the police was abysmal. And why was he allowed to remain on the force after the assassination and there's no record of his trial. I think it all points to a police cover-up for assigning such a loser to guard the President.

Who was the Chief of Police and was he questioned? Who did the Chief of Police report to? Would it have reflected poorly on Stanton in any way? Where is Pinkerton in all this?

I agree with Betty that Booth would have gotten by him one way or the other. Parker arrived before the play started to wait for the Presidential party. Plenty of time for Booth to influence Parker.

[richard petersen]

I thought Booth presented the card to Forbes, not Parker?

[RJNorton]

Richard, you are correct. It was Forbes. The exact placement of Parker at the time of the assassination is unknown. Most books say he was either still drinking in Taltavul's or back at Ford's in a seat where he was watching the play. Then he disappeared until early the next morning. Very strange.

Anita, your questions are excellent. I wish I had all the answers.

I might add that William H. Crook, another Washington policeman, stated that John Buckingham, doorkeeper at Ford's, said a chair had been placed in the passageway behind the State Box for Parker to sit on. Whether or not this is true I cannot say as Crook has a poor reputation as a source.

[L Verge]

You beat me to that point, Mr. Petersen. It was Forbes who let Booth pass into the presidential box. The question of Parker's duties was never really explored, I don't believe, until sometime in the late 1990s when Mike Kauffman first advanced his theory on a Surratt Booth Tour - Parker was assigned as an escort (point man actually), not as a bodyguard. I remember that there was quite an exchange of opinions between Mike, Hall, Maione, and others.

The Superintendent of Police at the time was A.C. Richards, who had been in his job less than six months. He later claimed that he had been in Ford's Theatre at the time of the assassination and had gone after Booth. Most historians think that is a fabrication. There is a book written about twenty years ago about Richards. The title is The Lincoln Assassination's Forgotten Investigator, authored by Gary Planck. It is hard to find.

John Parker was brought up on charges before a police board, and so far as we know there were records of that hearing until sometime in the mid-20th century when some housekeeping was done at the police headquarters and the records ended up in the trash. I have been told by a former police historian that the papers were retrieved by a policeman and that he or his family probably still have them. No one has come forward so far after my plea to at least look at them.

About thirty years ago, a family friend found one page in her late-husband's papers that appeared to be a photocopy of one of the pages. I had it in my desk at work for years until it suddenly disappeared...

In any case, Parker was apparently cleared by the first board and survived the police force for another three years before being dismissed on other charges.

[Anita]

Laurie,

What was one the page that disappeared from your desk?

What's your gut reaction- Are transcripts of Parker's s hearing still out there?

[L Verge]

It was a handwritten page that really gave no information on the trial before the police board, but did make reference to John Parker. Without other papers, it made no real sense - but it must have to someone, and only a few people knew I had it in the desk. I have my suspicions, but that's all.

My gut reaction is that the transcripts are still out there in private hands -- unless some unknowing family member threw them out. As of about five years ago, the owner was believed to still be alive. The police historian that I was dealing with, however, was young and was doing double-duty by working on the archives. I don't think that he wanted to push too many buttons on the old guys because of his youth. I even made a copy of the A.C. Richards biography to try to win him over when I found out that the department did not know about the book, but it didn't work.

Rich Smyth can correct me on this, but I don't believe that Parker left any descendants.

[Gene C]

Speaking of A C Richards, his letters to Weichmann continue to be offered on Ebay for the low, low price of only.......

http://www.ebay.com/itm/One-of-The-Best-...2a2f54a828

[Anita]

(11-25-2013 07:40 PM)Gene C Wrote:  Speaking of A C Richards, his letters to Weichmann continue to be offered on Ebay for the low, low price of only.......

http://www.ebay.com/itm/One-of-The-Best-...2a2f54a828

It's only 20K- a bargain! Great prize for a forum trivia question winner.
Not the letter but a chance to bid!

---

(11-25-2013 07:38 PM)L Verge Wrote:  It was a handwritten page that really gave no information on the trial before the police board, but did make reference to John Parker. Without other papers, it made no real sense - but it must have to someone, and only a few people knew I had it in the desk. I have my suspicions, but that's all.

My gut reaction is that the transcripts are still out there in private hands -- unless some unknowing family member threw them out. As of about five years ago, the owner was believed to still be alive. The police historian that I was dealing with, however, was young and was doing double-duty by working on the archives. I don't think that he wanted to push too many buttons on the old guys because of his youth. I even made a copy of the A.C. Richards biography to try to win him over when I found out that the department did not know about the book, but it didn't work.

Rich Smyth can correct me on this, but I don't believe that Parker left any descendants.

Interesting info Laurie. There's a lot more to be revealed here. Do you know the names of the five members of the D.C. Police Board that dismissed the charges against Parker ? I've searched but can't find their names.

[RJNorton]

Although John Chandler Griffin's Abraham Lincoln's Execution is not a book I personally would recommend to anyone, what the author says about the charges against Parker caught my eye.

Griffin writes, "Edwin Stanton, again for understandable reasons, ordered that all charges against Parker be dropped, and so a hearing into the matter was never conducted."

Griffin obviously feels Stanton had ulterior motives ("understandable reasons" in Griffin's eyes) to quiet any investigation into Parker's actions. I am curious - has anyone else ever read in another book that Stanton himself ordered the charges against Parker be dropped?

I am not a "Stanton conspiracy follower," but I do find it curious if Griffin is right and that Stanton was the real force behind dropping the charges against Parker.

[Craig Hipkins]

Great thread! My question would be regarding Stanton's motive in dropping the charges against Parker. Also, did Stanton have the authority to even do this? I understand that martial law was the norm in the days following the assassination but Parker was a Washington City Police officer. Any charge as far as dereliction of duty goes should have been handled by his immediate superiors including A.C. Richards. To me the only way that Stanton should have become involved in the charges against Parker were if it was somehow believed that he had something to do with the conspiracy.

Roger, I have not read Griffin's book. Is he in the Eisenchimal camp?

Craig