I was actually, going post that same link, which confirmed that he was there and involved in the search, but did you know that this obscure document is the ONLY REFERENCE TO ELLSWORTH in all the testimonies in the WC report?
Sorry, you fail to develop this into anything important. Since Ellsworth was apparently -- according to his own statements to Dick Russell I already quoted back to you -- there as a volunteer and on his own dime, and did so little of importance, why was it necessary for others to have mentioned him?
The fact he is mentioned only once speaks to how little he actually did, not to any cover-up (which I think is the innuendo you're going for).
Not only was he never called to testify, but the officers who were with him then, never mentioned his name. It doesn't appear in any of the testimonies.
More innuendo. Please develop this and tell us what he did that was so important that he *should* have been called to testify. Please develop this and show us the evidence the other officers all knew his name and deliberately concealed it. Otherwise, you're just grasping at straws to find something suspicious here.
Nor is there any mention of the name of the other ATF agent who was with him then.
Please develop this and show us the evidence the other ATF agent's name was known, and concealed. As you might remember, even Ellsworth said he believed he was the only federal agent in the building (remember he also said he discovered the sniper's nest -- inflating his own importance in both instances, which we know is common), and effectively denying the other ATF agent's presence on the sixth floor. Was Ellsworth also part of this cover-up to conceal the other ATF agent's name I think you're hinting at?
In other words, you're just desperately throwing innuendo around at this point because you have nothing else to fling at the facts.
Ellsworth never claimed to have seen a rifle on a lower floor. But we have no idea what he saw, or whether he made any attempt to identify it. He probably didn't witness the actual discovery of that rifle, and had no idea where it was found. He might have been on a different floor at the time.
Yes, as you admit, "we have no idea what he saw", which makes his recollections from 30 years after the fact meaningless, and leaves, as I said a while back, the contemporaneous memos and testimony as the best source of data. Despite your best attempt to build a conspiracy upon the sands of Ellsworth's three-decades-later recollection, it was bound to fail. Hearsay and recollection don't make a good foundation for the vast structure of this supposed conspiracy you conjecture.
This is in reply to my claim that "If he only remembers one - and one hidden amongst boxes is all he mentions".
But he did mention a rifle amongst the boxes to Dick Russell as I quoted in post 3335. Your assertion above is incorrect. He did mention that.
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=10761622#post10761622
"If I recollect right, there was an elevator shaft or stairwell back in the northwest corner [it is, of course, a stairwell in that corner - Hank]. The gun was over near that, just south of it behind some boxes. I think the rifle was on the fourth floor. I have a vague recollection that the position it was in, and where it was found, led to the conjecture that as Oswald came down the stairs, he probably pitched it over behind these boxes."
That recollection sounds a whole lot like where the rifle was actually found on the sixth floor, and what Oswald would have done as he descended from the sixth floor. And Ellsworth remembered that conversation about what the assassin would have done (Oswald's name was not known to the investigators when the rifle was found). But according to you, he's actually talking about another rifle on another floor.
Wrong again. He never claimed that he saw the rifle on a lower floor. Hank, you are constantly misrepresenting me as well as Ellsworth. Please do your homework so we can discuss this stuff.
He did say he recalled conversation about the rifle being on another floor. It's unclear from his statement of his recollection where exactly he was when he had the conversation. It's unclear from his statement of his recollection what exactly he witnessed and what is hearsay.
No, I musn't. He never claimed to have seen ANY rifle that was hidden. This is getting tiresome, Hank.
I quoted him as telling Dick Russell the rifle was tossed amongst some boxes. If he was on the sixth floor for the photographing of the rifle amongst the boxes as the contemporaneous memo claims, it's apparent to me that his recollection of the rifle being on another floor amongst some boxes is simply wrong. He only mentions one rifle to Dick Russell and to the LaFontaines, not two.
If his memory is as accurate as you wish to believe, with him being a federal agent and working on the supposedly most important case of his lifetime, he should have recalled seeing one rifle on the sixth floor and either seeing or hearing about another rifle on a lower floor. But his recollections are totally devoid of any such information, and nowhere does he mention more than one rifle, and only one rifle, amongst some boxes.
Do you suppose he - gasp - *forgot* about the sixth floor rifle entirely, or - gasp - simply got the floor wrong in his recollection?
Neither choice makes your arguments any stronger. Either choice totally destroys your arguments about the import of Ellsworth's three-decade-later recollection to the LaFontaines, and how he, being a federal agent working on the biggest case of his life, wouldn't be likely to get any of this wrong.
Hank
__________
Homework assignment: Compare and contrast Robert's treatment of the lone mention of Ellsworth in one contemporaneous document with Robert's treatment of the lone mention of a rifle being found on another floor in the three-decade-later recollection of Ellsworth. 
