Now let’s move on to our next “eyewitness,” Richard Davis. Mr. Davis was supposedly in his office on the 39th floor of a building at or near 50th Street and 5th Avenue. This general location is commonly known as Rockefeller Plaza. Due to there being a number of buildings at least that tall in the immediate area, it was difficult to determine exactly which one Richard was in.
However, it is precisely this factor which makes his eyewitness account suspect. Richard speaks as though he has a clear view of the World Trade Center from his vantage point on the 39th floor of his building. This eliminates almost every building in Rockefeller Plaza, since there are many tall buildings which would obscure his view.
Without actually going to New York myself and looking for myself, my best guess (based on Google Earth) was that Richard Davis was either at 30 Rockefeller Center (GE building) or 630 5th Avenue (International Building).
After doing a little digging, I discovered that there is a Richard R. Davis that works at Bessemer Trust Company NA, which just so happens to operate out of the International Building. This Richard R. Davis holds degrees from both Columbia (MBA) and Yale (LLB). He currently serves as Bessemer’s Managing Director, Secretary and General Counsel.
As it turns out, Bessemer has a very prestigious client base. They proudly proclaim to manage over 46 billion dollars for only 1800 clients. 92% of these clients are individuals, accounting for almost 42 billion dollars. A little math tells us that the average individual client is entrusting Bessemer with 25 million dollars.
After a little more digging, I found out there just happens to be a Richard R. Davis living at 1185 Park Avenue in New York.
Now it’s not every day that you Google somebody’s home address and find out there’s been a book written about it. Granted, this guy doesn’t have the whole place to himself. According to this website, it’s been broken down into about 185 apartments, although this website says there are only 167 apartments.
FYI, if you’re interested in living here, you’re in luck! A three bedroom space appears to be available for just $3.75 million.
Now, before I actually get into my analysis of what Richard told Bryant Gumbel, I want to be clear that up to this point, I have presented you with information about two Richard R. Davis’ who may or may not be the same person. Even if this is the same person, I also haven’t provided a solid link to Richard Davis, the lying “eyewitness.”
Analysis – Keeping up with the Davis’
I suppose if one were interested enough, one could check out the lobby of the International Building to see if Bessemer is located on the 39th floor. I suppose one could also call Bessemer and ask to speak to Richard R. Davis to determine whether his voice matches the voice from the CBS interview, if one were so inclined to connect the dots.
OR – if these options sound like too much work, I suppose one could Google “Bessemer 39th Floor” and retrieve this SEC document or an earlier one, from which I’ve excerpted the following text:
I suppose after verifying that, one could skip the step of actually talking to Richard at work by simply checking out the outgoing message on his answering machine at home.
I have offered this audio as an alternative to inciting the harassment of Mr. Davis, by way of relieving you of the temptation to call the publicly-listed number yourselves. My research was conducted only for the purpose of identification. I am now satisfied that the “eyewitness” who called CBS, the executive at Bessemer Trust, and the individual living on Park Avenue are actually one and the same person – Mr. Richard R. Davis.
With my curiosity now quelled, I can now get on with the task of analyzing the actual “eyewitness account” of Richard R. Davis.
Analysis – Richard R. Davis’ “Eyewitness Account”
From the same video as the last installment, the “eyewitness account” of Richard R. Davis can be heard from 6:10 until about 9:00 Video Run Time (VRT).
Once again, the keyword “deliberate” is being employed by an “eyewitness.” By this point, I can only speculate that this keyword was designed to help bridge the gap between an “accident” and a “terrorist attack.”
Mr. Davis was much better prepared for Bryant’s “Why do you say it was deliberate?” question than was “Theresa Renault.” From his vantage point 0.8 miles behind the “plane,” he was apparently able to conduct a maintenance evaluation as it flew the remaining 3 miles or so away from him (at an approximate rate of 500mph) until it “struck” WTC1.
Right about now is where my recent anonymous comment posters (BG & Fred) are probably starting to get excited about pushing the prospect of an old man getting his “planes” mixed up. After all, this guy could have easily lost track of the “737” he says he saw once it got 4 miles away.
While it is believable that Richard could have identified a “two-engine jet” from 0.8 miles away, it is not believable that he could determine that there was nothing wrong with it. It is also questionable as to whether he could have still seen it from 4 miles away.
However, once again, I really don’t care about the “first plane” anyway. What makes Richard’s “eyewitness account” so impossible are his statements about the “second plane.” At about 7:50 VRT, Richard declares “We saw the second one come up the Hudson and veer into the second building.”
This is truly amazing. Not only were these people able to spot the “second plane” coming toward them from over 4 miles away (remember the 16ft fuselage diameter), once again Richard was able to determine with great certainty that “there appeared to be nothing wrong with the aircraft” and that “it was flown very deliberately into the building.” These statements are absolute hokum. He may as well have stated that he saw the pilot giving him the finger (too bad - that would have saved me the trouble).
I’d be curious to have a gander out the window from Richard’s office myself. I wonder exactly how much of his view of the towers would have been obscured by the Empire State Building (or any other buildings for that matter).
Unlike Rose Arce, Richard Davis doesn’t appear to be lying about where he was on September 11, 2001.
However, due to the fact that there was no plane in the area for Richard to see from his window (proven in “Pinocchio: Part II” article), I have no choice but to conclude that he is lying about seeing the “second plane.” This conclusion is bolstered by the fact that even if there had been a plane in the air, it is a ridiculous notion that he would have been able to both spot it and characterize its behavior from over 4 miles away.
If he lied about seeing the “second plane,” how much of a stretch do you suppose it would be to believe he also lied about seeing the “first plane?” While considering this, take into account that due to its proximity to him, the Empire State Building should have obscured much more than it appears to in the the Google Earth image above. His actual view would be much better represented by the image below:
This vantage point would have hindered him from tracking the "first plane," as he claims to have first "noticed" it "by the time it was passing the Empire State Building."
As far as how close Richard Davis’ relationship is to the “9/11 planners,” I’ll leave that up to you to decide for yourselves. I’m guessing he knows quite a bit more than your average 9/11 stooge.
Of course, albeit educated – my “guess” is useless without subpoena power. Can I get a show of hands for any takers?