A Couple of Real Gems from the "Harvey and Lee" Website

[David Josephs]

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

David,

Yes, that is an assumption on my part. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

But what about Stripling? They had a copy of Oswald's record there. Doesn't that indicate that schools do keep a copy of the record that they pass on to the next school?

BTW, Greg Parker claims that schools didn't keep school records... the school district did. And that that proves that Oswald's record at Stripling could not have been taken by the FBI.

 

Sandy,

I'd assume each state has it's own way of doing it.  Beauregard's records refer to a PS 44 in NY called "Byron Jr High"

CE1413 refers to ALL records on Lee Harvey in the New Orleans files and not once, other than the above mention, do these records refer to NYC school records which "should" have been sent...  As I understand, schools kept two sets of records, one perm and one that goes with the child....

Ask Greg what the source is of the info gathered by the "districts"...  
They didn't just pull the stuff out of their ears.....  they got reports on each child from the school admins themselves... who got them from the records of the teachers... grade cards, attendance cards, etc...  Maybe it's done differently in different parts of the world.  I grew up in NY and moved to CA in Jr High... 

Greg's one lynchpin in his arguments is how impossible it is for US citizens or its military to keep records with any level of accuracy... The US is founded on the minutia of detail and record keeping... yet school administrators don't know how many days in a school year?  Please.

 

47 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I agree... it's like trying to figure out Mexico City.   DJ: That a shout out?  

 

[Sandy Larsen]

5 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

John just sent me this census page from 51-52 that indicates a “Harvey Oswald” was born to a “Marguerite Ekdahl” on October 19, 1938.  (According to the WC, “Lee Harvey Oswald” was born on Oct. 18.)  Note John’s note about Marguerite’s use of the name “Oswald.”
 

Anyone care to make a theory about this?  Just a series of weirdly familiar mistakes?

 

I always look for innocent explanations first. But if what I see supports a working theory of mine, I'll make a note of that.

The mistake on the date is a simple error. I don't find anything sinister about that.

The use of the names "Harvey" and "Ekdahl" is odd. I have no explanation.

I can see a person making innocent LOOKING mistakes if they are trying to hide. For example, from creditors. Actually, I've seen that done. Use a middle name instead of a first. Use a maiden name instead of a married name. Even changing the birth date wouldn't hurt, so why not throw that in?

 

[Sandy Larsen]

57 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

Beauregard's records refer to a PS 44 in NY called "Byron Jr High"

Jeez, I wonder where they got that??  Byron, I mean.

 

[Jim Hargrove]

13 hours ago, David Andrews said:

Jim, has John ever considered why John Pic took an angry attitude in his WC testimony?  One couldn't read his emotions from the transcript, but the WC counsel brings the attitude up to Pic and threatens Pic with the law and the military authorities if he doesn't cooperate.  This may be the only instance in the WCR where a witness receives this treatment.

David,

During Pic’s testimony, I remember Jenner going through a bunch of legalize at an oddly inappropriate time, but don’t recall it being particularly threatening.  Can you give me an example?  (It’s long testimony, as you know.)

[Jim Hargrove]

12 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

BTW, Greg Parker claims that schools didn't keep school records... the school district did. And that that proves that Oswald's record at Stripling could not have been taken by the FBI.

At the time of the assassination, each of the various schools in the Fort Worth Independent School District stored student records.  Some years later, these collective records were transferred to district headquarters and placed on microfilm.  Former Stripling assistant principal Frank Kudlaty talks about this very issue at about the 2:50 mark in Part III of his interview with John Armstrong.

The amount of evidence for Lee HARVEY Oswald at Stripling school is substantial.  In addition to his W.C. testimony, Robert says his brother attended the school in two separate newspaper reports prior to the assassination.
 

 

John Armstrong has a YouTube interview with Oswald’s Stripling classmate Fran Schubert.

At the time of the assassination, and at various times for more than a decade earlier, “Marguerite Oswald” lived at 2220 Thomas Place, right next to Stripling School.  What a coincidence, eh?

The principal of W.C. Stripling School in the late 1990s, Ricardo Galindo, told John it was “common knowledge” that Oswald attended Stripling.  John spoke to a number of other Stripling teachers and students who remembered Oswald at the school.
 

[Jim Hargrove]

11 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I agree... it's like trying to figure out Mexico City.

But the Pic characterization problem is, in my view, an isolated one that should have a simple answer. The problem is self contained... at least that's the case if it is accepted that primarily only one of the Oswalds had truancy problems, and primarily only one of the Marguerites had employment problems.

I can think of only five possible explanation for Robert's mischaracterizations:

1. My "extended family" scenario.
2. It is actually LEE (not HARVEY) who had the truancy problem. (This doesn't explain the Marguerite employment problem. But I paid less attention to Pic's testimony regarding her, so perhaps that's not really a problem.)
3. The FBI went to town altering Pic's testimony. (This doesn't sound so absurd considering the real possibility that Pic's testimony was largely inconsistent with the official story.)
4. Pic was extensively coached, and did an excellent job of lying.
5. There were two Pics. (Maybe even two Roberts). And it was the fake one who testified.

Can anybody think of any other possibility that would account for Pic's wrong characterization of LEE and REAL Marguerite?

IMO, #4 would have been too difficult, #5 is too ridiculous, and #2 probably doesn't work for Marguerite. That leaves #1 and #3.

#3 certainly seems a lot more likely than #1. Though the alterationist likely would have had to be a professional story writer. Pic's testimony sounds very real to me.

Another possibility is a combination of #2 and #3. If it is LEE who was the truant one, that would explain Pic's characterization of LHO. (This is #2.) Any problem with Pic's characterization of Marguerite could be fixed through alteration. (This is #3.) Let's call this Possibility #6.

My favorites -- those that I think are feasible-- are:

      3. The FBI went to town altering Pic's testimony.
      6. It was LEE with truancy problems. And Pic's testimony regarding Marguerite was tweaked as necessary.

I know that there is evidence that the boy with truancy problem was HARVEY. But remember, there is also evidence that the boy was LEE. Is the evidence that it was HARVEY so great that we are sure it was he who was the truant one?

 

Not sure I’d make the assumption that only one of the Oswalds had truancy problems.  If Dr. Kurian’s recollection of Harvey telling him his “brother” substituted for him at school, and assuming that it could only have been a school-aged kid (like the other LHO), then its pretty clear both boys would have had truancy problems.

Regarding your numbered potential explanations….

1. I just can’t think of much evidence for it.
2. The decade-long pattern of Harvey being placed in and out of situations similar to Lee’s, always seeming to get just a “taste” of Lee’s life, including in the USMC, suggests Harvey would more likely have the truancy problem.  Hardly proof of that fact, though.
3. We have proof that the FBI did alter sworn testimony, and so this is always my leading thought when I read testimony that disagrees with what I think happened.  If this is the case, it begs the question of why Hoover didn’t change Pic’s refusal to recognize clear photos of his “brother.”  Could it be because those were considered opinions rather than recollections?  Because Pic might have recalled the photo evidence and question altered testimony later?  Or just an oversight?  (The FBI did make a lot of mistakes in the cover-up!)
4. Strikes me as dangerous to bring someone like Pic into the spy family game unless he was already a member.  And if he was, could the photo observations have been designed to throw us off that track. I’m inclined to reject this one but, as always, it had to be considered.
5. Funny, but not likely. 

Can you give us more of your theory about the census roll above?  The hiding from creditors explanation had never occurred to me, but it sure is funny that she would settle on the Ekdahl name, the false birth date, and "Harvey Oswald" all at the same time.

Edited June 24, 2017 by Jim Hargrove

[Jim Hargrove]

John has just made the following update to the Two Marguerites page on HarveyandLee.net....

=============== QUOTE ON ===============

During the Christmas holidays of 1957 Marguerite Claverie Oswald (mother of LEE Oswald) worked at Paul's Shoe Store in Ft. Worth (see group photo).  In the early spring of 1958 she was working at the Clyde Cambell Mens store. On May 29, 1957 at the request of Leonards Dept. Store, the Retail Merchants Credit association reported that Marguerite Claverie Oswald was living in apt. #3 at 3830 W. 6th in Ft. Worth (where she had been living for the past year, since June, 1956). 
 

NOTE: Marguerite Claverie Oswald (3830 W. 6th) and the Marguerite Oswald imposter (4936 Collinwood) lived nearby each other in Ft. Worth from June, 1956 thru June, 1957. In early October, 1957 the Marguerite Oswald impostor and HARVEY were living at the Hotel Senator in New Orleans, directly across the street from the Pfisterer Dental Lab where HARVEY worked and became close to co-worker Palmer McBride. At the same time Marguerite Claverie Oswald (mother of LEE Oswald) was living at 3830 W. 6th, apt 3.

 

IN THE SUMMER OF 1958 THE MARGUERITE OSWALD IMPOSTOR SWITCHED IDENTITIES WITH MARGUERITE CLAVERIE OSWALD

One year later, in late spring 1958, Marguerite Claverie Oswald left Fort Worth and moved to New Orleans where she once again resided at 126 Exchange Place in the French Quarter. She obtained employment at the nearby Kriegers Dept Store and Holmes Dept Store where she sold women's clothes. While working she was visited by a few "old friends,"  including Mrs. Logan Magruder and Mrs. Benny Comenge. On May 17, 1958 a $1000 life insurance policy on LEE Harvey Oswald lapsed due to non-payment of premium. On June 10 the National Life and Accident Insurance company notified Mrs. Oswald of the policy lapse, by letter, addressed to her at 126 Exchange Place. Mrs. Oswald relayed the information to her son, LEE Oswald, in Japan. On June 30, while incarcerated in Atsugi, Japan, LEE Harvey Oswald applied to the company for reinstatement of the policy. He listed his address as US Marine Corps, MAG 11, MAC S-1, FPO San Francisco, CA., and listed his mother's address as 126 Exchange Place in New Orleans. LEE Oswald's mother never returned to Ft. Worth, and probably lived in New Orleans for the rest of her life. 

In the late spring of 1958, when Marguerite Claverie Oswald moved from Ft. Worth to New Orleans, the Marguerite Oswald impostor and HARVEY Oswald left New Orleans. HARVEY quit working for the Pfisterer Dental Lab, and he and his caretaker/mother left the Hotel Senator and moved to Ft. Worth. HARVEY wrote a letter to the dental lab and said that he was working for a shoe store in Ft. Worth. The letter was read to employees by the officer manager of the dental lab. The Marguerite Oswald impostor briefly worked for Washer Brothers, a family-owned department store with one location. On August 28 she began working for the King Candy Company and operated a booth at the Fair Ridglea Department Store in Fort Worth. On December 5, while at work, a jar fell on her head, allegedly causing injury. The Marguerite Oswald impostor claimed injury, hired an attorney, and was awarded workers compensation. She then applied for a hardship discharge to the US Marine Corps so that her "son" (HARVEY, now at MACS 9 in Santa Ana, CA) could return to Fort Worth and care for her. Following the summer of 1958 the Marguerite Oswald impostor, now living in Fort Worth, became the one and only "Marguerite Oswald," mother of the Lee HARVEY Oswald who "defected" to Russia in 1959 and was accused of killing President Kennedy in 1963. In the fall of 1958 the Marguerite Oswald impostor was now living in Ft. Worth, while Marguerite Claverie Oswald, the mother of LEE Oswald, was living in New Orleans. The switching of identities was now complete.
 

IN THE AUTUMN OF 1958 HARVEY OSWALD SWITCHED IDENTITIES WITH LEE HARVEY OSWALD

In the fall of 1958, after briefly working at a local shoe store, HARVEY Oswald left Fort Worth, re-entered the Marines, and was sent to Atsugi, Japan. On September 14, 1958 HARVEY Oswald boarded the USS Skagit for Taiwan, accompanied by Marines who never knew or were associated with LEE Oswald. On October 6, HARVEY Oswald was listed on Marine Corps Unit Diary #158-58 at Ping-Tung (North Taiwan). When later interviewed in Moscow by reporter Priscilla Johnson, HARVEY Oswald said, "After I finished high school I joined the Marines at 17.... I was in Japan, the Philippines, Indonesia, and Formosa (the Dutch name for Taiwan). While HARVEY was in Taiwan, LEE Oswald remained in Japan and made repeated visits to the Atsugi Station Hospital in Japan on Sept. 16, 20, 22, 23, 29, and was admitted to the hospital on October 6. On October 5 HARVEY Oswald left Taiwan and returned to Japan. In late October, 1958, HARVEY Oswald left Japan and soon arrived at MACS 9 in Santa Ana, CA, where he would remain until discharged in Sept., 1959. On November 2, 1958 LEE Oswald left Yokosuku, Japan aboard the USS Barrett and arrived in San Francisco on November 15. After leave, LEE Oswald was stationed at the Marine Corps jet base in El Toro, CA. According to Major William P. Gorsky, Assistant Provost Marhsall at the Marine Corps Air Station at El Toro, LEE Harvey Oswald was discharged from the Marines in March, 1959. HARVEY Oswald remained at the Marine Corps base in Santa Ana, CA and was not discharged from the Marines until Sept. 11, 1959.
 

THE SWITCHING OF IDENTITIES WAS NOW COMPLETE 

LEE Oswald was out of the Marines and his mother (Marguerite Claverie Oswald) was living at 126 Exchange Place in New Orleans. The Marguerite Oswald impostor was living in Ft. Worth, where she would remain for the rest of her life. Russian speaking HARVEY Oswald, now stationed in Santa Ana, CA, could now express his communist sympathies to fellow Marines and in doing so prepare for his upcoming "defection" to the Soviet Union. Soon, the CIA would successfully place HARVEY Oswald, a Russian speaking "American defector," inside the Soviet Union. 

================== QUOTE OFF ==================

 

[Sandy Larsen]

16 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

On 6/23/2017 at 5:56 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

BTW, Greg Parker claims that schools didn't keep school records... the school district did. And that that proves that Oswald's record at Stripling could not have been taken by the FBI.

At the time of the assassination, each of the various schools in the Fort Worth Independent School District stored student records.  Some years later, these collective records were transferred to district headquarters and placed on microfilm.  Former Stripling assistant principal Frank Kudlaty talks about this very issue at about the 2:50 mark in Part III of his interview with John Armstrong.

Thanks for pointing that out, Jim. I already believed what the Stripling vice principal said, but didn't realize that John had asked him specifically about this issue. It's good to know because it shows that there is some possibility that the partial permanent school record in New York may have been a legit P.S. 117 record.

BTW, FWIW. it doesn't matter to me whether that partial record is a legit P.S. 117 record or if it was created by the FBI. But the more we know, the more we can figure out what happened.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

On 6/24/2017 at 6:59 AM, Jim Hargrove said:

On 6/23/2017 at 8:30 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

I can think of only five possible explanation for Robert's mischaracterizations:

1. My "extended family" scenario.
2. It is actually LEE (not HARVEY) who had the truancy problem. (This doesn't explain the Marguerite employment problem. But I paid less attention to Pic's testimony regarding her, so perhaps that's not really a problem.)
3. The FBI went to town altering Pic's testimony. (This doesn't sound so absurd considering the real possibility that Pic's testimony was largely inconsistent with the official story.)
4. Pic was extensively coached, and did an excellent job of lying.
5. There were two Pics. (Maybe even two Roberts). And it was the fake one who testified.

Another possibility is a combination of #2 and #3. If it is LEE who was the truant one, that would explain Pic's characterization of LHO. (This is #2.) Any problem with Pic's characterization of Marguerite could be fixed through alteration. (This is #3.) Let's call this Possibility #6.

My favorites -- those that I think are feasible-- are:

      3. The FBI went to town altering Pic's testimony.
      6. It was LEE with truancy problems. And Pic's testimony regarding Marguerite was tweaked as necessary.

Not sure I’d make the assumption that only one of the Oswalds had truancy problems.  If Dr. Kurian’s recollection of Harvey telling him his “brother” substituted for him at school, and assuming that it could only have been a school-aged kid (like the other LHO), then its pretty clear both boys would have had truancy problems.

Jim,

When I refer to the "truancy problems" that Pic described in his WC testimony, I'm using that phrase to mean not only the truancy but everything related to it. Like his stay at Youth House, his rebellious nature, and his being evaluated psychologically.

If it was HARVEY who had those problems -- along with the truancy -- then why was Pic so familiar with it all? If, on the other hand, it was LEE who had those problems, then it would be no surprise that Pic was aware of it.

 

Quote

Regarding your numbered potential explanations….

1. I just can’t think of much evidence for it.
2. The decade-long pattern of Harvey being placed in and out of situations similar to Lee’s, always seeming to get just a “taste” of Lee’s life, including in the USMC, suggests Harvey would more likely have the truancy problem.  Hardly proof of that fact, though.
3. We have proof that the FBI did alter sworn testimony, and so this is always my leading thought when I read testimony that disagrees with what I think happened.  If this is the case, it begs the question of why Hoover didn’t change Pic’s refusal to recognize clear photos of his “brother.”  Could it be because those were considered opinions rather than recollections?  Because Pic might have recalled the photo evidence and question altered testimony later?  Or just an oversight?  (The FBI did make a lot of mistakes in the cover-up!)
4. Strikes me as dangerous to bring someone like Pic into the spy family game unless he was already a member.  And if he was, could the photo observations have been designed to throw us off that track. I’m inclined to reject this one but, as always, it had to be considered.
5. Funny, but not likely. 

Thanks for your comments on those possibilities. We agree on the viability of #3 and on the unlikelihood of #1, #4, and #5

I'm going to keep in mind the possibility of LEE being the one who was truant and in Youth House (#2). Because if that were the case, it would resolve all those Pic problems. What I need to do is weigh the Pic problems against the evidence that the Youth House boy was HARVEY and not LEE.

If I can find the time, I will read all the Pic testimony while pretending that anything that refers to HARVEY was introduced by the FBI. And that there was a reason for introducing it. If I find out that, under that assumption, they went overboard and introduced way more than they needed to, then I will tend to think that the FBI didn't alter the testimony after all and that LEE was really the one in Youth House.
 

Quote

Can you give us more of your theory about the census roll above?  The hiding from creditors explanation had never occurred to me, but it sure is funny that she would settle on the Ekdahl name, the false birth date, and "Harvey Oswald" all at the same time.

 

Are we even sure that the census information came from REAL Marguerite? I don't know how the census was conducted back then. but maybe FAKE Marguerite gave information to census takers (not realizing the potential consequences of doing so) and maybe REAL Marguerite didn't. (I don't know how the census bureau tracks people down, but I'm pretty sure I haven't been counted multiple times as I should have been. I recall filling out a census form only once. I've never been interviewed by a census taker.)

Here's another possibility... Those in charge of the Oswald project may have anticipated potential difficulties introduced by having two people with the same name, birth date, parents' names, etc., etc. They may have instructed REAL and FAKE Marguerite to intentionally do certain things when submitting forms, like be off on a date a little bit, use a middle name instead of a first name, a maiden name instead of a married name, and so forth. They may have been instructed to do this on most forms, but not certain other forms -- ones that needed to be accurate for whatever reason. In the event that inaccurate data caused a problem, REAL or FAKE Marguerite could just say it was a little mistake or make up some other excuse

The point in doing this would be so that it wouldn't stand out to anybody going through records that there were two people with the same information, and yet allow Oswald's history to be traced (for example by the KGB).

 

Edited June 26, 2017 by Sandy Larsen

[W. Tracy Parnell]

14 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

John has just made the following update to the Two Marguerites page

Like the entire H&L theory, this "update" is complete nonsense. Marguerite and LHO left New Orleans and moved to Texas in July 1956. Marguerite never returned. The "fact" that she moved to New Orleans is based, like so much of the H&L theory, mostly on mistaken eyewitness reports. People like Mrs. Logan Magruder and Mrs. Benny Comenge were just giving their best estimate as to when they saw Marguerite-they didn't keep a diary or anything.

For a discussion of Paul's Shoe Store see:

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/02/pauls-shoe-store.html

For Marguerite's addresses see:

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/02/marguerites-addresses.html

[David Andrews]

On 6/24/2017 at 8:48 AM, Jim Hargrove said:

David,

During Pic’s testimony, I remember Jenner going through a bunch of legalize at an oddly inappropriate time, but don’t recall it being particularly threatening.  Can you give me an example?  (It’s long testimony, as you know.)

I'm going to re-read Pic's testimony tonight and try to describe the friction between Pic and Jenner exactly, with quotations. 

Edited June 25, 2017 by David Andrews

[Jim Hargrove]

Of the three anomalies in the 1951-52 census roll shown above (wrong birthdate, wrong name of mother, and wrong first name), the one that provides the greatest clue to unpacking this document is the name "Harvey" instead of "Lee."

There are nearly fifty instances of transposed names of "Lee" and "Harvey" in government documents in the period of the Oswald Project (1947-63).  With so much documentary evidence, it may will be, as Sandy Larsen suggested above,  that a record-keeping method had been devised for separate governmental dossiers for the two young men in the period leading up to the defection of Harvey.

In the 1951-52 census roll, all three of the anomalies help to draw a clear distinction between the two Oswald boys:  the name Harvey, the incorrect birthdate, and the use of name Ekdahl instead of Oswald.  Those three pieces of information clearly identify the young Russian-speaking boy as distinct from "Lee," born on October 18 to Marguerite Oswald.

Tracy Parnell would like us to assume that the October 19, 1938 birth date given on the census roll for Harvey Oswald was a mere typographical error with no other significance.   Remember, though, that the Marguerite impostor also informed NYC Youth House probation officer John Carro that her little boy's birthdate was October 19, 1938.  Is there a connection between the census roll and the erratic testimony of the Marguerite impostor?

With so many instances of the name Harvey Oswald (or Harvey Lee Oswald) in government documents, it would be irresponsible to conclude that the discrepancies are due merely to human or typographical error.

An essential reference point for understanding the scope of the Oswald Project is that on the day of the assassination, Robert Oswald was approached by the FBI and was asked the following question:

"Is your brother's name Lee Harvey Oswald or Harvey Lee Oswald?  We have it here as Harvey Lee."  

Robert's succinct response was:  "It's Lee Harvey Oswald."

Even the FBI was confused about the "Harvey" and "Lee" conundrum on November 22, 1963.  But shortly thereafter, a concerted effort was made to correct the record by either altering or destroying documents to give the appearance to history of a single Lee Harvey Oswald.

But too many documents survived the purge, such as this 1951-52 census roll.

An important study would be to systematically examine all of the documentary evidence in which Oswald's name is listed as "Harvey Oswald"  (or "Harvey Lee Oswald").  Such a study would demonstrate that by the day of the assassination, when Oswald was taken into custody, it was difficult for the authorities even to identify their suspect by name.  Who was this frail, mild-mannered man?   Alek J. Hidell?  Lee Harvey Oswald?  Or, Harvey Lee Oswald?

The FBI team on the ground in Dallas was under the impression that the man under arrest was "Harvey Lee Oswald" and requested confirmation from Robert Oswald to set them straight about his brother's name.  Around the same time, Lieutenant Jack Revill of the Dallas police had typed up a list of TSDB employees that was headed by the name "Harvey Lee Oswald" of 605 Elsbeth.  But Oswald never resided at 605 Elsbeth; he was in residence at 602 Elsbeth, Apt. 2 in 1962.  

It turned out that the information received by Lt. Revill was coming from a military intelligence file.  On April 20, 1978, Lieutenant Colonel Robert E. Jones, operations officer of the U.S. Army's 112th Military Intelligence Group Fort Sam Houston, San Antonio, Texas, testified before the House Select Committee on Assassinations.  He described a military dossier that he had read on Oswald and seemed confused as to why there was no indication that Oswald was ever debriefed by the CIA upon his return from the Soviet Union. (Click here.) The Committee failed to ask Col. Jones appropriate questions about why this file was "routinely" destroyed in the early 1970s and why Oswald would not be debriefed by the authorities following the  years spent in the USSR, let alone the finer points about "Harvey" and "Lee."

The difference between the census roll and the other other documents is that the former was a public record, as opposed to records from military intelligence files.  But in 1951-52, the Oswald Project was in its earliest stage of development.  The census roll needs to be placed in the context of the known body of evidence of "Harvey" Oswald in the pre-assassination period and the embryonic phase of the Oswald Project.  The architects of this spy project sought to create confusion in the event that the extremely efficient KGB were to follow a paper trail of the young man who had defected and who answered to the name of "Harvey."

The singular importance of this most recent discovery of John Armstrong is that that the census roll may be the earliest extant government document pertaining to the Oswald Project.  More scrutiny of the Ft. Worth school records may uncover additional documents like this one.
 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

8 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Tracy Parnell would like us to assume that the October 19, 1938 birth date given on the census roll for Harvey Oswald was a mere typographical error with no other significance.

Any number of possible explanations. It could simply be a typo. As Sandy suggested, it could be an attempt to avoid creditors. Or it could be for some other unknown reason that would benefit Marguerite. It isn't an either-or situation-in other words this had to be immediately explained or there were two Oswalds.

[David Josephs]

On 6/25/2017 at 7:59 AM, David Andrews said:

I'm going to re-read Pic's testimony tonight and try to describe the friction between Pic and Jenner exactly, with quotations. 

David - wasn't Jenner and Rankin in on the explanation regarding Ely's work?  I would expect that Jenner, knowing about the inconsistencies and problems with Oswald's bio, would not treat PIC as a hostile witness.  Pic wasn't stupid... he was very careful with his answers...  but yeah, Jenner, like Liebeler had the WCR agenda...

DJ

 

Edited August 31, 2017 by David Josephs

[Jim Hargrove]

4 hours ago, David Josephs said:

David - wasn't Jenner and Rankin in on the explanation regarding Ely's work?  I would expect that Jenner, knowing about the inconsistencies and problems with Oswald's bio, would not treat PIC as a hostile witness.  Pic wasn't stupid... he was very careful with his answers...  but yeah, Jenner, like Liebeler had the WCR agenda...

Jenner earned his pay tiptoeing through minefields in the official biography of “LHO.”  For example, when questioning Robert Oswald, Jenner started to talk about the summer of 1947 when Allen Dulles abruptly adjourned.  When Robert’s testimony began again, Jenner said, “This brought us through the summer of 1948, I believe.”  Avoided was the revelation that during that very summer, one Oswald family was living at 1505 8th Ave. in Fort Worth while the other was in a new home at 101 San Saba in Benbrook.

When Robert testified that his brother Lee attended Stripling School in the fall of 1952, Jenner surely knew that NYC public school records showed LHO was in junior high school in New York at the same time.   He questioned the Stripling reference once, and then immediately dropped the subject, never to return to it.

When Ed Voebel told Jenner LEE Harvey Oswald lost a tooth in a fight after school, and Lillian Murret said the punch “ran his tooth through the lip” and she paid the dental bill, Jenner failed to ask for the dentist’s name so the records could be checked.

There are other examples that I don’t have time to research now, but Jenner appeared to be the go-to guy for avoiding “problems” in LHO’s biography.