David Reitzes

[Nancy Eldreth]

Dixie and Dawn and Dave and forum,

What am I dealing with here?

Judyth Baker is what I am dealing with here?

I got a email last night will not say who it is from and asked this person asked that I NOT TO TELL WHO IT IS>

So I won't.

But it seems that Judyth Baker has treated MANY people as she has treated me.

Now, I look forward to hearing from someone that no one knows.

Now, Judyth has the game of guessing who is this person that never knew me and did know herself and has TREATED THIS PERSON AS SHE HAS ME (refering to myself).

OH don't worry Judyth I won't tell who it is?

NOT like you say that about me, that is????

BUT YOU KNOW IT IS GOOD TO KNOW THAT I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE THAT JUDYTH BAKER DOES WHAT SHE DOES TOO>

GOOD TO KNOW THIS

Now I can pick my head up and go on with a good feeling inside.

Gee, Judyth you should be careful NOT TO CHOOSE ANYONE TO BE YOUR FRIEND WE DON"T LIKE GETTING THREATED LIKE THIS REALLY>

I am not deleting this, choose by me.

By the way I didn't tell anyone that Dixie wrote to me and would like to know how that got out....????

Not by me. I guess I had better go back and take a look at the email.

I remember what it said and it didn't strick me as bad or disconforting at all.

So, attack Dixie because she wrote to me Judyth? Make it a slurr. Sorry Judyth but this doesn't cut it anymore? Does it?

However, my point is anyone that becomes a friend to Judyth better watch out? We get trashed by her if we ask questions? Try to learn? Try to understand one way or another? Find out way to much? Get trampled down if we start to find out facts? Then wonder what is wrong with this picture?

Yeah, I find a lot wrong with it?

Like Judyth knew prior to JFK being shot about it to happen why wasn't she a hero and make a call to the White House to STOP IT?

Can't turn the clock back Judyth and you can't answer many questions? This I find offensive? WHY becaue it came from Bob Vernon or me or who ever else it is that you find offensive?

Glad to know that there is a list of us that you have treated the same as you have threated me now>>>>>>>>>

WE WISH TO LEARN that is OUR ONLY PROBLEM.

WE DID BELIEVE IN YOU AND NOW HAVE PROBLEMS WITH THAT BECAUSE OF YOUR OWN BEHAVIOR BACK TO US.

Yes, Judyth I do find it offensive.

[Terry Mauro]

Dixie and Dawn and Dave and forum,

By the way I didn't tell anyone that Dixie wrote to me and would like to know how that got out....????

Not by me. I guess I had better go back and take a look at the email.

I remember what it said and it didn't strick me as bad or disconforting at all.

So, attack Dixie because she wrote to me Judyth? Make it a slurr. Sorry Judyth but this doesn't cut it anymore? Does it?

Nancy Eldreth Jan 7 2005, 01:55 AM Post #40

Advanced Member

Group: Members

Posts: 207

Joined: 13-September 04

Member No.: 1487

Thank you Dixie for what you wrote to me privately.Looks that way.

I have another thread and keep adding to it which even you saw and Judyth avoids the thread.

Maybe added to both threads she will answer and maybe not.

I am afraid if she avoids those questions then Judyth has exposed herself as a fraud and I will always know this. I was one to totally believe her SO MUCH.

Losing my faith in that now. Maybe it is me but everyone tells me NO IT ISN"T YOU IT IS JUDYTH BAKER.

I even told Judyth that someone told me privately that is also on this forum and won't give the name out for confidentaly that they too knew that Mary Farrell was big trouble and about somethings not right about Lancer and Debra. I won't tell who it was that told me this. However I stated to Judyth this fact alone COULD BACK YOUR STORY.

What did Judyth DO

WISH ME WELL.

OK

Fine Judyth take it or leave it but some people do read some of my posts.

I know for a fact as soon as I posted the thread that Gary Mack was online on Simkins and was into that posts of which you refuse to answer.

It was fast too. Now, Judyth it is hopeful that you do answer me.

GOOD LUCK NOW and I wish you well.

--------------------

Biography: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=1632

[Judyth Baker]

Please remember that my book will be coming out this year.

I want to thank people who have been sending me private emails. I see that some of this material is going to be useful to researchers and students.

That makes it worth the effort.

Meanwhile, back to the topic. This is the final article in the Dave Reitzes thread that I wish to present for the time being.

Within this article, below, I attempt to distinguish among the main players in the assassination research community.

°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°° THE COMPOSITION OF THE 'RESEARCH COMMUNITY' , WITH SPECIAL ATTENTION TO MR. DAVY´S COMMENTS ABOUT MR. DAVE REITZES°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

We are discussinG Dave Reitzes' rhetoric and research methods, since he puiblishes a great deal on the Internet which affects those scholars and students who read it.

The websites look professional, AND there are many citations, and Mr. reitzes seems to be presenting information correctly. But he does He?

Mr. Reitzes is not known as a man who seeks to interview witnesses. He usually relies, as do most researchers in this case, on quotes from others.

SECONDARY SOURCES: "48 Chromosome Knowledge"

I am reminded how for many years people thought the human nucleus had 48 chromosomes --because the male chromosome XY type was shown in the first photo of the elicted chromosomal materials, ALONG with the female XX type. Everybody quoted it that way for some two decades, as I recall, until somebody noticed that the first quote stating humans had 48 chromosomes was wrong. Somebody should have asked the scientist who posted the photo how many chromosomes were in the typical human cell's nucleus. Nobody interviewed HIM. They relied on the photo that was published, they counted the chromosomes, and came up with 48.

Personal interviews CAN often bring out the truth-- sometimes even if the person interviewed lies, for their statements might contrast with what they said previously. Now, I am talking about live interviews, depositions, audio and video tapes, and statements made in the presence of an additional witness who can vouch that the statement was not coerced and is accurately transcribed (even then transcribed statements are occasionally redacted).

The quality of the interview of course rests on knowing the situation at the time of the interview. People tended to lie about Lee Oswald right after the assassination. The same people, years later, often moderated their statements or even said they had not been quoted correctly. orest Pena told The warren Commission nothing about the relationship between Warren DeBrueys and Lee Oswald. Later, several sources confirmed that Pena had been threatened. Eventually, Pena told everything, and his progress toward telling the truth is understandable and he is to be admired for finally telling the truth. Such a witness should not be discredited since there is proof that the witness was afraid to begin with.

These matters must be taken into consideration.

In the case of WILLIAM DAVY AND DAVE REITZES, an example of how failing to interview subjects can turn even Mr. Reitzes' "good" research awry is presented here (remember, I am not trying to say that Mr. Reitzes is a poor investigator. He digs into things. But I am trying to say that he is selective, and reports as it suits him to support his personal beliefs, often using rhetorical devices, and rarely conducting live interviews. That means he is not really a researcher. He is, instead, a spokesman.).

William Davy realized that Mr. Reitzes had a propensity for making statements without getting interviews from living witnesses. A good example is what happened to me. Mr. Reitzes never spoke to me one moment 'live.' He never visited me. Mr. Davy wrote `Let Justice Be done`, which is filled with the results of many live witness interviews, and he is sensitive when Mr. Reitzes ´corrects´him based on " 48 chromosome" knowledge:

Concerning Mr. Reitzes'methodology, Davy wrote this (among many other complaints, after Reitzes attacked his book):

"Reitzes’ ...claims I "attempt to rehabilitate nutball witness Charles Spiesel (Davy 173-4)." In fact, I do no such thing. On the very pages Reitzes cites I list all of Spiesel’s wild, paranoid claims. I criticize his story as being too pat and describe his testimony as "lunatic." Is this Reitzes’ idea of rehabilitation? It was Judge Haggerty himself who thought Spiesel may have been dismissed too easily and I note that in the book.

Reitzes then writes "Davy also presents a dubious new theory of his own when he attempts to link the mental hospital in Jackson, where Oswald allegedly was seeking a job, to the CIA’s infamous MK/ULTRA mind control experiments." No, this was recalled to us by Dr. Alfred Butterworth, one of the East Louisiana State Hospital’s physicians and corroborated by other hospital employees. Tell us Mr. Reitzes, how many of the Jackson hospital employees did you interview?`

Of course I also report on secret goings-on at Jackson. In my book, I include the supporting statement of a living witness who himself was a subject of medical testing at Jackson almost at the same time of the experiences i recount at Jackson. Davy complains, justifiably, that he interviewed a witness to support his statement, knowing that Reitzes interviewed nobody, and that reitzes relies on secondary materials. Wrote Davy next:

`But less commendable, according to Reitzes, is my "acceptance of Daniel Campbell’s assertions that Banister was a "bagman for the CIA" and "was running guns to Alpha 66 in Miami (There is no evidence to support either claim)." I guess Reitzes naively expects a CIA document to appear affirming something like that. While he’s waiting, he may be interested to know that this was confirmed by Dan Campbell’s brother, Allen as well as close Banister associate, Joe Newbrough. Tell us Mr. Reitzes, how many of Banister’s operatives did you interview?"

In fact, Mr. Reitzes rarely interviews anyone, but will refute the claims of writers such as Davy who can back up their statements with live interviews, relying himself on secondary sources.

So, we now point out that living witness statements are preferable to secondary sources, especially where the conditions of the interviews are known. Such statements can be lies. I have seen interviews by the FBI and Secret Service where the person being interviewed stated the interviews were not correctly reported. Therefore direct quotes should be part of the report of an interview. The direct quote must also be IN CONTEXT. If a person said in a live interview, `I have always believed Lee Harvey Oswald shot Kennedy until I Mr. X told me his side of the story.` If this is reported as `I have always believed Lee Harvey Oswald shot Kennedy...`then the ´live+´interview has been distorted.

needless to say, I have seen my own quotes similarly distorted from their original context.

All these factors must be taken into account.

In the end, judging the quality of a researcher´s work includes these considerations:

1) live interviews reported in context whenever possible

2) quotations not taken out of context

3) balanced presentation where conflicts exist (cannot ignore important arguments `on the other side´)

4) willingness to post corrections when shown to be in error

5) avoidance of use of pejorative or prejudicial statements (I removed, for example, a statement made by Davy against Reitzes that was overly prejudiced against Reitzes, where the three dots are located in the quote).

6) the use of footnotes or end notes to back up statemenhts... and when checked, that these notes actually exist and are accurate (errors may happen, but they should not be chronic) ... and avoiding using ONESELF as the `source`of a statement (I was astonished to find one researcher quoting his earlier works over and over again as his ´source´of information)

7) if a ´researcher´ constantly publishes material only supporting one side of a theory, unless that person is a WITNESS, he or she is displaying an AGENDA. A witness has the right to seek supporting evidence, though every witness should know what is out there against him or her in matters of controversy such as the Kennedy assasssination, especailly since lying occurs (sadly, by officials, too).

A researcher has to seek evidence for and against his or her thesis. If only one side is presented, the person is not a researcher. A witness can legitimately defend only his or her side, because that witness is speaking from experience. researchers must decide if what the witness says is true, distorted, or false. Honest researchers take care and time to do live interviews and to present both sides of the picture in witness testimony sitruations.

Otherwise, they are said to have an AGENDA and are being SELECTIVE in presenting their evidence.

°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°°

Final comment: There is so much evidence ---and there are so many conflicting statements in the Kennedy assassination materials---- that most people are overwhelmed. I´ve been more fortunate, because, as a witness, I know what Lee Oswald, for example, really was doing on certain days. I knew him as a living, breathing person.

This helps me to quickly sort through conflicting stories. Therefore, I am also in a position to know who has been lying.

It is a distressing position to be in, but one I take with humility and dedication. I also know whom to respect among present `researchers´in the JFK research community. And who should be rebuked for muddying the waters fore their own purposes.

Best regards,

Judyth Vary Baker

Seeking the Exoneration of Lee Harvey Oswald

[Dawn Meredith]

Dixie and Dawn and Dave and forum,

By the way I didn't tell anyone that Dixie wrote to me and would like to know how that got out....????

Not by me. I guess I had better go back and take a look at the email.

I remember what it said and it didn't strick me as bad or disconforting at all.

So, attack Dixie because she wrote to me Judyth? Make it a slurr. Sorry Judyth but this doesn't cut it anymore? Does it?

Nancy Eldreth Jan 7 2005, 01:55 AM Post #40

Advanced Member

Group: Members

Posts: 207

Joined: 13-September 04

Member No.: 1487

Thank you Dixie for what you wrote to me privately.Looks that way.

I have another thread and keep adding to it which even you saw and Judyth avoids the thread.

Maybe added to both threads she will answer and maybe not.

I am afraid if she avoids those questions then Judyth has exposed herself as a fraud and I will always know this. I was one to totally believe her SO MUCH.

Losing my faith in that now. Maybe it is me but everyone tells me NO IT ISN"T YOU IT IS JUDYTH BAKER.

I even told Judyth that someone told me privately that is also on this forum and won't give the name out for confidentaly that they too knew that Mary Farrell was big trouble and about somethings not right about Lancer and Debra. I won't tell who it was that told me this. However I stated to Judyth this fact alone COULD BACK YOUR STORY.

What did Judyth DO

WISH ME WELL.

OK

Fine Judyth take it or leave it but some people do read some of my posts.

I know for a fact as soon as I posted the thread that Gary Mack was online on Simkins and was into that posts of which you refuse to answer.

It was fast too. Now, Judyth it is hopeful that you do answer me.

GOOD LUCK NOW and I wish you well.

#########WHY does this post come out under Terry Mauro's name and when you click on bio you get Nancy? What the hell is goijg on?

Dawn Meredith WIth NO agenda Nancey

--------------------

Biography: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=1632

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Dave Weaver]

Dixie and Dawn and Dave and forum,

By the way I didn't tell anyone that Dixie wrote to me and would like to know how that got out....????

Not by me. I guess I had better go back and take a look at the email.

I remember what it said and it didn't strick me as bad or disconforting at all.

So, attack Dixie because she wrote to me Judyth? Make it a slurr. Sorry Judyth but this doesn't cut it anymore? Does it?

Nancy Eldreth Jan 7 2005, 01:55 AM Post #40

Advanced Member

Group: Members

Posts: 207

Joined: 13-September 04

Member No.: 1487

Thank you Dixie for what you wrote to me privately.Looks that way.

I have another thread and keep adding to it which even you saw and Judyth avoids the thread.

Maybe added to both threads she will answer and maybe not.

I am afraid if she avoids those questions then Judyth has exposed herself as a fraud and I will always know this. I was one to totally believe her SO MUCH.

Losing my faith in that now. Maybe it is me but everyone tells me NO IT ISN"T YOU IT IS JUDYTH BAKER.

I even told Judyth that someone told me privately that is also on this forum and won't give the name out for confidentaly that they too knew that Mary Farrell was big trouble and about somethings not right about Lancer and Debra. I won't tell who it was that told me this. However I stated to Judyth this fact alone COULD BACK YOUR STORY.

What did Judyth DO

WISH ME WELL.

OK

Fine Judyth take it or leave it but some people do read some of my posts.

I know for a fact as soon as I posted the thread that Gary Mack was online on Simkins and was into that posts of which you refuse to answer.

It was fast too. Now, Judyth it is hopeful that you do answer me.

GOOD LUCK NOW and I wish you well.

#########WHY does this post come out under Terry Mauro's name and when you click on bio you get Nancy? What the hell is goijg on?

Dawn Meredith WIth NO agenda Nancey

--------------------

Biography: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=1632

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dawn,

there are actually 2 links to biographies in Terry's post.

This is easy explained, because the second part of Terry's post is a copy/paste job of Nancy's full post including the link to Nancy's biography on bottom of Nancy's post.

She then did only highlight the part that makes it clear that Nancy had obviously

forgotten, that she did mention Dixie's mail in her post.

So Terry's Biographie link is the second one then, and Nancy's the first one.

Edited January 10, 2005 by Dave Weaver

[Stephen Roy]

A big thank you to John Simkin for allowing me to pop in here an clairify a few points. I have been in touch with Judyth Vary Baker since about 1999, and we have had a on-again/off-again private correspondence. For some reason, Baker chose to go public with it in this forum over the past week.

I came onto the internet in the mid-90s under a variant of my given name, and I engaged in discussion on some JFK newsgroups. One day while I was at work, a scraggly 40-ish man came to my door and said something to my wife about me "perpetuating the coverup." She excused herself, called me and the police, but the man walked away. My wife insisted and I agreed to adopt a "screen name", something a bit more anonymous. I tried several possibilities but AOL said they were already in use. AOL allows up to 10 characters, so I tried a TV term, "blackburst" (the signal to which all video devices are synchronized in a TV studio), and AOL accepted it. I became known as a David Ferrie specialist in the JFK groups. When people would ask my first name, I arbitrarily chose "Dave" (after Ferrie).

I explained publicly on a number of occasions that Blackburst was a pseudonym, and why I chose it. I also explained this by email to several people. Eventually, I did share research with a few folks, which necessitated using my real name, but in a spirit of privacy.

In late 1999 or early 2000, I was contacted by Baker and her associates and we had numerous exchanges. I had a clear impresson that Baker wanted to keep these exchanges private at that time. I also wanted to remain on her bulk email list so that I could get the details of her account.

In the summer of 2000 I signed on to the JFKLancer Forum, but the rules required that I use my real name. I never used "Blackburst" on my few posts on that forum. Debra Conway invited me to speak at the Lancer NID2000 conference, and the topic of my 30-minute talk was agreed upon as "Ferrie: Man and Myth." Although I considered speaking as Blackburst, Debra convinced me to use my real name. Of perhaps 100 or so topics I could have mentioned about Ferrie, I chose about 10. When I arrived in Dallas, I was given a name tag with my own name, and I wrote "Blackburst" underneath it. I made no secret of my identity. I spoke to numerous attendees wearing this tag, including Steve Tyler, Joe Biles, Mary Ferrell, Peter Dale Scott and many others. The tag can be seen in the video of my talk.

It has been erroneously suggested that I was asked not to mention Baker, but this is not true. I had not included Baker as part of my limited talk time, but I do recall some email just prior to the conference, in which she considered going to the event. In the Q & A following my talk, a question arose about Edward Haslam's thesis in "Mary, Ferrie and the Monkey Virus." I replied that I had reservations about the paucity of evidence cited in the book, and the author's tendency to ask a question on one page, then repeat it a few pages later as a fact. Nevertheless, I added (paraphrase) that a new witness had emerged whose account, if proven true, could change the way we look at Oswald's time in New Orleans. One or two other panelists then briefly made reference to the Baker matter.

At the time, I thought I was doing what Baker wanted. Years later, questions were raised about whether ot not the panel was muzzled. I saw no such thing. And questions were raised about why nobody mentioned Baker. While her account was not part of my formal presentation, I DID mention her in the Q/A.

At various times over the years, Baker and her associates pointedly asked me why I would not come out and support her account. I replied that I thought we should all wait to see what evidence was presented in the book.

A few years back, I thought about setting up a meeting. As it was hard to get time off from work and home, I asked if I could do a one-day turn around: Fly into Moisant, meet her at the airport for a few hours, and fly home that night. Her emails at the time, which I saved, indicate that she wanted to meet but did not have a vehicle available to travel from her home to Moisant on my prospective date. I did not end up meeting her, but I did give her my home phone number in the process.

As noted, I was long troubled by some of the assertions in Haslam's book, so I kept an eye out for anything to confirm or deny them. One assertion made by others (but not specifically by Haslam) is that Ferrie had many white mice and did medical research in his last apartment at 3330 Louisiana Avenue Parkway. The documents I found suggested that he did have such mice in 1957, six years and 3 living spaces perviously, but not in 1963. As I interviewed people who knew Ferrie, I would ask about this, and I was unable to find anyone who saw them in that period. This includes several very close friends. Ferrie's landlord did not see mice or a lab there. Pictures taken at at 1963 birthday party do not appear to show them. Coroner's pictures from Ferrie's 1967 death do not show them.

I communicated the above PRIVATELY to Baker and her associates. At some point, I was asked in the newsgroups if there was any indication of mice in that apartment at that time. I decided to give a carefully phrased and honest answer that none of theose I spoke with recalled them. This apparently angered Baker.

Baker also raised some question about "research technique", saying that I was wrong to bring witnesses together. Let me clarify: In most cases, I contacted them by "cold-calling", or cold email or snail mail. The interviews would be either via telephone or one-on-one. On a few occasions, I would meet someone I had only spoken with on the phone for lunch or some such thing. In several cases, one Ferrie acquaintence would introduce me to another, and so on. And on two occasions while I was in New Orleans, a couple of acquaintences who ALREADY KNEW other Ferrie friends would ask if they could join the friends and I for dinner. I did NOT ever bring together people who did not already know each other.

And she has asked why I do not name some of these people. The first obvious reason is that some of these interviews were hard to get, and I want exclusivity for future publication. Another factor is privacy. Some were very reluctant to talk, and only did so on a pledge of privacy. One is an elected official. Another is a community watch leader. Another is a successful attorney. They don't want more publicity about "that Ferrie thing." And still another factor: Ferrie was at least bisexual, and had relationships with a few of these people, some as underage boys. One can easily understand why I just "don't want to go there."

Then in recent months, there was a flap over a complicated story involving Lee Harvey Oswald's tooth. Baker apparently incorporated into her account some information I had either emailed or posted concerning the date Ferrie first left the New Orleans Cadet Squadron of the Civil Air Patrol. At one time, I had fragmentary dates and reported them in that way. I subsequently located and spoke with some who had first-hand knowledge of that event, and obtained news clippings which indicated that a new commander was in place by January 1955. Baker then blamed the flap on me, first privately, then publicly.

In a private email, I noted that she should be careful about incorporating published materials about Ferrie into her account, because 90% of those published materials are of questionable accuracy, and I noted that I thought she was buying into things she was reading. She somehow quoted this back to me in a private email as me saying her account was 90% gleaned from published materials, which is not what I said.

Until recently, I considered Baker a friend. We had many pleasant exchanges and I offered private support as best I could. For some reason, she has decided to take this into a public forum and violate several confidences. She has quoted private emails. More important, she has given out my real name and personal info against my stated desires. I TOLD HER several times that Blackburst was not my real name. I sent her a photo of my family. I gave her my phone number, which would display my name on callerID. Now she has let the toothpaste out of tube, and it can't be pushed back in. I don't know what I've done to deserve this, but Baker judgmentally emailed me that it was best for the research community, and I would thank her someday.

She even indicated that she expects me to attack her. THIS is not an attack, but a careful worded defense, which still leaves some things private. I have no desire or reason to attack her. But the friendship, if there was one, is over. I have asked, if she included a particuar exchange in her book, to delete it. I regret that she has come under bad influences and has made some bad decisions.

(BTW, I had the "Coke Syndrome" with my computer, spilling a partial can of Coke onto the keys. It works OK, but I have very sticky keys, requiring me to keep going back to see if I have miskeyed. Apologies for any typos!)

[Nancy Eldreth]

I have talked many hours of emails back and forth with Judyth.

To the most part I have enjoyed writing to her and hearing from her and we chated about a lot of things. Health, excercise, JFK, family, friends, and even Stephen King. All were great conversations and many things she has taken the time to share with me and others was wonderful.

Something happened in our friendship and she blamed me. I made a mistake she asked me one question over and over again and I kept saying no and then I sort of pulled back from her as well on it. I had asked her NOT to tell anyone ever on this because it is touchy. Well, one day in all of my NO's to her in this answer I oneday made a mistake and said YES HE DID. The truthful answer was of course all of the NO's to it. Then Judyth asked me again, after I made the mistake and I said NO and she said well you said yes he did. I TOLD HER NO I SAID NO. TO this one question which I am not going to go into because as I said it is a VERY Touchy issue. I told Judyth why it is and to have some feelings with it. She make a LARGE BULK MAIL SENDER OUT and said to everyone that the answer was YES HE DID AND he won't (so on and so on). The email somehow excaped me. I don't know if I had deleted it or ignored it or just plain all out and out didn't get it. I am not going to judge the issue here and now because I really don't know. BUT I DID NOT SEE IT OR READ IT. Until one day someone sent it back to me. I was floored.

Judyth and I had an argument and she then showed me the email where I said YES by accident. IT went back and forth and I was dizzy after it. I said finally how many times had I said no to you on it and told you why it is so touchy how many? GO Back and LOOK and see for youself what did I say to you. The matter did get cleared up, but it took me asking her to bring back the words I said and tell it that I made a mistake and YOU TOOK IT THIS WAY. She never said it the way it really was. IT was TOTALLY MY OWN MISTAKE ALL MINE AND MY WAY OF WRITING TO HER. I got more angry than you can imagine at her and she to this day don't know how angry I was at that moment. No one truly does know.

I told Judyth that she was her own worst enemy and I don't think she knows how true this is even. OH I KNOW SHE GOT INTO TWO SEPARATE CAR ACCIDENTS.

They are after her.

Now the car accidents happened after one certain convention down in Dallas and it maybe the very one you speak of Stephen and I have a feeling it is. A lot went on down there about that time. NOT GOOD EITHER. I got Judyth full maybe story and some that most on this forum don't know and this tells why she got into those accidents. SO SOMETHING IS SURELY BEHIND THIS. A LOT and it is why Judyth gets so upset. I can't say that I do blame her either at all. I know I would.

Another time I made or made to think I made another mistake except the only mistake I made was to loose or disgard a email that became so highly important.

This Judyth has won over all of us. Again, I am not going to go into what it is now.

WE LOOKED AND LOOKED and we found bits and pieces of other emails that DO tie in but not the total part. TO MAKE SOME OF WHAT I STATED HIGHLY TRUE.

She knows what I am saying on certain words and that she shouldn't if there wasn't anything to it. NOT EVEN SAYING THE WHOLE THING.

So, I got close enough to her she says I don't know her. VERY TRUE I don't and she doesn't know me either. Not totally no one on this forum does either. They think they do but they don't. So again I don't judge Judyth and wish I had it but I still do not judge her.

Finally the end came it was a bute too. Before that end though I asked Judyth there is a way I can get some information directly over to the Kennedy Family and would you like to give something over to them. She right away said tell them I am out fo the country. OK but that isn't what I meant. Later on I was wrong again I held and kept and do have for sure ONE EMAIL FROM HER WHERE SHE DOES TELL ME WHAT TO SAY TO THEM. BUT it is a game way. So I asked her to say something from it. SHE NEVER DID. I can go back and take a look at somethng that is rather deep and I don't understand it and also am afraid if I DO IT I may mess it up. BUT SHE DID GIVE ME TO DO SOMETHING AND IT IS A MESSAGE. I still sort of shutteer on it WHAT IF I DO MAKE ANOTHER MISTAKE? This is big now and take this thing serious and I DO TAKE IT VERY SERIOUS.

IF I were to know what I know now and redo the whole thing with Judyth Baker back to score card day ONE. I would know to take things much much slower and take the time with it more and not pass so many emails that blend in. Take it one step at a time. IF ONE COULD? That is.

I mean she writes almost not wanting to tell a lot of things and explain a lot of things and I had to write to her so many times what do you mean over and over. I didn't wish to appear to be dumb but that is how I felt. MAYBE MADE TO FEEL.

After all we had posts going up about me that I can't read. I have a learning disorder. NO I DON'T. They would have caught that in school I would think.

I admit I read fast and I sometimes type way to fast. SOMETIMES. Sometimes I miss something and say I will keep it and go back later on and forget to like the one message Judyth gave me to tell the Kennedy Family. I wish she would also cooperate REALLY. She doesn't. It is up to us to figure things out. WELL JUDYTH FORGIVE ME FOR BEING HUMAN BUT WE DO NEED HELP. As I told her in a message about the Kennedy Message to give. What Judyth doen't know YES I and this person I have named to you. Well, it was on how you would say it and what it is as depending on which Kennedy we were going to give this over too. WE were going to make it very special for not only THEM but also for YOU. I have a feeling the one that was going to help me she also wanted to make it very specail day for me as well.

OK now because of all the emails at that time the one issue prior and the one issue of trying to get things done as well as me putting something over to Vernon because of the Dallas convention and what really did happen there at that time. Judyth KNOWS and I have BEEN TRYING TO GET HER TO OPEN UP ABOUT IT IN TOTAL BUT SHE WON'T. THAT EMAIL I DO HAVE TO THIS DAY. I also knew it is a very serious ISSUE and not to be taken lightly at all. I gave the email over to Bob Vernon. He was asked not to post it up I thought he would ask questions over it. BOB didn't and he posted it up. Judyth hit the ceiling over it. I GOT IT AND TO THIS DAY I GET IT. I honestly think this is wrong that I would. SHe then went into how sensitive this is. This is why they tried to kill me NANCY. THIS and you gave it all out. That is the whole thing behind it and you told it. She wasn't happy with me and now I am not her friend. OK fine. I am human and I tried to get the rug out from some people who like to stand in mud and I will admit it. PAY OFF"S and all kinds of things. I tried to get Judyth on this forum and if not this one antoher one to give and finally open up and tell it because this is why many truth's about JFK won't come out into the open. STUCK LIKE GLUE and they got JUDYTH STUCK IN IT.

What Bob Vernon posted up isn't all of it but just some of it. HE doesn't have all of it. Many of the emails Judyth gave me I don't have but I still have a lot of them. All of the fights I do have all of them. Many and including the first emails between us. I would not part with them for anything.

I am going to say why Judyth CAN'T AND WON'T go there. I will probably catch hell for it but here goes. She was threatened and she was threatened that they would destroy all of Lee's information of papers that are not in NARA and kept silent. They have copies of them Judyth and I went down to NARA to find that out. THEY NEVER PUT ORGINALS SO THE FBI AGENT TOLD ME. Now, Judyth think hard. DID YOU WHEN YOU WENT SEE ALL ORGINALS THERE AND NOTHING BUT ORIGINALS THERE OR WHERE THEY COPIES?

According to Judyth one paper was torn in front of her by Mary. According to Judyth they gave her one and she kept the original one and gave back over to NARA a copy. There has to be record of that paper. Also this bothers me so much Judyth if you really do have an original because you went to NARA. YOU saw some of the time cards. The only thing that saves you is another one employee put a mark on one of them. SAVED by that. But I wish you never touched the time cards. EVER. THIS IS A ZIG ZAG pattern. ONE I DON"T LIKE.

(I KNOW NO ONE IS GOING TO KNOW JUST WHAT I MEAN HERE AND BY THAT REMARK). It means in the covers and doing and dealings with JFK they make things almost impossible to prove one way or another. YOU GET IT ONE WAY AND ARE CORRECT THEY HAVE IT ANOTHER WAY UNDONE TO WHAT YOU HAVE.

Frankly, that is why JFK isn't solved it is zig zagged all the way through. That is a full safe way of covering all traces of true evidence and counteracting the whole thing. NOT ANY HARD EVIDENCE to disprove what they set up as set ups.

Well Judyth claims she has an original from Mary that was given to her that is marked original copy and it was from NARA and she has it to this day. This undoes what the FBI agent told me. I don't wish to embarrass the FBI agent there because I asked him a question that he should full well have known. BOb Vernon holds that in his hands now. I emailed him on it tonight. I have the copy of that email BOB. Judyth is very happy I said that to the agent at NARA. THAT WAS A COVER BOB NO TWO WAYS ABOUT IT. THIS is ALSO SHOWING A CONSPIRACY AS WELL. Monaghan was a former FBI AGENT. HE knew and covered for Lee. But that is a problem he knew and covered for him and where he went they knew as well. This also shows up in Jim Garrison's reports. THe only thing it does prove it that THEY KNEW and it is a conspiracy. But the sad parts I have written to Judyth and asked her some questions and she did answer them.

Zig Zag patterns are not easy or nice. Just when you think you are onto something it is taken away from you as proof and or evidence. The time cards is good but it isn't in itself enough.

Judyth does have to say a lot. Tell a lot of what she expericned and knew. BUt, FEAR they put in her takes it all away not just for her life but also for the truth to come out.

As it holds now. Judyth is also involved in killing JFK because Lee did do it. THEY SAY HE DID SO THERE FORE. That is enough to sake anyone right there. SO, they discredit Judyth. That sounds good except now we have proof that Judyth did in fact cover to Lee. WELL LEE WAS OUT TO DO THINGS THAT LEAD TO KILLING JFK. They got two tapes and it was so staged. THEY KNEW ABOUT THE TO BE PLANNED FIGHT with the phamlets. STAGED? Lee should have been questioning then and there what is going on here? So should have Judyth? I know I would be.

WELL JUDYTH ONE THING I HAVE TO ADMIT your temper gets the best of you and all of us. THIS IS A TRUE FACT.

WE TRIED TO HELP YOU AND WE FAIL YOU ALL THE TIME.

I know I have and got rewarded one month and got yelled at the next.

Now for the BIGGEST PROBLEM THAT WE GOT

WHO HEADS JUD. COMM. of the US and that is Arlen Spector?

I got a bone to pick with him............

A BIG ONE. Some how I hope I can do it but need a lot of help.

Has anyone ever seen Spector's book that came out four years ago?

It would take 20 years at least to do it and that is what he put to it or more.

More for us to figure out how to undo it. HIS WORDS AND HIS THEORY.

I got a bone to pick with Spector..........

A BIG ONE. I am not sure how I can fair either. How this will work out and if it even gets to that point and or part.

Judyth Spector paid for a lot of crime and that is a fact and I am told NEVER TO SAY IT WELL I AM SAYING IT.

THESE GUYS PAY TO KEEP JFK SILENT AND THEY DO ATTACK AND MORE.........

Now, Judyth will you tell it or still be silent?

What side are you on?

Were you involved in the act of having JFK killed with Lee?

Are you trying to save your own skin because of the time we are in now of open forums and open questions?

The fact that we know JFK is a conspiracy and not just one lone nut Lee by himself with no one with him as Spector would have us to believe?

Judyth if I am not your friend then who is?

Maybe I am glad that I am not your fiend if you were truely involved in the act of knowing that Lee was going to kill JFK?

I don't mean to be mean to you but I have to be and must be.

IS YOUR STORY TRUE? IS IT A COVER UP IN A ZIG ZAG PATTERN TO KEEP IT COVERED ALL WHILE YOU ARE KNOWING YOUR CREDITABITY IS GOING DOWN THE TUBES AND SO IS LEE'S HIDDEN FACTS?

Yes, these are hard questions.

REALLY HARD ONE.

You fight for the right of the truth to come out, well so DO I FOR REAL.

At a high cost to my own pride and to my family which did in fact get hurt very bad over this not just my daughter now but also my son (on the son part you don't know about).

I have to through this somehow get this to justice all the way for what is really behind this. IF I DON'T THEN IT IS DROPPED EVEN THOUGH THERE IS NO LIMIT OF TIME TO THE CRIME THAT WAS DONE TO HER, BECAUSE OF WHO PAID FOR IT OF WHICH I AM TOLD NOT TO TELL IT.

WILL YOU TELL IT JUDYTH OF WHAT YOU KNOW AND OF THE FACTS THAT YOU HIDE? Or doens't this mean anything to you for fear factors over papers that they do have. DON'T THEY JUDYTH

Just post up the paper that is the original and show us??????

NOT IN YOUR BOOK ONE YEAR TO COME OUT THEN WE SEE

WHEN IT IS TOO LATE BUT NOW JUDYTH NOW IT DOES MATTER TO MY KIDS AND ME FOR WHAT I HAVE TRIED.

Judyth there is NO TIME EITHER TO THE MURDER OF JFK and how this STANDS AS WELL. If Lee does still get felt to be guilty and you knew then so are you.

Judyth do you have the emails still of my daughers attack?

RE READ THEM...........

What does this matter to me?

A LOT...

[Dawn Meredith]

I have talked many hours of emails back and forth with Judyth.

To the most part I have enjoyed writing to her and hearing from her and we chated about a lot of things.  Health, excercise, JFK, family, friends, and even Stephen King.  All were great conversations and many things she has taken the time to share with me and others was wonderful.

Something happened in our friendship and she blamed me.  I made a mistake she asked me one question over and over again and I kept saying no and then I sort of pulled back from her as well on it.  I had asked her NOT to tell anyone ever on this because it is touchy.  Well, one day in all of my NO's to her in this answer I oneday made a mistake and said YES HE DID.  The truthful answer was of course all of the NO's to it.  Then Judyth asked me again, after I made the mistake and I said NO and she said well you said yes he did.  I TOLD HER NO I SAID NO.  TO this one question which I am not going to go into because as I said it is a VERY Touchy issue.  I told Judyth why it is and to have some feelings with it.  She make a LARGE BULK MAIL SENDER OUT and said to everyone that the answer was YES HE DID AND he won't (so on and so on).  The email somehow excaped me. I don't know if I had deleted it or ignored it or just plain all out and out didn't get it.  I am not going to judge the issue here and now because I really don't know.  BUT I DID NOT SEE IT OR READ IT.  Until one day someone sent it back to me.  I was floored.

Judyth and I had an argument and she then showed me the email where I said YES by accident.  IT went back and forth and I was dizzy after it.  I said finally how many times had I said no to you on it and told you why it is so touchy how many?  GO Back and LOOK and see for youself what did I say to you.  The matter did get cleared up, but it took me asking her to bring back the words I said and tell it that I made a mistake and YOU TOOK IT THIS WAY.  She never said it the way it really was.  IT was TOTALLY MY OWN MISTAKE ALL MINE AND MY WAY OF WRITING TO HER.  I got more angry than you can imagine at her and she to this day don't know how angry I was at that moment.  No one truly does know. 

I told Judyth that she was her own worst enemy and I don't think she knows how true this is even.  OH I KNOW SHE GOT INTO TWO SEPARATE CAR ACCIDENTS.

They are after her.

Now the car accidents happened after one certain convention down in Dallas and it maybe the very one you speak of Stephen and I have a feeling it is.  A lot went on down there about that time.  NOT GOOD EITHER.  I got Judyth full maybe story and some that most on this forum don't know and this tells why she got into those accidents.  SO SOMETHING IS SURELY BEHIND THIS.  A LOT and it is why Judyth gets so upset.  I can't say that I do blame her either at all. I know I would.

Another time I made or made to think I made another mistake except the only mistake I made was to loose or disgard a email that became so highly important.

This Judyth has won over all of us.  Again, I am not going to go into what it is now.

WE LOOKED AND LOOKED and we found bits and pieces of other emails that DO tie in but not the total part.  TO MAKE SOME OF WHAT I STATED HIGHLY TRUE. 

She knows what I am saying on certain words and that she shouldn't if there wasn't anything to it.  NOT EVEN SAYING THE WHOLE THING.

So, I got close enough to her she says I don't know her. VERY TRUE I don't and she doesn't know me either.  Not totally no one on this forum does either.  They think they do but they don't.  So again I don't judge Judyth and wish I had it but I still do not judge her.

Finally the end came it was a bute too.  Before that end though I asked Judyth there is a way I can get some information directly over to the Kennedy Family and would you like to give something over to them.  She right away said tell them I am out fo the country.  OK but that isn't what I meant.  Later on I was wrong again I held and kept and do have for sure ONE EMAIL FROM HER WHERE SHE DOES TELL ME WHAT TO SAY TO THEM.  BUT it is a game way.  So I asked her to say something from it.  SHE NEVER DID.  I can go back and take a look at somethng that is rather deep and I don't understand it and also am afraid if I DO IT I may mess it up.  BUT SHE DID GIVE ME TO DO SOMETHING AND IT IS A MESSAGE.  I still sort of shutteer on it WHAT IF I DO MAKE ANOTHER MISTAKE?  This is big now and take this thing serious and I DO TAKE IT VERY SERIOUS.

IF I were to know what I know now and redo the whole thing with Judyth Baker back to score card day ONE.  I would know to take things much much slower and take the time with it more and not pass so many emails that blend in.  Take it one step at a time.  IF ONE COULD?  That is.

I mean she writes almost not wanting to tell a lot of things and explain a lot of things and I had to write to her so many times what do you mean over and over.  I didn't wish to appear to be dumb but that is how I felt.  MAYBE MADE TO FEEL.

After all we had posts going up about me that I can't read.  I have a learning disorder.  NO I DON'T.  They would have caught that in school I would think.

I admit I read fast and I sometimes type way to fast.  SOMETIMES.  Sometimes I miss something and say I will keep it and go back later on and forget to like the one message Judyth gave me to tell the Kennedy Family.  I wish she would also cooperate  REALLY.  She doesn't.  It is up to us to figure things out.  WELL JUDYTH FORGIVE ME FOR BEING HUMAN BUT WE DO NEED HELP.  As I told her in a message about the Kennedy Message to give.  What Judyth doen't know YES I and this person I have named to you.  Well, it was on how you would say it and what it is as depending on which Kennedy we were going to give this over too.  WE were going to make it very special for not only THEM but also for YOU.  I have a feeling the one that was going to help me she also wanted to make it very specail day for me as well. 

OK now because of all the emails at that time the one issue prior and the one issue of trying to get things done as well as me putting something over to Vernon because of the Dallas convention and what really did happen there at that time. Judyth KNOWS and I have BEEN TRYING TO GET HER TO OPEN UP ABOUT IT IN TOTAL BUT SHE WON'T.  THAT EMAIL I DO HAVE TO THIS DAY.  I also knew it is a very serious ISSUE and not to be taken lightly at all.  I gave the email over to Bob Vernon.  He was asked not to post it up  I thought he would ask questions over it. BOB didn't and he posted it up.  Judyth hit the ceiling over it.  I GOT IT AND TO THIS DAY I GET IT.  I honestly think this is wrong that I would.  SHe then went into how sensitive this is.  This is why they tried to kill me NANCY.  THIS and you gave it all out.  That is the whole thing behind it and you told it.  She wasn't happy with me and now I am not her friend.  OK fine.  I am human and I tried to get the rug out from some people who like to stand in mud and I will admit it. PAY OFF"S and all kinds of things.  I tried to get Judyth on this forum and if not this one antoher one to give and finally open up and tell it because this is why many truth's about JFK won't come out into the open.  STUCK LIKE GLUE and they got JUDYTH STUCK IN IT.

What Bob Vernon posted up isn't all of it but just some of it. HE doesn't have all of it.  Many of the emails Judyth gave me I don't have but I still have a lot of them.  All of the fights I do have all of them.  Many and including the first emails between us.  I would not part with them for anything. 

I am going to say why Judyth CAN'T AND WON'T go there.  I will probably catch hell for it but here goes.  She was threatened and she was threatened that they would destroy all of Lee's information of papers that are not in NARA and kept silent.  They have copies of them Judyth and I went down to NARA to find that out.  THEY NEVER PUT ORGINALS SO THE FBI AGENT TOLD ME.  Now, Judyth think hard.    DID YOU WHEN YOU WENT SEE ALL ORGINALS THERE AND NOTHING BUT ORIGINALS THERE OR WHERE THEY COPIES?

According to Judyth one paper was torn in front of her by Mary.  According to Judyth they gave her one and she kept the original one and gave back over to NARA a copy.  There has to be record of that paper.  Also this bothers me so much Judyth if you really do have an original because you went to NARA.  YOU saw some of the time cards.  The only thing that saves you is another one employee put a mark on one of them.  SAVED by that.  But I wish you never touched the time cards. EVER.  THIS IS A ZIG ZAG pattern.  ONE I DON"T LIKE.

(I KNOW NO ONE IS GOING TO KNOW JUST WHAT I MEAN HERE AND BY THAT REMARK).  It means in the covers and doing and dealings with JFK they make things almost impossible to prove one way or another.  YOU GET IT ONE WAY AND ARE CORRECT THEY HAVE IT ANOTHER WAY UNDONE TO WHAT YOU HAVE.

Frankly, that is why JFK isn't solved it is zig zagged all the way through.  That is a full safe way of covering all traces of true evidence and counteracting the whole thing.  NOT ANY HARD EVIDENCE to disprove what they set up as set ups. 

Well Judyth claims she has an original from Mary that was given to her that is marked original copy and it was from NARA and she has it to this day.  This undoes what the FBI agent told me.  I don't wish to embarrass the FBI agent there because I asked him a question that he should full well have known.  BOb Vernon holds that in his hands now.  I emailed him on it tonight.  I have the copy of that email BOB.  Judyth is very happy I said that to the agent at NARA.  THAT WAS A COVER BOB NO TWO WAYS ABOUT IT.  THIS is ALSO SHOWING A CONSPIRACY AS WELL.  Monaghan was a former FBI AGENT.  HE knew and covered for Lee.  But that is a problem he knew and covered for him and where he went they knew as well. This also shows up in Jim Garrison's reports.  THe only thing it does prove it that THEY KNEW and it is a conspiracy.  But the sad parts I have written to Judyth and asked her some questions and she did answer them. 

Zig Zag patterns are not easy or nice.  Just when you think you are onto something it is taken away from you as proof and or evidence. The time cards is good but it isn't in itself enough.

Judyth does have to say a lot.  Tell a lot of what she expericned and knew.  BUt, FEAR they put in her takes it all away not just for her life but also for the truth to come out.

As it holds now.  Judyth is also involved in killing JFK because Lee did do it.  THEY SAY HE DID SO THERE FORE.  That is enough to sake anyone right there.  SO, they discredit Judyth.  That sounds good except now we have proof that Judyth did in fact cover to Lee.  WELL LEE WAS OUT TO DO THINGS THAT LEAD TO KILLING JFK.  They got two tapes and it was so staged.  THEY KNEW ABOUT THE TO BE PLANNED FIGHT with the phamlets.  STAGED?  Lee should have been questioning then and there what is going on here?  So should have Judyth?  I know I would be.

WELL JUDYTH ONE THING I HAVE TO ADMIT your temper gets the best of you and all of us. THIS IS A TRUE FACT.

WE TRIED TO HELP YOU AND WE FAIL YOU ALL THE TIME.

I know I have and got rewarded one month and got yelled at the next.

Now for the BIGGEST PROBLEM THAT WE GOT

WHO HEADS JUD. COMM. of the US and that is Arlen Spector?

I got a bone to pick with him............

A BIG ONE.  Some how I hope I can do it but need a lot of help.

Has anyone ever seen Spector's book that came out four years ago?

It would take 20 years at least to do it and that is what he put to it or more.

More for us to figure out how to undo it.  HIS WORDS AND HIS THEORY.

I got a bone to pick with Spector..........

A BIG ONE.  I am not sure how I can fair either. How this will work out and if it even gets to that point and or part. 

Judyth Spector paid for a lot of crime and that is a fact and I am told NEVER TO SAY IT    WELL I AM SAYING IT.

THESE GUYS PAY TO KEEP JFK SILENT AND THEY DO ATTACK AND MORE.........

Now, Judyth will you tell it or still be silent? 

What side are you on?

Were you involved in the act of having JFK killed with Lee?

Are you trying to save your own skin because of the time we are in now of open forums and open questions?

The fact that we know JFK is a conspiracy and not just one lone nut Lee by himself with no one with him as Spector would have us to believe?

Judyth if I am not your friend then who is?

Maybe I am glad that I am not your fiend if you were truely involved in the act of knowing that Lee was going to kill JFK?

I don't mean to be mean to you but I have to be and must be.

IS YOUR STORY TRUE?  IS IT A COVER UP IN A ZIG ZAG PATTERN TO KEEP IT COVERED ALL WHILE YOU ARE KNOWING YOUR CREDITABITY IS GOING DOWN THE TUBES AND SO IS LEE'S HIDDEN FACTS?

Yes, these are hard questions.

REALLY HARD ONE.

You fight for the right of the truth to come out, well so DO I FOR REAL.

At a high cost to my own pride and to my family which did in fact get hurt very bad over this not just my daughter now but also my son (on the son part you don't know about). 

I have to through this somehow get this to justice all the way for what is really behind this.  IF I DON'T THEN IT IS DROPPED EVEN THOUGH THERE IS NO LIMIT OF TIME TO THE CRIME THAT WAS DONE TO HER, BECAUSE OF WHO PAID FOR IT OF WHICH I AM TOLD NOT TO TELL IT. 

WILL YOU TELL IT JUDYTH OF WHAT YOU KNOW AND OF THE FACTS THAT YOU HIDE?  Or doens't this mean anything to you for fear factors over papers that they do have.  DON'T THEY JUDYTH

Just post up the paper that is the original and show us??????

NOT IN YOUR BOOK ONE YEAR TO COME OUT THEN WE SEE

WHEN IT IS TOO LATE BUT NOW JUDYTH NOW IT DOES MATTER TO MY KIDS AND ME FOR WHAT I HAVE TRIED.

Judyth there is NO TIME EITHER TO THE MURDER OF JFK and how this STANDS AS WELL.  If Lee does still get felt to be guilty and you knew then so are you. 

Judyth do you have the emails still of my daughers attack?

RE READ THEM...........

What does this matter to me?

A LOT...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

________________________________

Nancy,

Now I am totally confused. Are you saying here that Judyth is now saying Lee was NOT a patsy and in fact in on the conspiracy to kill JFK?

Say less and be clear, otherwise people will just skip your posts.

I would also like to see a post from Judyth on this one point..

thanx, in advance, to both ladies,

Dawn

[Judyth Baker]

DearDawn:

I do believe what Nancy means is I will be blamed as a part of the conspiracy to kill JFK because they are3 trying to prove Lee did it, and since there is plenty of proof I was in contact with Lee, I am also guilty.

She is trying to show concern, I believe.

As for handling the time cards, I handled them at Reily's, not later. I only wanted the time cards because I knew I had written on them and this would prove I handled Lee's time cards. My initial "J" is on five of the cards, and my initial has been erased from at least one card.

Matt Allison knew I wanted to get copies of the cards in 2001, and he knew when I was coming to the Archives. He checked out all the Reily stuff so I could not look at it, and he has been caught red0-handed by close questioning that this is true right on internet forum.

I cannot tell nancy things because she turns right around and tells Mr. Vernon.

So far, Mr. Vernon has gone around with HIS twisted version of my testimony, and most recently has gone to Mr. reily himself, reporting that after telling "Judyth's crazy story"it made Mr. Reily laugh. Mr. Reily will not be laughing after he gets off the phone. Reily is a wily, clever, tough fellow, a charming man, but pres. of Tulane for a long time, tried to take over Ochsner's Foundation with two others in the 1970's, and he actually told Vernon that Monaghan came from Oak Ridge, revealing something I could not prove before.

Nancy wants me to do things her way NOW, even though I have told her the book is coming out this year.

Nancy gives everything to Vernon, as you can see above. Vernon published yesterday my critique of Mr. Blackburst, with the header : JUDYTH VARY BAKER THE QUEEN OF TWIST.

So why should I respond to Nancy, when she is so easily influenced by Mr. Vernon?

Nancy sent me an email calling me a xxxx because she claimed I had not really moved from Holland because my email address is till from Holland. Uwe Ebolde (sp?) (he goes by the name of David Weaver here, although that is a fake name) she said told her that. Well, calling me a iar when in fact I am indeed living elsewhere, and all my closest friends know this, is just one example of the problem I have with Nancy.

I did try to be her friend and would not be in this kind of toruble if I had not written to her and offered her friendshiup when people were picking on her over at Lancer, where she was ejected. I believe Nancy is intleligent but cannot express herself, possibly because of some dyslexia.

But when she started calling me a xxxx and also tried to force me to do what she wanted, she went too far. I repeat, my book is coming out, and seocndly,l she gives all her information to Mr. vernon.

And she gets the information wrong, too. She told mr. Vernon thgat I sent her an email saying I had been in a mental institution and had undergone torture with electrochocking, while they yelled at me. I could send you those emails where she says maybe she dreamed it, and then when she said I lied and really did say those things.

Of course I never had any such thing happen to me. I told her I worked for a psychiatrist, Dr. James Stuart, who used electroshock on people and that I had witnessed some bad sessions. She seems to have believed from this that I underwent it myself! geesh! I corrected her, but by then she had added quotes, such as that they were yleling at me to forget Lee's name while shocking me... and of course Mr. Vernon put this all over the internet.

Nancy does not mean to harm, but she has done a lot of harm.

I wish her well.

I feel similarly about Mr.; Blackburst,/Mr. Roy who is angry that his real name is now out in the open. But just as David Weaver is really Uwe Ebolde, and there are others playing these games, people's lives are at stake, their reputations, their futures. My life has been absolutely squished since speaking out.

I had a good reputation. My name is on a monument in Stafford, Texas, for civic service. I founded a Humane Society. I was a chold abuse investigator. I earned the Elect Lady award for service to my fellowman in the Mormon Church. I raised five lovely children, all good citizens. Three of the four I raised as a single parent.

I do not drink or smoke. Money is not important to me and I worked counmseling the homeless and the poor for five years. I volunteered working with the blind for nine years. I helped train guide dogs for the blind and began trying to create a smaller dog breed that could be used as guide dogs for children and the elderly that could live in smaller quarters, such as an apartment.

I taught school for seventeen years.

I really did think, since I did not even have a parking ticket and had many friends, and had been a newspaper reporter for seven years, that I was safe, that my job was safe, that my reputation was strong enough to take a few attacks.

I did not realize that porn pictures would be put out there--Vernon called attention to one--- that I would be called a con artist for trying to create a new dog breed, that an Fbi employee would complain and I would lose my job teaching and then find nobody would hire me again....

I did not know I would have to defend myself againsyt some of the silliest things on the internet.

I am weary and worn and have lost my home, my job, my car, most of my belongings, and because of harrassment, I live in different foreign countries for over two years now.

I miss America. My children. My grandchildren. But I received a serious death threat and at age 62 I live in a very private place.

Wherever I go, I do make friends, but without my internet frtiends I would feel extremely isolated.

I spoke out to defend an innocent man. I am speaking the truth. I am committed to the bitter end and realize that I will not probably see any reward fopr this in my lifetime.

But I am doing what is right and only ask that people think this out. Why in God's name would I do this, when I had everything I could ever want, and now have lost so much?

I sell my paintings for $2000 each. I was happy. But know what? I would have that occasional nightmare, seeing Lee shot before my eyes. I would realize that I had let him down.

In the end, I believe my rationnal voice and my steady and sure presentation of the facts will, in the end, prevail. Those who have obstrcuted this case for forty years do not want a new witness emerging.

I am grateful for the emails I get that help keep me going.

One other thing -- no more nightmares. A clear conscience. That is worth a great deal to me. sorry about typos...eye problems

Judyth Vary Baker

Seeking the Exoneration of Lee Harvey Oswald

[Ryan Crowe]

Welcome aboard Stephen,

Hope you stick around and join in on the discussion's here.

[Stephen Roy]

Thanks, Ryan. I have a BUNCH of new Ferrie stuff! A lot of it is biographical, but there are some VERY interesting new things! Here's a sneak preview:

In 1964 or 1965, Ferrie arrived late one rainy Sunday night at the office of friend in Jefferson Parish who was well-known for his opposition to Carlos Marcello. Ferrie handed him a package for safekeeping: It was described as an overstuffed manila envelope, apparently containing some sort of tape reels as well as papers. Ferrie indicated that the package was to be turned over to the right people if anything ever happened to him. (The friend presumed it had something to do with Marcello, but cannot be sure, even today.) He placed it in a file cabinet.

Some time later, Ferrie returned and asked if the package was still there and unopened. The friend said it was, and retrieved it. Ferrie said thanks and took the package away with him.

A couple of years later when Ferrie was found dead, the friend recalled the package and wished he had peeked inside.

VERY provocative. 1964 or 1965? Something to do with Ferrie's work on the Marcello case? Something to do with the assassination? Who knows?

[Ryan Crowe]

Stephen,

Very interesting, its obvious it was very important, makes you wonder what happend to it, another thing is I wonder why he didnt return it once the Garrison investigation started? When found dead was there anything in reports etc. that state if his home looked as if it was "searched" by anyone?

With the Garrison investigation going on, him being a suspect in it, this envelope might be the reason he died all of a sudden....Interesting indeed, thanks for posting that.

[Stephen Roy]

Stephen,

Very interesting, its obvious it was very important, makes you wonder what  happend to it, another thing is I wonder why he didnt return it once the Garrison investigation started? When found dead was there anything in reports etc. that state if his home looked as if it was "searched" by anyone?

With the Garrison investigation going on, him being a suspect in it, this envelope might be the reason he died all of a sudden....Interesting indeed, thanks for posting that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I suppose there are a number of things Ferrie might have done with the package between the time he retrieved it and the time Garrison subpoenaed him in December 1966.

As best I can tell, Ferrie's place was a pit on the day he was found dead, but there is no indication of anything like a search. The back boor was busted open, but that was by Jimmy Johnson, who found the body. The only inventory I've found of the apartment does not list anything like that package.

[Dawn Meredith]

Stephen,

Very interesting, its obvious it was very important, makes you wonder what  happend to it, another thing is I wonder why he didnt return it once the Garrison investigation started? When found dead was there anything in reports etc. that state if his home looked as if it was "searched" by anyone?

With the Garrison investigation going on, him being a suspect in it, this envelope might be the reason he died all of a sudden....Interesting indeed, thanks for posting that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I suppose there are a number of things Ferrie might have done with the package between the time he retrieved it and the time Garrison subpoenaed him in December 1966.

As best I can tell, Ferrie's place was a pit on the day he was found dead, but there is no indication of anything like a search. The back boor was busted open, but that was by Jimmy Johnson, who found the body. The only inventory I've found of the apartment does not list anything like that package.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

____________________________________________

Thank you Judyth for that post. It clears up a lot of things. I hope Nancy takes it in the spirit in which you clearly wrote it.

At this point I just do not know what to make of Nancy. One private reason that I shall not post. It concerns, of course Bob Vernon. I tried to help Nancy, she knows that I did, we had hours of email and phone conversations. She is far more intelligent than her posts show. In fact that is why I asked to call her rather than email when assisting her, I could not understand her posts. I agree it may be an eye problem, I thought at first English was not her native language, but upopn speaking with her discovered that not to be the case.

I have not ceased trying to accomplish what Nancy and I discussed. It's still in the works, things take time.

Great info on Ferrie Roy, sorry you had to come into the picture this way, but every piece of this puzzle is important in the big picture.

"There are many people ...that have the answers to questions and don't even know the questions exist"

A researcher famous for his lack of seeking fame. A friend.

Dawn

[Dave Weaver]

DearDawn:

I do believe what Nancy means is I will be blamed as a part of the conspiracy to kill JFK because they are3 trying to prove Lee did it, and since there is plenty of proof I was in contact with Lee, I am also guilty.

She is trying to show concern, I believe.

As for handling the time cards, I handled them at Reily's, not later. I only wanted the time cards because I knew I had written on them and this would prove I handled Lee's time cards. My initial "J" is on five of the cards, and my initial has been erased from at least one card.

Matt Allison knew I wanted to get copies of the cards in 2001, and he knew when I was coming to the Archives. He checked out all the Reily stuff so I could not look at it, and he has been caught red0-handed by close questioning that this is true right on internet forum.

I cannot tell nancy things because she turns right around and tells Mr. Vernon.

So far, Mr. Vernon has gone around with HIS twisted version of my testimony, and most recently has gone to Mr. reily himself, reporting that after telling "Judyth's crazy story"it made Mr. Reily laugh. Mr. Reily will not be laughing after he gets off the phone. Reily is a wily, clever, tough fellow, a charming man, but pres. of Tulane for a long time, tried to take over Ochsner's Foundation with two others in the 1970's,  and he actually told Vernon that Monaghan came from Oak Ridge, revealing something I could not prove before.

Nancy wants me to do things her way NOW, even though I have told her the book is coming out this year.

Nancy gives everything to Vernon, as you can see above.  Vernon published yesterday my critique of Mr. Blackburst, with the header : JUDYTH VARY BAKER THE QUEEN OF TWIST.

So why should I respond to Nancy, when she is so easily influenced by Mr. Vernon?

Nancy sent me an email calling me a xxxx because she claimed I had not really moved from Holland because my email address is till from Holland. Uwe Ebolde (sp?) (he goes by the name of David Weaver here, although that is a fake name)  she said told her that. Well, calling me a iar when in fact I am indeed living elsewhere, and all my closest friends know this, is just one example of the problem I have with Nancy.

I did try to be her friend and would not be in this kind of toruble if I had not written to her and offered her friendshiup when people were picking on her over at Lancer, where she was ejected. I believe Nancy is intleligent but cannot express herself, possibly because of some dyslexia.

But when she started calling me a xxxx and also tried to force me to do what she wanted, she went too far. I repeat, my book is coming out, and seocndly,l she gives all her information to Mr. vernon.

And she gets the information wrong, too.  She told mr. Vernon thgat I sent her an email saying I had been in a mental institution and had undergone torture with electrochocking, while they yelled at me. I could send you those emails where she says maybe she dreamed it, and then when she said I lied and really did say those things.

Of course I never had any such thing happen to me. I told her I worked for a psychiatrist, Dr. James Stuart, who used electroshock on people and that I had witnessed some bad sessions.  She seems to have believed from this that I underwent it myself! geesh!  I corrected her, but by then she had added quotes, such as that they were yleling at me to forget Lee's name while shocking me... and of course Mr. Vernon put this all over the internet.

Nancy does not mean to harm, but she has done a lot of harm.

I wish her well.

I feel similarly about Mr.; Blackburst,/Mr. Roy who is angry that his real name is now out in the open.  But just as David Weaver is really Uwe Ebolde, and there are others playing these games, people's lives are at stake, their reputations, their futures. My life has been absolutely squished since speaking out.

I had a good reputation. My name is on a monument in Stafford, Texas, for civic service. I founded a Humane Society. I was a chold abuse investigator. I earned the Elect Lady award for service to my fellowman in the Mormon Church. I raised five lovely children, all good citizens. Three of the four I raised as a single parent.

I do not drink or smoke. Money is not important to me and I worked counmseling the homeless and the poor for five years. I volunteered working with the blind for nine years. I helped train guide dogs for the blind and began trying to create a smaller dog breed that could be used as guide dogs for children and the elderly that could live in smaller quarters, such as an apartment.

I taught school for seventeen years.

I really did think, since I did not even have a parking ticket and had many friends, and had been a newspaper reporter for seven years, that I was safe, that my job was safe, that my reputation was strong enough to take a few attacks.

I did not realize that porn pictures would be put out there--Vernon called attention to one--- that I would be called a con artist for trying to create a new dog breed, that an Fbi employee would complain and I would lose my job teaching and then find nobody would hire me again....

I did not know I would have to defend myself againsyt some of the silliest things on the internet.

I am weary and worn and have lost my home, my job, my car, most of my belongings, and because of harrassment, I live in different foreign countries for over two years now.

I miss America. My children. My grandchildren. But I received a serious death threat and at age 62 I live in a very private place.

Wherever I go, I do make friends, but without my internet frtiends I would feel extremely isolated.

I spoke out to defend an innocent man.  I am speaking the truth. I am committed to the bitter end and realize that I will not probably see any reward fopr this in my lifetime.

But I am doing what is right and only ask that people think this out. Why in God's name would I do this, when I had everything I could ever want, and now have lost so much?

I sell my paintings for $2000 each. I was happy. But know what? I would have that occasional nightmare, seeing Lee shot before my eyes.  I would realize that I had let him down.

In the end, I believe my rationnal voice and my steady and sure presentation of the facts will, in the end, prevail.  Those who have obstrcuted this case for forty years do not want a new witness emerging.

I am grateful for the emails I get that help keep me going.

One other thing -- no more nightmares. A clear conscience. That is worth a great deal to me. sorry about typos...eye problems

Judyth Vary Baker

Seeking the Exoneration of Lee Harvey Oswald

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Judyth,

why do you insist on letting people think I have hidden my real name

from you ?

You know that this is not true.

You never did tell me that me using the name David or Dave Weaver

on the internet is a problem for you, or I could not be

trusted because of that.

You even addressed me with my real firstname in most of the mails

we exchanged starting around June 2004.

You know my full name from me since that time and maybe even

longer via Nancy.

In every mail you got from me did it not say the following:

-----Original Message-----

From: Uwe Leybold [mailto:uleybold@t-online.de]

Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 12:45 AM

To: Judyth Vary Baker

Subject: Re: thanks for this Nancy

------------------------------------

Take also a look here, same date, send to Wim.

----- Original Message -----

From: Uwe Leybold

To: wim dankbaar

Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 12:52 AM

Subject: Fw: thanks for this Nancy

----------------

Or here:

-----Original Message-----

From: Uwe Leybold [mailto:uleybold@t-online.de]

Sent: Sunday, July 25, 2004 4:27 PM

To: Judyth Vary Baker

Subject: Re: I continued to audit Russian in college and have a dual

language text to prove it.

----------------

-----Original Message-----

From: Uwe Leybold [mailto:uleybold@t-online.de]

Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 12:36 AM

To: Judyth Vary Baker

Subject: Re: Judyth Baker--Cancer Researcher not showing up on JFK

Lancer

---------------

This one I love realy, attention Virus attack !!!

-----Original Message-----

From: Uwe Leybold [mailto:uleybold@t-online.de]

Sent: Thursday, July 29, 2004 12:31 AM

To: Judyth Vary Baker

Subject: Re: I did send you no Virus knowingly, attachment is only a

screenshot

---------------------

Yes Judyth, everything faked, sure must be, because otherwise

you would have told a lie to member's on this forum.

Now please ask Wim, to look for all the mails with the faked

address and name from me, which he got, even before

I ever had contact with you.

You may also look through all the faked mails I did send you,

take my name from it, go into google, find me, and then call me.

You can also ask Martin, Pamela and Anita, I never did hide my

real name to them.

Or just ask Wim, he has my phone number, and he also has my

address here in germany, because he did send me 2 DVD's last year via postal

service.

So I repeat, you know my full and real name at least since July 2004,

you also called me by my first name in many of the mails you did

send to me.

There are things that have changed over the years Judyth,

mainly the number of the year.

Every year since 1999 you have announced that the book will

come out, if not the same year, then at least soon.

What has not changed, obviouly is your way of behaviour towards

those who won't take your word alone as proof.

And what has not changed is this:

The public has never seen one ounce of proof about your 2 centerclaims.

1)Affair with Lee

2)Participation in the "Get-Castro" project.

You do describe yourself as a living witness to those points,

but a witness should not only demand to be believed,

he should also deliver the proof for his claims.

Judyth I know real research takes time, but I thought you are a witness,

and you said you had the proof for it already when you came out in 1999.

So where's the problem ?

And to clarify the e-mail issue at the time of your move from Holland,

you told Nancy, that your mail address would not be valid anymore

and you would no longer be able to receive any mail send to that

mail address.

I told Nancy, I see no reason, why a move to another country should require a change of the mail address, at least technicaly, it is no problem accessing a mail account regardless of the country you relocate to.

So I said to Nancy,that I think you are not telling the truth to her,

and maybe you just wanted to receive no more mails from Nancy.

And of cours it turned out, that your mail account was still valid after

you did relocate, and most probably still is.

So Nancy was realy hurt that you did not tell the truth to her.

I'm talking about this mail address: elect63@xs4all.nl

Edited January 13, 2005 by Dave Weaver