Bronx Zoo photo questions

[Greg Parker]

The photo in question is purported to be of "Harvey".

Robert Oswald readily admitted to taking this photo.

Was Robert "in" on the scam?

If it was something more than just a happy family snap, what was the purpose of it?

Why did (presumably the fake) Marguerite provide it to the WC, when it might give the game away?

edit: okay - the title should read "questions"!

Edited August 2, 2015 by Greg Parker

[David Josephs]

Greg... Are you asking a question or teeing up a golf ball?

The first rule a lawyer learns is to never ask a question they didn't already know the answer to in order to setup their case.

Am I wrong in thinking you have your answer to that question and are waiting to pounce... Or is this genuine interest in an answer and discussion?

For some reason Robert and John conflict about a 1952 visit. And John does not recognize that boy as his brother. Whereas Robert claims he took this in Aug 53.

It's Sunday and I'm turning all the gadgets off... But if you want to offer one or the other side of the answers to the question, it is a facinating subject, and it'll be Monday...

Taking a breathe and going to smell some roses... Enjoy your day....

[Greg Parker]

Since I don't believe Harvey existed, how could I possibly know the answer to these questions?

If it was something more than just a happy family snap, what was the purpose of it?

Why did (presumably the fake) Marguerite provide it to the WC, when it might give the game away?

I am asking because I want to know what you guys believe in regard to these questions. I don't intend to argue about your answers.

[Steven Gaal]

Since I don't believe Harvey existed, how could I possibly know the answer to these questions?

If it was something more than just a happy family snap, what was the purpose of it?

Why did (presumably the fake) Marguerite provide it to the WC, when it might give the game away?

I am asking because I want to know what you guys believe in regard to these questions. I don't intend to argue about your answers.

"He went to the Zoo as any normal child would. That's the story I want to tell." // speaking for Marguerite. , gaal

[Greg Parker]

Since I don't believe Harvey existed, how could I possibly know the answer to these questions?

If it was something more than just a happy family snap, what was the purpose of it?

Why did (presumably the fake) Marguerite provide it to the WC, when it might give the game away?

I am asking because I want to know what you guys believe in regard to these questions. I don't intend to argue about your answers.

"He went to the Zoo as any normal child would. That's the story I want to tell." // speaking for Marguerite. , gaal

So you're saying it was just a normal family snap of "Harvey" not taken for any hidden purpose?

Can you answer the other question as to why the fake Marguerite would hand over a picture of the fake Lee that his own brother doesn't recognize, and thereby put the whole scheme in jeopardy of being exposed?

[David Josephs]

Greg,

(edit - WHY questions do not help any of us Greg... how would we know why anyone does anything related to these events other than to guess? "Why" does MO get so many questions about her and her family's history wrong in your WC testimony? "Why" did the SS hand over a Money Order to the FBI as payment for the rifle when they should have known it was never put thru the banking system? "Why" is there nothing but clues to the conspiracy and NONE related to who or what really went down?)

If we look for photos of Oswald between 1952 and 1955 we come to find, there aren't any.

We have his 6th grade photo, which was most likely taken in the fall of 1951..

And we have the 1955 photo Voebel took

and there is a photo from 1954 Mardi Gras which Myra says is Harvey...

Maybe it just seemed strange that during these transition years we are offered NO PHOTOS of either boy... so the Zoo image becomes the summer of 1953 (??)

We are reminded that none of the school records from NYC other than the Carro reports and some ancillary contact reports are offered by the FBI. No grades, yearbooks, or anything to substantiate the incorrect Spring 1953 semester's attendance #'s.

and since we are on these important years... can you simply address what the FBI claims was his total attendance and absences from 3/23/53 thru 1/8/54?

the FBI tells us a total of 200 days were spent in school or absent during this time... and for some reason you cannot seem to understand how the FBI arrived at that figure... out of a total of 210 weekdays during this time period, the FBI has him in or out of school 200 days.

Yet removing Summer and Youth House and we are left with much fewer than 200 days..

How dat?

Seems they were off by quite a bit. You still having a tough time figuring out how 200 days fits into 210 days with 55 weekdays of summer and 17 weekdays at Youth House?

These are connected Greg... the records are wrong and the boys are in the process of being switched... there is not an administrator in the world who would put 105 days attended from March 23 thru June 29... that's an FBI mistake.

Edited August 3, 2015 by David Josephs

[Greg Parker]

Thank you.

Can you tell me why the fake Marguerite produced the photo of the fake Lee thus jeopardizing the whole thing?

Can I ask also what proof is there that the Voebel took that photo and what proof is there of the time frame? I ask because I can't find anything that doesn't trace nack to just Armstrong's word for it. Voebel never said he took it.

And one more... did Myra produce the Mardi Gras photo from her own collection?

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

Regarding the FBI report -- I will only repeat - it is an FBI report - not an official school record. The school records add up perfectly.

[Jon G. Tidd]

Greg Parker,

Have you ever thought Robert Oswald's post-assassination behavior was odd?

The fact he produced the Imperial Reflex in early 1964 is odd to me. If it was owned by Lee, and Robert had it, why wouldn't he have served it up sooner?

Another question: Why, do you think, did Robert not stand up more strongly for his blood brother Lee? Did they dislike one another? I have a brother with whom I'm quite close, despite 10 year's age difference. I've supported him at every opportunity.

[Greg Parker]

Thank you.

Can you tell me why the fake Marguerite produced the photo of the fake Lee thus jeopardizing the whole thing?

Can I ask also what proof is there that the Voebel took that photo and what proof is there of the time frame? I ask because I can't find anything that doesn't trace nack to just Armstrong's word for it. Voebel never said he took it.

And one more... did Myra produce the Mardi Gras photo from her own collection?

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

Regarding the FBI report -- I will only repeat - it is an FBI report - not an official school record. The school records add up perfectly.

C'm David. Surely these are not hard questions. And you have produced a photo that is completely new to me, and I'm sure many here. Can you please give some background to where it came from e,g. Did Myra give it to Armstrong?

[Greg Parker]

Greg Parker,

Have you ever thought Robert Oswald's post-assassination behavior was odd?

The fact he produced the Imperial Reflex in early 1964 is odd to me. If it was owned by Lee, and Robert had it, why wouldn't he have served it up sooner?

Another question: Why, do you think, did Robert not stand up more strongly for his blood brother Lee? Did they dislike one another? I have a brother with whom I'm quite close, despite 10 year's age difference. I've supported him at every opportunity.

Jon, I don't think you can draw any conclusions on the Oswald's from your own experience.

For every happy sibling relationship where blood is thicker than water, I could match with examples where siblings have turned on each other when in trouble.

And my own background btw, is much closer to Oswald's than anyone here. I have an older half brother. I was in the Navy Cadets. I was farmed out to relatives as a kid. I was dragged around the country as a kid and attended 11 different schools before dropping out as soon as I could. I worked in sales. Did manual labor.

Robert's behavior has to be looked at on it's own merits and in the context of the situation. You wanting to suggest that he turned on his brother because it wasn't his real brother doesn't cut it.

[David Josephs]

Thank you.

Can you tell me why the fake Marguerite produced the photo of the fake Lee thus jeopardizing the whole thing?

Can I ask also what proof is there that the Voebel took that photo and what proof is there of the time frame? I ask because I can't find anything that doesn't trace nack to just Armstrong's word for it. Voebel never said he took it.

And one more... did Myra produce the Mardi Gras photo from her own collection?

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

Regarding the FBI report -- I will only repeat - it is an FBI report - not an official school record. The school records add up perfectly.

(regarding the FBI reports and NYC attendance)

The school records reflect that FBI report Greg. There are not 127 potential days from March 23 to the end of that semester... THAT is the problem Greg... not the FBI report. The FBI simply added to get to 200 and changed the info on the NYC records. Copies of copies of copies Greg... and none match the original PERM Record from the first semester at ps117... but you keep dancing to your own tune on that one

No Greg, I cannot tell you WHY Marguerite did anything. Can you?

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10407#relPageId=427&tab=page is proof that VOEBEL gave the snapshot to John Corporan of WDSU-TV who in turn made a print.

With regards to the time frame - (too bad you don't feel it necessary to read the book Greg, your lack of familiarity with it is painfully obvious while your ongoing need to attack what you've never read is even more painful... but no worries - if you;re not going to trap me into an argument here I have no problem filling in the blanks for you and others)

From H&L:

In early 1996, I wrote to Hallmark, included an enlargement of the photograph

from Life Magazine, and asked if they could date the advertisement. I soon received a

letter from Hallmark Archivist Sharman Robertson who informed me that she had located

a copy of the ad, which appeared in the November 17, 1954, edition of Scholastic

Magazine. The advertisement was for a TV adaptation of Macbeth, which was shown

on the television program "Hallmark Hall of Fame," and aired on NBC on November

28, 1954. 54-15 The advertisement for "Macbeth," posted above the classroom blackboard,

was probably part of an English class assignment.

The date on the Hallmark advertisement meant that Lee Oswald, who was

showing off in front of his friend's camera, knew Voebel before the November 17, 1954,

edition of Scholastic Magazine was posted on the blackboard. Therefore the beginning

of their friendship, and Lee Oswald's fight with Johnny Neumeyer during which one of

his front teeth was apparently knocked out, occurred shortly before the advertisement

for Macbeth was posted in Helen Dufour's English class.

(EDIT - I did not respond to the Myra Mardi Gras question... it says that John showed the photo to Myra, so I am asking John where he acquired it and will get back to you)

And since this is all about H&L... here is the statement from Asst Pricipal Head about the records... Seems to say to me that Re-Ad = Attended

Which would explain why 168 is there... The "89" in the Fall semester Re-Ad column should also be considered his attendance if the record is consistent..

and since you do add 179 and 5 to get your 184 school days... your own calc corroborate this...

Is there anything else Greg?

Edited August 3, 2015 by David Josephs

[Greg Parker]

(regarding the FBI reports and NYC attendance)

The school records reflect that FBI report Greg. There are not 127 potential days from March 23 to the end of that semester... THAT is the problem Greg... not the FBI report. The FBI simply added to get to 200 and changed the info on the NYC records. Copies of copies of copies Greg... and none match the original PERM Record from the first semester at ps117... but you keep dancing to your own tune on that one

This is just unintelligible gobbledygook. I'm sorry - but it is. The school records - as I have demonstrated, are perfectly fine.

No Greg, I cannot tell you WHY Marguerite did anything. Can you?

This is the fake Marguerite we are talking about here. The one who had secrets to keep regarding secret CIA programs that she put at risk according to Gaal to "tell a story" to make Oswald appear to be a normal kid.

Thank you for the Voebel information. I accept now that he took the photo. I don't accept there is any evidence that the photo was taken just after the fight. Who knows how long that Hallmark poster was on the wall? Who knows the exact date of the fight? This photo as with other photos, looks like a part of it has been attacked by a marker pen. Those photos have two things in common. Life Magazine and Jack White via the HSCA.

As for Mr. Head -- I have already addressed what he said, which was "the abbreviation 're ad' regularly represents 'readmitted' and added that his interpretation of the numbers set forth opposite this abbreviation would represent a total listing of school days for a given school year."

He changed his mind only because he could not work out why the figure was below the mandated minimum days of 170. And the answer to that was simple. You have to add back on the days absent 168+ 12 for 54-55 and 179 + 5 for 53-54.

Anything on the Myra photo?

Edited August 3, 2015 by Greg Parker

[David Josephs]

(regarding the FBI reports and NYC attendance)

The school records reflect that FBI report Greg. There are not 127 potential days from March 23 to the end of that semester... THAT is the problem Greg... not the FBI report. The FBI simply added to get to 200 and changed the info on the NYC records. Copies of copies of copies Greg... and none match the original PERM Record from the first semester at ps117... but you keep dancing to your own tune on that one

This is just unintelligible gobbledygook. I'm sorry - but it is. The school records - as I have demonstrated, are perfectly fine.

No Greg, I cannot tell you WHY Marguerite did anything. Can you?

This is the fake Marguerite we are talking about here. The one who had secrets to keep regarding secret CIA programs that she put at risk according to Gaal to "tell a story" to make Oswald appear to be a normal kid.

Thank you for the Voebel information. I accept now that he took the photo. I don't accept there is any evidence that the photo was taken just after the fight. Who knows how long that Hallmark poster was on the wall? Who knows the exact date of the fight? This photo as with other photos, looks like a part of it has been attacked by a marker pen. Those photos have two things in common. Life Magazine and Jack White via the HSCA.

As for Mr. Head -- I have already addressed what he said, which was "the abbreviation 're ad' regularly represents 'readmitted' and added that his interpretation of the numbers set forth opposite this abbreviation would represent a total listing of school days for a given school year."

He changed his mind only because he could not work out why the figure was below the mandated minimum days of 170. And the answer to that was simple. You have to add back on the days absent 168+ 12 for 54-55 and 179 + 5 for 53-54.

Anything on the Myra photo?

No Greg... your NYC records work is complete junk. The list of days I posted proves it... believe what you will... even you cannot get 127 days of school from 3/23 thru 6/29, the end of the 7-8 Spring semester. That's the only incorrect line on this attendance record. One also wonders how a child can miss a semester and a half of school and still be promoted to 8th grade...

If you look at his actual grades for that first semester and a half he barely averaged a 50%... after youth house, all that changes. And thanks to you proving that Re-Ad is added to absences to arrive at a total number of school days in a year... 89 + 1 is the same as your 168 + 12 argument.

Re Marge... Steve has his POV. I cannot know WHY things were done until I know the actual plan. Killing JFK was not something related to this in any possible way... not from 1952 thru 1960 at the least, probably even later.

With respect to Steve... her job was to play the mother. Period. The record the FBI created speaks for itself... He cannot be at Youth House and then be Class president. He cannot go to ps44 in Manhattan AND the Bronx AND/OR Queens at the saem time. He cannot attend 105 days and miss 15 from 3/23 thru 6/29 - not possible.

Her testimony if filled with mistakes about her own life and the lives of those around her. Silly woman, I know.

Greg, why do you think the zoo photo is something that jeopardizes the entire thing? There is nothing to compare it to other than the 1951 6th grade photo and the 1954/55 BJHS photos... The caption in LIFE suggests he is Truant in this photo (they don't mention it was taken in summer when school was out).

The Crop of the Zoo photo hides the size of the child... In 1964, who would have known the difference - I mean they believed the SBT and that there was no conspiracy... except in a few US circles and most of the rest of the world...

You and I know more about the assassination that even the Commissioners or lawyers did at the time... we cannot think with 2015 minds and 50 years of study when we talk about the WCR and the context of those times.

The Evidence IS the Conspiracy Greg. That's all it is. Closed-loop Corroboration used over and over to build a case - that with the most cursory analysis it's weaknesses scream "look at me".

(i.e. Why would the FBI leave two conflicting reports in the same WCD? One report has Dolan taking the Microfilm from Waldman at Kleins... except the 2 pages prior to this report is the SAME REPORT, SAME DATE, SAME # except it has the signature of all three of the FBI agents who were there - not just Dolan - and says that the FBI is to subpeona Waldman if they need the evidence since he has put the Microfilm in his safe. Or CE1961 and CE1962 which contrdict each other. The records are full of reports like this - contradicting the value of the evidence out of the gate... and you want to know WHY?)

So tell me, consensus in Australia at the time and again now... Oswald guilty? a conspiracy involving him? a conspiracy with him as Patsy? Just curious.

[Kathleen Collins]

Greg Parker,

Have you ever thought Robert Oswald's post-assassination behavior was odd?

The fact he produced the Imperial Reflex in early 1964 is odd to me. If it was owned by Lee, and Robert had it, why wouldn't he have served it up sooner?

Another question: Why, do you think, did Robert not stand up more strongly for his blood brother Lee? Did they dislike one another? I have a brother with whom I'm quite close, despite 10 year's age difference. I've supported him at every opportunity.

Robert doesn't support the man killed by Ruby. This man was not his brother. Over the years Robert has never visited his 2 "nieces" because they aren't his nieces. The best research would be for someone to obtain Robert's DNA and compare it to the one of the nieces. Only that.

Kathy C

[Greg Parker]

Greg Parker,

Have you ever thought Robert Oswald's post-assassination behavior was odd?

The fact he produced the Imperial Reflex in early 1964 is odd to me. If it was owned by Lee, and Robert had it, why wouldn't he have served it up sooner?

Another question: Why, do you think, did Robert not stand up more strongly for his blood brother Lee? Did they dislike one another? I have a brother with whom I'm quite close, despite 10 year's age difference. I've supported him at every opportunity.

Robert doesn't support the man killed by Ruby. This man was not his brother. Over the years Robert has never visited his 2 "nieces" because they aren't his nieces. The best research would be for someone to obtain Robert's DNA and compare it to the one of the nieces. Only that.

Kathy C

Kathy, I would support DNA testing, but I fear certain people would only scream that the results have been faked.

I would ask how you know that ( a ) Robert has never visited his nieces and ( b ) if you have solid evidence he hasn't, then what evidence is there to support the reason for it?