For Chris Newton, Larry Hancock, Tracy Parnell, and other Critically-Minded Members

[Tom Hume]

 

Thanks David. As always you are a fountain of information.

Maybe this is a wild goose chase, but you had been making the point earlier that the two visa applications, one the original and the other a copy, didn’t line up. And of course the two photos didn’t line up on the page either. My interest is a little different - I don’t think the two photos you posted are “exactly” the same version, but two different clicks of the camera. If that’s true, would this be important?

If you do think it would be important if the two photos turned out to be separate clicks of the camera, perhaps other members would weigh in on this observation. 

Comparing the noses on the two photos, the left picture appears to have been taken slightly from the right of straight on, and the right photo taken slightly from the left. Also, the head in the right photo is tilted slightly up, and the right photo slightly down.

Compare the two photos in Sandy Larsen's last post on the previous page - I can't seem to get them posted here. While you're at it, read Larry Hancock's last post, I just buried it - sorry. 

Tom

 

Edited June 2, 2017 by Tom Hume

[David Josephs]

On 6/2/2017 at 9:37 AM, Larry Hancock said:

David, I apologize, should know this...do we not have a copy of the photo which was actually submitted along with Oswald's application, did the Cubans misplace it, not keep it, fail to hand it over, etc.

If we do and it turned out to be the Oswald in a sweater and time image I remember then I become increasingly suspicious.  Its possible that an impersonator might have tried to make an impression without having a photo but if pressed come back with an old Oswald photo just to get it in the record.  Probably nobody would look that closely and of course after the fact, it would be Oswald.

-- very interesting,  Larry

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The HSCA seems to have also reversed the Carbon with the "original" in these descriptions.  

I don't think there are too many "originals" with regards to the Mexico Evidence

 

 

Edited August 30, 2017 by David Josephs

[Larry Hancock]

Ok, next two questions.   Do we agree that the Oswald inside the Consulate was not wearing a sweater and tie according to the staff descriptions?    If so, then where is the first known occurrence of this particular photo and what agency would have had it in their files prior to October, 1963.

Along with those questions, what Agency or group would have had copies of the materials that the person at the consulate showed during the visit.

The answers to both questions would seem to tell us who was behind the visit, assuming it was not Oswald.

 

[David Josephs]

 

My pleasure as always Tom....  Something is a bit wonky with these images though.  

CORNWELL - And what did you do with the photographs?
TIRADO - Stapled them.
CORNWELL - Stapled them?
TIRADO - Yes.
CORNWELL - On top of the application.

We might also want to know why the COPY of this application does not show staple marks on the photo

 

 

Edited June 18, 2018 by David Josephs

[David Josephs]

On ‎6‎/‎2‎/‎2017 at 10:49 AM, Larry Hancock said:

Ok, next two questions.   Do we agree that the Oswald inside the Consulate was not wearing a sweater and tie according to the staff descriptions?    If so, then where is the first known occurrence of this particular photo and what agency would have had it in their files prior to October, 1963.

Along with those questions, what Agency or group would have had copies of the materials that the person at the consulate showed during the visit.

The answers to both questions would seem to tell us who was behind the visit, assuming it was not Oswald.

 

Who are we supposed to believe Larry?  Wouldn't these two be the best witnesses?  Who else reports on his clothing that morning?  

Mr. PREYER. And I believe you recognized none of the photographs in that album as being the man whom you feel you saw in the Embassy. Have you ever seen that man again, the man who you believe you saw in the consulate? 
Senor AZCUE. No, never. This is what I stated before. 

CORNWELL - Did he return with the photographs?
TIRADO - With four photographs.
CORNWELL - Four of them.
TIRADO - Yeah. 
CORNWELL - Were they all the same? To the best of your memory, was he wearing the same kind of clothes that he was wearing that day in the photographs?
TIRADO - Yes. 

Senor AZCUE. Yes, yes, about four or five blocks away in a street known as Calzada de Tacubaya. There are photographic studios. Possibly Sylvia might have pointed out to him where he could obtain the photographs, or maybe he already had the photos. 
Mr. PREYER. Well, in the photographs on the application, and also in the passport, Oswald appears to have on a tie and a sweater. How was he dressed when he came to the Embassy, to the consulate? 
Senor AZCUE. I always imagine him or visualize him as wearing a suit, coat and pants, trousers, with a pattern of crossed lines, not very clear design. Blue, some reddish. I never conceived of him or visualized him wearing a light sweater. When I saw this photograph in April of this year, I also noticed that the clothing he was wearing was not the same. 
Mr. PREYER. So that the clothing he was wearing in the photographs was not similar to that which he was wearing when he actually visited you in the Embassy. 
Senor AZCUE. I am almost in a position to assure that. 

 

And since the bus arrives 10-10:30am, we are to remember that the first "call" comes at 10:37am from the Cuban Consulate... not exactly alot of time to change...

So who sees him on the bus before he gets off... of course our friends the McFarland, Mumford and Bowen

Miss MUMFORD. He was dressed casually. I don't remember what color trousers he had on. He had on a dark sweater. I know that. It was a wool sweater, a sort of a charcoal gray color. When we saw him on television. being arrested or being taken down to the Dallas County jail, Patricia was the first to recognize that that was the same sweater. We were reluctant to believe this. of course, at first; that we knew this man. But she said the thinning hair on the top, the thinning, curly, wiry hair, plus the sweater that she recognized right away, and I recognized afterwards, made us almost certain that this was the same man. 

Not exactly the same sweater as in the Visa Photo... (is that sweater found in his belongings?)

 

 

Is this by chance the Mexico Visa sweater?

 

 

Edited June 18, 2018 by David Josephs

[David Josephs]

Mr. BALL. And they showed you pictures of Oswald, didn't they; Lee Harvey Oswald? 
Miss MUMFORD. No. 
Mr. BALL. You didn't ever see a picture of Oswald? 
Miss MUMFORD. No. 

[Larry Hancock]

David, I'm not trying to argue with you, I'm trying to work it backwards step by step.

1. The man wearing the clothes in the photo was not there that day so....so the photo was taken earlier.

2. The picture was taken earlier and if the man had been Oswald why would he just happen to have a photo taken much earlier (can we date that photo) with him in MC and not have taken it to the Consulate....makes little sense.

3. So....what Agency other than Oswald himself would have had a copy of that photo and how could they have gotten it.

4.  And the man in the Consulate had a variety of materials including FPCC correspondence and other correspondence that Oswald might have had copies of (why would he be keeping copies of his own correspondence, did he keep a scrapbook)?

5.  What Agency would have had copies of that material - the FBI comes to mind based on intercepts and their inside person at the FPCC but would the CIA have had the same sort of materials.

Just trying to flesh out how it would come down and who would be supporting the visit given that it was an imposter.

  

 

 

[Tom Hume]

Post deleted - I'll be back.

Edited June 2, 2017 by Tom Hume

[David Josephs]

24 minutes ago, Larry Hancock said:

Ok, next two questions.   Do we agree that the Oswald inside the Consulate was not wearing a sweater and tie according to the staff descriptions?    If so, then where is the first known occurrence of this particular photo and what agency would have had it in their files prior to October, 1963.

Along with those questions, what Agency or group would have had copies of the materials that the person at the consulate showed during the visit.

The answers to both questions would seem to tell us who was behind the visit, assuming it was not Oswald.

 

Quote

David, I'm not trying to argue with you, I'm trying to work it backwards step by step.

1. The man wearing the clothes in the photo was not there that day so....so the photo was taken earlier.

2. The picture was taken earlier and if the man had been Oswald why would he just happen to have a photo taken much earlier (can we date that photo) with him in MC and not have taken it to the Consulate....makes little sense.

3. So....what Agency other than Oswald himself would have had a copy of that photo and how could they have gotten it.

4.  And the man in the Consulate had a variety of materials including FPCC correspondence and other correspondence that Oswald might have had copies of (why would he be keeping copies of his own correspond

NEVER made that assumption Larry... we're on the same page - I'm just trying to do as you suggested and find the trail of his appearance from the bus the FBI offers to the Duran/Azcue encounter.  

1. 99% agree... one says yes, one no...  who confirms the lack of a sweater and tie?
2. You assume that the photos we have, associated with that application, are authentic and were the photos Duran stapled.  (so were are the other 2 photos, he comes back with 4 of them?).   She claims she looked and they were of the man in front of her.  Depending on who was who's asset - and didn't Azcue & Duran go back to Cuba not long after the assassination?
3. The Cuban offices of the consulate: TIRADO - Well, I used to put it in a file, and uh, I used to keep one copy, another to send, the original, we used to send to Cuba. And I think I have another file.   I would expect the Cuban State dept to have a home office to which the offices send their paperwork
4. Why he supposedly kept much of the incriminating evidence the FBI produced is a great question...  Answer? He didn't keep them, they were added to the evidence between Nov 22 and when the FBI returns those items on Monday Nov 26.  Armstrong's work on the initialed DPD evidence which leaves and the extra few hundred items without initials that were returned is direct evidence of obstruction.

TIRADO - Well, I used to put it in a file, and uh, I used to keep one copy, another to send, the original, we used to send to Cuba. And I think I have another file. 

CORNWELL - Did anything else occur on the second visit, any other conversation, or any other event?
TIRADO - No, but I told you, it's uh, he said that he was a friend of the Cuban Revolution. He show me letters to the Communist Party, the American Communist Party, his labor card, and uh, he's working in Russia, I don't remember exactly, but he said on his application, his licence number...

This and the short letter about moving to the Baltimore/DC area are the only 2 letters to the Comm Party that could have been shown...  but their exact contents was not discussed.

TIRADO - Yes, it was his labor card, form Russia, his us, marriage pact, yes, that he was married with a Russian, and uh, a clipping that he was with two policemen taking him by his arms, that he was in a meeting to support Cuba. And a card saying that he was a member of the Fair Play for Cuba in New Orleans. And
CORNWELL - Do you recall what was said or what occurred that caused him to produce all of these documents about his having a Russian wife and his Fair Play For Cuba activity?
TIRADO - Just a minute. (Spanish--what means recall?)
LOPEZ - Recordar. He showed me all of these papers to demonstrate that he was a friend of the revolution.

[David Josephs]

I was going to answer your question Tom...

Duran says the man brought back 4 photos... and that she saw them and they appeared to be the same man as was in front of her.... she stapled 1 to the original visa app and supposedly stapled the other to the carbon copy but it does not appear that way.

And where again are those other 2 photos?  You'd think he'd give one to Marina or June or his buddy George...

[Tom Hume]

Sorry David, I wanted to work with these photos a little more before I went too far out on a limb. To be clear, three of questions if I may.

(1) Do you think the side by side visa photos you posted are the same photograph, or do you think they are similar but separate clicks of the camera at the same photo session?

(2) I’ve had several passport photos taken over the years and never ended up two versions of those photos. If you think the visa photos are slightly different, does that seem unusual to you?

(3) So I take it that the other two visa photos are not represented in John Armstrong’s collection, entered into evidence, or anywhere else that you’re aware of. We have a better version of the "right" visa photo, you posted it and it's ubiquitous. Do you know of any better copies of the "left" photo?

If you've already answered any of these question somewhere, sorry, this Mexico thing is complicated.  

Thanks,

Tom

 

Edited June 2, 2017 by Tom Hume

[Tom Hume]

Sorry David, I got my right and left hand mixed up in my last post - I've corrected it.

 

Edited June 2, 2017 by Tom Hume

[David Josephs]

46 minutes ago, Tom Hume said:

Sorry David, I wanted to work with these photos a little more before I went too far out on a limb. To be clear, three of questions if I may.

(1) Do you think the side by side visa photos you posted are the same photograph, or do you think they are similar but separate clicks of the camera at the same photo session?

(2) I’ve had several passport photos taken over the years and never ended up two versions of those photos. If you think the visa photos are slightly different, does that seem unusual to you?

(3) So I take it that the other two visa photos are not represented in John Armstrong’s collection, entered into evidence, or anywhere else that you’re aware of. We have a better version of the left visa photo, you posted it and it's ubiquitous. Do you know of any better copies of the right photo?

If you've already answered any of these question somewhere, sorry, this Mexico thing is complicated.  

Thanks,

Tom

 

1. They LOOK virtually identical except for the way the copy makes Oswald's face look more round and squashed vertically.  
   I don't see why though, the different photos have such different characteristics...  the photo stapled to the CC should look the same as from the original.
   Without knowing the provenance of the copy all I can say explicitly is that the staples are not there...  IDK if there is anything to the HSCA stating that the poor quality copy was on the original visa application and the high quality one is with the carbon...
   
   They didn't have photocopiers in '63 at the Cuban Consulate in Mexico, did they?
    so how did they make a copy of the Carbon with the photo on it without it being stapled?  unless maybe the photos were added after the fact.?
   
   
    
2. Unusual?  I get the impression the photo was done at one of those sit in pull the curtain and take 4 exposures of the right size arcade places.  We also have that same straight down shadow under the nose while the rest of the shadow is off to his right...   I also don't think this was a "passport photo" kind of situation yet you make a point... 4 photos of that size is usually from specialized equipment...  and it would be polaroid-like...    Since they tried to find the place .  (and again, the way the FBI can create evidence I'm surprised there was no one working in a photo shop who would say what was needed.) and came up empty I am leaning toward a planned visit by this impostor to come back again and again...  or the entire thing was a ruse and none of this ever happened the way we are seeing it.  Could Duran and Azcue be in on whatever was going on with the CIA/DFS at the time?   IDK ... yet.
   
   The staple thing is now starting to bother me...  
   
   CORNWELL - And what did you do with the photographs?
   TIRADO - Stapled them.
   CORNWELL - Stapled them?
   TIRADO - Yes.
   CORNWELL - On top of the application.
   TIRADO - Yes.
   
   TIRADO - Yeah. I think that I already explained (to) him where he could take the photographs.
   CORNWELL - You told him some locations in town where he could go? Were there some right in the neighborhood of the Consulate there?
   TIRADO - That I don't remember.
   
   How many different places could there possibly be, that she would actually recommend?  
   
    
3. I have not seen the other 2 photos and they're not in the Armstrong Mexico binder...  I'll get in touch with John and see what he has... he told me he still have reels of microfilm to get printed...  so you never know.  I have no better images than the one that looks like a photo of the original.
    

Yes, Mexico can be very complicated....  Not sure if you read thru the 6 papers I did at CTKA/Kings and not even sure if they will clarify or complicate the matter...

If this was a lone nut then the evidence would line up a bit more comfortably.  the pains the FBI took to create a Mexico Trip and the number of times fraudulent evidence was accepted then dropped convinces me our man was not there.

[Tom Hume]

Thanks David, and yes I did read all six papers - twice. A great piece of work on your part and it made things much clearer.

Thanks for the answers, and my only comment is that I was a music composition major in 1963, and the Music Department had three giant copy machines available to us to print out our stunning masterpieces. I’d guess the Consulado de Cuba would have had one.

Tom

 

Edited June 3, 2017 by Tom Hume

[Sandy Larsen]

 

 

In comparing the two photos (which alternate in this animated gif), it is my opinion that the two are not from the same negative. I believe two shots of Oswald were taken. The biggest giveaway is that Oswald's right shoulder is in different vertical positions. Perhaps he shifted his weight to his other foot between shots and this resulted in movement in the tilt of his shoulders.

It is also my opinion that the poorer of the two photos is actually a photostatic copy. This is given away by the copy's low quality, high contrast (which makes Oswald's hair look more receded), and optical bloom that can be readily seen in the tie.

Why would the Cubans have returned the application's carbon copy with a photocopy of the photo instead of the original? I have no idea.

 

Edited June 3, 2017 by Sandy Larsen