Jump to content
The Education Forum
Steve Thomas

How did Hosty expect to talk to Marina?

Recommended Posts

How did FBI Agent James Hosty expect to communicate with Marina Oswald?

 

Mr. STERN. Did you take over from Agent Fain or in some other way?
Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; I did not take over directly. When Agent Fain retired directly from the Bureau he had closed the case.(on Lee Harvey Oswald). He had a case which we call a pending inactive case on Mrs. Marina Oswald. This case I did take over. It was in what we call a pending inactive status, that is, nothing was to be done for a period of 6 months. Then at the end of the 6-month period it was then turned into a pending case and I went out and attempted to locate Mrs. Marina Oswald for the purpose of interviewing her.

 

I might add that it is the practice of the FBI to interview immigrants from behind the Iron Curtain on a selective basis, and she was so selected to be one of these persons to be interviewed.

 

Mr. STERN. When was this?
Mr. HOSTY. This was March 4, 1963, when I began my inquiry as to her present whereabouts
. I determined on March 4, 1963, through the Immigration and Naturalization Service records that she had moved from Fort Worth to the Dallas area. She was living on a street called Elsbeth Street in the Oak Cliff section of Dallas.

 

On March 11, 1963, I made inquiry at this Elsbeth address,

 

Mr. STERN. You say that you were considering interviewing Marina Oswald?
Mr. HOSTY. Right.
Mr. STERN. Did you know that she did not speak English?
Mr. HOSTY. Yes; I knew that.
In fact, I determined that when I did the neighborhood check on the 3d of March.
Mrs. Tobias (the landlady at Elsbeth) told me that she didn't speak a word of English and couldn't communicate with anybody except her husband who spoke Russian.

 

So, Hosty was doing a neighborhood check on March 3rd, before he began his inquiry on March 4th to learn her present whereabouts and learned from INS that the Oswalds had moved to Elsbeth.

He talked to Mrs. Tobias on March 11th and found out that they had moved. Mrs. Tobias told him that Marina couldn't speak English.

 

What "neighborhood" was Hosty checking on March 3rd? And knowing that she didn't speak English, how did Hosty think he was going to be able to talk to her?

Mr. HOSTY. (On the) 1st of November. I worked in the Fort Worth area in the morning and on my way back from the Fort Worth area at approximately 2:30 p.m., I stopped at the residence of Mrs. Ruth Paine, 2515 West Fifth Street,

 

Guess who else lived in the Fort Worth area?

The White Russian Community of George DeMohrenschildt and George Bouhe and Max Clark, etc. Were they a conduit of information for James Hosty?

They had known that the Oswalds were living on Elsbeth as far back as November of 1962. George Bouhe had files on everybody.

 

Steve Thomas

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve:

Interesting that you should bring this up.  I have been recently embarked upon a study of John Armstrong's book, attempting to wrap my arms around the two-Oswald concept.  Lots of interesting (but controversial) information to digest.  I now know who the names and subtopics are in this fascinating study, including the enigma of whether Oswald (in Russia) actually spoke Russian, or pretended not to understand the language.  As well as, did Marina speak English?  To quote researcher George Bailey (Oswalds Mother 2011):

Contradictory reports regarding Oswald's language proficiency make sense, in the context of two Oswalds. Conversely, his wife Marina was apparently a very good English speaker but spoke little of it when she emigrated to the US.  Armstrong states that he saw Marina’s handwritten notebooks in the National Archives and they were all in English. Lee wrote Marina letters in English to her while living in Russia. Even mother Marguerite reveals in her Commission testimony detailed conversations she had with her daughter in law–conversations in English, without anyone to translate. Yet Marina needs a translator to give her sworn testimony to the Warren Commission in 1964.  Evidently, she was under similar pressures in America as Lee was in Russia ... which would fashion her an operative as well. Both were in a Cold War contest to not reveal too much of who they were.

In December 1963 Robert Oswald provided the FBI a 15-page statement wherein he notes meeting with Marina to discuss a management contract she was about to sign with Jim Martin (who briefly became her lover).  There was a discrepancy in the contract that Marina noted – since she could read English – and discussed this issue in English with Robert, with no translator present.  Yet he later denies her language proficiency in testimony to the WC, where he states his sister in law had "limited knowledge" of English, and that he would communicate with her via hand signals.  Jim Martin subsequently told the HSCA in 1978 that Marina could understand English quite well.

What struck me about this saga is, all of the intense fact gathering and interviews done by the FBI - even after Oswald is dead, and the lone nut label has been christened - why send agents out to get school, tax, and employment records?  Why go to all of that trouble just to paint Oswald's personal history (since he is already presumed guilty)?  And why the obvious fabrication and alteration of documents and records?  It seems that the plotters framed the FBI and were blackmailing them (almost taunting them) - a theory that has resonated with me for some time (e.g. invoking the unreliable Mannlicher-Carcano) - because they knew that one of these Oswald's was an FBI informant and operative, who could bring serious disgrace to the Bureau.  Hoover and his agents were covering their backs and desperately protecting their reputation, in the awful aftermath. 

Gene

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Gene Kelly said:

Why go to all of that trouble just to paint Oswald's personal history (since he is already presumed guilty)?  And why the obvious fabrication and alteration of documents and records? 

Gene, maybe they collected all of this info simply because they were tasked to? I would think any investigative body was going to investigate the person that they're supposed to investigate, perhaps going back to his history. Yes, Oswald never had a chance in hell anyway...he was after all 6 feet under.  Still, they basically did their jobs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems attractive Marina was preyed upon ( maybe "hit on" is a more commonly used phrase ) by so many men for months after 11,22,1963.

Jim Martin?  Robert Oswald? Hugh Aynesworth? Others?

That kind of pressure on such a young woman in an extreme emotional situation almost beyond description must have made getting through it even harder for Marina.

Two small children to nurse and care for. No money in the beginning. Dependent on Ruth Paine.

An absolute nutty mother-in-law.  A brother-in-law who totally felt Marina's husband shot and killed JFK. Amazing she got through it all and looking more attractive and together with each passing year. Shows an unusually strong personal constitution if you ask me.

Excuse the following question but...does anyone here feel that Ruth Paine might have had more in mind than simple human concern in wanting Marina to actually live with her?  I've read a few reported statements (hints?) of this sexual inclination inference regards Ruth Paine over the years.

It seems Marina couldn't break that bond with Ruth Paine fast enough as soon as she could afford to do so. And she ( Marina ) reportedly never spoke to Ruth Paine again after 54 YEARS! 

Edited by Joe Bauer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

It seems attractive Marina was preyed upon ( maybe "hit on" is a more commonly used phrase ) by so many men for months after 11,22,1963.

Jim Martin?  Robert Oswald? Hugh Aynesworth? Others?

That kind of pressure on such a young woman in an extreme emotional situation almost beyond description must have made getting through it even harder for Marina.

Two small children to nurse and care for. No money in the beginning. Dependent on Ruth Paine.

An absolute nutty mother-in-law.  A brother-in-law who totally felt Marina's husband shot and killed JFK. Amazing she got through it all and looking more attractive and together with each passing year. Shows an unusually strong personal constitution if you ask me.

Excuse the following question but...does anyone here feel that Ruth Paine might have had more in mind than simple human concern in wanting Marina to actually live with her?  I've read a few reported statements (hints?) of this sexual inclination inference regards Ruth Paine over the years.

It seems Marina couldn't break that bond with Ruth Paine fast enough as soon as she could afford to do so. And she ( Marina ) reportedly never spoke to Ruth Paine again after 54 YEARS! 

Joe,

Marina Oswald is an open book -- if only readers choose to believe her.  Her WC testimony is self-consistent, without any contradictions, and she never changed any aspect of that account to this very day.  The main trouble is, that many readers fail to read her WC testimony carefully enough -- if at all.  

The following is my opinion: 

1.  Marina Oswald was from Communist Minsk.  Sexual liberation was already old-fashioned in 1960, when she met Lee Harvey Oswald.  Marina was a liberated woman since her teen years.  This is partly what the USSR was all about.  So, one should never portray Marina as a shy, retiring, vulnerable type of woman.

2.  Marina Oswald had a college degree in pharmacology - which he earned before she turned 20.  She was very bright.  She didn't learn English in the USSR, except a few polite words, like Hello, Goodbye, Please, Thank you, and so on.   Yet if she had been allowed to learn English in the USA by Lee Oswald, I have no doubt she would have learned quickly.   As it turned out, Lee was a jealous type of person, and tried to hold Marina back for himself.

3.   Robert Oswald did not believe his brother was guilty.   He always kept an open mind about it.  At the end of his book, Lee (1967) he expresses his doubts in very clear terms.  He wanted somebody to come forward with PROOF about how Lee's rifle and pistol could be involved in the murders of 11/22/1963, without Lee's involvement.  It tortured him.

4.  As for Ruth Paine, she was not a lesbian.  She was the Quaker Charity Lady.   While it's true that William Manchester tried to plant that seed of suspicion in his book, The Death of a President (1967), he only used his cleverness and innuendo, and provided no material evidence whatsoever.

5.  The main reason that Marina never spoke with Ruth Paine again was because Robert Oswald ordered Marina to avoid her.  Robert hated and despised Michael Paine.   When asked why over the decades, Robert Oswald never answered the question.  He told the WC in his testimony that Michael Paine had a "fishy" sort of handshake.

5.1.  In my opinion, Robert Oswald blamed Michael Paine 100% for the trouble that Lee Harvey Oswald got himself into.   For one thing, Michael Paine allowed Marina to move in with Ruth Paine (yes, it was by his permission) instead of forcing Lee Oswald to beg his own family for support.  

5.2.  Family should stick together, no matter how poor they were.  Yet here was this rich guy from the East Coast, flaunting his money around like some big shot, with two homes and three cars -- while Robert Oswald had to drop out of high school to scrape for a living his whole life long.

5.3.  It was the fact that Michael Paine was rich -- that's what Robert Oswald hated.  And this rich guy then became the ENABLER for Lee Harvey Oswald to get into trouble.  I think that's what Robert's problem was.

5.4.  Anyway, Robert Oswald flatly ordered Marina Oswald to have nothing at all to do with Ruth Paine, ever.   Marina realized that her only solid family in the USA was Robert Oswald, so she decided to do as he said.

5.5.  Weeks and months later, when Ruth Paine learned that Marina was living with Robert Oswald and his family, she came by their place to beg to visit with her friend, Marina Oswald.   Robert and Vada turned Ruth Paine down, flat.  No sympathy.

6.  A secondary reason that Marina never spoke with Ruth Paine again was because the Secret Service strongly advised her to avoid Ruth Paine.

6.1.  For one thing, they were uncertain about who all the players were, and what their roles were, so they decided to keep Marina Oswald isolated for as long as possible until they could figure things out.

6.2.  Rumors flew.  For example, the Dallas Police had said that they found "six or seven filing cabinets full of the names of Castro supporters" in Ruth Paine's garage.  It was only a rumor, but it was printed in the newspapers.

6.3.  Also, when Ruth Paine delivered her Care Package to Marina Oswald through the Secret Service via the Irving Police, the Secret Service found the "Walker Letter" inside one of Marina's housekeeping books.  The Secret Service first reaction was that Ruth might be another Russian spy, and that the message was a secret code to Marina.

6.4.   After experts determined that Lee Harvey Oswald had written that letter -- and why -- and the Walker shooting became public -- the Secret Service wondered if Ruth Paine was connected to the CIA.   That would really complicate their jobs.  So, the Secret Service again advised Marina Oswald to stay away from Ruth Paine.

6.5.  Marina was terrified of being deported.   Marina hated the USSR.  One of the reasons she married Lee Harvey Oswald was that he was still an American citizen, had kept his passport, and represented a chance of moving to the USA.   She never thought things could turn out so badly -- but she didn't want to raise her kids in the USSR.

7.  I am always saddened to hear nonsense about Ruth Paine -- like claims that she was a Russian spy -- or a CIA agent setting up Oswald for the JFK Assassination -- or a lesbian.

7.1.   The material evidence confirms that Ruth Paine was a Quaker Charity Lady, helping out Marina, who was afraid that Lee was going to abandon her in the USA, or send her back to the USSR alone (as he had often threatened to do).   Marina hated the idea of going back to the USSR, so she turned to Ruth Paine for help.

7.2.  The fact remains that Ruth Paine gave more WC testimony than any other witness.   More than five thousand questions.  We know more about Ruth Paine than about any other WC witness.  Ruth Paine, like Marina Oswald, is an open book.   But most people don't read their WC testimony carefully enough. 

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
typos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/16/2018 at 11:54 AM, Gene Kelly said:

What struck me about this saga is, all of the intense fact gathering and interviews done by the FBI - even after Oswald is dead, and the lone nut label has been christened - why send agents out to get school, tax, and employment records?  Why go to all of that trouble just to paint Oswald's personal history (since he is already presumed guilty)?  And why the obvious fabrication and alteration of documents and records?  It seems that the plotters framed the FBI and were blackmailing them (almost taunting them) - a theory that has resonated with me for some time (e.g. invoking the unreliable Mannlicher-Carcano) - because they knew that one of these Oswald's was an FBI informant and operative, who could bring serious disgrace to the Bureau.  Hoover and his agents were covering their backs and desperately protecting their reputation, in the awful aftermath.

Hey there Gene,

As you may know I spent almost 2 years with John tracing footnotes and discussing the evidence....  the same notion struck me - that Oswald's non-assassination life was overly detailed in areas that had little to no consequence on his life.  (I hope you also follow up on John Ely's Oswald bio work)

So I went into the evidence of the 2 other assassins around that time, Sirhan Sirhan and James Earl Ray...

Ray is given a page Bio while Sirhan offers even less....  The are obvious a number of things being hidden about Oswald's life....

I look forward to your posts on the subject,

DJ

img_800_317_300.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Marina Oswald is an open book -- if only readers choose to believe her.  Her WC testimony is self-consistent, without any contradictions, and she never changed any aspect of that account to this very day.  The main trouble is, that many readers fail to read her WC testimony carefully enough -- if at all

Just so we all understand...

This statement is blatantly false and proven so on other forums and other thread where PT makes the same claim..  One of the most obvious conflicts is Mexico City and what Marina says about it...  I could go thru her testimony - as others have - and pick out scores of conflicts, lies, and changes over the years.

That you would continue to post this same exact statement repeatedly and then go off into some diatribe about Marina and Ruth that requires speculationa dn assumption after assumption without a supporting item of evidence or corroboration of anything you post in sight...

Marina lied about what she knew of Oswald... she lied about the physical evidence she gives to Leibeler in August 64.  She lied about the extent of her English ability.
She LIED about everything she could... and then claimed and played dumb.

What I can't figure is... Why in the world would you try to give Marina and by default Ruth ANY credibility?

WCR testimony:

Mrs. OSWALD. Nothing. And it is at that time that I wrote a letter to Mrs. Paine telling her that Lee was out of work, and they invited me to come and stay with her. And when I left her, I knew that Lee would go to Mexico City. But, of course, I didn't tell Mrs. Paine about it.

Mr. RANKIN. Had he discussed with you the idea of going to Mexico City?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. When did he first discuss that?

Mrs. OSWALD. I think it was in August.
 

HSCA testimony:

Mr. McDONALD - When did you first learn of his planned trip to Mexico City? When did you first know about that?

Mrs. PORTER - Shortly before I left for Dallas with Ruth Paine.

Mr. McDONALD - How did you learn of this?

Mrs. PORTER - He told me about his plans to go to Mexico City and to visit the Cuban Embassy over there.

================

Mr. RANKIN. When you were asked before about the trip to Mexico (CE1781 & 1792), you did not say that you knew anything about it. Do you want to explain to the Commission how that happened?

Mrs. OSWALD. Most of these questions were put to me by the FBI. I do not like them too much. I didn't want to be too sincere with them. Though I was quite sincere and answered most of their questions. They questioned me a great deal, and I was very tired of them, and I thought that, well, whether I knew about it or didn't know about it didn't change matters at all, it didn't help anything, because the fact that Lee had been there was already known, and whether or not I knew about it didn't make any difference.

CE1781: http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/html/WH_Vol23_0209b.htm

 

the SS interview Nov 29th: 

“She was asked whether she had any knowledge of Lee's trips to Mexico or Washington, D.C.  She replied in the negative.  She was asked whether she or Lee had any cameras and she replied that Lee bought one camera in Russia and a second one in the United States . She said one was a small camera and the other was a box camera. She added that she was not proficient with operating any Cameras and she never had an opportunity to do so.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Just so we all understand...

This statement is blatantly false and proven so on other forums and other thread where PT makes the same claim..  One of the most obvious conflicts is Mexico City and what Marina says about it...  I could go thru her testimony - as others have - and pick out scores of conflicts, lies, and changes over the years.

That you would continue to post this same exact statement repeatedly and then go off into some diatribe about Marina and Ruth that requires speculationa dn assumption after assumption without a supporting item of evidence or corroboration of anything you post in sight...

Marina lied about what she knew of Oswald... she lied about the physical evidence she gives to Leibeler in August 64.  She lied about the extent of her English ability.
She LIED about everything she could... and then claimed and played dumb.

What I can't figure is... Why in the world would you try to give Marina and by default Ruth ANY credibility?

WCR testimony:

Mrs. OSWALD. Nothing. And it is at that time that I wrote a letter to Mrs. Paine telling her that Lee was out of work, and they invited me to come and stay with her. And when I left her, I knew that Lee would go to Mexico City. But, of course, I didn't tell Mrs. Paine about it.

Mr. RANKIN. Had he discussed with you the idea of going to Mexico City?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. When did he first discuss that?

Mrs. OSWALD. I think it was in August.
 

HSCA testimony:

Mr. McDONALD - When did you first learn of his planned trip to Mexico City? When did you first know about that?

Mrs. PORTER - Shortly before I left for Dallas with Ruth Paine.

Mr. McDONALD - How did you learn of this?

Mrs. PORTER - He told me about his plans to go to Mexico City and to visit the Cuban Embassy over there.

================

Mr. RANKIN. When you were asked before about the trip to Mexico (CE1781 & 1792), you did not say that you knew anything about it. Do you want to explain to the Commission how that happened?

Mrs. OSWALD. Most of these questions were put to me by the FBI. I do not like them too much. I didn't want to be too sincere with them. Though I was quite sincere and answered most of their questions. They questioned me a great deal, and I was very tired of them, and I thought that, well, whether I knew about it or didn't know about it didn't change matters at all, it didn't help anything, because the fact that Lee had been there was already known, and whether or not I knew about it didn't make any difference.

CE1781: http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/html/WH_Vol23_0209b.htm

 

the SS interview Nov 29th

“She was asked whether she had any knowledge of Lee's trips to Mexico or Washington, D.C.  She replied in the negative.  She was asked whether she or Lee had any cameras and she replied that Lee bought one camera in Russia and a second one in the United States . She said one was a small camera and the other was a box camera. She added that she was not proficient with operating any Cameras and she never had an opportunity to do so.”

David,

Your emotional reaction overstates your case.   In all of Marina's WC testimony (which is what I have always vouched for) there is not one single contradiction.   You didn't show one.  You CLAIMED you did, but you didn't.

All you showed was that when Marina Oswald was suddenly picked up by the Feds immediately after the JFK Assassination, she DENIED EVERYTHING.  This is what a normal housewife in Texas would have done -- and what she would have been expected to do under Texas Law.

So --- your case against Marina Oswald is built entirely on your own emotional reaction -- not on logic or even common sense.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve,

To respond directly to your question -- it is my humble opinion that FBI agent James Hosty had no intention of trying to speak with Marina Oswald, either early in 1963 or late in 1963.

Instead, James Hosty was solely and only interested in Lee Harvey Oswald, and getting further information about Lee for the bulk of 1963. 

The question is, why, since FBI agent John Fain had closed already closed the FBI case file on Lee Harvey Oswald.  

My opinion is that James Hosty was secretly supporting Ex-General Edwin Walker in Dallas.   James Hosty was a Bridge partner with neo-Nazi Robert Alan Surrey, who kept his business office inside of General Walker's personal home at 4011 Turtle Creek Boulevard in Dallas.  

In his book, Assignment Oswald (1996), Hosty admits that his main job for the FBI in Dallas was to keep an eye on "General Walker and his Minutemen in Dallas" (page 4).

In my opinion, Walker and Surrey had "turned" James Hosty, and when General Walker was acquitted by a Grand Jury in January 1963, for his role in the deadly racial riots at Ole Miss in September 1962, Walker began a project of revenge on JFK and RFK for sending Walker to an insane asylum after those riots.

The first step was to select a Patsy.   General Walker selected Lee Harvey Oswald early in 1963, simply because Walker hated everything about the USSR, and here was this Marine brat who allegedly defected to the USSR, and then came back to DALLAS with a Russian bride. 

So, in my CT, General Walker and Robert Alan Surrey prevailed upon FBI agent James Hosty to spy on Lee Harvey Oswald starting early in 1963.  That is why James Hosty first "decided" to approach Marina Oswald -- not speaking one single word of Russian himself.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
typos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

All you showed was that when Marina Oswald was suddenly picked up by the Feds immediately after the JFK Assassination, she DENIED EVERYTHING. 

Yes Paul.. she lied.

And when repeatedly given opportunity to correct herself... she only digs deeper...

Marina stated that she had only used a camera once in her entire life... to take the BY Photos.  When asked to recount how she took the photo she stated she held the camera up to her face and pushed the button Ozzie told her to...  

THIS is what she would have seen when looking down into the box camera for the one and only time in her life... yet this view she can't remember ?  And not only can't she remember but 1 photo becomes 2 photos becomes 3 photos becomes 4 photos with one burned and one lost until 1977.

Worse yet, the woman needs to repeat the viewfinder process 4 times while getting perfect, crystal clear images, repeatedly...

Mrs. OSWALD. I think that that was towards the end of February, possibly the beginning of March. I can't say exactly. Because I didn't attach any significance to it at the time. That was the only time I took any pictures.
I don't know how to take pictures. He gave me a camera and asked me someone should ask me how to photograph, I don't know.

Mr. RANKIN. How did it occur? Did he come to you and ask you to take the picture?
Mrs. OSWALD. I was hanging up diapers, and he came up to me with the rifle and l was even a little scared, and he gave me the camera and asked me to press a certain button.
Mr. RANKIN. And he was dressed up with a pistol at the same time, was he?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. You have examined that picture since, and noticed that the telescopic lens was on at the time the picture was taken, have you not?
Mrs. OSWALD. Now I paid attention to it. A specialist would see it immediately, of course. But at that time I did not pay any attention at all. I saw just Lee. These details are of great significance for everybody, but for me at that time it didn't mean anything. At the time' that I was questioned, I had even forgotten that I had taken two photographs. I thought there was only one. I thought that there were two identical pictures, but they turned out to be two different poses.

 

So you see Paul...  your repeated sad attempts at expressing your growing opinions winds up showing off how little you know of the evidence.  I'm not going to take the time to show you everywhere Marina lied over the years...  would fall on deaf ears as you still aint gonna learn what you simply don't wanna know...

:up

5a60be2f91dc8_ViewfinderimageforImperialreflexcamerawithinvertedBYP-whatMarinawouldhaveseen.jpg.7e96b073c90992a09d5aa3773c102a47.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Yes Paul.. she lied.

And when repeatedly given opportunity to correct herself... she only digs deeper...

Marina stated that she had only used a camera once in her entire life... to take the BY Photos.  When asked to recount how she took the photo she stated she held the camera up to her face and pushed the button Ozzie told her to...  

THIS is what she would have seen when looking down into the box camera for the one and only time in her life... yet this view she can't remember ?  And not only can't she remember but 1 photo becomes 2 photos becomes 3 photos becomes 4 photos with one burned and one lost until 1977.

Worse yet, the woman needs to repeat the viewfinder process 4 times while getting perfect, crystal clear images, repeatedly...

Mrs. OSWALD. I think that that was towards the end of February, possibly the beginning of March. I can't say exactly. Because I didn't attach any significance to it at the time. That was the only time I took any pictures.
I don't know how to take pictures. He gave me a camera and asked me someone should ask me how to photograph, I don't know.

Mr. RANKIN. How did it occur? Did he come to you and ask you to take the picture?
Mrs. OSWALD. I was hanging up diapers, and he came up to me with the rifle and l was even a little scared, and he gave me the camera and asked me to press a certain button.
Mr. RANKIN. And he was dressed up with a pistol at the same time, was he?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. You have examined that picture since, and noticed that the telescopic lens was on at the time the picture was taken, have you not?
Mrs. OSWALD. Now I paid attention to it. A specialist would see it immediately, of course. But at that time I did not pay any attention at all. I saw just Lee. These details are of great significance for everybody, but for me at that time it didn't mean anything. At the time' that I was questioned, I had even forgotten that I had taken two photographs. I thought there was only one. I thought that there were two identical pictures, but they turned out to be two different poses.

 

So you see Paul...  your repeated sad attempts at expressing your growing opinions winds up showing off how little you know of the evidence.  I'm not going to take the time to show you everywhere Marina lied over the years...  would fall on deaf ears as you still aint gonna learn what you simply don't wanna know...

:up

 

David,

You are not providing evidence to support your case -- you are merely repeating your case.

Marina Oswald never said she took three or even two Backyard Photographs.  She always said she took ONE, ONE and only ONE.

I believe her.

Nor does the material evidence contradict Marina Oswald.   The only ones who contradicted her in 1964 were the Warren Commission attorneys, who refused to believe Marina when she said she took ONE, ONE and only ONE Backyard Photograph.

Because they had MORE THAN ONE in their hot little hands.  They didn't want to believe the consequences of that evidence, namely:

(1) That some expert in photography had taken Marina's ONE photograph and made several FAKE photographs with it; or

(2) That Lee Harvey Oswald had ACCOMPLICES who knew a lot about FAKE photography.

Since the WC attorneys outright refused to believe these factors, they kept jamming Marina's head with the demand that she MUST HAVE taken more than ONE, ONE and only ONE Backyard Photograph.   No matter how many times she repeated her story, they kept coming back and jamming her head with their own refusal to accept it.

What could she do?   They could deport her.  She had repeated the TRUTH to them several times.   So, she finally concluded, "Maybe I just don't know cameras."

Now, a half-century later, you and the H&L CTers are claiming that Marina is the one to blame for this confusion.  But that's only your bias.   The WC attorneys are the real ones to blame about the Backyard Photograph confusion.

So, no, Marina did NOT lie.  You're simply mistaken about it.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, David Josephs said:
 

Yes Paul.. she lied.

And when repeatedly given opportunity to correct herself... she only digs deeper...

Marina stated that she had only used a camera once in her entire life... to take the BY Photos.  When asked to recount how she took the photo she stated she held the camera up to her face and pushed the button Ozzie told her to...  

THIS is what she would have seen when looking down into the box camera for the one and only time in her life... yet this view she can't remember ?  And not only can't she remember but 1 photo becomes 2 photos becomes 3 photos becomes 4 photos with one burned and one lost until 1977.

Worse yet, the woman needs to repeat the viewfinder process 4 times while getting perfect, crystal clear images, repeatedly...

Mrs. OSWALD. I think that that was towards the end of February, possibly the beginning of March. I can't say exactly. Because I didn't attach any significance to it at the time. That was the only time I took any pictures.
I don't know how to take pictures. He gave me a camera and asked me someone should ask me how to photograph, I don't know.

Mr. RANKIN. How did it occur? Did he come to you and ask you to take the picture?
Mrs. OSWALD. I was hanging up diapers, and he came up to me with the rifle and l was even a little scared, and he gave me the camera and asked me to press a certain button.
Mr. RANKIN. And he was dressed up with a pistol at the same time, was he?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. You have examined that picture since, and noticed that the telescopic lens was on at the time the picture was taken, have you not?
Mrs. OSWALD. Now I paid attention to it. A specialist would see it immediately, of course. But at that time I did not pay any attention at all. I saw just Lee. These details are of great significance for everybody, but for me at that time it didn't mean anything. At the time' that I was questioned, I had even forgotten that I had taken two photographs. I thought there was only one. I thought that there were two identical pictures, but they turned out to be two different poses.

 

So you see Paul...  your repeated sad attempts at expressing your growing opinions winds up showing off how little you know of the evidence.  I'm not going to take the time to show you everywhere Marina lied over the years...  would fall on deaf ears as you still aint gonna learn what you simply don't wanna know...

:up

5a60be2f91dc8_ViewfinderimageforImperialreflexcamerawithinvertedBYP-whatMarinawouldhaveseen.jpg.7e96b073c90992a09d5aa3773c102a47.jpg

great job, Dave.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David:

I don't buy that FBI was simply doing their job.  Why on earth would the FBI want Oswald's 9th grade records on the morning after the assassination?   Frank Kudlaty, the assistant principle at Stripling Junior HS in Fort Worth, stated that he remembered Lee Oswald attending because he was called by the Principle to head to the school Saturday morning (the 23rd) and hand over records on Oswald to the FBI agents.  Lee Oswald was only at Stripling for about six weeks in the fall of 1954. But there are four family statements that he attended Stripling in Fort Worth; three by Robert, and one by Marguerite.  Fellow students also recall him as a classmate.  Yet the Warren Commission never published these records or information, and the FBI denied knowledge of them (or lost them), yet they appear to have placed an urgent priority in obtaining them.  The records vanished from the evidentiary record.  It's not my intent to debate Oswald's matriculation at Stripling; it’s the FBI that puzzles me.  What do Oswald's 9th grade school records have to do with a murder investigation?

However, if one buys into the idea that the family was constantly (and oddly) on the move from 1947-1959 -- making it difficult to trace the whereabouts of “Lee Harvey Oswald,” once he had defected -- then the significance of 2220 Thomas Place (opposite Stripling) takes on a new significance.  Perhaps it was a home base (or “safe house”) for the so-called Oswald Project ... one that FBI needed to erase. Now the urgent collection of a just a few weeks’ worth of junior high school records takes on new meaning. Layer in the fact that WC attorney John Ely's notes are notably missing from the National Achieves, and the subsequent exposition of the Jenner memo stating:      

"Our depositions and examination of records disclose that there are details in Mr. Ely's memoranda which will require material alteration and, in some cases, omission".

There’s something fishy going on here, and it’s the FBI that seems out of character.

Gene  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×