Was it really just a MOLE HUNT about "Oswald?"

[Sandy Larsen]

On 6/29/2020 at 7:44 AM, W. Tracy Parnell said:

....coached witnesses speaking 30-40 years later do not meet such a definition.

 

Who was coached, Tracy?

 

[Jim Hargrove]

1 hour ago, Mark Stevens said:

I ask yet again, albeit in a different manner, if one person claims he saw LHO but at least 294 have absolutely no recollection of him, doesn't the preponderance of evidence weigh in favor of the overwhelming majority of people who never saw him? 

Assuming we’re talking about Stripling JHS students in the fall semester of 1954, you’re just making up the claim that  “294 have absolutely no recollection of him [LHO]," aren’t you?

If you’re NOT making this up, please provide proof that “294” students students at Stripling in 1954 had no recollection of LHO being there.  

Be sure to provide the NAME each of the "294" students who had no recollection of LHO.

After all, the principal of Stripling in 1994 said it was “common knowledge” that LHO attended the school.  

But you know better, right?  Is that because you’ve worked as a principal at Stripling School also, and learned that Mr. Galindo was just making up his claim?

But by all means, now ask for a statistically-inclined definition of "common knowledge", as if Mr. Galindo's message wasn't perfectly clear.

It was, and remains, common knowledge among local Stripling School district residents and current and former students and teachers that Lee Harvey Oswald attended Stripling School in the 1950s.

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram confirmed this simple fact in an article published in 2017 and updated in 2019.

Once again, 

This 1959 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article indicates LHO attended Stripling.

This 1962 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article indicates LHO attended Stripling.

Published two days after the assassination of JFK, this Fort Worth Star-Telegram article reported: “He attended Stripling Junior High School and Arlington Heights High School before joining the Marines.”

In his 1964 Warren Commission testimony, Robert Oswald said that LHO attended Stripling School.

This May 11, 2002 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article indicated that “a boy walked to Stripling from a home nearby.  His mother was living in a home behind the school on Thomas Place by 1963, when the world learned the name Lee Harvey Oswald.”

And then, of course, there is the Fort Worth Star-Telegram article from 2017 mentioned above.

Way back on December 27, 1993, John Armstrong wrote to Ricardo Galindo, the then current principal of Stripling School, asking if there were any records for Lee Harvey Oswald's attendance the school.  Mr. Galindo telephoned John back and said that, although there were no records, it was “common knowledge” that LHO had attended the school. [Harvey and Lee, p. 97]

In this 1997 interview, Stripling Student Fran Schubert watched LHO walk from the school to his house at 2220 Thomas Place just across the street from the school.

And, of course, in a 1997 interview, the assistant principal of Stripling School described how he met two FBI agents at Stripling less than 24 hours after the assassination and gave them the records for LHO.  Mr. Stevens can only say that Frank Kudlaty, who went on to become the Superintendent of Schools for Waco, Texas, was mistaken (about his entire story of meeting FBI agents hours after the assassination???) or lying.

Edited June 30, 2020 by Jim Hargrove

[Mark Stevens]

54 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Assuming we’re talking about Stripling JHS students in the fall semester of 1954, you’re just making up the claim that  “294 have absolutely no recollection of him [LHO]," aren’t you?

If you’re NOT making this up, please provide proof that “294” students students at Stripling in 1954 had no recollection of LHO being there.  

Be sure to provide the NAME each of the "294" students who had no recollection of LHO.

I've explained this multiple times, and you clearly know this because you mentioned my comments just after this statement. If you are so concerned about where that number came from, how about you read back the multiple pages of avoidance you've proffered and actually answer the question where this number came from. I've explained this numerous times, it's not my fault you are unwilling or unable to answer the question.

You won't though. You'll reply with another article, and how this proves LHO attended Stripling. When it doesn't. It just proves an article exists saying LHO attended Stripling, it doesn't prove he actually attended.

When we inquire about the veracity of the statements in the articles, or sourcing of the actual statements, we're told the articles exist, and that's enough proof. Who needs actions, when you've got words?

Is this the standard of discussion allowed here? As long as you don't call someone bad names you can lie, you can twist words, you can accuse people of stating things they clearly didn't say, all this is acceptable forms of discussion, only name calling is taboo? A person can present a topic, then be allowed to not discuss the topic on the very thread they introduced, this is reasonable discussion?

The only way this debate ends without you actually answering the questions put forth is when one of us are banned, this thread is locked, or one of us die. I will come here every day and "demand" you answer the questions you continue to avoid. Everyone who follows will see your constant deflection and inability to answer the most basic questions regarding ideas you brought forth. But hey, them articles...right...?

ETA:

Also, for the people in the back who may not understand...You cannot use the fact that they exist as evidence the claims made in them are true. When a person attempts to discuss the claims of the article, not the fact the articles exist, you cannot again use the fact the articles exist as evidence the claims made in them are true.

Edited June 30, 2020 by Mark Stevens
ETA

[Sandy Larsen]

7 minutes ago, Mark Stevens said:

....You'll reply with another article, and how this proves LHO attended Stripling. When it doesn't. It just proves an article exists saying LHO attended Stripling, it doesn't prove he actually attended.

 

Mark,

None of the H&L evidence proves that there were two Oswalds. Just like none of the evidence pointing to a JFK assassination conspiracy proves that there was a conspiracy. However, that doesn't mean that there weren't two Oswalds and that there was no JFKA conspiracy. One needs to consider the totality of the evidence and consider whether it amounts to just a bunch of mistakes, lies, and coincidences, or whether it likely proves the case.

I notice how guys like you only want to argue against the weakest of H&L evidence. I notice that if we suggest you argue against the stronger evidences, someone on your side will claim that we are only trying to divert attention. Tactics like these betray the weakness of your side's position, not to mention your side's debating skills.

Why don't you try debating something that cannot be explained away so easily as saying "he was lying" or "she was mistaken." I suggest debating -- if you can -- the 1953 fall semester school records which show Oswald attending two schools simultaneously.

 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

6 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Who was coached, Tracy?

Kudlaty for one by Jack White who told him of the remarkable H&L theory. Kudlaty then "remembered" the "seizure" of the records that he never thought enough about to mention to anyone previously or obtain a receipt for. If you're concerned about the word "coached" call it "having a thought planted in his mind" or whatever. It amounts to the same thing.

[Mark Stevens]

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Mark,

None of the H&L evidence proves that there were two Oswalds. Just like none of the evidence pointing to a JFK assassination conspiracy proves that there was a conspiracy. However, that doesn't mean that there weren't two Oswalds and that there was no JFKA conspiracy. One needs to consider the totality of the evidence and consider whether it amounts to just a bunch of mistakes, lies, and coincidences, or whether it likely proves the case.

I wholehearted agree. The issue I'm taken "offense" with is the fact that even though "None of the H&L evidence proves that there were two Oswalds," H&L supporters, yourself included continue to make statements such as:

Norwood: "a total of six eyewitnesses (Frank Kudlaty, Fran Schubert, Richard Galindo, Mark Summers, Bobby Pitts, and Douglas Gann) clearly recalled Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School" (these six people are a mix of things, but not 6 eyewitnesses who clearly recalled Oswald attending Stripling. This fact is absolutely clear and hardly able to be challenged, but please by all means do)

Hargrove: "Thank you for that clear summary of the evidence that one LHO attended Stripling School in Fort Worth in the fall semester of 1954 while the other was still at Beauregard School in New Orleans. Your point about the FBI contacting Stripling principal Weldon Lucas less than 24 hours after the assassination is a clear indication that someone in the Bureau, probably Hoover himself, understood the danger of the Stripling evidence and in all likelihood planned from the beginning to make it all disappear. Small wonder the agents didn't offer Mr. Kudlaty a receipt!" (This is simply a parroting of Norwood's quote above, again these statements are in no way evidence or proof that Oswald attended Stripling. We can more closely examine what these "witnesses" actually stated and what they actually saw, but the H&L group constantly refuses to discuss these witness statements and whether they qualify to be used in the manner H&L supporters use them.)

Larsen: "We have multiple corroborating witnesses. Francetta and other corroborating witnesses say you're wrong." (Yet, you nor none of the other H&L supporters will actually discuss who these witness are, or what their actual statements were, or begin to answer questions regarding their statements and the associated questions their statements awaken.)

The fact that one has to "consider the totality of the evidence and consider whether it amounts to just a bunch of mistakes, lies, and coincidences, or whether it likely proves the case" is literally the exact words I, Tracy Parnell, and surely others have tried to get the H&L to understand. When the totality of evidence for H&L, especially in regards to Stripling, amounts to 6 "eyewitness" and the totality of evidence that he did not attend, is the literal hundreds of students and faculty who do not remember him, the totality of the evidence amounts to mistaken identifications at best, and outright fraudulent statements at worst. I do not accuse anyone of making outright fraudulent statements, and to the best of my knowledge have not yet accused anyone of mistaken identifications. You know why I haven't? Because H&L supporters will not even discuss the statements with me. They only continue to habitually mention the fact that they exist as some kind of proof the statements themselves are true.

Please.Discuss.The.Witness.Statements.

The absolute irony of everything you said is astounding.

 

Quote

 

I notice how guys like you only want to argue against the weakest of H&L evidence. I notice that if we suggest you argue against the stronger evidences, someone on your side will claim that we are only trying to divert attention. Tactics like these betray the weakness of your side's position, not to mention your side's debating skills.

Why don't you try debating something that cannot be explained away so easily as saying "he was lying" or "she was mistaken." I suggest debating -- if you can -- the 1953 fall semester school records which show Oswald attending two schools simultaneously.

 

I've literally been trying for pages, days even to get you, Norwood, Hargrove, or any other H&L supporter to talk about basically the entire H&L tale, but we have to start somewhere. We can't debate all aspects of the tale in one post. Much like an elephant, we have to take it one bite at a time. While I try to chew on and digest the "eyewitness" bite, you and other supporters savagely rip the morsel from my mouth and instead stuff in "newpaper and records" bites. Can we finish one course before we move on to the next.

I will literally discuss every single page of H&L with you, or anyone, but we have to do it logically and in a genuine manner meant to ascertain what the evidence actually is and what the evidence actually states. We can't deflect from a topic because the H&L group does not want to discuss it, "thinks it's a waste of time," or simply cannot answer the questions. There is absolutely nothing wrong with saying "I'm not entirely sure," or "I haven't looked at it that way," or "I made a mistake," or "You're right, that doesn't mean what I thought it did." In fact, the ability to do so defines a persons character, it does not detract from it. The fact that numerous errors have been made and not once has anyone said, my bad I messed up and was wrong, is inherently telling.

Just a few pages ago you pointed out numerous errors I made in a post. I replied by admitting yes I did in fact make errors largely due to not paying attention. While I did intend to edit the mistakes, I left them for posterity.

Hargrove on the other hand, has also made numerous mistakes. He also made the audacious point of saying that when errors are made, people correct them. He then did not correct his errors or even acknowledge them. I'd say that's ironic, but at this point I have to seriously question Hargroves motives and his habitual desire to refuse to discuss other evidence besides newspaper articles and school records (which I've stated we could discuss if we could just move on from the witness statement topic of discussion). Hargrove though refuses to discuss the statements. 

I await another post regurgitating the same articles and records, while completely ignoring and/or misrepresenting the "eyewitness" statements. Or we could easily discuss this "weak evidence" (I'm not sure exactly what evidence that refers to) if this includes the witness statements, and then move on to the other topic(s). We could just discuss the statements, regardless of whether you believe them to be strong or weak, close that discussion, and move on to whatever strong evidence you would like to discuss.

Articulated conclusions, everywhere.

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

A few points:

This is precisely the flaccid dodge-em we’ve come to expect.

Rather than you deciding for us whether this is one of the weakest of Armstrong’s many arguments (some of them quite good), are we not entitled to judge the merits of his contention ourselves?

We are asked to accept the provenance of Robert Oswald’s mistaken assumption that Lee had attended Stripling.  It was in the paper.  Yes it was, but that doesn’t mean it is true.  

I’ve pointed out several times now - to the deafening response of crickets - that nothing in the FWST reportage indicates the paper ever contacted the school to verify Robert’s mistake.  I will gladly accept ANY evidence of ANY kind that the FWST contacted ANYONE at Stripling to verify the claims made by Robert.  It seems a reasonable ask.

What do we get?  Nothing.

Instead, we are now to be herded onto higher ground, where the Armstrong hypothesis is purportedly less easily dissected.  

I suspect we’ll get there in good time.  But until then, this thread has exposed the paucity of actual evidence on offer regarding an essential aspect of the H&L hypothesis.  

The constant refrains about Kudlaty’s many virtues are irrelevant to me.  Meals On Wheels?  Fantastic!  I like the man already.   Really.

Wasted on me, though.  I’ve never implied that Kudlaty deliberately did anything wrong.  I’ve never accused him of anything other than mis-recalling a detail.  A small detail, but one that determined whether he got to discuss his brief brush with Lee Oswald’s files, or the somewhat diminished tale of Robert Oswald’s files.  What the mind forgets, it also embellishes.

In any case, I think it’s been demonstrated to all but the most obdurate that the quality of evidence being proffered re: Stripling is significantly less persuasive than has been admitted.  But the H&L team don’t need to admit that; it’s time to move to higher ground.  Again.  And again.  And again.

Lather.  Rinse.  Repeat.

To be studiously fair to John Armstrong, I’ve spent years - literally - in research libraries studying the 26 volumes, the HSCA and the Church Committee volumes, newspaper archives, phone books for various US and foreign cities, hundreds of mostly obscure books, and much, much more, in hard copy or microfilm or microfiche.  I know the magnitude of the work he undertook, perhaps better than most.  I want it understood that I have nothing but respect for the work ethic he displayed, and the tenacity with which he pursued an overwhelming amount of data.   Props.

The fact that I disagree with his conclusion ought not diminish his contribution of documents we’d have never seen without him, or my acknowledgment of it.

That said, I hope it puts my posts in the proper context.  Nothing personal.  Whatsoever.

Just the facts, ma’am.

 

[Jim Hargrove]

Just the facts, indeed!

What Mr. Bojczuk calls a “distraction” and RCD calls “the flaccid dodge-em we’ve come to expect” is actually clear evidence that the documentary trail of both Lee Harvey Oswalds flows like a river through this entire saga of a long-term U.S. intelligence operation.

The Russian-speaking LHO was given as many experiences as possible similar to the American boy born as Lee Harvey Oswald in the hope of fooling Soviet bureaucrats during his false defection.  Both of the young LHOs, for example, attended Beauregard Junior High School in New Orleans.

As I’ve been pointing out most recently in this thread, during the fall semester of 1954, one LHO attended Stripling JHS in Fort Worth while the other attended Beauregard JHS in New Orleans.  The evidence for two LHOs in school simultaneously is even clearer one year earlier, during the fall semester of 1953. 

Because both the FBI and the Warren Commission missed this detail and neglected to cover it up, school records published in the Warren volumes show that both LHOs attended a full fall 1953 school semester in New York City and New Orleans simultaneously.

In the fall semester of 1953, one LHO attended Public School 44 in the Bronx borough of New York City, where he was present for 62 full days and 5 half days, was absent 3 full days and 8 half days, for a total accounting of 78 days.

Also in the fall semester of 1953, the other LHO was present at Beauregard Junior High School in New Orleans for 89 school days.

H&L critics will be quick to claim this is all a "distraction" and a “flaccid dodge-em we’ve come to expect.” Besides, they'll claim, someone else, somewhere else has debunked the evidence shown above, and they'll supply a flurry of links to these so-called “debunkings.”  

But none of them will dare to try to debunk this evidence right here, because it will then be obvious to all how silly their arguments are.  If they're not careful, unsuspecting readers might see that there is a clear pattern to all this evidence, and, above all else, that can't be allowed to happen.

For much more on the two Oswalds in school during this exact period, see John A’s write-up on our website:

Lee and Harvey in Three Consecutive School Semesters

Just a couple of years after those described above, both LHOs were in the Marine Corps, where the evidence that there were two of them is equally clear. This is not a “distraction,” or a “flaccid dodge-em we’ve come to expect.”

It is “just the facts, ma’am.”

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

And thus do we see the spotlight dramatically shift from Stripling to something else.

Mark Stevens and Jeremy B. have raised pertinent points thus far un-engaged by the H&L team.  I’ve raised a few myself.  But Stripling is now toast, in order to cut and run elsewhere.

Noted.

[Jim Hargrove]

11 minutes ago, Robert Charles-Dunne said:

But Stripling is now toast, in order to cut and run elsewhere.

Oh fer cryin' out loud!

In a November 15, 1959 Fort Worth Star-Telegram story entitled “My Values Different, Defector Told Mother,” Marguerite was quoted as saying: "He quit school at 14 …. he quit in the eighth grade ….. but was so set on getting an education, he quit and returned three times."  That, of course, hardly matches the WC record of Classic Oswald®  But it makes perfect sense if we understand that the Russian-speaking Oswald attended, and later quit, Stripling JHD, Warren Easton High School, and Arlington Heights High School.

We can also say, with absolute certainty, that in this 1997 interview, former Stripling student Fran Schubert said she watched LHO walk home across the street from Stripling to the duplex that once stood at 2220 Thomas Place, the same address where Marguerite Oswald was living on November 22, 1963.  What a coincidence!

We can also say that, in this 1997 interview, former Stripling School assistant principal Frank Kudlaty, who went on the become Superintendent of Schools for Waco Texas, said that he met two FBI agents at Stripling less than 24 hours after the assassination and handed over LHO’s Stripling records. 

Way back on December 27, 1993, John Armstrong wrote to Ricardo Galindo, the then current principal of Stripling School, asking if there were any records for Lee Harvey Oswald's attendance the school.  Mr. Galindo telephoned John back and said that, although there were no records, it was “common knowledge” that LHO had attended the school. [Harvey and Lee, p. 97]

We can also point to this additional evidence:

"Teachers and classmates remember him as attending Stripling, though there is no official record.”

--2017 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article

This 1959 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article indicates LHO attended Stripling.

This 1962 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article indicates LHO attended Stripling.

Published two days after the assassination of JFK, this Fort Worth Star-Telegram article reported: “He attended Stripling Junior High School and Arlington Heights High School before joining the Marines.”

In his 1964 Warren Commission testimony, Robert Oswald said that LHO attended Stripling School.

This May 11, 2002 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article indicated that “a boy walked to Stripling from a home nearby.  His mother was living in a home behind the school on Thomas Place by 1963, when the world learned the name Lee Harvey Oswald.”

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram is and was hardly a hotbed of conspiracy theories.  Many of its articles make the assumption that LHO killed JFK.  But it is also the local paper that covered events at Stripling School, and one of the conclusions it clearly reached was that LHO was Stripling's "best-known" student.

 

[Mark Stevens]

17 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Just the facts, indeed!

...

 

7 minutes ago, Robert Charles-Dunne said:

And thus do we see the spotlight dramatically shift from Stripling to something else.

Mark Stevens and Jeremy B. have raised pertinent points thus far un-engaged by the H&L team.  I’ve raised a few myself.  But Stripling is now toast, in order to cut and run elsewhere.

Noted.

Robert, I believe you have introduced a very valid and quite tangibly correct assessment.

Quote

 

Moreover, Kudlaty was not lying when he said that he was instructed to give the FBI the school records of a student named Oswald.  That student’s first name was Robert, not Lee.  Why?  Because the entire Oswald family - and acquaintances - were now under the Bureau’s microscope.  

Kudlaty provided the records, as claimed, on the date claimed, I have little doubt.  But who has sought out ROBERT Oswald’s school records, if only to rule out my hypothesis?

 

A few interesting and valid points should be made. Robert's name was Robert Lee Oswald. Robert Lee Oswald attended W.C. Stripling Junior High School for only one year, his 9th grade year.

Quote

Mr. OSWALD. No, sir; we did not, because we were just there during the summer months. And we moved prior to the school year of 19----
Mr. JENNER. '48?
Mr. OSWALD. '48---we moved to the address on Ewing Street.
Mr. JENNER. All right. And each of you then enrolled in Arlington?
Mr. OSWALD. I was in the ninth grade, which was junior high school in Texas. I enrolled in W. C. Stripling.
Mr. JENNER. First?
Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir. And John Edward enrolled in Arlington Heights High School.
Mr. JENNER. W.C. Stripling High School was a junior high school?
Mr. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. JENNER. And Arlington Heights High School was senior high school?
Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir; the last 3 years.
Mr. JENNER. And, at this time, your brother Lee was enrolled in-----
Mr. OSWALD. West Ridglea Elementary School.
Mr. JENNER. So at this point each of you was attending a different school?
Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir; that is correct.
Mr. JENNER. And Lee was 9 years old.
You continued at Arlington Heights Junior High School for how long?
Mr. OSWALD. No, sir--W. C. Stripling Junior High School. For 1 year, the ninth grade.
If I may, sir, perhaps correct something--I don't know for sure which way it was. When I said Lee attended West Ridglea Elementary School, I think perhaps the first year he attended Arlington Heights Elementary School, because I don't believe the West Ridglea Elementary School was completed at that time.
Mr. JENNER. We might take you in sequence so that at least I don't get confused.
You spent a year at W. C. Stripling High School?
Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir.
Mr. JENNER. So we now have we are now into '49-'50, is that correct?
Mr. OSWALD. That is correct, sir.
Mr. JENNER. And after a year at W. C. Stripling High School, you enrolled where?
Mr. OSWALD. At Arlington Heights High School.
Mr. JENNER. And that would be in the fall of 1949?
Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir.

While not immediately true, it is very much possible that almost everything Kudlaty said is entirely correct. Maybe the FBI showed up at W.C. Stripling for very much the same reason Jim Hargrove will not debate something other than the damn newspaper articles, and that is the fact that the newspaper did state Oswald attended Stripling (in articles related to his defection which would possibly put the articles on the FBI's "radar"). The FBI sent agents there to get whatever records the school had pertaining to Oswald. Kudlaty, doing the only responsible thing he knew to do was turn over the only records pertaining to an Oswald that he had, which was the records for Robert LEE OSWALD. He then glanced at the records as he stated he did, and only saw records for Robert's 9th grade year at Stripling. 

While the scenario above is not the only, absolute truth, it is just as likely, if not more likely so to be true as the H&L accepted "facts."

I await anyone's articulated conclusion.

[Sandy Larsen]

2 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

8 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Who was coached, Tracy?

Kudlaty for one by Jack White who told him of the remarkable H&L theory. Kudlaty then "remembered" the "seizure" of the records that he never thought enough about to mention to anyone previously or obtain a receipt for. If you're concerned about the word "coached" call it "having a thought planted in his mind" or whatever. It amounts to the same thing.

 

What evidence is there indicating that Jack White coached Kudlaty into saying that the FBI got LHO's Stripling School records from him?

 

[Sandy Larsen]

2 hours ago, Mark Stevens said:

The issue I'm taken "offense" with is the fact that even though "None of the H&L evidence proves that there were two Oswalds," H&L supporters, yourself included continue to make statements such as:

Larsen: "We have multiple corroborating witnesses. Francetta and other corroborating witnesses say you're wrong."

 

I'm puzzled. What is wrong with my statement?

The multiple witnesses corroborated some of what Kudlaty said, that LHO attended Stripling. And what they stated contradicted something you wrote (I forget what), which is why I said that they "say you're wrong."

 

2 hours ago, Mark Stevens said:

(Yet, you nor none of the other H&L supporters will actually discuss who these witness are, or what their actual statements were, or begin to answer questions regarding their statements and the associated questions their statements awaken.)

 

I told you I would if I could. I haven't found time/energy-level yet.

 

2 hours ago, Mark Stevens said:

The fact that one has to "consider the totality of the evidence and consider whether it amounts to just a bunch of mistakes, lies, and coincidences, or whether it likely proves the case" is literally the exact words I, Tracy Parnell, and surely others have tried to get the H&L to understand.

 

Well then, there you go! That's what I believe.

 

2 hours ago, Mark Stevens said:

When the totality of evidence for H&L, especially in regards to Stripling, amounts to 6 "eyewitness" and the totality of evidence that he did not attend, is the literal hundreds of students and faculty who do not remember him, the totality of the evidence amounts to mistaken identifications at best, and outright fraudulent statements at worst.

 

That hundreds of students and faculty didn't remember Oswald attending Stripling is precisely what I would expect in the case of a second Oswald attending Stripling, especially if he attended for only a few weeks. (I believe Kudlaty said he attended for a few weeks.)

 

2 hours ago, Mark Stevens said:

Quote

I notice how guys like you only want to argue against the weakest of H&L evidence.

I've literally been trying for pages, days even to get you, Norwood, Hargrove, or any other H&L supporter to talk about basically the entire H&L tale, but we have to start somewhere. 

 

So why do you want to start with what is the weakest evidence for the Stripling situation? That is, those multiple witnesses, not counting Kudlaty?

Let me save you some time.... if all I had were their statements, I would reject them. They're not very convincing. Fran's is better than the others, but I'd reject hers too.

Okay, can we discuss Kudlaty now? His statement is very convincing... so much so that I have to reconsider the statements of the multiple witnesses. What they said corroborates some of what Kudlaty stated. Does that mean that they really witnessed LHO? No, not necessarily. But it's more likely to be the case when combined with Kudlaty's statement. Such is the nature of corroborating testimony.

 

[Jim Hargrove]

10 hours ago, Mark Stevens said:

While not immediately true, it is very much possible that almost everything Kudlaty said is entirely correct. Maybe the FBI showed up at W.C. Stripling for very much the same reason Jim Hargrove will not debate something other than the damn newspaper articles, and that is the fact that the newspaper did state Oswald attended Stripling (in articles related to his defection which would possibly put the articles on the FBI's "radar"). The FBI sent agents there to get whatever records the school had pertaining to Oswald. Kudlaty, doing the only responsible thing he knew to do was turn over the only records pertaining to an Oswald that he had, which was the records for Robert LEE OSWALD. He then glanced at the records as he stated he did, and only saw records for Robert's 9th grade year at Stripling. 

While the scenario above is not the only, absolute truth, it is just as likely, if not more likely so to be true as the H&L accepted "facts."

I await anyone's articulated conclusion.

Of course, if Mr. Stevens had bothered to read THIS POST from last Saturday, he would not need to "await anyone's articulated conclusion."  Here's the information again....

 According to John Armstrong’s accounting of his initial telephone conversation with Mr. Kudlaty, the Stripling assistant principal said that he found school records for both Robert Oswald and Lee Oswald that Saturday morning at the school.  See below (emphasis added). 

I telephoned Mr. Kudlaty, introduced myself as a JFK researcher, and asked if he knew whether or not "Lee Harvey Oswald" had attended Stripling. Without hesitation Frank said, "Yes, he attended Stripling." Somewhat surprised I asked, "How do you know that." Frank replied, "Because I gave his Stripling records to the FBI."

I was momentarily stunned by Frank's answer, and asked him to tell me what he remembered in detail. He explained, "Early on the morning following the assassination, Saturday morning, I was telephoned by my boss, Mr. (Weldon) Lucas (Principal of Stripling), and told to go to school and meet two FBI agents. I lived close to the school at that time and arrived at the school before they (FBI Agents) got there. I went into the school and located Oswald's records. In fact I found both Lee Harvey and Robert Oswald's records for Stripling.  I opened Lee Harvey Oswald's folder and briefly looked over his records and noted that he had attended less than a full semester at Stripling…." [H&L, p. 98]

It always seemed strange to me that the FBI sent agents to gather (and confiscate!) the elementary school and teen-aged employment records of Lee Harvey Oswald within hours of the assassination.  By this time, Hoover could not possibly have determined (at least honestly) that there were no other co-conspirators or that no other government officials had been targeted for assassination.

And yet you want us to believe that less than 24 hours of the assassination of JFK, the FBI was gathering junior high school records for the designated patsy’s brother?  Do you also believe that the man who would soon become the superintendent of Waco Schools  didn’t know the difference between the putative assassin of JFK and his brother?
 

Here is another clear indication that Mr. Kudlaty had LHO’s school records, and not Robert’s.  Robert Oswald testified to the WC that he attended Stripling School for a year:

Mr. JENNER. And Lee was 9 years old.
You continued at Arlington Heights Junior High School for how long?
Mr. OSWALD. No, sir--W. C. Stripling Junior High School. For 1 year, the ninth grade.
If I may, sir, perhaps correct something--I don't know for sure which way it was. When I said Lee attended West Ridglea Elementary School, I think perhaps the first year he attended Arlington Heights Elementary School, because I don't believe the West Ridglea Elementary School was completed at that time.
Mr. JENNER. We might take you in sequence so that at least I don't get confused.
You spent a year at W. C. Stripling High School?
Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir.
Mr. JENNER. So we now have we are now into '49-'50, is that correct?
Mr. OSWALD. That is correct, sir.
Mr. JENNER. And after a year at W. C. Stripling High School, you enrolled where?
Mr. OSWALD. At Arlington Heights High School.

But in the first minute of his 1997 interview, Mr. Kudlaty indicated that LHO’s records showed he “didn’t attend for a full year.”

At around the 2:28 mark in the interview, he had this exchange with John:

JA; Now, just to clarify, we’re talking about the records of Lee Harvey Oswald, the accused assassin of JFK?
FK: That’s right, uh-huh.
JA: And, to your knowledge, he did attend Stripling?
FK: Yes, he had to have attended.  I didn’t know Lee Harvey Oswald.  I didn’t know he was a student there, but we wouldn’t have had a record for him if he hadn’t attended, even one day, we would have had a record.  To the best of my recollection, his records were incomplete in that they did not show a full year of attendance…. I believe he had grades for one 6-week period.

click here for 1997 interview with Frank Kudlaty

[W. Tracy Parnell]

12 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

What evidence is there indicating that Jack White coached Kudlaty into saying that the FBI got LHO's Stripling School records from him?

 

You can go to Greg Parker's site and read about White's relationship with Kudlaty and how that may have effected the story that he told. Now, if you want to believe that Kudlaty listened to White and suddenly and independently "remembered" that the FBI confiscated records, a fact that he had never mentioned to anyone before and saw no significance in previously, you are free to do that. I am a little skeptical though.