Jump to content
The Education Forum

DO WE ALL AGREE THAT THE BACKYARD PHOTOS ARE FAKE?


Guest James H. Fetzer

Recommended Posts

Len

Whilst I enjoy "jousting" with you I'm going to make this my last post on this thread because it does seem to just go around in circles trying to get each other to see things from a different perspective.

i) Michael Paine said he was against violence in ANY form

He then lets Oswald stay in his "home" over most weekends "knowing" that he has beat Marina on several occasions and possibly "knowing" he has a rifle. If Paine knew there was a rifle in the garage it went against everything he stood for. If Ruth didn't know there was a rifle in her garage then she's as thick as two short planks. The woman was a snoop, in more ways than one.

I agree with you on the rifle comment. It wouldn't be strange for someone to own a rifle in Texas, in '63 or 2010. But what does that generalisation have to do with this? We are talking about a self-proclaimed "Quaker" and "Pacifist" here. Your argument makes no sense Len.

I'm right on the page number of Paine saying he saw the backyard photo on the evening of the assassination. Hearings Volume IX p. 444. Len, the "maybe he misremembered" line is one that could be used on ANYTHING that ANYONE EVER said during the hearings.

As far as the letter being left around. There was no letter Len. There was no rifle. There was no backyard photographs. Debating this with you just makes me more and more convinced.

You haven't addressed the issue of the Minox camera Len but lets call it quits eh?

After the Minox I was going to bring up the Walker note that suddenly reappeared in the nick of time - Ruth as the lone-ranger. Then the bus ticket to Mexico. Then Ruth's notations in her pocket diary regarding Oswald ordering the rifle on the 20th March with a small star. Then a notation in her handwriting at the top saying "Oct 23 LHO purchase of rifle." Page 56 below...

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/w...WH17_CE_401.pdf

But I'm sure in your world-view Len, there's just more innocent explanations concerning these issues. If you think that putting on the evidence sheet "envelope containing miscellaneous photos and negatives" is protecting the chain of custody of the backyard photos, maybe the officers involved could have saved themselves a whole pile of work by putting ALL of Oswald's possessions in one giant bag, photographing it and writing on the evidence sheet "one giant bag containing a load of Oswald's stuff"?

Lee

I will reply further when I have more time but is hunting for food un-Quaker and if I'mnotmistaken Paine often went to Unitarian services.Shouldhe have been such a died hard he wouldn't let a tenant keep a rifle there.

Even in the FBI interview his statement he told LHO he was opposed to "all violence" seems tohave been in the context of bringing about political change.

As for the allegations LHO beat Marina that would be all the more reason to let her stay there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Why did you truncate my sentence to change its context?

I wrote [emphasis added]:

"You have FBI documents that back that up? No all you have is Fritz's report but you choose to ignore the part where he clearly stated he showed LHO the photo after 6PM"

OK Len, i got it.

You were asking for a FBI document to back up the backyard photos were shown to Oswald before the evening session (though i have no idea why you asked this), while i misinterpreted your question and thought you asked the authenticity of the FBI document i've already posted in question and thats the reason i truncated your sentence to make sure you will know what i mean. I could have let the whole sentence intact with just the "NO" added in bold. Will do it next when it hurts you. My fault.

But to my self defence i like to ask why is this question of relevance when i already provided Captain Will Fritz's official interrogation notes from the Warren Commission Appendix XI? I have no FBI document saying that because it doesn't exist and you know it.

The notes are crystal clear confirming that the Dallas Police Departement was in the noon session already in the posession of minimum one backyard photo.

Here again:

hmatwfritz0100020009.png

hmatwfritz01000200101.png

For what is it good for to post a FBI document when the WCR made it clear? Would this convince you?

Or would you then ask for a CIA or a DPD or any other Government document to back that up?

Is this divertion by design?

Shall i play Len Colby for a minute? Ok, here you go:

You have FBI documents Oswald admitting to shot the president or Tippit?

You have FBI documents were Michael Paine admitted the backyard photos were shown to him for the first time on november 23,1963?

You have FBI documents shown photos of Oswald on the six floor shooting?

I hope you see how little sense it made to send someone on a wild goose chase.

I said that's all you had because it was all you cited.

Ah, and thats not enough? LOL

If you actually have any FBI documents which indicate LHO was shown the photos before 3:20 post it here rather than whine.

Aha, FBI documents are more worth then WC documents or what? Why? I prefer not to respond to your last "Kindergarten" wording.

Len, the nonexistence of a FBI document makes another (WC document) not obsolete. Get it?

Since you're not a native speaker I'll rephrase:

"Perhaps Martin can propose o coherent scenario IN WHICH LHO was asked about a planted photo before it was found."

Ah, thats far better. Now i understand.

The answer is no. I was not a witness there in 63 and would be therefore just speculation. Well, i can speculate and share ideas but you are the last person

i like to share ideas with.

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

To make this posting worthwhile the time i'd like to summarize the inconsistency and whereabouts of the backyard photos.

I like to include some parts of the excellent research of Lee Farley too.

Lee, i hope you don't mind. Please tell me if there is a problem and i instantly edit this posting.

In the early afternoon of November 23, 1963, Dallas detectives obtained a warrant to search the Paine residence in Irving, Tex., where Marina Oswald had been living. (125) The search concentrated primarily on a garage in which possessions of the Oswalds were, stored. Among the belongings, Dallas Police officials found a brown cardboard box containing personal papers and photographs, including two snapshot negatives of Oswald holding a rifle.

fbirose-stovall.jpg

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...bsPageId=703416

And here according to Fritz's interrogation notes the DPD was already in the possession of minimum one backyard photo before it was found.

hmatwfritz0100020009.png

hmatwfritz01000200101.png

Plain, straight, clear.

Since we know time is running linear forward and not backwards we are facing here a major problem.

Now to the research of Lee Farley: (Thank you Lee)

Michael Paine's testimony is supporting that the backyard photos were found way before there were discovered:

MR LIEBELER: Did the FBI or any other investigatory agency of the governement ever show you a picture of the rifle that was supposed to have been used to assassinate the president?

MR PAINE: They asked me at first, the first night of the assassination if I could locate, identify the place where Lee was standing when he was holding this rifle and some, the picture on the cover of Life.

MR LIEBELER: Where you able to?

MR PAINE: I identified the place by the fine clapboard structure of the house.

And here the documents showing the Hester's worked on the backyard photos in the night after after the assassination:

http://img169.imageshack.us/img169/1216/hester.jpg

Martin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Martin since this is the 2nd or 3rd time you’ve insinuated I was being intentionally deceptive and you have insulted me a few times and after nearly 4 months you have yet to explain your conclusion the sun angle in the BYP’s should have been 33.6 degrees, I really don’t owe you any sort of a reply.

I asked you about “FBI documents” because YOU said you claims about the BYP’s were “supported by” them. You seemed to be referring to the time when the DPD came into possession of one. This should have been obvious to you at the time. I am NOT responsible for YOUR comprehension errors. See below the except of the relevant portion of the post where I asked about this,emphasis added .

Well, gazillion words have been written about the infamous backyard photos in the WCR, HSCA, FBI uncounted books from both the LN'er and the CT'er side but nothing change the fact what i have singled out here supported by official FBI and WC documents:

The DPD was in the possession of minimum one backyard photo hours before it was discovered by Dectives ROSE and STOVALL in the

Paine garage.

You have FBI documents that back that up? No all you have is Fritz's report but you choose to ignore the part where he clearly stated he showed LHO the photo after 6PM

Fritz indicated they had a photo in the early afternoon but in the next page he said LHO was shown the photo after 6pm.

As for Paine’s statement he was show the photo the night of the assassination, records were kept as to who was interrogated when, do any of them indicate he was questioned then?

As for Hester the article said "...he believes it was the afternoon of Nov.22,1963..." and quoted him as saying "I just happened to see the thing...where the man came up holding the thing I don't know" he also stated worked 72 hours straight.

So we have an old man recalling with uncertainty something that happened over a dozen years earlier during a period he worked 3 days straight.Partsofhis talemake littlesense.

How does one just "happen" to see a slidewhich is 24 x 36 mm or 6 x 7 cm at the most?

Why would they make color positives of a black and white print?

Why would they take color positives to a black and white lab?

Why they be flashing around such uber secret images?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well argued The only thing I can contribute is that of a memory of a story read when doing some research on Emmett Till, I might even have posted on it but basically it was about a peace equal rights true christian values grouping that moved south. The story is of their experience over time. The writer laments how readily over time people being white, became southerners, and slowly all customs of segregation accommodated. It wouldn't surprise me in the least that such groupings become tainted. It strikes me that they knew far more than they were going to let on. Basically the job was over and the rest was to become history. This does not negate the cold war factor. I deal with it by seeing it as a recognition that the hypocricy of the US of A as with Kennnedy came live news. This gave the burgeoning socialist movements to a very large extent a heavily Che influenced drive that gained in popularity and very harsh measures were called for. Kennedy being the person he was had really only one choice, to beat the soviets by winning the hearts and minds of the people. Simplistically: basically everyone wanted peace. The problem with a peace minded world is that it is more likely to seek and nurture peace, which fundamentally has to do with righting wrongs. A big ask for some.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Martin since this is the 2nd or 3rd time you’ve insinuated I was being intentionally deceptive and you have insulted me a few times and after nearly 4 months you have yet to explain your conclusion the sun angle in the BYP’s should have been 33.6 degrees, I really don’t owe you any sort of a reply.

I asked you about “FBI documents” because YOU said you claims about the BYP’s were “supported by” them. You seemed to be referring to the time when the DPD came into possession of one. This should have been obvious to you at the time. I am NOT responsible for YOUR comprehension errors. See below the except of the relevant portion of the post where I asked about this,emphasis added .

Well, gazillion words have been written about the infamous backyard photos in the WCR, HSCA, FBI uncounted books from both the LN'er and the CT'er side but nothing change the fact what i have singled out here supported by official FBI and WC documents:

The DPD was in the possession of minimum one backyard photo hours before it was discovered by Dectives ROSE and STOVALL in the

Paine garage.

You have FBI documents that back that up? No all you have is Fritz's report but you choose to ignore the part where he clearly stated he showed LHO the photo after 6PM

Fritz indicated they had a photo in the early afternoon but in the next page he said LHO was shown the photo after 6pm.

As for Paine’s statement he was show the photo the night of the assassination, records were kept as to who was interrogated when, do any of them indicate he was questioned then?

As for Hester the article said "...he believes it was the afternoon of Nov.22,1963..." and quoted him as saying "I just happened to see the thing...where the man came up holding the thing I don't know" he also stated worked 72 hours straight.

So we have an old man recalling with uncertainty something that happened over a dozen years earlier during a period he worked 3 days straight.Partsofhis talemake littlesense.

How does one just "happen" to see a slidewhich is 24 x 36 mm or 6 x 7 cm at the most?

Why would they make color positives of a black and white print?

Why would they take color positives to a black and white lab?

Why they be flashing around such uber secret images?

Ok Len.

I try to make it now very simple.

I will respond to all your statements later but let us try to put this issue to rest. OK?

Two simple questions:

1. Can you confirm the time of the very first mentioning of the backyard photos has happend between 12:35PM and 1:10PM

during this noon interrogation from Captain Will Fritz?

2. Can you confirm the time of the very first discover of backyard photos has happend at 3:20PM in the Paine garage by Detective MC Cabe?

Can you please answer this two questions?

wc-fbi.gif

We can discuss all issues surrounding the later interrogations on november 23 and 24, 1963 regarding the backyard photos and it's enlargements in a

constructive way if you will, but let us not ignore this discover and the main reason of my first posting in this thread here please.

This is a serious attempt to build a bridge to you.

Thank you forward

Martin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok Len.

I try to make it now very simple.

I will respond to all your statements later but let us try to put this issue to rest. OK?

Two simple questions:

1. Can you confirm the time of the very first mentioning of the backyard photos has happend between 12:35PM and 1:10PM

during this noon interrogation from Captain Will Fritz?

2. Can you confirm the time of the very first discover of backyard photos has happend at 3:20PM in the Paine garage by Detective MC Cabe?

Can you please answer this two questions?

wc-fbi.gif

We can discuss all issues surrounding the later interrogations on november 23 and 24, 1963 regarding the backyard photos and it's enlargements in a constructive way if you will, but let us not ignore this discover and the main reason of my first posting in this thread here please.

This is a serious attempt to build a bridge to you.

Thank you forward

Martin

Yes Martin Fritz did say they had the photo at the time of the noon interrogation but he contradicted himself 2 paragraphs later, the latter version is supported by the Secret Service inspector. Please clarify what this supposed FBI document you referred to was.

I welcome your bridge building,if you want it to work:

1) Stop insulting me

2) Stop accusing me of being dishonest

3) Explain how you calculated what the sun angle should have been in the BYP's with in 0.1 degrees without knowing the time or admit error.I will continue to press you on this till you do one or the other.

Edited by Len Colby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Len

No problem. I didn't catch your reply to be honest. Got sidetracked by something.

Hunting for food is not un-quakeresque. But lying and stealing is. Michael Paine did go to Unitarian services but that could have been to catch up with Allen and John Foster.

If someone says that they are "opposed to violence in any form" I would take it to mean that they were "opposed to violence in any form."

Letting Marina stay (if she was in fact beaten by Lee but I don't believe this for one second) then yeah, it would be quakeresque to let Marina stay. But NOT LEE. And certainly not Lee and his guns. And his spy kits. And his James Bond photos. And his temper. And his FBI friends knocking.

Ruth Paine is not what she says she is Len. And you know it...

...come on, be honest with me

Lee

Lee I look forward to discussing other matters with you but just as you indicated in an earlier post you were bailing out I don't think we can go much further on this topic. Neither of us is presenting much evidence, we're just speculating as to how we think people we never met should have acted before we were born. Also we've become impossibly sidetracked from topic of the thread.

Edited by Len Colby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes Martin Fritz did say they had the photo at the time of the noon interrogation but he contradicted himself 2 paragraphs later, the latter version is supported by the Secret Service inspector. Please clarify what this supposed FBI document you referred to was.

quote]

Actually he did no such thing. All he said IN HIS RECOLLECTION of the days events, is that the wanted to find abot about the places he had lived. He mentions the photograph but never says he HAD the photograph at that point in time. Martin and you are ASSUMING he had it. There is no proof that is the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually he did no such thing. All he said IN HIS RECOLLECTION of the days events, is that the wanted to find abot about the places he had lived. He mentions the photograph but never says he HAD the photograph at that point in time. Martin and you are ASSUMING he had it. There is no proof that is the case.

Let's get clear on what this document suggests because the meaning is being interpreted in different ways here and Craig is leaving out an important point:

Fritz states in his typed interrogation notes that on the 23rd he brought LHO from his jail cell to his office at 12:35pm. He talked to Oswald about the different places he had lived in Dallas "in an effort to find out where he was living when the picture was made of him holding a rifle which looked to be the same rifle we had recovered."

Question number 1: why would Fritz be making "an effort" to find out where Oswald was living when the photos were made, if the photos had not yet been found?

Fritz later states, in the same interrogation and in line with his questioning of Oswald concerning the places where he lived, that "Mr Paine had told" Fritz "about where Oswald had lived on Neely Street." Oswald was accordingly "very evasive about this location."

Question number 2: Does this then support Michael Paine's testimony to the Warren Commission

MR LIEBELER: Did the FBI or any other investigatory agency of the governement ever show you a picture of the rifle that was supposed to have been used to assassinate the president?

MR PAINE: They asked me at first, the first night of the assassination if I could locate, identify the place where Lee was standing when he was holding this rifle and some, the picture on the cover of Life.

MR LIEBELER: Where you able to?

MR PAINE: I identified the place by the fine clapboard structure of the house.

See my original Post on this Lee. Is this his RECOLLECTION of the days event? There is no indicationit was written as it happened. Of course there is no indication it was written at days end either. And thats the point. To suggest that his report menas he had hte BYP at 12;35 is just wishful thinking.

NOTHING proves that fact in the least.

You are taking things on FAITH only.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Either Michael Paine and Will Fritz were completely wrong about the timing of these photographs into the record or there is something not quite right with this picture, pardon the pun.

I’ve never had a paternity test done Craig, but I’m sure my Dad is my Dad. There are some things in life that you have to take on faith…

I would never take ANY of this on faith, thats just a recipe for disaster. The bottom line here is that there is no real PROOF about the timing of the introduction of the BY photos in any of this. Lots and lots of conflicting data and recollections. Nothing out of the ordinary, but no proof ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Either Michael Paine and Will Fritz were completely wrong about the timing of these photographs into the record or there is something not quite right with this picture, pardon the pun.

I’ve never had a paternity test done Craig, but I’m sure my Dad is my Dad. There are some things in life that you have to take on faith…

I would never take ANY of this on faith, thats just a recipe for disaster. The bottom line here is that there is no real PROOF about the timing of the introduction of the BY photos in any of this. Lots and lots of conflicting data and recollections. Nothing out of the ordinary, but no proof ....

Very interesting thread - I've read thru the entire thing and was very happy to find reference to the Fritz notes but we're missing a piece of evidence

An observation

On page 9 it appears Fritz is trying to trap Oswald into saying he lived where Frtiz seems to know the photos were taken... NOT that he showed Oswald these photos ONLY that Frtiz is aware of their existence and knows what they look like... this is at 12:35pm on 11/23/63

and as we've already seen in the FBI report dated 2-3-64 Det Rose does not find the negatives until 3:20pm 11-23-63

Add this now, he books them into evidence at 4:30pm on 11-23-63 - when the 12 photos were printed is not yet determined

Faked or not (I am not touching that one in this post) I find it hard to understand how Fritz can be questioning/trapping Oswald regarding photos that had not been yet found, not yet known to be found, not yet known they would be found or even prints yet made so FRITZ himself would know what he was asking Oswald to describe.

I look forward to the discussion

DJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Lee... appreciate and agree with your thoughts.

We do get sucked into the minutia arguments with the other side quite often... part of the point of the conflicting evidence...

I also apprecite the thought about the report yet I think we have to give it more weight than you do... much like the Baker and Weitzman affidavits that emphatically contradict later testimony. I cannot see how one goes back in time, as Fritz does in this report, and literally create timelines that are in conflict with existing hard evidence. He knows when these negatives were booked into evidence, Baker knew when he actually ran into a person on the stairs and Seymour identified the rifle - a whole day later, exactly as he did the day he "found" it.

Dismissing these afterward when even more conflicting information is available discounts the notion that the FBI/CIA et al could care less what was contained in the "official record" and that these little hints and mix-ups are the cracks in the veneer of the conspiracy/cover-up. Worse yet is that the photos themselves prove the rifle to be different than the one attributed to him in evidence.

So just like Hancock's premise that proof is in the whispers, heresay and unchecked comments that build upon themselves to paint a certain picture, I see that we find pathways to reality in these discovered gems - when looked at from the standpoint of, what would an innocent DPD do and say versus one that was not, these anomolies take on new depth.

my .02

DJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if Walker might have had access to them some hiw. afa the timing of the photos. are the plant growth whatever an indication of the season the photos were taken?

wiki:sundials

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sundial

''In some designs, it is possible to determine the date of the year, or it may be required to know the date to find the correct time. In such cases, there may be multiple sets of hour lines for different months, or there may be mechanisms for setting/calculating the month.''

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Worse yet is that the photos themselves prove the rifle to be different than the one attributed to him in evidence.

my .02

DJ

Why? and How?

hey craig...

I do not know who published this first, possibly Gil Jesus, http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...p;mode=threaded, just not sure.... is that on the rifle in custody and in all the pictures, the shoulder strap is connected to an oval ring sling that is mounted on the left side of the rifle, the rifle in the backyard photos has its ring mounted on the bottom of the rifle http://i42.tinypic.com/25z4g3k.jpg and Gil goes on to name a few more reasons - just not related to that photo.

I've read your posts here Craig and while I agree with your measurement and angle analysis you'd have to agree that creating this photo, these photos, was not rocket science at the time. Add to the fact that the DPD had to go back a second time to find them, like the print on the gun barrel that "appears" the next day, or the clip that "appears" after the fact, or that Oswald went home on a Thursday - just "out of the ordinary" type stuff that makes one question the motive and reasoning.

It would be great if you could show the photo is not possibly a composite based on your knowledge - or at least why you think it isn't and more importantly - to please acknowledge my post about the timing of Frtiz' questions and the discovery of the photos/negatives... I still can't see how, after the fact, he remembers questioning him with the photos on his mind when he knew full well when those photos were found and brought in... a mistake? an offhand remark where he is mistaken about the time when others corroborate the chronology? or a simple clue about when/where those photos might have been made.

btw, I learned long ago to NEVER use 2d measuring tools on 2d representations of 3d images, simply does not work. So I appreciate where you are coming from with most of your posts... but some of these topics require more than measurable data: common sense and "what would an innocent group do with evidence" come to mind.

DJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...