David Josephs

First off thanks to those helping out Greg with links etc... I think Greg, that you'd need to do more digging into Bethesda... and look at the ARRB testimonies... Searching the forum is a great place to start... The throat wound was expertly described by ER staff as one of entry... discussing it as an exit would would be contradicting the only truth we had by that afternoon... === As to the zfilm being authentic.... it is currently in 9 pieces at NARA and NEVER had the 0183 stamped on any part of it... In fact, 0184 must have been printed based on the mechanics of the machinery.... Mrs. Z has something interesting to say: There is also the case of the film sent to SS Chief ROWLEY friday overnight... and the films which show up at NPIC Sat night (Dino) and Sunday (Homer). There is little if anything to "authenticate" that film as original. Again... good luck, yet I think there is sufficient info to find on this forum which may have you rethinking some of the conclusions you've come to... Take care DJ

The idea of the image was to show that a south knoll shot is not out of the question... It's really up to each of us to "see" which scenario works... and have at least some compelling evidence with which to back yourself up.... The search function in this forum is very good.... you can find quite a lot of material on most every aspect of the case... That south knoll shot may have cleared the windshield and have been Cliff's shot to the throat with the windshield hole/crack being from another source... IDK Triangle though... East (Dal-Tex/Courthouse/street level), North (knoll) and South (knoll)... The shot from the fence is absurdly close... once you've been there and seen it.... Hope that helps DJ

Yes, this is. Reasonable doubt does not "impeach" anything... Reasonable doubt is the highest standard of proof, requiring that guilt be proven to the satisfaction of a rational person. Clear and convincing evidence is somewhat less rigorous. It requires that a judge or jury be persuaded that the prosecution case is true. "impeach the credibility" ?? Witness impeachment, in the law of evidence of the United States, is the process of calling into question the credibility of an individual testifying in a trial. And here we have the crux of the matter Mark... you're attempt at introducing reasonable doubt has no bearing on the credibility of anything any of the witnesses said because you fail to give the audience - those you are introducing the doubt to - the proper context for what was said. Your incredulity doesn't change the dynamics of the context.... a point you sorely miss, repeatedly. As to your naive and assuming comment, of course we've proven it was not possible for Oswald to have done it... proven it in a number of different ways. ...and we remain here to continue to dig and reveal... What you find doubtful .... is highly subjective.... the neglect of context appears to be your calling card in this discussion... and you still aint gonna learn what you dont wanna know.... Thanks for the discussion...

As much consideration as you give that it was Harvey who attended Stripling... I'm sorry you find Kudlaty unbelievable ... John just mentioned that it was Wylie who was principal in 1963 after Lucas' tenure - he was the Principal '53-'56 when Oswald attended - he had moved onto Arlington Heights... He says Wylie on the tape because it was indeed Wylie... yet Lucas had been there for years and Kudlaty and he were close... It not being consistent across all the platforms it's being presented is indeed a simple oversight.... and will be corrected. As to the rest of your OP, you are trying to impeach a direct witness with conjecture.. with your interpretation of how things SHOULD be... You start with Robert... I address Robert by trying to have you understand the relationship between the three "brothers"... by giving you context for this you give me grief... The conflict between the 2 older brothers is central to understanding how it was even possible for Kudlaty to be telling the truth. You then proceed to say, repeatedly, that people don't mean what they are saying... that no one else was ever asked? that's the rebuttal to which you want me to reply? THIS is your point... Further, numerous local personalities and people connected to Oswald have spoken to the Fort Worth Star-Telegram over the years, and as mentioned, newpapers across the country. Many of them have some connection to Oswald or a story to tell, none have Stripling stories. It is clear the Fort Worth Star-Telegram articles which reference Robert Oswald’s statements regarding Oswald as attending Stripling are blown out of proportion to increase their otherwise neglible (sic) importance. At no point over the almost 60 years of coverage does the Star-Telegram update their reporting, and continues to this day to use statements Robert Oswald gave them in 1959. The paper likely was unable to get new statements, and continues to just run with what they have. You seem to be forgetting his testimony in 1964... Says the same thing... has no idea about Beauregard... can you please try and remember it was 1959, not 2019? So people COULD have said something... newspapers COULD have followed up... you truly do not comprehend the reach and power of the FBI in 1963.... the number of informants was staggering... if Hoover's FBI didn't want you looking, you stopped looking... I know you're not that naive.... man, I hope you're not that naive. The rest of the OP is only your questioning the statements of direct witnesses... Summers is clearly confused about what he remembers. He references teaching Robert Oswald, when they weren’t at the school at the same time. a semicolon can be used between two closely related independent clauses. The images below start with the 49-50 school year... followed by 50-51.... Robert is listed along with Harvey... with different parents... Robert testifies to skipping 10th grade, Mr. JENNER. Would that be 1951, the end of your sophomore year?Mr. OSWALD. No, sir; 1950 would be the end of the school year. That summer there I started a job with an A&P Supermarket there in Fort Worth.I might say along this period mother seemed to be having difficulty keeping a job or making enough money and so forth to raise us. I stayed out of school that next year and worked for A&P.Mr. JENNER. Out of school 1950-51? Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir. Proceeding with you, at the end of the school year '50-'51--I assume you continued working there the summer of '51?Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir.Mr. JENNER. And did you reenter school that fall?Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir; I didMr. JENNER. Where?Mr. OSWALD. Arlington Heights High School. Mr. JENNER. You attended Arlington Heights High School for the school year '51-'52?Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir; that is correct.Mr. JENNER. And what about the year '52-'53?Mr. OSWALD. July 1952 I joined the Marine Corps. Robert is crossed out in the 51-52 records.... despite finishing the entire year.... strange so if Mr. Summer teaches him Jan 50 thru Summer 1951... one way or another... that's about 2 school years in his mind... so what? Harvey Lee Oswald in 7th grade would be 1954.... September. He would be with the woman on the right, while Lee remained with the woman on the left... Context again Mark... and for those who don't know everything about the subject, it helps. Looking again at the OP, you simply try to impeach these witnesses with conjecture and hyperbole.... and you neither spoke with these witnesses or the people who did We have little else to cover here... now we know about Wylie.... and you still think these guys are the same...

Add this to the fact the FBI invented the journey from start to finish and Hoover goes out of his way to cover for the CIA... why? Cause his boy Oswald was doing his FBI gig spying on Cubans... the CIA left him no choice but to put him on buses to and from Mexico... L/9 was was of AZCUE's buddies... none of his reports mention Oswald in Mexico either.... On the 28th he is driven to the Sports Drome in Dallas and is seen there on opening day... Hoover called Mexico classic CIA double-dealing... who the other 2 men were is not nearly as important as accepting that the Odio sisters saw Oswald.... If we could proceed accepting that our Oswald was not in Mexico on those dates, it may help other things come into focus... FWIW DJ

Nobody has thanked you ... and nobody cares for the orders you bark... While you go round and round with Wylie and Lucas and Stripling... waiting and drooling for a post to come your way so thankfully you get to speak your piece.... (originality doesn't seem to be your strong point... Other People's Work... that's where you live... ) Luckily there is an IGNORE function whereby we don't have to listen to you pollute thread after thread... Frank said what sounds like Wylie at the beginning of that video... Lucas took over in 1953. Probably a simple mistake since this was now 10 years later... What's not a mistake is your ineffective attacks on Kudlaty for not having done this that or the other... for doing what he says he did... and you wondering, hypothetically, what else... what else can we use to trip Kudlaty up...???? In the end, you simply can't. Which principal is not nearly as important as FBI agents removing the accused's school records and job records in select areas of the country from 11/23 all thru the following week... while the FBI Lab takes fewer items than it returns to Dallas that following week... Your inability to see more than a single puzzle piece at a time is what defines childish here Robbie... Terribly sorry you can'y figure out how they fit together but if you follow along for a while and stop interrupting, maybe you'd learn to see TWO pieces at the same time... With regards to the emoticons... it's 2020, get over yourself already... 💩

You got it RCD.... Now you can go right back to your tiny little world where nothing relates to anything else... keep discussing the chlorophyll while the rest of us explore the trees and the forest.... what an amazingly myopic view of evidence you have.... Obituary for Kathryn Lucas: A Yucca beauty while in her freshman year, she met and later became engaged to Weldon M. Lucas, a student and athlete at North Texas. They married Dec. 24, 1932, and resided in Fort Worth, where Weldon, known as "Luke," coached in the Fort Worth Independent School District. In the mid-1940s he became a vice principal at McLean Junior High, in the '50s a principal at Stripling High School and in the early '60s a principal at Arlington Heights High School. Can you post HARRY WYLIE's bio and occupation from 1953 to 1957.... y'know to prove he was actually the principal at the time... Lucas started in 1953... maybe Wylie was 51 & 52? Maybe, just maybe Kudlaty misspoke having had Wylie as his principal a few years earlier... You can prove Wylie was the principal, right?

obviously... but it's not mentioned in the post that starts this thread.... Was it just a mistaken name... I've had enough of this bantering anyway... Like trying to teach a rock to swim...

Mark.... (we sure do like long posts, don't we? First... what qualifies you to determine beyond all other explanations that was what the man was thinking as he was speaking? Then... follow up with a "prove a negative" question. Nobody does that anymore... so last century... Sadly it seems you will not consider my arguments related to Pic and Robert and the huge break in communication between late '52 and '54. Pic knowing his brother was not the boy at the Bronx zoo in Aug 53 Robert contradicting Pic about October 1952... if Robert was there, he knows his brother is not at Stripling since he was in NYC if he was not there in 1952 but 1953... spending time with his brother, taking him around the Bronx... still Stripling? Yet with all this behind him by a number of years, and knowing now what he does, he says that after 6th grade he would attend Stripling.... Yes, Robert says "started attending" Stripling as if he knew first hand Mr. JENNER. Now, the condition that you described as to Lee shifting for himself during the daytime, when your mother was away working and you were away working, and your brother John was in the Coast Guard, continued, I take it, when he began attendance and while he was attending W. C. Stripling Junior High School?Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir. Yet Jenner knows better than that.... he has Oswald's whole life and not once does it say he went to Stripling.... He knows with the fortitude of RCD... yet does not call Robert on it... it's not important to him... or is it too important? The WC determined that many witness' statements required alteration and revision... they were entitled to make wholesale changes to testimony and have the revised, self written account put in the final record... learning this fact made me shudder... sadly, it's true. In all of the WCR and H&E's there are only 2 reference to Stripling, someone who talks about knowing Robert in 1959 - which has to be 1949 - and how violent a temper he had... WCD887 p25... and Robert's testimony. Like so much testimony... it is simply ignored by the WC.... in 1963 Robert knows his brother was either in NYC or New Orleans, but says Stripling Pic tells us that he too was off in Aug/Sept 1953 and saw his mother but never saw Lee... Marge complains to John about Lee no having anyone to confide in.... this is within a few weeks one way or the other of Robert's 1953 visit.... it seems though that Robert moved his 1952 visit to 1953 for some reason... IDK at this point. We both agree he knows the boy in NYC and again in New Orleans did not attend Stripling.... yet you see Mark, Robert was talking about Harvey Lee Oswald. So his comments and all of Stripling disappears from the record... We are left to John Armstrong, 30 years later finding out yet another example of the FBI of the time acquiring and disappearing evidence contrary to the official company line. (Can you say Minox camera??) I gave your essay starting this thread a fair shake yet the reasoning behind you're not accepting the story revolves quite a bit around your incredulity at the events... not the events themselves... being amazing that something is or isn't in a file is fine... stating conclusively certain items could NOT be in those files is pure guesswork... Guesswork presented as Fact... as Authentic Evidence.... when it's not... it's your POV on the subject and your alternative explanation which may or may not fit all the known facts... Please don't believe you are impeaching the word of the man who has nothing to lie about... and did not get calls from 2 principals (RCD???) but simply tells the story as he remembered. The really interesting part is that there are always 2-4 people who feel it their duty to shoot arrows which fall woefully short each and every time... Dangerous people with a little knowledge... a glimpse at a puzzle piece they don't like and have just enough to be able to try and knock it down.... It's no big deal really... it takes so much time and effort to really want to understand the evidence... even if you read the book... So to one and all..... sorry it requires so much of your time and effort to GET it... and to think... 57 years later and we still don't know how many 'who's pulled the triggers... Keep working at it... the years 1947 to 1975 are filled with some of the most amazing "Conspiracies" related to JFK in one way or another... Discounting the duplicity of H&L as a Cold War tactic already used by others is a bit premature I feel... But that's me... take care DJ

Thanks Steve... great stuff... FWIW Monterrey was where the Aussie girls were supposed to have gotten back on the Flecha Rojas bus to Mexico City The typed and original passenger list for those getting on in Monterrey is posted below.. So, we bought the ticket on the bus at Laredo and that enabled us to stop off in Monterrey. But the ticket was from Laredo to Mexico City.Mr. BALL. And from what company did you buy the ticket?Miss MUMFORD. As far as I can remember, it was a bus company called Transporter del Norte. === Mr. BALL. Well. you were shown pictures of a man later on by the Federal Bureau of Investigation agent, were you not?Miss MUMFORD. Yes.Mr. BALL. And they showed you pictures of Oswald, didn't they; Lee Harvey Oswald?Miss MUMFORD. No.Mr. BALL. You didn't ever see a picture of Oswald?Miss MUMFORD. No.

Did you even bother reading Mark's post that starts the thread before posting? Obviously not Not once on that page does anyone state that he received calls from 2 different principals... are you so desperate to appear as if you actually know something about H&L that you'll make things up just to try and prove a point? Sad really that you can't follow 3 different people on one single page of a thread not to mention the hundreds of other details with which you can't be bothered.... You must be an expert at those large piece puzzles where you only need 3 pieces to complete... any more than that and the puzzle is simply unsolvable for you... If you don't understand the entire puzzle from one piece, why bother.... what a farce. FWIW... see if you can keep this all straight #3 in particular as you can't be bothered to read for comprehension... geez! Keep posting buddy... you'll talk yourself out of your own position soon enough... There were 3 Principals: 1 - Lucas for Stripling 1963, 2 - Bostick for Monnig 1963, 3 - Ricardo Galindo for Stripling 1990's 1. 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. 2. Frank Kudlaty knew the principal of Monnig Junior High, Mr. Ree Bostick, for many years and talked with him after the assassination. Mr. Bostick told Frank that FBI agents also visited his school and asked for Lee Harvey Oswald's school records. Mr. Bostick did know which records, if any, were given to the agents 3. Galindo was the Principal at Stripling Junior High School when Armstrong was researching “Harvey & Lee” 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 Robert's testimony, there is nothing said about BEAUREGARD JHS. Yet he says he was there literally within a month of his finishing BJHS... in fact, the 1955 telephone directory has "Margt Oswald" listed at 120 N Telemachus despite them living on Exchange Place since summer of 1954. Mr. JENNER. Did you visit your mother and your brother in New Orleans when you returned from the service in July of 1955?Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir; I did. I did not--yes, sir, it was in July 1955 when I made my first trip from Fort Worth, Tex., to New Orleans, La He says he visits mom and brother in July 1955.... with nothing said about 1954... in fact his testimony is specifically steered away from 1954.... t's as if the boy Robert is talking about never attended Beauregard JHS... and of course, that's the case... the boy Robert says went to Stripling was not his brother... and he and Pic knew... Pic gets especially elusive as we get to 1954. We have no letters FROM Pic to his mother, his REAL mother for that would not work... her address would be different than the return address on all the letters from Marge... We have one dated July 1952 talking of coming to NYC... the next letter is May 1954... with Marge just now telling PIC they've moved back from NY... (5 months ago supposedly.. and this from a woman who appears to have written scores of letters to PIC virtually every single month up to 1952, then again after May 1954.... This exchange should give you some idea how PIC felt about his brother Lee Harvey: we've all seen the 1962 Thanksgiving photo... We KNOW an Oswald and Marina and Marge were there... just not Pic's brother. Mr. JENNER - Did you see your brother at any time thereafter? (August 1953)Mr. PIC - No, sir; I did not.Mr. JENNER - Was there an occasion in Thanksgiving 1962 when you saw him?Mr. PIC - Yes, sir; I can get to that. There are things happened prior to that.Mr. JENNER - You did see him--Mr. PIC - No, sir; I did not see him. I seen my mother. Mr. JENNER - I see. All right; go ahead. Sandy, Robert is lying and PIC knows it... PIC also seems to know something is off with his other "brother".... But of course these puzzle pieces have nothing to do with the Stripling piece of the puzzle, right? Lee Oswald never went to BENBROOK Elementary in 1945 as claimed... there is a single FBI report which claims: Address on enrollment card is "Worth Hotel" AND 7408 Ewing which is not bought until 1948. MO lists LEE's Bday as July 9, 1939 to get into school* *This info is from an FBI report as footnote to p674 of the WCR. CE1874 mentions O.H. STOWE superintendent TARRANT county schools claiming they had an enrollment card for October 31, 1945 with July 9 1939 as Lee's Bday. The address was listed as ROUTE 5 BOX 567 (but of course that card is not in evidence) yet the WCR has him entering 1st grade in January 1947... over 2 years later.... 7408 Ewing was not built until 1948 notice the DOB for HARVEY... now if he's 8 with the 7/9/39 Bday the record has to be between Sept '47 and Oct 19, 1947... otherwise NANCY LEE would also be 8 years old. Finally, Marge divorces in June 1948 and specifically asks for her name back... yet HARVEY's mom is known as EKDAHL for a number of years in these records... Bottom line Sandy.... the existence of HARVEY LEE has been as carefully hidden as the frontal head shot.... we all know it's real, proving it given what the FBI did to the evidence is another story entirely... Take care

dup

dup...

Russian Funds Transfer ??

Guess you never put together a puzzle where one piece gives you no real clue about the entire image, but it fits and helps make the image complete... Without that piece yet with all the others, the picture is still easily seen... only not by you Maybe that's the problem... you look to solve complicated equations by trying to find where it says 1 + 1 = 2 so you can understand it... Sorry RCD... in this one of a kind exception to virtually every rule... this situation can't be understood with 1 + 1 = 2 simplicity .... if you want simple... Oswald did it.... There, simple and easy for you... As with Stripling and virtually every item of evidence you can name, there are "alternate explanations"... A lot of it planned that way. You not accepting evidence or witnesses does not negate what they say and represent... You can't prove Kudlaty was making it up.... You can't prove Myra DeRouse wrong and you still don't seem to understand 1954 at Exchange vs 1956... Again RCD... no matter... luckily, you are not the standard by which evidence and truth is determined... that only exists in your mind. Now that you've repeatedly proven yourself here.... What jollies do you derive by remaining here if you're never going to be satisfied with an answer in the context of the assassination? Too bad too, you used to have something to say...

You will not be convinced here at least.... so I have to ask... What caliber of evidence would suit you... ? ...would convince you we are dealing with the records of one person created from the lives of 2 people ...for a long period of time....? For if there is no standard to meet... why are you bothering with this at all?

IOW you never read her testimony and have no idea about the conflicts to which I refer.... You never read the book but feel qualified to critique it... You are terribly unfamiliar with the subject matter and seem only to parrot those who have a little knowledge and with whom you agree.... 🦜 And yes Jon, given the time she was given, the address of everywhere I've lived is not too difficult.... the problems arise from the conflicts created... and the outright lies she tells about her marriage, her children, her homes, her jobs... and on and on... you'd know that if you took any time to research a topic instead of just jumping in and hoping you know how to swim.... you obviously need some of those water wings.... Since you really have no idea of what I speak..(and the others are here to argue the breadcrumbs)..... and you honestly think that the JFK case is filled with "perfectly logical alternatives" to the actual narrative... There is no point in discussing anything with you.... you have no grasp of the underlying situation whatsoever.... all good Jon.... ....you aint gonna learn what you dont wanna know.... and since there are quite a few locations for you to find out for yourself... you might take the time to brush up on the subjects you so vehemently denounce.... I can ask you the same I asked RCD who also chooses not to answer... You will not be convinced here at least.... so I have to ask... What caliber of evidence would suit you... ? ...would convince you we are dealing with the records of one person created from the lives of 2 people ...for a long period of time....? For if there is no standard to meet... why are you bothering with this at all? Bu-bye now...

Hey... thanks John Since you are so well versed in the evidence you MUST know about all the conflicts created by the "fake" Marge's WC testimony... or better yet, you can explain how the "real" Marge would not know so much about herself, her children, her marriages, or her residences.... C'mon here Jon... you must know SOMETHING about her history from reading or viewing source documents all by your little self (oh, right, thanks for the update) I had forgotten... you don't do research or check anything... you only criticize and jump on the bandwagon with a few "atta boyz" for those knowing vastly more than you... Thanks for adding so much to this thread and the forum in general... You're a shining example ...

No easy answer.... RCD... there is a book full of "no-easy answer" conflicts.... you say you were involved with the text but not to what extent and in which areas... If you were aware, you chose not to follow up on the sources upon which the theory is based as it obviously does not suit your understanding of history in this matter... or you did and found them not supporting the theory... Fair?.... well fair enough I see a conversation starting in 1945 which includes Edwin Ekdahl, Benbrook, Korth, the growth of Ft. Worth post WWII.... and the conflicting testimony of Robert O and John Pic. You will not be convinced here at least.... so I have to ask... What caliber of evidence would suit you... ? ...would convince you we are dealing with the records of one person created from the lives of 2 people ...for a long period of time....? For if there is no standard to meet... why are you bothering with this at all?

What I posted Mark, leads us to Dec 1953,, a year before Stripling... I’d think we both agree that certain events lead to the scent of duplicity... Stripling doesn’t just happen on an island. I get the feeling you didn’t bother reading my post at all.... where we find Pc and Robert at odds over the fall of 1952 when Robert falsely claims he was not in NYC with Lee, mother and the Pics... to Robert per his story, Lee is in NYC and not possibly at Stripling in 7th grade... Pic says he was there... no matter, fast forward to August 1953. Robert is with Harvey, taking his photo... Pic visits his real mother, Lee is not included... Lee, says mom, has no one to confide in... yet Robert is within weeks one way or the other of coming and living with Lee and Marge... I see this as the real mother and Pic talking and not mentioning an event that will not happen to them... Robert is visiting Harvey, the boy at the zoo, and Marge.... Robert knows about both boys, I conclude, and truly does not know where Harvey and Marge go in Sept 1953.... while Lee and mother Stay thru Jan 1954 then go to New Orleans and Beauregard January 1954. But Jenner keeps up the attack on the correct years Mr. OSWALD. Just a minute, please.In 1952 Lee was 13 years old. He would be attending W. C. Stripling Junior High School then. Mr. JENNER. I see. For the school year 1951-52? (NO, 7th grade is 52-53) But we are talking about 1954, September..... gotta finish this on the laptop...

And even as far over as to miss TSBD entirely.... the scenario works well... add triangulation.... the south and north knoll ... and the actual direction of his head.... more left side damage ala Huber?

Good luck Mark... again, I think Jim is doing a great service ... John the digging.... whole point was to keep digging... we may not agree on every item, but we understand the the picture.... why have so many intelligence related people been within 1 or 2 degrees of separation from this Oswald fellow. NYC 1953 is a hole worth diving into some day.... I want you to consider that Pic and Robert conflict as to when Robert was in NY.... Robert tries to move it off to late 1953, (Pic does not see Lee after 2/53) When Pic, wife, Lee Marge, and others where together in the late fall months of 1952.... Lee would be at school in NYC... not Stripling.... and Robert would/should know that since he was there with Lee attending a NYC school... Mr. PIC - I think this was, his leave was probably in October or November 1952, a matter of a month or two after they had moved out. We visited their apartment in the Bronx. Mr. JENNER - Excuse me, where did your brother stay? Mr. PIC - I think he stayed at the Soldier-Sailor-Airmen Club in New York. Mr. JENNER - In any event he did not stay with you. Mr. PIC - No, sir; he may have stayed with my mother also. I don't think so. Maybe for a night or two. We went out, my wife fixed him up with a date with one of her girl friends and we went out together a couple of times. So, we were invited up there for this Sunday dinner. So it was my mother, Lee, Robert, my wife, myself, and my son. Robert was already there when we arrived. When Lee seen me or my wife he left the room. For dinner he sat in the front room watching TV and didn't join us whatsoever. Even if NOT... Mark... he was there again in 1953... staying with the family... he'd still not know there was no Stripling? Mr. OSWALD. This was July or August of 1953. I had my orders to go to Miami, Fla. I took a 10-day leave and left Millington, Tenn., by car and came to New York City and spent 10 days in New York with Lee, mother, John, and his family.Mr. JENNER. Where did you stay?Mr. OSWALD. At mother's apartment, with Lee, in the Bronx some place I do not recall the address. Mr. JENNER. What, if anything, did you learn at that time regarding Lee's attendance or nonattendance in school? Mr. OSWALD. Nothing on that, sir. This was in the summer time. Lee, of course, was home and not supposed to be in school. And I do not think anything was brought up that I recall about whether or not Lee had been attending school regularly or not. Mr. McKENZIE. Can we go off the record? Mr. JENNER. Yes. (Discussion off the record.) === PIC is placing the time exactly when Robert would be visiting, or soon to visit and not a single word is mentioned from mother? odd to me. Mr. JENNER - During the time, on the occasions when you saw her, which was relatively infrequent from January of 1953 to, what is the next date you gave, September of 1953?Mr. PIC - August-September 1953.Mr. JENNER - August of 1953, September of 1953, was there any discussion with her about Lee?Mr. PIC - When I asked about him it was the same old stuff, he is getting along better. She would tell me that he still doesn't have anybody to confide in, things like this.Mr. JENNER - Was there any further discussion about truancy, any possibility of care for him by a psychiatrist?Mr. PIC - No, sir; when I asked about this she said everything was working out fine.Mr. JENNER - All right. PIC had not seen LEE since Feb 1953.... Pic is referring to his real mother here... and the real Lee.... PIC was not with Robert or Lee (the boy in this photo at the zoo) while with his mother...in 1953 and Robert knew it. (In Aug 1953 Robert's LEE was not the one from Late 1951 when the inset was taken....)

I read it Mark... A lot of work, time and effort... . I'd like you to consider the interesting coincidences surrounding 2220 Thomas over the years while I take a day or so to work a reply. Very interesting.....

Pithy, insightful post T.... you add so much to a conversation