Thomas Graves

I rely on everything Marina said under oath -- however, Marina herself admitted that she knew very little -- mainly what Lee told her, and he was often an unreliable source. As for the Imperial Reflex camera -- even granting your one-sided observations and suspicion about Ruth Paine -- photographic experts at the very least concluded that the BYP were made with the Imperial Reflex camera -- to the exclusion of all other cameras. Marina claimed ignorance about cameras as she claimed ignorance about rifles and guns. In the early 1960's, that was common for females. Very little of USA life was co-ed in the early 1960's -- it was very much like the 1950's until JFK was assassinated. Do you wish to review Marina's testimony about the Imperial Reflex in this thread, Rob? I believe it is defensible. IMHO, Oswald used both the cheap Imperial Reflex camera as well as the expensive, sophisticated camera equipment at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall to create at least four different BYP's himself -- deliberately -- for plausible deniability. He used the assistance of Roscoe White for this purpose. After having done this back in March 1963, when LHO was confronted on November 23, 1963 with one of the BYP by Captain Will Fritz, LHO predictably said, "That photo is a Fake! It is my face stuck on somebody else's body! I know a lot about photography and I can prove that!" In other words, LHO had immediate plausible deniability -- and he had rehearsed that little speech for six months! Every word he said there was true! Regards, --Paul Trejo Being "under oath" with the WC meant very little for several reasons. Firstly, they never enforced a perjury charge against any witness, thus, they never enforced a "must tell the truth" approach. Secondly, there was no cross-examination, therefore, it is not legal testimony that you will find in a court of law. Numerous witnesses brought lawyers with them to testify, but there was no lawyer for LHO. That is wrong. You have the right to believe everything that Marina said, but both the WC and HSCA had doubts about her truthfulness on quite a few issues. I choose to be more careful and that is my right. You call my account of the camera "one-sided", but it is based on the evidence. Do you have different evidence? If so, please let me know about it. You seem willing to believe claims by Marina and lay the issue on LHO, but that is not how I see it. Anything LHO would have told her in private was protected under law so all we would have is her claim that it was said. I don't need to review the testimony in this thread as I have reviewed it for thirty years, therefore, I know that there is no evidence showing that LHO owned that camera or that Marina ever took any photos. Just so you know, I am new here, but I am not new to this topic. Rob, I don't know if Marina had a lawyer during her WC interrogations (I would imagine that she did), but her coming to the US from the USSR, a regime not known for ensuring fair judicial proceedings, might have put the fear of god into her regarding her WC testimony, and therefore might have caused her to be more truthful under that kind of questioning than she otherwise would have been. Just sayin'. -- Tommy

Dear Paul, How could three bullets to the head support anyone's Lone Nut theory? Or does LN here stand for Longish Narrative? -- Tommy

Three shots to the head from the same gun? An automatic? -- Tommy

Andrej, I thought you said you believed that Marina herself took CE-133A, which, in my reading, makes CE-133A the original photo, before manipulation. As for Roscoe White -- of course Marina never met the man -- as I read her testimony. Instead, IMHO, we have Lee Oswald dressing all in black (which were not his own clothes) and surprising Marina as she was hanging laundry outside one day in early March, to demand that she take his picture with their cheap, Imperial Reflex camera. She objected, and said she didn't know how to work the camera. LHO insisted, and told Marina which button to press. Marina said repeatedly that she took one and only one picture -- of Lee only -- dressed in this "costume" of all-black. She put it out of her mind, because she thought it was ridiculous. Now -- the photographs of Roscoe White were therefore taken by LHO himself. Not by Marina. Probably the black clothes were Roscoe's in the first place -- because LHO had no black clothes, according to the evidence, in my reading. Again -- the pose is impossible; it is faked by photo manipulation. And after Roscoe posed for FOUR BYPs -- LHO then manipulated these photographs by inserting his own head in all four. He did this with JCS equipment around the same time that he made his fake A.J. HIdell ID cards. He did this by taking photographs of the photographs, and retouching and taking more photographs of the photographs. As for the weird slant of the photo -- it was achieved by lifting one end of the photo before the final photo of the photo was taken. LHO did this deliberately. Finally, Roscoe's knee is bent backwards in the photo -- and that isn't a crease in his pants. It's clearly re-touching of the photo, IMHO. Regards, --Paul Trejo Dear Paul, Could you please tell us why Oswald took photos of Roscoe White, holding a rifle and Communist newspapers, in Oswald's own back yard? Thanks, -- Tommy

Admiral Thomas Moorer was Woodward's boss, or Haig's boss? Never mind. I just realized that Woodward was a Naval officer at the time. Carry on. -- Tommy

Andrej, No, CE 133-A is also manipulated. The square chin is the first clue. Also, the thick neck, the broad shoulders and the lumpy right wrist. All these belong to Roscoe White. Further, look at the right knee on CE 133-A. Now look at your right-knee in the photo you shared. Your leg is STRAIGHT. Now look at LHO's knee -- it is bent backward. Actually, look at the line of the horizontal fence-post that intersects the vertical knee point. There is re-touching there. No, CE-133A is also manipulated. We no longer have the single photo that Marina took. But even Marina herself was fooled -- as LHO was a superb deceiver. He reveled in it. Regards, --Paul Trejo I had a weird idea last night. Maybe the bad guys wanted LHO to look a little "twisted" and "unbalanced." Like I said, weird. -- Tommy

Dear Kirk, Sorry but I don't have the time to read your long post. Did I say that that short segment was the best segment of the video? Really? Or is it possible I just chose something near the beginning? -- Tommy

Andrej, Impressive work. But it looks to me as though "Oswald's" hips are turned more toward the camera than yours are, and his right knee is bent the wrong way. Also, his right foot is pointed more forward than yours. -- Tommy

Sandy, I was speculating about what kind of weapon would be a good knoll weapon and absolutely, "I settled". Are you trying to form an argument over my use of grammar? Go for it. Chris, Are you confessing to having participated in the assassination? (lol) -- Tommy

bumped

Sandy, Actually, Jack introduced the guy Ruby killed on 11/24/63 to Oliver as "My friend Lee with the CIA." At least that's what I've heard her say. -- Tommy Tommy, Are you correcting what I said? Or adding more detail? If the former, please explain. Because what you said seems to be consistent with what I said. BTW, Oliver says this shortly after the 18 minute mark of the video Sandy, The devil's in the details. According to Beverly Oliver, Jack Ruby said, "This is my friend, Lee, with the CIA." He didn't say, "This is my friend Lee Harvey Oswald, with the CIA." I realize that you (probably) wrote it the way you did to indicate that Oliver was talking about the guy she (claimed to have) watched Ruby shoot on TV (i.e., Lee Harvey Oswald). I "corrected you" to help prevent any confusion or misinterpretation which might arise in the minds of all of the CIA lurkers, newbies, students, serious students, "researchers," and "serious researchers" on this here forum. (lol) -- Tommy Tommy, [...] Or is it that Ruby only called the man "Lee," and because of that we are depending upon Beverly Oliver's cognitive skills as to whether that really was Oswald as opposed to some other dude named Lee? [...] Sandy, Correctomundo! Jack introduced him as "Lee," not 'Lee Harvey Oswald," according to Oliver. Then she claims she recognized this "Lee" when Jack shot him on TV. You don't want "researchers" to go around saying, "Jack introduced him to Beverly and Jada as Lee Harvey Oswald," do you? Just a matter of historical (or should I say hysterical?) accuracy, Sandy. Nothing wrong with that is there? Sheeh. -- Tommy

Dear Robert, I only believe three things. [Just kidding; there are probably four.] 1) That Marion Baker ran into the TSBD, 2) that Shelly and Lovelady can be seen walking down Elm Street Extension, and 3) that they cut across it and headed over towards "the island" right after they passed that groovy-looking gate (or whatever it is) on the side of the TSBD. -- Tommy Would you please start another thread and list all of the evidence in the whole case that you believe in?

Dear Mike, You're right. I was wrong. My bad. I remember her now, up there on Houston Street by "Gerry Patrick Hemming." My bad. I'm sorry. It's interesting that you didn't say, "I think you made a mistake, Tommy. That photo was taken up on Houston about a minute earlier," or words to that effect. But noooooo, you had to throw in a "I don't want to be overly critical, but ....." insult, instead (even though it is against EF rules to impugne the general research abilities of another member). I can see that you and I are going to get along just fine, Mike. (lol) By the way, have you caught any other mistakes I've made? There must be millions of them. I'm probably "all wet" about Larry Ronco's not killing himself, and about Babushka Lady's having a purse strap going across her back, right? (Does that oldish-looking woman walking towards the grassy knoll have a purse strap going across her chest? Maybe she does; it's hard to tell.) Oh yeah, and the fact that Beverly Oliver said in her tape recorded HSCA interview that one of the two guys who took her film was CIA? Yes, I know. These three things probably don't qualify as "original research," but they are new to me, and I thought I'd share them with y'all. Hope that's okay with you, Mike. BTW, how is my forgetting that that photo was taken up on Houston Street while the limo was passing by the same as "not being able to determine the difference between photos" ? Do you not see the similarities in that woman's clothing and Babushka Lady's? Thanks for not being "overly-critical" of my silly mistake, Mike. (lol) I will try to improve. Hopefully, I will eventually become a "serious researcher" who it truly worthy of your highly sought-after respect. In the meantime, I hope it's okay for me to be just a "serious student" and to "think out loud" on this forum. Meaning what? Meaning I reserve the right to be able to "change my mind" and / or to present "contradictory / devil's advocate arguments" (i.e., for me to appear to be "all over the place") even mid-thread, if necessary. Would that "bug" you too much, Mike? Are you the kind of "serious researcher" who prefers to "stick to his guns, come hell or high water" and insists that others do that, too? I am truly sorry about choosing the obviously-wrong photo of Babushka Lady. That was a stupid mistake and I'll be the first one to admit it. -- Tommy Bumped for Mike Walton, with an addendum: Douglas Caddy accused me of being a "serious researcher"? The nerve! Do try to get your facts straight, Mike, especially when you're talking about me. This is what Mr. Caddy really said about me (in post # 25 on the Judyth and Wim thread on 9/11/14): Michael, with all due respect, Thomas Graves over the years has provided an incredible amount of information and knowledge about Kennedy's assassination in his over 5000 posts in our forum. He is neither naïve nor gullible. You, he and I, along with the other members of the forum, are trying our best to construct the definitive account of what happened in 1963 in Dallas and in the orchestrated cover-up that followed. Each of us has something to contribute in this endeavor. We are doing this because JFK's assassination was a major turning point in American and world history and affects everyone to this day. So, Mike, where the heck does Mr. Caddy accuse me of being a "serious researcher"? He's much too smart to say such an obviously-wrong thing as that. LOL

Dear Mike, "You should me enough"? Is that (gasp) a mistake? -- Tommy

Sandy, Actually, Jack introduced the guy Ruby killed on 11/24/63 to Oliver as "My friend Lee with the CIA." At least that's what I've heard her say. -- Tommy Tommy, Are you correcting what I said? Or adding more detail? If the former, please explain. Because what you said seems to be consistent with what I said. BTW, Oliver says this shortly after the 18 minute mark of the video Sandy, The devil's in the details. According to Beverly Oliver, Jack Ruby said, "This is my friend, Lee, with the CIA." He didn't say, "This is my friend Lee Harvey Oswald, with the CIA." I realize that you (probably) wrote it the way you did to indicate that Oliver was talking about the guy she (claimed to have) watched Ruby shoot on TV (i.e., Lee Harvey Oswald). I "corrected you" to help prevent any confusion or misinterpretation which might arise in the minds of all of the CIA lurkers, newbies, students, serious students, "researchers," and "serious researchers" on this here forum. (lol) -- Tommy

I take it, then, that you believe everything that everybody said. Sandy, Everyone except that lyin', money-grubbin' Beverly Oliver. (lol) -- Tommy

Dear Joe, Actually, she says "bang-bang .....bang ..........................................boom-boom!," indicating five shots from at least two different guns. I'm thinking that none of them could have been echoes because the third one didn't have one. -- Tommy

bumped What I've highlighted in red above is the impression I've gotten since becoming a member of the forum. So far, every time I've asked another member why they believe a particular witness is a phony, I've receive IMO lame reasons.. Nevertheless I'm glad there are those on the forum who look for and share reasons not to believe a witness. They save me a lot of time and effort in doing so myself. Hmm, I don't know Sandy, but in the case of Gordon Arnold, where he admits to being part of a computer simulated photo that once showed just one figure (badge man) and now shows three with the assassin and an accomplice only a few feet behind Arnold and firing by his ear to corroborate his story, and we both agree the photo is bogus, (let others think what they will.) I'm not sure what reasoning would qualify as greater than 'lame' for you. But having said that, maybe it's the rebellion against that gullibility that you profess, that leads you to delve and use some of those unique sleuthing skills you possess. Thomas, when you recommended to watch that short excerpt from Beverly Oliver, I was expecting more photo evidence of who the Bubushka lady was. Instead the highlight is really her in front of an audience hunkering down and saying "That's me, I'm the Bubushka Lady", and that is relevant for our subjective judgments, she does sound convincing. On the other hand, Yes, I've always thought Bubushka Lady dresses more like a woman approaching middle age then a sexy 17 year old, wanting to get the attention of her President. She does make a reference in mwkk that Jada who worked at the Carousel (Oliver didn't)had seen Ruby and LHO together, but Jada had denied she had seen them together when asked by newsmen after the assassination. But what if she was the Bubushka lady? What new evidence did she provide that no one else in that proximity didn't? To me the most noteworthy part of her story is the confiscation of the film she alleges taking. Isn't it? Dear Kirk, Did watching that 3 minute and twenty-one second long section whet your appetite to watch more, maybe even the whole thing? Maybe some of the photo evidence you're looking for is in it yet. (What were you hoping for exactly? A full frontal view?) Look at it this way, maybe you'll hear her say something you can prove to be false! During that short section, did you notice that black wig she claimed to have worn that day? What do you think of her description of the shots? ("bang-bang ....bang .......................................boom-boom!") Etc. -- Tommy PS What makes you think she would have wanted to "dress sexy" on that cool, windy day to "get the attention of her president"? PPS Didn't you catch the part where she says that, although she was a singer at the Colony Club, she would often visit (between sets) the next door Carousel Club, and occasionally work there as a "hostess," too? (Or did I just read that somewhere or hear it in her approx. 25-minute long HSCA interview [q.v.] on youtube?)

Not the only stripper to claim to see them together, I'm going to post a quote from another soon. Clue in timeline above. Chris, FWIW, according to Oliver, she wan't a stripper (she says she tried it once and was practically booed off the stage). She was a singer at Abe Weinstein's nextdoor "Colony Club," and she also worked for Ruby sometimes as a "hostess." The stripper who Oliver claims was at the same table that night and was also introduced to "my friend Lee with the CIA" was Jada. Oliver claims that Jada disappeared right after the assassination, but we know that isn't true because she was interviewed on camera shortly after it. Turns out Jada died in 1980 in New Mexico. http://www.jfklancer.com/pdf/Jada_mark.pdf -- Tommy

Sandy, Actually, Jack introduced the guy Ruby killed on 11/24/63 to Oliver as "My friend Lee with the CIA." At least that's what I've heard her say. -- Tommy

Dear Mike, You're right. I was wrong. My bad. I remember her now, up there on Houston Street by "Gerry Patrick Hemming." My bad. I'm sorry. It's interesting that you didn't say, "I think you made a mistake, Tommy. That photo was taken up on Houston about a minute earlier," or words to that effect. But noooooo, you had to throw in a "I don't want to be overly critical, but ....." insult, instead. I can see that you and I are going to get along just fine, Mike. (lol) By the way, have you caught any other mistakes I've made? There must be millions of them. I'm probably "all wet" about Larry Ronco's not killing himself, and about Babushka Lady's having a purse strap going across her back, right? (Does that oldish-looking woman walking towards the grassy knoll have a purse strap going across her chest? Maybe she does; it's hard to tell.) Oh yeah, and the fact that Beverly Oliver said in her tape recorded HSCA interview that one of the two guys who took her film was CIA? Yes, I know. These three things probably don't qualify as "original research," but they are new to me, and I thought I'd share them with y'all. Hope that's okay with you, Mike. BTW, how is my forgetting that that photo was taken up on Houston Street while the limo was passing by the same as "not being able to determine the difference between photos" ? Do you not see the similarities in that woman's clothing and Babushka Lady's? Thanks for not being "overly-critical" of my silly mistake, Mike. (lol) I will try to improve. Hopefully, I will eventually become a "serious researcher" who it truly worthy of your highly sought-after respect. In the meantime, I hope it's okay for me to be just a "serious student" and to "think out loud" on this forum. Meaning what? Meaning I reserve the right to be able to "change my mind" and / or to present "contradictory / devil's advocate arguments" (i.e., for me to appear to be "all over the place") even mid-thread, if necessary. Would that "bug" you too much, Mike? Are you the kind of "serious researcher" who prefers to "stick to his guns, come hell or high water" and insists that others do that, too? I am truly sorry about choosing the obviously-wrong photo of Babushka Lady. That was a stupid mistake and I'll be the first one to admit it. -- Tommy

Another little mistake of Beverly's that I've caught is that although she has many times said that both of the men who took her film on 11/25/63 were FBI, she was tape recorded by the HSCA's investigators as saying that one of them was FBI ("Regis Kennedy") and the other one was (unnamed man) CIA. PS Looks like Babuska Lady's talking to the woman next to her in this photo. I wonder if that woman would remember her? -- Tommy

http://www.theirregular.com/news/2003-01-08/Obituaries/910505.html Bingo! http://www.theirregular.com/news/2003-01-08/Obituaries/910505.html Thanks Tommy, I watched about twenty minutes of it. Fascinating. I believe her. Beverly Oliver says her "prototype Yashica 8mm movie camera" (which I can't find on the Internet; AFAIK Yashica didn't market any 8mm movie cameras that weren't super 8) was given to her in 1963 her by her then-boyfriend, Larry Ronco, "who was working at the Kodak exhibit at Six Flags over Texas." Oliver has said that Ronco killed himself after the assassination. I've just found this press photo of a Larry Ronco working for Eastman Kodak Company back in the day. I don't know when the photo was taken. He's holding a Kodak "Retina Reflex" camera (first made in 1957), but I'm not sure which model. https://www.google.com/search?q=%22larry+ronco%22+eastman&rlz=1C1AVNE_enUS702US702&espv=2&biw=1280&bih=667&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjRreX32ZTPAhULHGMKHd96Bc0Q_AUIBygC#imgrc=EpMDZcdeigJdqM%3A Here's "Larry Ronco" and Beverly Oliver. -- Tommy If he's Beverly's "Larry Ronco," he didn't kill himself after all. Lawrence T. Ronco 1935-2003 -- He was a starting player on the Phillips High School 1953 Maine State Basketball ChampsCONCORD, N.H. -- Lawrence "Larry" Taylor Ronco, 67, passed away on Jan. 1, 2003, in New Hampshire, following a brief illness.He was born in Farmington, on Aug. 22, 1935, the son of Warren B. and Ella (Taylor) Ronco. He attended Phillips schools where his mother taught for many years, graduating from Phillips High School in 1953 as valedictorian of his class.Among many extra-curricular activities, he was a starting player on the 1953 Maine State Basketball Champions, Phillips High School, a distinction he carried proudly throughout his life. He went on to graduate from the University of Maine in Orono in 1957.After college, he served as a Lieutenant in the United States Army for two years, primarily at Fort Carson, Colo. Upon discharge from the Army, he became an employee of Eastman-Kodak Co. and later was self-employed with a national sales line that included jewelry and ladies accessories. He traveled extensively, finally settling in Nashua, N.H., after marrying Deborah Baker of Massachusetts in 1975.In addition to his wife, survivors include his sons, Scott and his wife Anne of North Reading, Mass., Ryan and his wife Molly of Roseville, Calif., Derek of Nashua, N.H.; and six grandchildren.A funeral was held Saturday, Jan. 4, 2003 at Phillips Methodist Church with Rev. Norman Boulay officiating.Interment will be in the spring at the Lower Cemetery in Eustis.Donations may be made to the organization of one's choice. http://www.theirregular.com/news/2003-01-08/Obituaries/910505.html

Sandy, If the to-be-found TSBD rifle wasn't ready, at least the bad guys knew what kind it would be, or had already decided to "find" a Carcano 91/38 there, because that's the kind of rifle "Oswald' is holding in the backyard photos. Since the BYP's determined what kind of rifle would be "found," why then wouldn't one have been ready to be put in place? And wouldn't the bad guys have already created all the paperwork required for it to be linked to Hidel / Oswald? How would it have helped the bad guys for them to put that off until after the assassination? Or do you think the BYP's were created after the assassination, too? -- Tommy

bumped What I've highlighted in red above is the impression I've gotten since becoming a member of the forum. So far, every time I've asked another member why they believe a particular witness is a phony, I've receive IMO lame reasons.. Nevertheless I'm glad there are those on the forum who look for and share reasons not to believe a witness. They save me a lot of time and effort in doing so myself. Sandy, Happy to oblige. BTW, what do you think of my previous post (# 73)? Tommy, I don't know who Mikkonen of Finland is or exactly what he did. But I'm only mildly surprised that a person could get things confused, like Zapruder for Nix. I've known people like that. Some people refer to them as "air heads" or "scatter brained." My mother was a bit of one. At the same time she was a very talented self-taught artist. She taught herself many skills. So I agree with you on your assessment of Beverly Oliver. Based on what little I know. EDIT: Her clothes sure don't look like those of a seventeen year old. Sandy, It's too bad this 2013 video of her is so gosh darn long. No one here seems to be willing to watch it. As a tasty "hors d' oeuveres," I suggest that y'all watch it from 05:04 to 08:25. I mean, 3 minutes and 21 seconds isn't too much to ask, is it? Hopefully it will "whet your appetite" and make you want to consume "the whole enchilada." -- Tommy