Dean Hartwell

JVB EVIDENCE AND CROSS-EXAMINATION This is a work in progress where I am collecting evidence about JVB's story. My focus is on her four basic assertions: (1) JVB went to New Orleans during the time Lee Harvey Oswald is known to have been there. Evidence: the work time card mentioned on the main thread and shown on previously named web sites. Cross-examination: None to date (2) JVB met Lee Harvey Oswald. Evidence: Anna Lewis' statements on a previously mentioned video. She states that she and her husband David double-dated with JVB and Lee. Cross-examination: Stephen says it would help to know more about what, if anything, anyone encouraged Anna to say before she talked on the video. She should also clarify why she gave a different story to Garrison than her husband regarding how she knew LHO, which may or may not be a problem. Barb adds that she believes JVB may have encouraged Anna before she made statements. Barb also states that she is trying to confirm a comment made Debra Conway as to whether Anna Lewis originally recalled JVB. Barb also claims that JVB sent around a "transcript" of an interview with one witness to another witness. (3) JVB and Lee Harvey Oswald had an affair. Evidence: Comments made by Anna Lewis on this topic on the same video. Cross-examination: See above. Jack adds that he believes several agencies and other parties watched LHO very closely in New Orleans and that none of the agencies has produced any report mentioning JVB. (4) JVB worked on a lab on a project to collect cancer cells to use to kill Fidel Castro. Evidence: Newspaper clippings posted show her interest in work in a science-related field and her excellence as science student. Cross-examination: See above. Sources in dispute: LHO: The True Story... JVB has said that it is unauthorized due to a contract dispute. She says she submitted corrections that were not made in the publishing of the book. Cross-examination: Barb states that the status does not negate everything in it. Barb asserts that on page 171 JVB says that Kerry Thornley took a picture of her and LHO together. Further discussion could turn up picture or clarify what part(s) of book are not reliable for reason of contract dispute, etc. This ties in to JVB assertions #2 and #3. Evidence rule: Independent corroborating evidence is best. Jack says it is a second source with no stake in the matter (paraphrase). Further questioning made it clear that he believes self-serving interest rules out a witness; I say it should be a factor for finder-of-fact (you) to consider. Comments on credibility (to get listed, you need to show some basis of what you are saying in one of the four assertions): John Dolver asks: "Judyth, when you went to spend some time in Sweden and go through the process of applying for asylum, part of your claim is that you are a socialist. Could you please take time to outline the argument you have for this, as well as state why you consider this a point of relevance. Further, how do you reconcile that with the proposed murder of the head of state of the sovereign nation of Cuba and performing this task with the Central Intelligence Agency of the sovereign nation the United States of America. Please." Where it goes next: All members are free to respond with ideas on evidence. I need any evidence that works for or against any of these assertions (#1-#4). You do not have to prove it but you must give reason to believe what you are suggesting.

Thank you, John! I am going to incorporate your fifth question in my next update. My ears are still buzzing! Dean

Good points, Stephen. I will employ my skills at conciseness. The key will be evidence that relates to the four main assertions. Only FOUR assertions? There are hundreds! Jack, I have presented four assertions that form the basis of her story. Evidence should fit under one of these assertions. If not, as I have said, you may bring up evidence outside the subject of these assertions at a later time.

Then I take it you, as judge, will not allow questions from doubters. For instance JVB claims she was one of the women in this photo. Then she said she was not. Then she said she was there, but not in the photo. I think some here would like to cross-examine her about this. Overruled? Jack Jack, There are no judges. I have already allowed evidence from doubters under "cross-examination." Serious questions, like yours, are welcome. Please tell me where JVB made her claim(s). I need a source. An independent source. Her claims are in this thread. You find them. Jack, I am not clear what you mean. Are you saying that JVB claimed somewhere in this thread that she was in the picture?

JVB EVIDENCE AND CROSS-EXAMINATION I have decided to take the comments I am getting on this thread and put it into a new form. We could assign JVB the "plaintiff" status and say that her case is that she is telling the truth about her time in New Orleans in 1963. Her specific assertions and evidence offered for each can be shown, as can "cross-examination" or counter-arguments offered by critics. This is a work in progress and, of course, is subject to my own bias as to what is relevant or debatable evidence. (1) JVB went to New Orleans during the time Lee Harvey Oswald is known to have been there. Evidence: the work time card mentioned on the main thread and shown on previously named web sites. Cross-examination: None (2) JVB met Lee Harvey Oswald. Evidence: Anna Lewis' statements on a previously mentioned video. She states that she and her husband David double-dated with JVB and Lee. Cross-examination: Stephen says it would help to know more about what, if anything, anyone encouraged Anna to say before she talked on the video. She should also clarify why she gave a different story to Garrison than her husband regarding how she knew LHO, which may or may not be a problem. Barb states that she is trying to confirm a comment made Debra Conway as to whether Anna Lewis originally recalled JVB. Barb also claims that JVB sent around a "transcript" of an interview with one witness to another witness. (3) JVB and Lee Harvey Oswald had an affair. Evidence: Comments made by Anna Lewis on this topic on the same video. Cross-examination: See above. Jack adds that he believes several agencies and other parties watched LHO very closely in New Orleans and that none of the agencies has produced any report mentioning JVB. (4) JVB worked on a lab on a project to collect cancer cells to use to kill Fidel Castro. Evidence: Newspaper clippings posted show her interest in work in a science-related field and her excellence as science student. Cross-examination: See above. Sources in dispute: LHO: The True Story... JVB has said that it is unauthorized due to a contract dispute. Cross-examination: Barb states that the status does not negate everything in it. Specific assertion: Barb asserts that on page 171 JVB says that Kerry Thornley took a picture of her and LHO together. Further discussion could turn up picture or refute JVB statement or clarify what part(s) of book are not reliable for reason of contract dispute, etc. This ties in to JVB assertions #2 and #3. Evidence rule: Independent corroborating evidence is best. Jack says it is a second source with no stake in the matter (paraphrase). Further questioning made it clear that he believes self-serving interest rules out a witness; I say it should be a factor for finder-of-fact (you) to consider. Where it goes next: All members are free to respond with ideas on evidence. Remember we are now only working on JVB's assertions (I will get to other possible evidence later). I need any evidence that works for or against any of these assertions (#1-#4). You do not have to prove it but you must give reason to believe what you are suggesting.

Good points, Stephen. I will employ my skills at conciseness. The key will be evidence that relates to the four main assertions.

Thank you, Jack. We don't need attorneys or judges here. If people don't like the job I am doing, they can make constructive suggestions (not complaints!) that everyone will see. Then I take it you, as judge, will not allow questions from doubters. For instance JVB claims she was one of the women in this photo. Then she said she was not. Then she said she was there, but not in the photo. I think some here would like to cross-examine her about this. Overruled? Jack Jack, There are no judges. I have already allowed evidence from doubters under "cross-examination." Serious questions, like yours, are welcome. Please tell me where JVB made her claim(s). I need a source. An independent source.

Dean, you seem unaware that Judyth reports in her book that Thornley took a picture of her and LHO together .... using O's Minox camera, no less, and that she then took a photo of the 2 of them. Barb :-) Barb, To which book do you refer? If it is a source in dispute (if there is doubt over whether it is a valid source for whatever reason), I would be happy to make another evidence/cross-examination to discuss that.

Thank you, Jack. We don't need attorneys or judges here. If people don't like the job I am doing, they can make constructive suggestions (not complaints!) that everyone will see.

Barb, Thank you for your comments, which I have just read. Just quickly on the word "testimony" - of course Lewis did not speak under oath. But the dictionary defines it as "evidence in support of a fact or statement" (dictionary.com). Dean, In this arena, dealing with witnesses and a murder case, the word "testimony" tends to carry the legal sworn definition for most people...and understandably so. This isn't a church where members of the faithful "testify" about their faith in God, or any other loose connotation of the word. I believe it is important to be careful when using the word as it applies to a witness regarding anything about this case... lest use of the word "testify" or "testimony" be misleading. No comments on Judyth having found and spoken to Anna Lewis first? Or Anna's demeanor during her taped statement? Or Judyth's interview technique as noted both by Stephen Roy and myself? Barb :-) Barb, See my post (5:50 PM today) where I summarize what you and Stephen told me. Tell me what you think of that and consider I am trying to be clear and concise. Anna Lewis' demeanor is important, but best left to the viewer. As for the use of the word testimony, I answered Michael on that. I can certainly agree to use "testify" et al in a legal sense from now on. Any luck on the Conway quote?

Barb, Thank you for your comments, which I have just read. Just quickly on the word "testimony" - of course Lewis did not speak under oath. But the dictionary defines it as "evidence in support of a fact or statement" (dictionary.com). Actually dictionary.com lists it this way: 1. Law. the statement or declaration of a witness under oath or affirmation, usually in court. 2. evidence in support of a fact or statement; proof I guess it was convenient for Dean to leave out the word proof. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/testimony Michael, Because I never stated that Anna spoke in a trial or other legal forum, the definition as evidence is appropriate. As far as proof goes, look at my recent post on how I am using this thread to examine evidence. Proof is in the eye of the finder of fact, a point to which I am not at yet on this thread.

JVB DEBATE IN A "TRIAL" FORM I have decided to take the comments I am getting on this thread and put it into a new form. We could assign JVB the "plaintiff" status and say that her case is that she is telling the truth about her time in New Orleans in 1963. Her specific assertions and evidence offered for each can be shown, as can "cross-examination" or counter-arguments offered by critics. This is a work in progress and, of course, is subject to my own bias as to what is relevant or debatable evidence. (1) JVB went to New Orleans during the time Lee Harvey Oswald is known to have been there. Evidence: the work time card mentioned on the main thread and shown on previously named web sites. Cross-examination: None (2) JVB met Lee Harvey Oswald. Evidence: Anna Lewis' statements on a previously mentioned video. She states that she and her husband David double-dated with JVB and Lee. Cross-examination: Stephen says it would help to know more about what, if anything, anyone encouraged Anna to say before she talked on the video. She should also clarify why she gave a different story to Garrison than her husband regarding how she knew LHO, which may or may not be a problem. Barb states that she is trying to confirm a comment made Debra Conway as to whether Anna Lewis originally recalled JVB. Barb also claims that JVB sent around a "transcript" of an interview with one witness to another witness. (3) JVB and Lee Harvey Oswald had an affair. Evidence: Comments made by Anna Lewis on this topic on the same video. Cross-examination: See above. Jack adds that he believes several agencies and other parties watched LHO very closely in New Orleans and that none of the agencies has produced any report mentioning JVB. (4) JVB worked on a lab on a project to collect cancer cells to use to kill Fidel Castro. Evidence: Newspaper clippings posted show her interest in work in a science-related field and her excellence as science student. Cross-examination: See above. Evidence rule: Independent corroborating evidence is best. Jack says it is a second source with no stake in the matter (paraphrase). Further questioning made it clear that he believes pecuniary interest rules out witness; I say it should be a factor for finder-of-fact to consider. Where it goes next: Members are free to respond with ideas on evidence. Remember we are now only working on JVB's assertions (I will get to other possible evidence later). I need any evidence that works for or against any of these assertions (#1-#4). You do not have to prove it but you must give reason to believe what you are suggesting. Complaints, rhetorical questions and other distractions will be ignored.

Barb, Thank you for your comments, which I have just read. Just quickly on the word "testimony" - of course Lewis did not speak under oath. But the dictionary defines it as "evidence in support of a fact or statement" (dictionary.com).

Dean I have two possible theories on why you like to ignore me 1. You are blind 2. You dont like my answers Its a real slap in the face when you say "No reply to this question" and "No one has answered this question" when clearly I answered those two questions on the first page right after you asked them Why even ask for opinions on Judyth when all you do is ignore the replies? I get the impression you want to be confrontational. When I correspond with some other people, I feel like I have more of a constructive conversation. So I appreciate their answers more.

UPDATE ON QUESTIONS I ASKED OF CRITICS OF JVB ON MAY 10

Which one? I made two Dean. I'll concede to you the absence of a photo. But I'll raise you a love letter (unsigned). Ha ha ha! I'll see your love letter unsigned and raise you a thread!

Dean, I also think you're forgetting one of the golden rules of running any agency that operates on secrecy. Collect dirt. On everyone. The dirtier the better. Collect it on your friends, your family, your enemies. J.E.H. wrote the book on it. So, I can't help but wonder that if the "love affair" did happen, there would be something more than what is currently available. Which I must say, stories aside, is so little that it basically amounts to nothing. And a final point. According to the story, as presented, Oswald was going to be losing his marriage anyway. He was going to marry JVB wasn't he? So what did he have to lose by having his picture taken with her if he was going to throw it all away anyway? Sorry, but it doesn't make any sense to me. I have maintained an open mind throughout this incredibly strange and hostile thread and now must proclaim that the whole thing doesn't stand up to any sort of scrutiny because the evidence is simply not there to support it. As far as suggesting to Jack that "an absence of evidence, is not evidence of absence." This is straight out of the Leo Strauss school of thinking that was adopted by the likes of Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz in the the 1970's. Look where that type of thinking led... Lee Lee, What makes the most sense to me is that someone doing informant work would not deliberately allow others to collect dirt on them. Also, from what I have read of LHO, he did not seem careless or carefree. If you have other information, please share it. My "absence" comment simply reflects a solid principle: that just because no one reports a record on something, that does not mean that something did not exist. Consider LHO and the accusation he was on the 6th floor: the dubious claims of Brennan notwithstanding, no one claimed to have seen LHO on the 6th floor near the time of the shooting. This does not prove he wasn't there. One could look to the bogus Warren Commssion "simulation" of someone going from the 6th to the 2nd floor as evidence, or sightings of LHO on a lower floor around the time of the shooting, etc. for evidence he was not at the 6th. Thanks, Dean

First, we don't know much about Anna Lewis. Is this the Anna Lewis who was married to David Lewis? Under what circumstances was the interview taped? Did anybody discuss evidenciary matters with her prior to the interview? Why has Anna Lewis not been interviewed in any other venue (testimony, TMWKK, etc.)? THE VIDEO INTERVIEW LETS US LEARN MORE ABOUT ANNA LEWIS, WHO WAS MARRIED TO THE LATE DAVID LEWIS. IT WAS TAPED IN 2003 AND BROUGHT TO THE INTERNET BY WIM DANKBAAR. ACCORDING TO DANKBAAR IN A 2007 POST http://jfkmurdersolved.com/phpBB3/viewtopi...bff5af704433b39 DEBRA CONWAY INTERVIEWED LEWIS. I DO NOT KNOW IF ANYONE DISCUSSED EVIDENTIARY MATTERS WITH LEWIS FIRST. THAT WOULD BE A GOOD QUESTION FOR ANY WITNESS. ANNA LEWIS, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, HAS NOT BEEN INTERVIEWED IN ANOTHER VENUE. SHE DID NOT TELL GARRISON THE TRUTH ABOUT KNOWING JVB. SHE SAID DAVID HAD TOLD HER TO KEEP HER MOUTH SHUT. Second, what are we to make of that fact that David Lewis had a great deal of contact with NODA Jim Garrison's probe in its first few months, but described his alleged contacts with Oswald in way that did not include double-dating with Oswald and Baker? What are we to make of Garrison himself dropping Lewis as a witness after apparently falsely reporting that he was shot at by exile Carlos Quiroga? I DO NOT KNOW WHY DAVID LEWIS DID NOT MENTION THE DOUBLE-DATING OR HIS STATEMENTS ABOUT QUIROGA. HE DOES NOT APPEAR ON THIS TAPE. Third, it is not unheard of for peripheral witnesses to be influenced by the comments of other claimed witnesses. I have seen a transcript of Baker's interview with Edwin Lea McGehee, wherein she tells him right off the top (of the transcript, at least) that she was the woman in the car near his barbershop in 1963, and makes a few other statements I consider inappropriate for a formal interview. This causes me to have less than full confidence in the Lewis interview. YOU MENTION JVB'S STATEMENTS AS A WAY TO EXPLAIN WHY YOU DO NOT HAVE FULL CONFIDENCE IN THE LEWIS INTERVIEW. I AM NOT SURE WHY YOU SAY THIS. Dean: Thanks for helping to turn the emotional level of this topic down a bit! Let me just give my own impressions. (I haven't yet mastered the art of quoting posts section-by-section.) Point 1: My questions were somewhat rhetorical. I would need to be satisfied that this was the real ex-wife of David Lewis, that she was lucid and capable of an accurate statement, and that she was not influenced in any way in her memories. To the best of my recollection, she was originally "found" by, and the interview arranged by, Baker (or with her help), and Baker was present for the interview. (See below) Also, I seem to remember that there was some reluctance on either Lewis's or Turner's part to use her interview in TMWKK. Point 2: David Lewis gave Garrison's staff an accounting of his contacts with Oswald; as I recall, he indicated that he encountered Oswald only two or three times; this did not include his wife or double dating. So his account varies from his wife's account. Point 3: As I noted, I have seen one interview in which Baker was involved during which she made leading statements to the interviewee**. Since Baker was also involved in the Lewis interview, I would hope that Baker's exuberance did not influence Lewis's statements. I am willing to accept the interview with reservations. I don't think it stands on its own as conclusive evidence; I would like to see corroborative evidence. This is just my opinion, but based on years of solid research. **In the McGehee interview I mentioned, the transcript shows McGehee (one of the "Clinton/Jackson witnesses" who thought he had seen a woman in a car associated with Oswald) carefully answering questions, while Baker makes statements such as "Well, I have to tell you - that was me," "I've got this all documented," "I've got all the proof," as well as other leading comments. I would hope this was not done in the case of Anna Lewis, before or during the interview. Thanks, Stephen. This type of cross-examination of evidence may help bridge the rift between the two groups. I would agree her statements should be checked to determine if anyone influenced what she said and she should be asked about whether she knows why her husband did not mention the double-dating.

Jack, The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Dean

Jack, I think you are saying that Wim Dankbaar has a pecuniary interest and therefore is not reliable. I am not sure I agree with this assessment but I will try to respect it. I believe that a source's pecuniary interest should be considered by the finders of fact, but the interest should not make their statements ineligible. The other witnesses I mentioned, Anna Lewis and JVB's sister, to my knowledge, do not have a pecuniary interest. Anyone with other information is free to share it. Dean

Dean, Perhaps what she says seems outlandish to you. In any case, the poll will not tell us whether she is telling the truth, only the perceptions of those who vote. And perceptions can be wrong. Here is an example which may have some relevance here: The Senate voted 87-2 to approve the Tonkin Resolution in 1964. Most Senators believed it was necessary to give power to the President to use force in the Gulf of Tonkin. The votes were based on the perception that North Viet Nam had twice attacked our ships. Years later, we know that this perception was well-intentioned but wrong. The second attack was concocted by our forces there. Some historians question what happened in the first attack. There was no good reason for the resolution, which started our entanglement in Viet Nam for years. Her outlandish claims I mean all you have to do Dean is look at the new JVB poll Not looking like many members believe Judyth at all And if you think the poll looks bad now just wait a couple days when its say 100 votes for No to 3 votes for Yes What does that tell you Dean?

Hi Dean Hagerman, What I got out of your earlier post is that you stopped believing JVB about 5 minutes into a video of her speaking. I find that a little hard to believe. What specifically made you stop believing her? As for Scott Peterson, I don't think he was very bright. He returned to the place where he had dumped his wife's body. He should have known cameras were on him. Dean Hartwell

OK, Lee. I got your point. I would say Oswald was smarter than those who allowed their pictures to be taken. He had more to lose than just his marriage. Depends. If it's a "wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am" type of affair your belief may be right. If the two people are in love I would say the likelihood of a photograph increases and depends upon the people involved. I understand that JVB claims she was "in love" with Lee and vice-versa. That's one of the risks involved in any affair, secret agents included, and if you're saying that there are people out there who have had affairs and not had photographs taken of themselves together I would say that you are wrong. I would also say that there were quite possibly dozens of people in New Orleans who, not only suspected, but actually KNEW that Lee Oswald was an informant.

Lee, They both likely knew that a photograph could be used to compromise them, especially Lee. For instance, what if someone suspected Lee was an informant and wanted to get information from him? They could have taken a picture (on the pretext of being a friend) and then threatened to send it to Marina. Dean Depends. If it's a "wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am" type of affair your belief may be right. If the two people are in love I would say the likelihood of a photograph increases and depends upon the people involved. I understand that JVB claims she was "in love" with Lee and vice-versa.

Hi Jack, By "stake in the incident," what do you mean? Financial stake, a friendship, a familial relationship? The reason I ask is because I am trying to determine what evidence would conceivably work for you. If she, a married woman, was having an affair with a married man, it does not seem likely she would tell anyone outside her close friends or family. If we rule out friends and family, we do not hear from Anna Lewis or JVB's sister. If we are looking for a photograph to confirm the JVB-Oswald relationship, we are not likely to find it. I do not believe people having affairs would want their picture taken together. The same problem arises as to the cancer project. If it was a secret project, then it would be no surprise that the participants would not tell others or document it. Given these limitations, how likely would it be that we could find someone truly independent of any relationship with JVB who could document her affair with Oswald and/or the project? Dean