Jim Hargrove

Anything is possible, I suppose, but despite all the speculation and conjecture, what is obvious now is that the famous rifle and scope from the BYPs does not appear to be the same rifle and scope put into evidence by the Dallas Police and the WC. Anyone who wants to say the rifles/scopes were the same must now prove why they appear so different.

John, This gets complicated because we're talking about two different Oswalds in the Marine Corps. The records were partially, but incompletely, merged. Russian-speaking Harvey Oswald was secretly brought to Japan (where American-born Lee Oswald was already serving), and spent a day or so in the brig to avoid being seen with his counterpart, and then left Japan aboard the the USS Skagit on September 14, 1958 for a trip to the South China Sea and a stay in and around Ping Tung, Taiwan. Here are USMC documents showing when Harvey left on "AKA 105," which was the USS Skagit, and that he was in Taiwan on Oct. 6, 1958. In the meantime, American-born Lee Oswald remained in Japan where he was rather famously treated for venereal disease. All these treatments happened while Harvey Oswald was aboard the Skagit and in Taiwan. If you want to look at this in greater detail, start reading roughly halfway down this page: https://harveyandlee.net/Marines/Marines.html

And, to point out the obvious, Mr. Ely’s memorandum about the school days of a Lone Nut® with no particular connections to anyone caused such consternation at the Warren Commission that, less than a month later, Jenner would write to Rankin and say, “... there are details about Mr. Ely’s memoranda which will require material alteration and, in some instances, omission.” No kidding!

Chris, But the scope is significantly shorter compared to the rifle in CE 133-A than it is in CE 139, as the comparison photo below shows. You say, “I am suspicious that the the rear of the scope may be added in,” but how does adding something to the scope make it shorter than the scope of the rifle in evidence? Anything added to 133-A altering the ratio of the length of the scope to the length of the rifle would have to REMOVE part of the scope. Not only would part of the scope have to be erased, but parts of “Oswald’s” clothing (and perhaps even his thumb in addition to clothing) would have to be added. In the days prior to cloning tools in digital photo editors, this would have surely been a difficult task, and one that is difficult to find a motive for. The dramatic difference between the lengths of the scopes in the two photos below is the most obvious tell that these rifle/scope combinations are different. It seems to me it is now up to a Warren Commission loyalist to prove otherwise. Are we to believe them over our lying eyes?

John, As the following two USMC embarkation slips show, both LEE Harvey Oswald and Roscoe A. White embarked aboard the USS Bexar at San Diego bound for Yokosuka, Japan on Sept. 12, 1957. (See the last line on each document.) Not only that, but the White embarkation doc shows that he (Roscoe White) left for Okinawa in September and Subic Bay in the Philippines in November. He and LEE Oswald were both stationed at El Toro, both travelled aboard the USS Bexar, and both were stationed in Subic Bay (in late 1957 and early 1958). Both were still there on January 5, 1958, when the Martin Schrand incident (accidental gun shot) occurred. These guys had ample opportunity to know one another.

According to John A., Roscoe A. White checked into the Marine Corps Air Station at El Toro, California on July 26, 1957, where American-born LEE Oswald was also stationed. LEE remained there until he left for Japan in late August. At the same time, Russian-speaking HARVEY Oswald was attending Aviation Electronics school in Memphis, Tennessee. We're in complete agreement on our suspicions of White. The circumstantial evidence against him for the backyard photo framing of LHO is complete and overwhelming.

Sandy, Apologies, but I forgot to answer your post. So if you happen to see this.... The Britannica image you printed has, as you say, a lower resolution than the one I used. However, I was acutely aware that the source I used for the photo might well be an issue, and so I was careful at the time to note that, according to Google Images, the source was Britannica. I also recall that, when clicking on the “go to the website” link, instead of landing on a Britannica page, I got some more pictures and descriptions from Google Images. My guess, at the time, was that Britannica probably has massive amounts of data behind a paywall, and that the Google spider somehow got through it to pull out that higher-resolution version of the picture. That is just a guess, however. One thing is certain, though. This image, in varying sizes and resolutions, is all over the net.

John, Thanks again for those fine comparison lines at the top of your post. There appear to be a number of differences between the two rifle images, but the length of the scopes is the most dramatic and obvious, made even more obvious by your thin lines which obstruct little in either image. After more study, I’m beginning to see what you mean about the scope tilt. If I’d been able to better align the two images, it would probably be more obvious. QUESTION: Shouldn’t the tilt be the same in such similar rifles, and, if it isn’t, wouldn’t at least one of the scopes have to be improperly aimed? As for the “spidery fingers,” not sure if that is an issue or just an optical oddity, but we do think the fingers belong to Roscoe White, along with the body and wide chin. Roscoe White is shown at left in the photos below. As John wrote, “Roscoe White worked in the photographic department of the Dallas Police Department. Roscoe and his wife, Geneva, moved to Dallas in 1963. White began working at the Dallas Police Department on October 7, 1963 (likely hired by Capt. Westbrook, who was in charge of the personnel department), while his wife worked for Jack Ruby in the Carousel Club…. Roscoe White continued working for the Dallas Police until Sept. 18, 1965, when he resigned, and died in an explosion six years later at age 35.” Above is a well-known picture of Geneva White posing for Ruby. About 5 years after Roscoe White’s death, his widow, now named Geneva Dees, supplied the HSCA with an 8 x 10 print of a Backyard Photo that was just slightly different from CE 133-A. John wrote, “According to Mrs. Dees the photo had been acquired by her former husband, Roscoe White (deceased) while employed with the Dallas Police at the time of the assassination. The HSCA designated this photograph as 133-C (Dees). Mrs. Dees told the HSCA that following the assassination her husband was "sent to the Oswald home in his capacity as a plainclothes detective for the photography division." She said that her husband was skilled in trick photography and had once made composite photographs of their boys which showed they were flying around a room. Significantly, the pose in the photo found among Roscoe White's possessions was similar to the pose in one of the "cut-outs" found in DPD files, and was the same pose used by the Dallas Police in re-enacting the backyard photos for the Warren Commission (Jesse Curry's book, JFK: Assassination File, p. 87)”

Len Osanic’s Black Op Radio interview of John Armstrong about his revelations on the Back Yard Photos will air tonight starting at 6 pm PST. It should be archived as Show # 946 soon after it airs. https://blackopradio.com/

John, Not all of the images in these collections are claimed to have been among Classic Oswald’s® possessions, at least I don’t think so. John A. was the only person I know of who sat at the National Archives and looked at every photo—front and back—in the so-called Oswald’s possessions collection. He said, from memory, that there were probably fewer than 30 or 50 in total. Some were what you would expect, including the Bronx Zoo and New Orleans, and some from the Far East, and a number of pictures were in the distinctive Minox camera format. He also said there were some that made no sense, such as photos of the Roman Colosseum and from London.

Thanks, Jeff! Mr. BALL. Did you find some pictures? Mr. ROSE. Yes; I found two negatives first that showed Lee Oswald holding a rifle in his hand, wearing a pistol at his hip, and right with those negatives I found a developed picture--I don't know what you call it, but anyway a picture that had been developed from the negative of him holding this rifle, and Detective McCabe was standing there and he found the other picture--of Oswald holding the rifle. Assuming Rose (and Hicks for the receipt) are telling the truth, my bet is the FBI "lost" one of the negatives. Why?

John, Thank you for these clear lines of comparison. The only point you make that I disagree with is the tilting of the scope. That may be caused, at least in my opinion, by a not quite preceise rotation of the Backyard photo rifle. I did my best, but I can see from your lines that it is not quite perfectly parallel with CE 139. Thanks again.

John A. described this sorry situation this way in the new article that prompted this thread: The search of the Paine's home was conducted by Detectives Gus Rose, H.M. Moore, R.H. Stovall, and John P. Adamcik. Rose said they found two sea bags, three suit cases, and two card­board boxes, which contained numerous items of evidence that belonged to Oswald. Rose said he found two negatives and one snapshot of Oswald holding a rifle, while Irving Police Officer John McCabe said he found a second "backyard photograph" in an off-white colored sea bag. Detective Adamcik, however, disagreed with both Rose and McCabe. Adamcik said that he found 2 "backyard photos" in a packet of 47 photographs and initialed each photograph. Two hours after they arrived at the Paine home the detectives took three backyard photos, which were initialed and dated, and one negative (133-B), to DPD headquarters (Rose, WC Vol. VII, p. 231). These three photos, shown below, are the only "backyard photos" found by the Dallas Police. The negatives for 133-A and 133-C were never found. Pat Speer is correct that only the negative for 133-B was ever acquired by the Warren Commission. In the original typed DPD lists of Oswald’s possessions, before the FBI got involved and produced a vastly expanded and falsified list, only Stovall Exhibit B lists anything about negatives. The article, for those entering this thread in the middle, is here: https://harveyandlee.net/Ryder/Ryder.html

Michael, I’m pretty certain John told me that the scope on the Mannlicher Carcano he owns does not slide back and forth in the mount, but I’ll try to remember to confirm that with him, at least for his scope. But it strikes me as ultimately irrelevant in this case whether the scope slides in the mount or not. Take another look at the comparison image above. Note how closely the ends (away from the shooter’s eye) of both scopes align, while the fronts (toward the eye) clearly do not align. The backyard photo scope is simply shorter than the scope of the rifle in evidence. Just measure them on your monitor. It shouldn’t matter whether it was mounted differently or not. And I don’t see how this could be explained by camera angles. If the images of the rifles are reproduced at the same length, then the attached scopes should also be the same length, regardless of how perpendicularly the subjects are aligned to the camera’s view, no?

Chris, According to Google Images, the photo I captured, rotated and cropped was from Britannica. I selected it because the image seemed clear and had extended grey tones bringing out additional details. To see a Google Image search based on the Britannica image, CLICK HERE. There appear to be scores of identical images all over the world. As I understand it, based on John A’s research, ALL the backyard photos officially entered into evidence (CE 133-A, B, and C) are so poor that a scope can’t even be seen against the dark clothing worn by who we suspect was Roscoe White with Oswald's head. John wrote, Life Magazine allegedly obtained a copy of 133-A (below) from FBI agent James Martin, who was entrusted with the care and protection of Marina Oswald. This photo, however, was an enhanced version of 133-A that was found by the Dallas Police. It showed more detail and now a scope could be seen on Oswald's rifle. THIS PHOTO WAS NOT FOUND BY DALLAS POLICE, and the origin and source of this photo (below) remain unknown. FBI Agent Martin should have been asked who gave him this photo. Enhanced version of 133-A. THIS PHOTO WAS NOT FOUND BY THE DALLAS POLICE. On February 21, 1964 Life Magazine published a 3rd version of CE 133-A that was retouched and showed even more details of the rifle and scope. The biggest problem we have, as I see it, is that it was never explained how LIFE magazine obtained such an enhanced copy of CE-133A. In my opinion, it looks like the magazine editors had access to a negative, which was not supposed to exist.

I don’t think so, Chris. Regardless of the angle of the rifles to the camera, even a brief observation of the above shows that the two scopes by themselves are different. Note that in the top photo, the Carcano rifle placed in evidence as CE 139, the part of the scope extending behind the mount (toward the eye of the shooter) is significantly longer than the portion extending forward from the mount (in the direction of bullet travel). But in the bottom image, showing the rifle Oswald was framed with from the “backyard photos,” the same two parts of the scope are essentially equal in length. For each of the two different scopes, viewed individually, these PROPORTIONS SHOULD NOT CHANGE, regardless of the angle the of the rifle to the camera. To me, at least, it seems quite obvious. Do you disagree?

Sandy, I did a Google image search for the backyard photo with the clearest view of the dark rifle and scope against the dark clothing worn by who we think was Roscoe White. According to Google, the one I selected was from ENCYCLOPEDIA BRITANNICA and seemed to have the the most complete grey scale and thus the most observable detail.

I never noticed the head size before, but you make an interesting point, Joe. A bit of quick research found an online page for comic book artists called “Understanding Basic Proportion of the Human Figure.” This page suggests that, in an adult male, the head should be about one-eighth as long as the the entire body, from head to toe, which is called “The 8-Head Count.” Rough measurements of the so-called picture of "Oswald" above indicate that the head is between a fifth and a sixth of the body height, much larger than it should be. You might be on to something here....

Here, of course, is the infamous pose as it appeared on the cover of the February 21, 1964 edition of LIFE magazine. This is a print of the full image I used for the crop in the comparison above.

To cut to the chase, here is a visual comparison of the “backyard photo” rifle and scope (CE-133-A) with CE 139, the rifle and scope placed in evidence by the Dallas Police and the Warren Commission. At John A’s suggestion, I created the graphic above by rotating a “backyard photo,” cropping out just the rifle, and positioning it directly below the WC image of CE 139. The differences, including the scope’s relation of the rifle, seem quite obvious. Note also the color of the sling and the curvature of the end of the rifle butt. John added the the pointers below to show the differences in the scope. Below is a link to John’s soon to be released article on my website discussing this new development. In short, the piece explains that the so called “Backyard photos” were being processed by Robert and Patricia Hester at the National Photography Laboratory in Oak Cliff long before they were officially “discovered,” and that the composite picture in the photo(s) is most likely Russian-speaking Harvey Oswald’s head placed on Roscoe White’s body, and that the whole Dial Ryder story was invented because initial prints of the backyard photos did not appear to show a scope mounted on the rifle. This piece may not be in its final form yet. I just finished uploading it to the server an hour or two ago, but it is already a kick-ass read! https://harveyandlee.net/Ryder/Ryder.html

Paul, I think LBJ put the kibosh on a Cuban invasion when he ordered the cover-up. If the plotters didn’t want to invade Cuba, what was the point of the whole FPCC charade in New Orleans? How do you explain all those lies by David Atlee Phillips immediately after the hit? And why to this day do so many “Kennedy assassination researchers,” at least the ones allowed to pontificate in main stream news outlets (Philip Shenon comes to mind) still try to blame Castro for the hit? If it wasn't to provoke an invasion of Cuba, what do you think was the actual goal of the plotters?

Ron, The article you cite was published on Jan 23, 1978, just one week before Henry Gonzalez replaced Thomas Downing as chairman of the nascent HSCA. Gonzalez immediately tried to fire Richard Sprague as chief council. In the squabble that followed, Louis Stokes replaced Gonzalez and, on March 29, Stokes replaced Sprague with G. Robert Blakey. In an old post on this forum, John Simkin added: Sprague later told Gaeton Fonzi that the real reason he was removed as chief counsel was because he insisted on asking questions about the CIA operations in Mexico. Fonzi argued that "Sprague... wanted complete information about the CIA's operation in Mexico City and total access to all its employees who may have had anything to do with the photographs, tape recordings and transcripts. The Agency balked. Sprague pushed harder. Finally the Agency agreed that Sprague could have access to the information if he agreed to sign a CIA Secrecy Agreement. Sprague refused.... "How," he asked, "can I possible sign an agreement with an agency I'm supposed to be investigating?" As you probably know, Blakey was a specialist in Organized Crime and refocused HSCA investigations away from the CIA. The article you cite is skeptical of Ruby’s claim to prison Dr. Warner Teutor that he (Ruby) “had been part of a conspiracy to kill Kennedy that involved ‘high government agencies.’” Nice timing.

That’s reasonable speculation, but the evidence shows that, on the day of the assassination, Jack Ruby called KLIF radio founder Gordon McClendon’s unlisted private phone number. McLendon was a former Naval Intelligence officer who was a close friend and confidant of CIA officer David Atlee Phillips. McClendon and Phillips had been friends since both attended school in Fort Worth and in 1975 McClendon joined Phillips in forming the Association of Former Intelligence Agents. The night of the assassination, Ruby accompanied KLIF announcer Russ Knight in Dallas Police headquarters where the men talked to D.A. Henry Wade and Dallas Police Lieutenant James Gilmore. Ruby told Gilmore that he was going to McClendon’s radio station, KLIF, to pass out sandwiches. He arrived there about 1:30am on 11/23. This is a likely a connection between Ruby and Phillips, with McClendon as the cut-out.

Ron, Thank you for the link. I skimmed through Campisi’s HSCA testimony for the second time (the first time was many years ago) and didn’t see anything close to a smoking gun regarding Ruby’s so-called Mob ties... other than the fact that Campisi claimed he knew him. Did I miss something? I can show you any number of FBI reports indicating that close Ruby friends, associates and law enforcement investigators were unaware of any real ties between Ruby and the mob. But, of course, that’s what we’d expect the FBI to show us, just as we’d expect G. Robert (“the Mob did it”) Blakey’s HSCA to find otherwise. From Wikipedia: George Robert Blakey (born January 7, 1936, in Burlington, North Carolina) is an American[3] attorney and law professor. He is best known for his work in connection with drafting the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act and for scholarship on that subject.... Blakey drafted the "RICO Act," Title IX of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970, signed into law by Richard M. Nixon.[1]....” Blakey was all about Organized Crime investigations, just as the HSCA's recently ousted Richard Sprague was all about investigating the CIA. The fact that Blakey couldn't pin Ruby on the Mob speaks volumes.

Do you think CIA's Frank Sturgis (real name Frank Fiorini) was friendlier than a Mafia hit man? Somewhere there is a picture of him posed with a gun on a bunch of human skeletons.