W. Tracy Parnell

Yes, I have and they are all much more plausible than the 2 Oswald theory.

Been discussed a million times and alternative explanations provided-see here: https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t1380-the-great-oswald-height-debate

Nobody's "harassing" anyone as evidenced by the fact that your compliant to the moderators produced no expulsions or even warnings as far as I know.

I went back and checked Robert's book. Funny thing, there is no mention of Stripling. He has LHO going from Ridgelea to NYC. It looks to me like Robert went over the records and realized that he had made a mistake during his WC testimony and therefore did not write about Stripling. I can't think of any other explanation when he is writing a book that will be his final word.

I never said Kudlaty knowingly lied. Only that the story he told was likely influenced by White's tales.

Misrepresentation. Nobody said there was a conspiracy between White and Kudlaty, White told his H&L story and Kudlaty "remembered" what was likely an explainable trip by some authority to attempt to obtain information and that got turned into a confiscation of records. Robert honestly believed that his brother attended Stripling. And he would have (or perhaps he would have attended the new Monnig school if you believe Armstrong) but for his relocation to NYC. Well, it is certainly true that you never stop posting the same thing over and over. But the evidence is not "overwhelming." Records, other documentary evidence such as real estate records, yearbook photos, etc. would be overwhelming. But you just have a few 30-40 year old memories of people who were falsely led to believe they were a part of history.

Just wondering-how many times are you going to post the same thing?

You can go to Greg Parker's site and read about White's relationship with Kudlaty and how that may have effected the story that he told. Now, if you want to believe that Kudlaty listened to White and suddenly and independently "remembered" that the FBI confiscated records, a fact that he had never mentioned to anyone before and saw no significance in previously, you are free to do that. I am a little skeptical though.

Kudlaty for one by Jack White who told him of the remarkable H&L theory. Kudlaty then "remembered" the "seizure" of the records that he never thought enough about to mention to anyone previously or obtain a receipt for. If you're concerned about the word "coached" call it "having a thought planted in his mind" or whatever. It amounts to the same thing.

No, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. And coached witnesses speaking 30-40 years later do not meet such a definition.

The "common knowledge" could have simply consisted of the newspaper reports quoting Robert's mistaken belief that LHO attended Stripling.

And that is all you have. No yearbook pictures, not a scrap of paper such as real estate records to prove your case. BTW, Armstrong obtained real estate records in several instances. You can believe that if they existed, he would have them. They don't exist.

1. They could be remembering Robert. 2. People want to be associated with a famous event-human nature. There is no hard evidence to support the claim, no yearbooks or even a scrap of paper. When will the H&L people learn that you can't trust what people say without verification. No, she didn't, he never lived there. His mother did in 1963. Provide the verifying documentation please. He admitted he did. Exactly.

I'm only going to say this one more time. Kudlaty wasn't "lying" in the traditional sense of the word. He was told by his friend Jack White about the amazing "evidence" that Armstrong had developed. After being coached by White, Kudlaty "remembered" the "confiscated" records that he had previously never mentioned to anyone or given a second thought or bothered to secure a receipt for. Contrary to what most people believe, memory is not like a snapshot from a camera. It is an mixture of what you remember and your subsequent experiences. Kudlaty was influenced by White to "remember" the whole scenario. Now please quit repeating the same nonsense over and over and address the real evidence.

Sandy, I think you are being too charitable in your assessment. The way I read Norwood's comment, he is saying there is no debate about H&L in general. You guys are offering facts (according to him) and the rest of us are offering "biased opinions" only. If he wants to clarify he can.

Yes, it's all a great misunderstanding on your part Mark. The great Doctor Norwood has spoken. There is no debate-only the "facts" provided by the H&L team that us mere mortals fail to comprehend. If you will only study their "evidence" you will become enlightened. What utter nonsense!

Thank you for your comments which make perfect sense.

Check out this article: http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/04/robert-oswald-and-stripling.html It really doesn't matter how many times Robert said LHO was at Stripling. He was in the Marine Corp by that time and had no first-hand knowledge. He was not referring to any records during his WC testimony, just making a reasonable assumption about where he believed LHO would have attended school at that time. But he was wrong. If you read Robert and John Pic's testimony, they add much to the historical record, but they were not right about everything and could not be expected to be 100 percent accurate. Nobody is always right. Here is another area where Robert was wrong and the H&L people predictably use it to promote more nonsense: http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/03/the-hunter-photo.html Another thing the H&L fans avoid-where are the yearbook photos of LHO at Stripling? Did the CIA buy all of those and destroy them?

People will say the most amazing things-even people with a great background. Professional investigators don't just take a statement from someone with a good reputation at face value. They collaborate it. But in the H&L world, these sort of facts don't matter. It was probably more Jack White that did the coaching. It is all explained at Parker's site so no need to reinvent the wheel. And I have already explained that it is not "lying" in the usual sense. An individual can be persuaded to believe they are a part of "history" and they are intoxicated by that concept. The same thing happened with Palmer McBride. In McBride's case, there was the additional incentive of being told by Armstrong that he was right after all. But when Lifton approached him in an objective manner and explained the evidence, he agreed that he was mistaken.

Robert Oswald told the WC that LHO "would be" attended Stripling. And he was right-he would have if he had not moved to NYC. Robert merely forgot about this. But he said it, so in the H&L world that makes it a fact. But it doesn't. The 1959 and 1962 newspaper articles are using Robert as a source and nothing else so we are right back at Robert's faulty recollection. The article that was published two days after the assassination was likely just quoting from the previous articles and also had no other source. What he did was to find individuals and coach them to say what he wanted. All of the evidence for Stripling comes back to Robert's faulty remembrance.

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2020/06/the-last-laugh.html

We seem to be going in circles Jim. Maybe a second opinion will help: https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t2209-dear-jim

Take your "overwhelming evidence" evidence to a professional investigator or an investigative reporter Jim, as I previously suggested. Let me know how far you get.

I think even Jim will admit that everything in every document or report regarding the JFK assassination cannot be true. The fact is people say the darnedest things for sometimes no discernable reason. We know what Kudlaty told White and Armstrong nearly 40 years after the fact. But what did he say in 1963 about the startling event that he allegedly witnessed. Nothing at all.

I am going to issue a challenge to Jim Hargrove and Sandy. Either you guys believe you have found the key to the JFK assassination or you are two hobbyists playing around and hoping that the publicity you generate at this forum will result in a movie deal ala Jim D. Which is it? If you really believe the H&L theory, why don't you take all of your evidence to someone like Nick Patoski? Mr. Patoski has previously showed at least an interest in the H&L theory and knows Mr. Kudlaty. Why not carefully explain all the evidence to him? Sandy, you can explain to him that even though some of the top experts in the world confirmed LHO's identity through dental records, you have a new theory which is "obvious" to anyone and no forensic dental training is required? If Mr. Patoski is not interested, perhaps he can refer you to someone who is. After all, there are all sorts of theories gaining traction in the world-faked moon landing, Elvis is alive, the earth is flat and so on. There has to one credible journalist somewhere who will listen and take on your cause. Perhaps you are afraid (or know) that anyone you approach will tell you the same things that myself, Jeremy B. and Parker have been for years. The H&L theory is provable nonsense. So, what's it going to be? Are you going to continue hiding here at your safe playground or get out there and really do something?