W. Tracy Parnell

Clearly, he had no Russian fluency when he arrived there. He obtained his ability, which as Jeremy points out, was far from perfect, over time from speaking it every day. Thank you Jim for providing all of these examples of what the critics have been saying all along. LHO could barely speak Russian when he first arrived.

Too funny. Jim Hargrove complains about Jeremy and then proceeds to post "the same old stuff" himself that he has dumped here time and time again (and has been debunked time and time again).

Translation: any photo that appears to refute the H&L theory is suspect. Any photo that seems to confirm it is authentic.

Perhaps he omitted it from his book because during preparation for that work, he reviewed the evidence and realized he was wrong.

Because seven years has passed and he simply got his timeline mixed up.

That is correct and Robert certainly believed it or he wouldn't have testified to it. The same may be said for all of the "witnesses" to Stripling. They probably all acted in good faith. And the same may be said for the more than 2000 individuals who said they saw prison escapees Matt and Sweat (made famous by the Showtime docudrama) in various places in New York and elsewhere that later evidence proved was not possible. Human nature being what it is, human beings will make all sorts of claims for various reasons.

Very good report Mark and good luck with your ongoing research.

Sounds more like Hargrove.

Just wondering-isn't there some kind of forum rule against posting the same thing over and over again? Is that your idea of making an argument? Posting the same thing over and over until the other side gives up? These points have been answered a million times and that will be true no matter how many times you repeat them.

Dr. Norwood, could you add this to your list of complaints to the moderators please?

Exactly. I've often said that using the H&L logic there could be a hundred Oswalds if you consider all of the discrepancies and false sightings.

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.