W. Tracy Parnell

Like the entire H&L theory, this "update" is complete nonsense. Marguerite and LHO left New Orleans and moved to Texas in July 1956. Marguerite never returned. The "fact" that she moved to New Orleans is based, like so much of the H&L theory, mostly on mistaken eyewitness reports. People like Mrs. Logan Magruder and Mrs. Benny Comenge were just giving their best estimate as to when they saw Marguerite-they didn't keep a diary or anything. For a discussion of Paul's Shoe Store see: http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/02/pauls-shoe-store.html For Marguerite's addresses see: http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/02/marguerites-addresses.html

Well, I think we are at a point of diminishing returns here and we will have to let the readers decide for themselves. I will admit that I have never undertaken a meticulous study of the testimony regarding the abuse and perhaps I should do that for myself at some point but have not previously because it is obvious that the abuse occurred.This apparently started as a means to gain control over her once they returned to the US. It apparently stopped when he felt he could no longer get away with it. You even admit that it occurred one time and that is all it takes to be an abused individual regardless of your attempts at semantics. There is also mental abuse which obviously happened when you consider the account in Marina & Lee. And as I mentioned before, he could have slapped her with an open hand any numbers of times and not left a mark. So the answer to the original question posed by this thread is a definite yes.

He took them to pick up Marina's things and then drove her to the Fords.

They all saw exactly the same bruise in exactly the same place and described it in exactly the same way? I think you're having a bad dream Sandy. BTW, how do you explain the extensive discussion of the abuse in Marina & Lee? Or have you even read it? You are in denial I'm afraid. The abuse doesn't prove LHO killed JFK anyway so I am a little surprised that you are so adamant about this subject. BTW, if LHO merely slapped Marina, it wouldn't necessarily leave a bruise. Again, try telling the judge that you are not abusing your wife you're just slapping her.

Yes I have a theory. It is obviously a typo.

Chris, I honestly didn't know if you were referring to GDM's testimony concerning his confrontation of LHO or something else. Turns out it was something else. In later years, GDM became concerned that he might have influenced LHO's killing of JFK and this caused him to become depressed and mentally unbalanced or at least contributed to it. This, along with the doubtless influence of conspiracy theories, accounts for some of the things in his book. I think more weight should be given to his WC testimony than to what he said in later years in a manuscript.

It is not surprising to me that Klienlerer was the only one to witness the abuse firsthand. LHO could hardly be expected to go around in public slapping Marina around-that was bound to attract attention. The abuse he witnessed occurred at the Hall's home indoors where no one else could see. On this occasion LHO lost his temper and slapped her. He wasn't worried about Klienlerer who was admittedly afraid of him. If Klienlerer said anything it was his word against LHO's. But while only Klienlerer saw the abuse, several others including Marguerite saw the bruises. Marguerite confronted LHO who told her to mind her own business. Marina may have said LHO wasn't violent at one point, but the book Marina & Lee says otherwise. To sum up, plenty of evidence LHO abused Marina.

What happened was that Marina left LHO and went to stay at Anna Meller's house. The date is uncertain but it was possibly on Monday, November 5, 1962. Probably the next Sunday the 11th, a meeting was arranged between Marina and LHO at the de Mohrenschildt's place. Marina did not want to go back with LHO and the De Mohrenschildts drove them to the Elsbeth apartment to get her things where the scene you mention occurred. This is all documented by Marina's biographer in Marina & Lee. So de Mohrenschildt was a key player in the incident. Now, you might say that McMillian can't be trusted because she is "CIA." But Marina, while she now believes in conspiracy, has not taken back anything in the book.

Careful Sandy. This type of speculation and deviation from the Armstrong doctrine could get you excommunicated. Seriously, there is an answer-the theory is nonsense.

Well, off the top of my head I don't remember "the whole tale." Let's do it this way-what part of his story don't you find credible.

Hughes gives the book a positive review but wisely adds the following caveat at the end: "without corroboration in key parts, its plausibility should be weighted carefully by the discerning reader."

That is an assumption on my part, but he was confronted regarding the abuse by de Mohrenschildt whose opinion he apparently respected.

My point was, no abuse was ever alleged while they were in Russia. LHO apparently saw the abuse as a way to gain strict control over Marina after they returned to the US. he eventually gave up on it because he realized he could not continue to get away with it.

Michael, Let me clarify. Only Klienlerer witnessed the abuse first hand. The abuse only occurred during a specific period of time and thereafter LHO stopped, apparently because he felt he could no longer get away with it. But not every person that knew him could be expected to have either witnessed the abuse or the bruises because it occurred during a specific time frame.

OK Sandy, good to know.

The quote from Marina proves nothing. LHO wasn't violent in the Soviet Union and nobody said he was. The abuse started after they came to the US and he had a comfort zone. Of course he wouldn't be violent in front of his aunt. Not every person who knew him witnessed the violence or the bruises. LHO was only physically abusive for a specific period of time and then stopped for whatever reason, probably because of the admonishment from de Mohrenschildt. He realized he couldn't get away with it anymore.

John and Robert provided some important information. However, they are wrong in this instance. LHO attended Trinity Lutheran, PS 117 and PS 44, all in the Bronx.

Sandy, Not every person was a witness to the abuse. And you can go to Marina & Lee and read about the abuse in detail. But both sides have made their case here and in the other thread, I'll let the readers decide. Since this is a CT forum, most will probably side with you.

Yes, but I don't believe LHO was a victim of it. Even his mother believed he hit Marina and she constantly made excuses for him.

Well it's just semantics but as I said tell, it to the judge. And I believe the evidence shows clearly that LHO abused his wife. You have to ignore a whole bunch of evidence and justify reasons for doing so. Have a good weekend.

Jim and Dave, We have made or arguments and I am happy to let the reads here decide for themselves on this point. Thanks

Not the "Harvey" you're referring to. And for the final time, Jenner asked him point blank if he had anything to add to his testimony including mere opinions. Do you really expect us to believe that he was only hinting about two Oswalds when he could right out and say "Mr. Jenner it is my opinion there were two Oswalds at different times"? And why not take the opportunity when he was on the phone with Armstrong, the creator of the two Oswald theory, to report to him his belief in that very theory? Maybe because he believed no such thing.

Normal for someone to change after years and years and have a former friend not recognize them? Seems normal to me and has happened to me many times.

John Pic mentioned "Harvey"? Yes, I must have missed that!

Here we go again is right. The key piece of testimony is: That's why, when I saw her on TV, after all of this happened, she looked so old and haggard, and I said, "That couldn't be Margie," but of course it was, but if you had known Margie before all this happened, you would see what I mean. She was beautiful. She had beautiful wavy hair. The Evans' were just surprised at the change in Marguerite-she had let herself go for sure. But at no time did they say or try to say she was a different individual than the person they had known. And none of the dozens or possibly hundreds of persons who knew the "old" Marguerite ever came forward to say the person they saw on TV was not the Marguerite they knew. As for Pic, he had not seen his brother for 10 years until Thanksgiving day 1962. He looked at some photos and did not feel they looked like his brother. He was being careful since he was under oath. But again, he never said insinuated or implied that there were two Lee Harvey Oswalds. Again, from his testimony: MR. JENNER-I will put it this way then: Is there anything you would like to add at the moment now that I am about to finish questioning you that you think you would like to have on the record? Mr. PIC - If you are interested in my opinions-- Mr. JENNER - Yes, sir; anything that you want to add. Mr. PIC - I think, I believe that Lee Oswald did the crime that he is accused of. I think that anything he may have done was aided with a little extra push from his mother in the living conditions that she presented to him. So when asked point blank to add anything to his testimony including his opinions, Pic said LHO was guilty. He didn't say anything about 2 Oswalds. And when Armstrong called Pic, he had the perfect chance to climb on the conspiracy bandwagon (as many did) but he chose to stand by his testimony.