John Butler

This is simply another example of not accepting what a witness says because you don't want it that way. Why should Detective Rose need a check up from "the neck up". Are you saying the man was mentally incompetent because he didn't agree to go along with the FBI's corrupt scheme to change the evidence? I suppose Rose and Stovall imagined seeing a roll of film in the "light meter".

Is it a sad truth that the historians will have their way and 50 years down the road Oswald will still be the lone killer of President Kennedy? Look at the history books in the public schools today. I haven't for 25 years, so I am going to assume they are still saying that Oswald murdered Kennedy and he was the lone shooter. I think that tradition is still there. Does that mean that all of the work done by many good and great researchers saying there was a conspiracy will account for nothing and go down a future drain?

This is the heart of Jeremy's work. Denying anything that contradicts the "lone-gunman narrative" which is essentially the Warren Commission conclusions. If witness statements support evidence for a conspiracy, then this must be countered at all costs. Even if the WC supports the notion of Oswald's bus ride, it must be countered if it "contradicts the lone-gunman narrative".

Jeremy finds facts as inconvenient and "un-nuanced" when they don't agree with his beliefs. Being an intelligent fellow, he will find the language to refute whatever you say. The difference between 5'9" and 5'11" would be simply an age difference, or a measurement mistake, or an unreliable witness. Whatever it takes and I'm sure it will sound reasonable to some. But, when you look at what he says it is simply assumptions with little evidence to back it up. I'm not convinced that's true. The ROKC guys make a plausible case that Oswald may not actually have been living there. See, e.g.: In this instance he refers to others for the factual evidence to back up his position. Nearly everyone I have seen or read, Jeremy excluded, believes Oswald rented a room from Earlene Roberts. And, when you go to this reference it indicates the opposite of what Jeremy said. You can tell from the portions of the transcript of the witnesses that Oswald was hiding his address and eventually gave it up. He never denied living on North Beckley. This is not in accord with Jeremy's thinking. His "plausible case" simply isn't there.

This is something I have noticed also. It seems when people toe the FBI line, or County, or DPD line they are often allowed something different to say that seems to go against the usual behavior. For example, Mary Moorman was allowed to say that the first shot was the head shot and the one where she took her Polaroid. Then she said she heard more than 3 shots. All came after the head shot. The important part of her testimony is that she and Jean were down by the Grassy Knoll as her Polaroid indicates. Maybe this is to "prove" the witnesses' character and bona fide some other aspects of their testimony. I don't know what to make of it. It is something that is noticeable with some testimonies. I think in Rose's case something different is happening. Probably Fritz's anger at having to send all of the evidence to the FBI and some of it coming back modified perhaps. Or, the FBI asking for things to be modified.

Greg, Do you know how to tell the difference between Army and Marine personnel in the 1950s? I suspect you don't. I could be wrong. There are clear differences in their uniforms and the way they wore those uniforms. Paine's army photos were mixed in with Oswald's Marine photos to confuse the issue on who's minox that was that was found in the garage. I guess Oswald was stealing Paine's minox when the police officer found it in Oswald's seabag. Or, as I suggested earlier Oswald may have jumped forward in time and use it to photograph things and then left it in his seabag over the years until it was found in Ruth's garage in Oswald's seabag. This is one of the alleged Michael Paine Army photos. It is neither Michael Paines or an Army photo. These men are in the Marines. Their uniform and dress say so. You may be looking at the original Lee Harvey Oswald.

Speaking of Lee Oswald in Minsk, or one of the Lee Oswalds in Minsk. I am not sure many people have seen this photo of the folks on the bridge in Minsk taking pictures of themselves. I don't know who the male is in the photo with Marina and her friend. The picture on the left hand either came from photos found at the Paines or from Alan Weberman. I had never seen the man in this photo before. I believe everyone more or less believed that the only people there were Oswald, Marina, and her friend. Now, there is some one else.

Chris, I am fairly sure its Oswald and Souetre, but no supporting evidence. Or, genetics can keep you young in appearance until about 30. I was still being carded for booze at age 26-27. If his is 1960 or there abouts Souetre could be 29 or 30 years old. The rubble in the background is left over from WWII. A good deal of the buildings in Minsk were rebuilt from that kind of rubble. Notice the wall in the back of this photo. This is just outside the lab or area that Oswald worked in at the Minsk plant. It is from the rubble of other buildings.

No. Just poking a stick at some of the lame reasoning one finds on the forum concerning Oswald matters. I wish folks would pay attention to your next comment.

I can go along with that. I can also go along with it being Souetre. I just don't have evidence to prove either way. I don't know anything about Skorzeny post WWII. I should read up on him.

I didn't know you were a proponent of Harvey and Lee. I think Alan Weberman is a more believable fellow than yours.

Will you deny these are the same Oswalds? One in Japan about 1958 and the other leaving Russia about 1962?

That's not really relevant when early on the camera was claimed to be Michael's camera.

You sure about that? You need to go back at look at Michael Paine's army photos. I have and believe I can separate Oswald's and Paine's. He was in the army during the Korean War. Army uniforms are quite different from Marine Corps uniforms even a few years later in 1958. Lacking on the uniform of Oswalds is a large white name stripe. Those are on all army uniforms of that period for personnel in the US Army. You were subject to Article 15 punishment if you wore your uniform without a name stripe. The photo also shows that the uniform lacks a unit patch. Really bad form in the US Army. He has on a tan belt and US Army belts were black. There are too many Marine/Army discrepancies for this to be an army uniform worn by Oswald in that photo.

None of these guys look like Oswald's arm in arm buddy. No resemblances at all.

Thanks Steve, This was the kind of answer I was looking for. However, the Oswald in Russia time period is from 1959 to 1962. What happened to Souetre after he left his regiment in 1960? Any ideas?

Greg, Are you in denial? Or, is the above statement "nuanced" as done by others who I think are in denial? This is the first time I have heard that this photo of Lee Oswald is not Lee Oswald. This photo was developed by the National Archives from film found in Ruth Paine's garage. Maybe Hemming that great spy and story teller slipped this camera film into Ruth Paine's garage so it would be swept up with the DPD dragnet and later claimed as Michael Paine's film. Or, maybe as Lee Oswald's film.

Are you or are you not representing this camera as the one owned by Michael Paine? Another question? Did Lee Oswald reach forward in time to seize Michael Paine's Minox and take the following picture at Atsugi years earlier that Alan Weberman had the National Archives develop? I believe this is before he knew Paine or Paines.

I too think this. However, how does one decide whether is early on garbled information or the truth. It is reported as if it is the truth. So, much for that nowadays and perhaps just so in the past.

Ditto. Ditto in the extreme. The current crop is aptly described.

Your friend has made a mistake according to Alan Weberman. The camera you show is not the same camera that Weberman says in in the National Archives. These are not the same cameras. Besides, the photo shown by Doudna is open increasing its length making it appear larger than it really is. Another question? What this pointed to in the picture?

Some where I have read or seen something that suggests the person with Oswald in this photo taken in Russia is Jean Souetre. I couldn't find that on a recent search of the forum and net. I'm not sure, but this fellow with Oswald looks like photos of Souetre. Souetre was born in 1930. This fellow doesn't quite look like 29-32 in age. This would be 1959 to 1962 for the years Oswald was in Russia. He might be a young 30ish. So, is this Souetre? I put together this to help decide. There are resemblances in hairline and chin. But, that may be coincidental. If that was Souetre in the photo with Oswald above, is it just another sinister character associated with Oswald? There is a long line of sinister characters starting with the Russian Colonel in Japan. Your opinion will be valued.

Pat, Where's the proof of a grey jacket? A medium grey jacket? Light or medium gray that looks like CE 163 the blue, Russian jacket. There's evidence or a light tan/grey jacket of the short waisted kind exhibited in the Hunter Photo. Not a longer jacket such as CE 163. Marina says she washed these jackets and they were never sent to the cleaners. There's always a problem with her veracity. But, why would she lie about washing jackets and not sending them to the cleaners. Particularly, when a cleaning tag was found in one of the jackets. Surely, she would have went along with the story if it was important at the time. What did this medium grey jacket look like. Is there a photo representation of it? I haven't seen any evidence of a medirm gray jacket so how can Greg postulate a 3 jacket theory?

It is my opinion that the light, colored Oswald jacket is not the one shown in CE 162. If you compare the following you will see what I am talking about. The jacket Oswald is wearing in the hunter photo has a wider collar, a breast pocket, and different cuffs. CE 162 appears to have a breast pocket, but it looks like a wrinkle. The hunter photo may show a light grey jacket or a light tan jacket. I don't believe it is white. I don't see where you get that from. The center photo is of Oswald in Russia with a friend (who is suspected of being an assassin). The Jacket Oswald is wearing is identical to photo no. 2 and is a dark blue color rather than a light or medium grey. WC CE 163 is the jacket Oswald is wearing in the photo taken in Minsk. It is not a light or medium grey in color. First off it is not light or medium grey. Secondly, it is the kind of jacket one would find in a militarized country such as Russia. Watch K dramas and you will see the same thing in Korea where all young men have to serve in the military. The color, the collar, pockets, zipper length, and epaulettes match.

Jeremy claimed I am trying to hide something by posting on a different single issue several times. I do that for clarity and simplicity. Short posts are easier to read than longer posts, say Greg Doudna for instance. Longer posts get boring and confusing after awhile.