John Butler

Don't worry about it. All of us make mistakes from time to time. Here's something you might think about when thinking about shooting coming from the Sniper's Nest on the 6th floor. The following makes it impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that firing did occur from the Sniper's Nest. Witnesses Closest to the Sniper’s Nest (within 40 feet except Jack Daugherty): Only three of these 13 witnesses say the shots came from the Sniper’s Nest or sixth floor. 10 witnesses said the shots came from a different location then the Sniper’s Nest. Harold Norman- 11-26-63 FBI statement: Norman said he heard a shot as the vehicle turned onto Elm St. He changed that later but, consistently said the shots came from above. (5th floor directly under Sniper’s Nest) Bonnie Ray Williams- Sheriff’s Office statement 11-22-63: First, said he heard two shots when the presidential limo turned onto Houston. Later, he changed that to a turn onto Elm St. and then later changed that to 3 shots. He first said the shots came from above. (5th floor directly under Sniper’s Nest) James “Junior” Jarman- Warren Commission testimony: At first, Jarman said much the same as Williams and Norman about hearing a shot from above. He later changed his testimony at the Warren Hearing to hearing shots from low and to the left. (5th floor directly under Sniper’s Nest) Jack Daughtery- 11-22-63, 11-23-63, 12-19-63, and 4-8-64: Daughtery made a number of statements saying he heard a loud noise like a shot, but didn’t know where it came from. Later, he said he heard one shot that sounded if it came from above on the next floor meaning the 6th floor. (5th floor near elevator) Elsie Dorman- FBI statement 11-24-63: She thought the shots came from the Court Records Building on Houston St. (4th floor less than 40 feet away) Sandra Styles- In a statement made to the FBI on 3-19-64 she said she heard shots but, did not know where they came from and offered no other relevant information. However, in a video published in October, 2017 she said as the presidential vehicle turned into the intersection she heard 3 shots. Reference: Jobert Jefford Paulson video, Oct. 17, 2017- The Case of the Lady Who Did Not See the Assassin. (4th floor less than 40 feet away) Vickie Adams- FBI statement 11-24-63: She said when the president’s vehicle entered the intersection she heard 3 shots. Her view was obstructed by trees. The sound came from the west or right side of the building. (4th floor less than 40 feet away) Dorothy Garner- FBI statement 3-20-64: When the shots occured the presidential vehicle was out of sight, obscured by trees. This would be in front of the TSBD. She thought the shots came from the west. (4th floor less than 40 feet away) Mary Hollies- 2-18-64 statement to Detective Potts said she heard 3 shots as the motorcade turned into the intersection. (4th floor changed to 5th floor) Betty Alice Foster- FBI statement 3-19-64: She was with Mary Hollies. She heard something like fireworks after the President’s car turned down Elm St. (4th floor changed to 5th floor) Steven Wilson- FBI statement 3-30-63: He said his view was obstructed by trees and heard 3 distinct shots. FBI Statement 3-25-64: The shots came from the west. (3rd floor directly below Sniper’s Nest about 30 feet away) Yola Hopson- FBI statement 12-1-63: She heard sounds that she thought were firecrackers which had been set off on the street below. She did not believe the sounds came from the within the building. (4th floor less than 40 feet away) Ruth Nelson- 2-18-63: She was with Yola Hopson. She heard 3 shots that sounded as if they were part of the celebration on the street. (4th floor less than 40 feet away)

Since he regrew his teeth and tonsils do you think he might have a touch of vampirism and would eventually rise from the grave to everyone in the CIA's horror. Maybe his loss of two inches was bound up in the regrowth of organs? When he eventually rises do you think he will tell all? Will he reveal those dark secrets that he took to the grave? Will he really tell us that he truly was the son of Emile Kardos, AKA Emil Gardos? Will he tell us what he was doing at all those mysterious military bases? Oh... pardon, that was Lee. Will he tell us dark secrets naming names of the high and mighty? When will he arise? Soooo...nnnn! Beware all you scoffers and deniers. The truth will be revealed Soooo....nnnn…

David, A bit off topic here, but just wanted to check if this photo is known to you. I ran across this recently and haven't seen it before. I'm not certain this is a true photo. There are a few details wrong in this photo.

Other studies say from 15 to 18. The total range of variation is 12 years to 26 years.

The dental formula for humans is 2-1-2-3 for each quadrant of the mouth. This means for one quadrant of the mouth you have 2 incisors, 1 canine, 2 pre-molars, and 3 molars and for 4 quadrants, upper and lower teeth, totaling 32 teeth. This is for the average human. This is not to say this is what you will always find. Some times various teeth are missing. Generally, the teeth missing most often are the 3rd molars. Some times 1 or more will not form various reasons. My favorite Anthropology expert from long ago said that in certain races this lack of a 3rd molar is more prevalent than other races. Then he went on an didn't say which. It took me years to find out that Asian races were the ones he was talking about. All of this is to say people should have 32 teeth as part of their human heritage. Harvey Oswald had 31 teeth with one missing tooth. and, I don't know what these dental records could be about unless they are Lee Oswald's records. As you can see from the exhumation photos that Harvey had all of his molars. None were missing or had not formed. Lee on the other hand had 3, 3rd molars missing. This differs from the earlier 1958 chart suggesting that 2 molar circled need to be removed. I would guess one was removed. And no. 32 was left alone.

You might notice on this Donabedian Exhibit No. 1 form that the dates and places of examination are unreadable. Everything else is, but not that.

David, There's really no excuse for my laziness. After awhile I shamed myself into looking that up and found your earlier work before you posted. Good work I might say. As serious as Gorsky and March says serious to me. So, is it worth putting into your timeline? I believe it is. It might even make more sense of the Lee Oswald / Steve Landesberg stories of Oswald and his buddy touring Europe in 60 If memory serves.

Here's something I ran across that is really interesting: https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/pdf/WH19_Donabedian_Ex_1.pdf It has this little snippet in it: It seems like No. 1 tooth and No. 16 missing. Nos. 30 and 17 are missing. X for No. 1 and no 16 does not look like an I for non-restorable teeth. That's a total of 4 missing teeth. Nos. 1, 16, and 17 refer to molars. No. 30 refers to a missing pre-molar. This is not Harvey with one missing tooth. This is Lee Oswald with more than one missing tooth. There is no notation for Central or Lateral Incisors. There can be no indication of missing incisors or a prosthesis because Harvey did not have this problem. This may indicate the two's records were merged badly indicating that these records are fraudulent. This is conclusive proof that these records were forged because Harvey only had one missing tooth, No. 30, a pre-molar on exhumation in 1981. Any indication that shows Harvey with more than one missing tooth indicates someone else, Lee in this case. A military form always has information denoting what type of form it is: Such as this form.

And, there are those that do neither, but present themselves as the one who really know what is real or not.

David, Is this Steenbarge interview regarded as serious evidence? Was Surell Brady FBI or what?

Nice statement.

Trying to suggest that films and photos were not altered is easily one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read.

What about the 5 missing teeth? There is a correspondence with missing tooth no. 30, but not with the other missing four. An X placed on a tooth designates a missing tooth and that is universal amongst dentists and dental charts. We could argue all day and night whether the prosthesis is recorded or not. Set aside any argument of altering the dental records and simply explain the 4 extra missing teeth. Can you do that? The man called Harvey Oswald was missing only 1 tooth after exhumation in 1981. He was not missing 5 or more.

None of this appointment argument really matters. Go to the end of this statement and you will see why. The "failed 5-5- 58" may be on the same line, but it is not in the same section indicating something totally different. "failed 5-5-58" doesn't refer to a failed appointment, it refers to a prosthesis failure. Why in the world would medical information and administrative information be mixed together? On the form is a section for appointments. Any notation of an appointment would be made there. There is no record of a new appointment made after each of 3 visits. The date for this dental visit is 5-14-58. Prophylaxis needed indicates a cleaning is needed. No where is that cleaning scheduled for an appointment. Most likely that cleaning was taken care on 5-14-58. It seems record procedures is just to list the date that something was done dentally. There are 3 dates for visits to that particular dental office. No appointments were scheduled on the dental record scheduling section indicating that medical information was kept separate from administrative records such as appointments. The dental records in question for Lee Harvey Oswald have 5 x's on them. That means 5 missing teeth. These are the upper left and right 3rd molars. The lower left and right 3rd molars. and, the lower left 1st molar. The reason as mentioned before in other places for the missing upper teeth are that they were replaced by the prosthesis. That doesn't really matter. Because, Harvey had only 1 missing tooth, tooth 30, the upper right 1st molar.

David, This is my first effort at using layers. I thought your excellent effort above could maybe use a third government ID with Harvey's photo from Dallas on it. (don't mind the draft card I couldn't at the moment find the government ID) That would clearly show the differences in the facial photographs attributed to Harvey Oswald.

Steve, Let's see. We have a Lee Harvey Oswald, a Harvey Oswald, a Leon Oswald, O. H. Lee, , not to mention Alek Oswald (James Alex Hidell,) and now a Leo Oswald. These names are from various, different records. Leo Oswald. A sharp eye. Maybe the lone nutters are right an Lee Harvey Oswald was as goofy as an outhouse rat. Nah... there's to much evidence stating there were at least two Oswalds or perhaps more.

Ron, I recall seeing an actress with one upper central incisor and pointed it out to my wife. Neither one of us remember who that was. One central incisor is genetic disease and fairly rare. From the internet: Solitary median maxillary central incisor syndrome (SMMCI) is a complex disorder consisting of multiple, mainly midline defects of development resulting from unknown factor(s) operating in utero about the 35th-38th day(s) from conception. It is estimated to occur in 1:50,000 live births." I disagree on one tooth. The gap appears big enough for two and if the leftmost tooth (screen right) from the gap is a canine, as it appears to be due to its size, then there is a two teeth gap. However, most folks see one tooth and it is probably best to think in terms of one tooth.

A good thought, more then speculation and based on evidence of the Steenbarge letter in 1978. This let's me trot out my bias again. With the Steenbarge letter we now have two Oswalds in Europe in Oct. 1959. One, Lee, in Germany and the other, Harvey, in Finland and Russia. That's closer to putting two Oswalds in Russia at the same time. (my bias) According to Steenbarge after Lee Oswald landed in either Rhine/Maine or Frankfort, Germany he disappears from the records. Supposedly, he is back in the Southeastern US later than mid-October. I think there is a record for him with a general notation of being in New Orleans from Nov. 1, 1959. David doesn't specify the source of this in his timeline. He just notes that Lee Oswald in in NOLA in Nov. 1, 1959. Perhaps David can provide more information here on Lee's whereabouts in NOLA at the first of Nov. 1959. There must be something to denote this. If so, then another smoking gun, or. Like so many of my notions, they often run afoul of the evidence.

See there folks, the problem is solved. It is not something sharp and pointed, but round and circular. It's the biggest cap off of the biggest pen available in 1959 or so. But, this answer still has the problem of transparency. If you look you can see the roof of the mouth behind Lee's left canine. And, if you really look close there appears to be two holes there. One large and one small. Oh, but look that's a small pen or pencil. To small for a large pen cap.

Sorry folks, It seems I make the same dumb error every time I look at this without thinking: I looked for what should be tooth 32 or the 3rd right upper molar and it appears not to be there. There are 15 teeth in Harvey Oswald's upper mandible. One is missing, but it is not the upper 3rd molar. It is tooth 30 or the 1st upper right molar that is missing. And, should be between the 2nd upper right pre-molar and the 2nd upper right molar. It was extracted. The reason for the continuous error is there is no space between the 2nd upper right pre-molar and the 2nd upper right molar. Tooth 30 or the upper right 1st molar is missing according to the report mentioned by Greg Doudna. The spot where I continuously make an error looks like a tooth should be there and appears malformed. Hence the error. It is not unknown that a 4th molar sometimes appears. From the internet "Fourth molars or distomolars are situated distal to the third molars, they have a rudimentary shape and are usually seen as impacted teeth (4). Fourth molars rarely erupt into oral cavity and thus are usually discovered through radiographs" I might add here that the eruption of a fourth molar is a very primitive trait. The dental formula for all mammals not marsupial is 3-1-4-3 which means for one quarter of the mouth there is 3 incisors, 1 canine, 4 pre-molars and 3 molars, all together a total of 44 teeth. This is a dental formula that is about 65-70 million years old. The dental formula for monkeys, apes, and humans is about 30 -35 million years old. It is 2-1-2-3.

Since the tongue is sharp on the end, could be call it a snake's tongue. No, it would have to be forked. Maybe a case of tongue in cheek. No, that wouldn't work either. I got it. It's a translucent tongue. Maybe Ozzie is the Invisible Boy. And, starts fading away from his tongue. I think I will take good advice and hold my tongue.

Given the state of honesty amongst Democrats today, who can say if it was the same in the past.

Jim, This is very interesting. Thanks for providing it. So, there is no documentation for a Feb., 1958 leave while Lee was at Atsugi, Japan. Or, as Robert recalled in the fall of the year perhaps September, either. There is no documentation for that either. The leave that Lee Oswald took when he left Atsugi, Japan is well documented as to time. But, what did he do during that leave is an unanswered question. One would assume he went back to see his family. Robert said, "I recall this to be in the early fall of the year­ perhaps September" contrasts startlingly with what he said in the inscription on the photo in question. He said "Lee and I went squirrel hunting with Vada’s brother on the Mercers’ farm in February, 1958 when Lee was at home on leave from the Marines. That’s my .22 rifle." The photo, as you say, comes from the book Lee: A Portrait of Lee Harvey Oswald published on January 1, 1967. I would guess 9 or 10 years is enough time to develop a faulty memory. But, the problem remains. Neither time mentioned, Feb., 1958 or Sept., 1958, by Robert Oswald was available for the original Lee Harvey Oswald to take leave and go to the US. As we have agreed in the past, Robert Oswald was a member of good standing in the Oswald Project. Is he believable? Do we need to look closely at what he has said over time? What he said doesn't match what you are saying. IMO, what Lee Oswald did on his leave when he returned to the US from Japan has nothing to do with what Robert said about Feb., 1958 or Sept., 1958. We have to look at Robert and who was available to be Lee Harvey Oswald in those two time periods. And, the only fellow available for this photo is Harvey from over at Pfisterer Dental Lab. It is not a short distance between New Orleans and Ft. Worth/Dallas, but certainly one that can be traveled in a day. One other question bothers me about this photo. What kind of squirrels were they hunting in this West Texas brush country? Ground squirrels?

This photo, according to Robert was taken in Feb., 1958. Is there any record of Lee Oswald taking a leave and returning to the US while stationed at Atsugi, Japan in 1957-58? If so, I have never seen or heard of it. I looked at David's timeline and he mentions this event as Lee Oswald in the photo, but with no other information perhaps suggesting he was puzzled by this. It does appear to be an oddity and maybe David can help clear it up. At one point I argued that his photo was Lee Oswald (center photo) due to his features matching the following: Broad nose and broad chin apparent in these 3 photos. This was part of a greater identification scheme listing the difference one can see in photos of Lee and Harvey. And, if memory serves you argued differently. My files are in such a mess it is hard to pin point at times what I am looking for. So, no offense intended, the memory problem is most likely mine. I changed my view on this (I think because you said something different) to Harvey Oswald. This was after I reanalyzed the phot and noticed the hair pattern as something that might point to the difference between Harvey and Lee and decided this was Harvey. Can you prove that Lee Oswald came home to Texas in Feb., 1958? Is there any documentation available? If so, that will settle the argument. I wondered about Marine Corps overseas leave when this photo was first seen. I can only vouch for my own experiences in Korea. There was a policy of allowing a mid-term leave to return home to the US for about 3 weeks leaving another week for travel time. The US Army gave 30 days leave every year to a GI. This was why the mid-term leave was available. For such a leave documentation was a necessary thing. This leave in the Army is tied to pay records and I believe 201 file so that if you overstayed your leave the Army could recover money that you may have been paid for this leave. The Marine Corps was probably the same. There should be a record. Other than that, I have no problem on disagreements. These things happen when people look at the sorry documentation call the Oswald graphic record.