Steve Roe

David, I sorry but I have to take issue with you here on this Tippit Shooting and the so-called other overwhelming evidence against the Patsy, Lee Harvey Oswald. Everyone knows your history of being bias, and out to get an innocent man convicted of a crime he never committed. So respectfully I’m going to lay out some of the evidence here for your consideration in hopes it might change your mind. If it’s any consolation, I was accused of being bias myself, and this new evidence may change my mind. 1. Marina Oswald identified her husband jackets to the Warren Commission. The blue jacket left at the TSBD and the Gray Jacket (CE162 – the jacket found under a car behind the Ballew Texaco Station). FALSE: Marina was threatened with deportation and was forced to lie under oath. Everyone knows that! The Warren Commission staff knew it too, that’s why they twisted her testimony around to convict Oswald in the public’s eyes. You really need to study the Deep State better. 2. Earlene Roberts testified that Oswald left the Beckley Rooming house zipping up a jacket. FALSE: Greg Parker and the ROKC research staff proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that Oswald never lived at the Beckley Rooming house. If James DiEugenio thinks Greg Parker is a top notched researcher exposing the WC myths, that’s good enough for me! 3. Oswald owned the Smith-Wesson.38 revolver that killed Officer Tippit; he bought it mail order from Seaport Traders in Los Angeles. FALSE: Oswald while working at Jagger-Chiles-Stovall was contacted by the secret Dodd Committee to order the pistol to expose mail order gun companies. He did it out of his patriotic duty. A secret Todd Committee handler gave Oswald the “True Adventures” magazine and clipped out the order coupon. All Deep State stuff, David. 4. The serial number on the revolver matched Seaport Trader’s paperwork. FALSE: Captain Pinky Westbrook of the DPD made sure the serial numbers matched because he was working with the CIA. We know this because he was sent to Vietnam to work with the CIA. Again, you need to bone up on the Deep State. 5. Oswald shot Officer Tippit. FALSE: It was Larry Crafard and Harry Olsen that did it. After Crafard shot Tippit, he was driven back to Ruby’s Carousel Club by Harry Olsen. I know Olsen was on crutches, but Crafard helped Olsen drive using his own foot on the accelerator and brakes. Crafard faked going back to sleep when Ruby’s bartender, Andy Armstrong woke him up in the backroom. Crafard I’m sure was exhausted after committing this murder. Go ahead and laugh, get it out of your system. 6. Tippit was Badgeman. TRUE: Author Joseph McBride almost proved this. Marie Tippit could not pin down the exact time JD Tippit came home to eat lunch. She failed to record the lunch time on her notepad at home. That is highly suspicious! 7. The Postal Code on the Klein’s envelope was “12”; someone other than Oswald mailed that money order to Chicago away from the General Post Office on Ervay Street. TRUE: James DiEugenio and John Armstrong proved that! Come on David, you need to study postal zones in Dallas. You may take issue with that statement by DiEugenio, but it was proven that Marina Oswald herself mailed a letter to Ruth Paine (the CIA handler) from the 214 West Neely Street apartment with a map of where she lived. On that letter was the Postal Code “15”. That postal code was in South Dallas, south of Fair Park, way across the Trinity River. We know that Marina took her baby in a stroller and walked a distance of some 15 miles, just to mail that letter! 8. Johnny Brewer was a conspirator in setting up Oswald to be captured. TRUE: We know the CIA often uses front companies to carry on their covert activities. Hardy Shoes on Jefferson Blvd was one of them. You may laugh at this, but where do you think the TV producers of the 1965 series, “Get Smart” got the idea of a shoe phone for Secret Agent Maxell Smart? Huh? Yep, Hardy Shoes. All Deep State. 9. Oswald didn’t shoot Officer Tippit, again. TRUE: Oswald was instructed by his handler to go get his Dodd Committee pistol and load the cylinder. It was a mere coincidence that the same .38 bullet shells of Remington-Peters and Western Cartridge were found on 10th and Patton that were found in Oswald’s Dodd pistol. His handler instructed him to meet him at the Texas Theater to receive further instructions. Because the Texas Theater was a dangerous place to be on a Friday matinee, his handler advised him to carry extra ammo in his pocket in case one of the patrons who did murder Officer Tippit was there. All foreknowledge of the Big Event, Deep State all the way!

Above quote was from McBride's response to Dale Myers. You can see the entire article here on DiEugenio's Conspiracy Website https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/myers-dale-with-malice-lee-harvey-oswald-and-the-murder-of-officer-j-d-tippit Considering the possibility that Tippit was Badgeman? Why even go there? Is this scholarly work exploring a nutty theory? Badgeman was debunked decades ago.

LITWIN, FRED. On The Trail of Delusion: Jim Garrison: The Great Accuser (pp. 166-167). NorthernBlues Books. Kindle Edition. He has a memo from Oser to Garrison about locating the camp (near Slidell).

Sorry, Roberts is very clear on this point in her WC testimony. Mr. BALL. It was a zippered jacket, was it?Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes; it was a zipper jacket. How come me to remember it, he was zipping it up as he went out the door.Mr. BALL. He was zipping it up as he went out the door?Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes. The jacket found under the car behind the Ballew Texaco station was a zippered jacket as well. Fibers inside the sleeve were consistent with Oswald's arrest shirt. There is no doubt whatsoever that Oswald murdered JD Tippit. The evidence is overwhelming.

You're missing the big point here. It doesn't matter what color Roberts describes the jacket. Oswald is captured in the Texas Theater without a jacket. Where's his jacket?

Recently I purchased the Kindle version of DiEugenio's new book. I saw many dubious claims repeated that have debunked (the Todd initials, overnight airmail to Chicago, Oswald's 3 Qtr. USMC pay, etc.). The citations of source material, most of them from other conspiracy books, is really bad. As I plow through this book, there will be more articles pointing out DiEugenio's claims, and stories mentioned in his book. Author Fred Litwin steps forward today with this doozy of a whopper concerning DiEugenio's citing of Dick Russel's book as a source. https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/anatomy-of-a-james-dieugenio-citation Does the truth matter? Or is this business as usual with baseless conspiracy stories?

Vince, is Oliver Stone even aware of this Elmer Todd initials rebut? Did DiEugenio tell him or anyone?

The Lopez Report did conclude Oswald was in Mexico City in direct conflict with your statement "Oswald was not in Mexico City". https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=799#relPageId=256 There's lots of evidence that he was in Mexico City, you just choose to ignore it.

I'm aware of this comment by Larry. Of course, this came on the heels of the Elmer Todd initials discovery which was a corner stone to Stone's recent JFK film. Naturally this is a huge embarrassment to those involved with the film. It's nothing more but sour grapes striking out at me for doing something they should have done in the first place. I have nothing personal against Larry and like to keep to our JFK disagreements solely in a civil manner. He's entitled to his opinion. Likewise, I have my own opinion that Ruth Paine is being victimized by baseless, senseless and reckless innuendos. What is a CIA handler anyway? Do they wash clothes, tend to children, take mothers to hospitals, give blood, help assist mothers in delivery where the husband was noticeably absent while secretly setting up a man to be framed? All of this stuff is nothing more than transferring the guilt from Oswald to fantasy nameless, faceless CIA spooks. Reasonable people see through this quixotic charade.

Tammi Long of the ARRB verified the chain of custody in the 1990's. Everything is not conspiratorial Sandy. How did someone sneak into the National Archives and scribble the initials? Ruth Paine and LHO CIA Agents? That is beyond reality Sandy.

I'd like to thank Dr. Mantik for his honesty and candor in recognizing the mistake on Elmer Todd's initials. That took a certain amount of courage and class to publicly admit it when he was featured on film. I was unaware Pat Speer did a study on the bullet as well, and his fine work should be acknowledged. Pat is a researcher and one of the very few I do read and study on the conspiracy side of the argument. Does the truth matter? Now the results rest with DiEugenio and Stone to come forth and recognize the obvious. Will they? Or will it be business as usual?

Good one! You know what they say, "when in a deep hole, stop digging". Apparently DiEugenio is trying to dig himself out of this mess he's gotten himself into. As you politely asked him to acknowledge his error on the file cabinets, he refused and waited for someone to provide an answer to get him out of this mess. The Michael Paine excuse is so laughable and beyond absurdity. The fact remains, not one commentor here provided one scintilla of provable evidence, only speculation. Both Michael and Ruth Paine were investigated by the FBI. Their background was examined, phone records, letters, etc. If and only IF, there was a list of Castro Sympathizers found, it would have been mentioned somewhere in FBI documentation and examined. Of course........there never was. It's too late for DiEugenio, what's done is done. His cameo role in Good's movie is now there for all to see. Now it's Max Good's problem and up to him now to examine this evidence and decide right or wrong. Attempts to slough off by stating "it was DiEugenio's opinion on the file cabinets" just won't cut it if you want to be a fair film maker. I would give Max Good the benefit of a doubt here, because all of this evidence of the file cabinets, maybe new to him. Perhaps he will make a statement or stay quiet about it. Either way, it's coming up and will be pointed out. Bottom Line: DiEugenio's comments about the "Castro Sympathizers" in Ruth Paine's garage is totally reckless, irresponsible, debunked nine ways to Sunday, and no doubt whatsoever, an unfounded vicious smear job on Ruth Paine.

Greg Doudna, I see DiEugenio's Wolf Pack has descended on you for posting real documents and evidence. You know you can't do that in here, they get upset. By the way Greg, did you know that Luby's Cafeteria where Michael Paine went after church to have conversations was a "Hot-Bed of Subversive Commies"? Yes, secret Castro Operatives were chowing down on Fried Chicken and Mash Potatoes while covertly plotting to overthrow the Government. They willingly gave a complete stranger, Michael Paine their names. Oh yeah, and Michael Paine filled up 7 metal file boxes of hundreds of Dallas area subversives. Of course, this is major stupid. You proved it, and it's funny to watch these lame excuses trying to pin the Paine's on anything nefarious. Now DiEugenio is changing his story again (he always does when caught telling these tales) blaming Michael Paine. Gee, don't you think he would have considered that long before getting on camera and telling the world?

Not acceptable, it's a deliberate smear by Mr. DiEugenio. This has been debunked decades ago.

Greg, this is a good post. I agree Ruth Paine was maligned in the film. Of course, you will get the nutty remarks about the CIA paying Ruth and Michael Paine hidden in the tax returns. That's to be expected from the Paine Bashers in this forum. You post evidence, and they post baseless speculation.

Are you serious? Do you really think there was a Koffee Klatch conspiracy? Was it a "You bring them - We frame them" ladies neighborhood social group? Wow, "Little Langley in Irving". The ridiculous lengths some people go to trash Ruth Paine is mind-blowing.

Greg, I may not agree with you on certain topics, but you are 100% correct on all these false allegations about Ruth Paine. Long time researchers have known about the CIA-ACLU confusion for many years. As you laid out in your post, it was the ACLU not CIA. You did an excellent job laying it out in detail. I saw the Max Good film and was disturbed how he waited to the end to pose these nutty accusations to an 87-year-old Ruth Paine. He would have been better served in researching the facts first and not rely on virulent conspiracy advocates who have an axe to grind with Mrs. Paine. In fairness, perhaps Mr. Good would like to comment or explain his position to see his side of the story. The truth does matter. I seriously doubt Mr. DiEugenio will make any apology of any kind in regard to Ruth Paine. He's too busy playing parlor games with phony "ignore" claims on you and Tracy Parnell, just trying to be popular among his handful of supporters. These reckless and false claims about Ruth Paine on this forum are of course without merit and belong in the trash. Related to the topic, even Harold Weisberg never bought into the Oswald Minox Camera fantasy. http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg Subject Index Files/S Disk/Stewart James L/Item 01.pdf

Tracy, Stone and DiEugenio's "false mysteries" are now being exposed. The Horne piece on Oswald's missing USMC pay was a total sham. Huge embarrassment now to those who think this film is telling the truth. There will be more.

Micah, this is nothing new on Oswald. Allow a little time, as we just got this god-awful series here in the U.S. And you are closer to the truth that it was indeed record keeping issues. Oswald did not get paid by the CIA, ONI, or any other intelligence agency. Horne as usual, is so way off base. As most people know he believes in nutty windshield holes, fake Z-Film, body alteration, etc. There was no fact-checking in this film series. Stone's staff took them at their word.

Bob, YouTube wants to make sure that video views are coming from real people. That's why a YouTube view is only counted when the following two criteria apply: A user intentionally initiates the watching of a video. The user watches it on the platform for at least 30 seconds. Thank you Bob.........

Pat, thank you for your efforts. As most people know here, Mr. DiEugenio has me and Tracy on "Ignore". It's not the Ed Forum "Ignore" option, it's him refusing to respond. It's nothing but a Forum Parlor Game, I can see his posts and he sees mine. Your point about "Flop" is taken, and you made some valid points. I might add, you have some very thought-provoking posts, even if we disagree on the subject. You do take the time to explain your reasoning as a researcher, and I can appreciate that. That's an amusing story about your wife's birthday on 11/22. Being married myself, I understand the priorities.

Pat, the film is a flop because of the following reasons. 1. Oliver Stone wanted more people to watch his film. He gripped about it soon after it was released in the U.S. that it didn't receive a big following like in Europe. Of course, there were a few favorable responses and some unfavorable, such as Tim Weiner in Rolling Stone. But the cold hard fact remains, Stone could not get a sizeable audience buzz going about his "Documentary" in this North American market. I'm sure you would agree that Stone and DiEugenio are striving to get more people to watch the film. They want everyone to see their so-called "groundbreaking" revelations. Besides safe space podcasts and social forums, nobody is talking about this film. That's a flop in my opinion. Of course, other films like Parkland were a flop, I agree. I never saw the film (Parland) and don't plan on watching it either. 2. The film is chock full of deceptive editing and blatant errors. If you put all the conspiratorial claims made in JFK Revisited together, you get a complete, incoherent mess. When the 4-Hour version comes out, I'm sure there will be more claims. That is a factual flop, in my opinion. Those are the two main reasons I'm calling this a flop. It's You-Tube bound... So, if the intent of Filmmaker Stone was to get a wide audience talking about his film, to bring awareness that there was a conspiracy to kill the President, backed up with his "Facts", which of course he wanted, it didn't happen. That's a flop. Pat, do you agree or not agree, that there were some significant errors in this film?

Yes, it's a big flop. Stone admits it, DiEugenio won't of course. All DiEugenio gives us is "how many views". Naturally someone clicks it on for a few seconds and leaves, that's counted as a view. All we need now is for DiEugenio to gives us the view count in Sri Lanka. Like the film, it's just another phony carnival barker show.

I agree Tracy, hitching your wagon to a Garrison's fraud trial, is on the wrong side of history. Nobody has any proof that Shaw was involved in the assassination. Although Jim D. wrote he was a low-level asset......but soon edited it out. Embarrassing, especially when Shaw had his trial and acquitted quickly.