Jean Ceulemans

In the same topic, about the way Ruth answered to her sisters employment I believe it was. IMHO she answered to those questions pretty much in the same way she answered the questions about the place her sister lived. I did not add the excerpts on the Q and A about the work she did. BUT perhaps you were talking about a perjury in an other part, or perhaps even another hearing ? Please give me some references to that so I can find where she committed perjury there, or copy the exerpts as I did with the address discussion, I'm really only trying to learn ya know !

Anyone out there that has a link where I can download these volumes (HSCA Oswald Chronologies) I used to have a "paid for" acces so I could download stuff but not any longer I have looked for it, but likely not in the right places

Thanks, that was indeed the main point I was getting at, nothing worth lying about. I have a little personal story myself, I actually also have a sister that is now living in Virginia. She moved to the US over 40 years ago, has moved a number of times (different states, cities, etc). If I need her address, I would have to look it up in the address book, I really wouldn't know the town or city it actually is.

Yes, but they got on to it from the visits she had made in that tour, and where she stayed during that, and she assumed that was Falls Church, one of their previous addresses. And why would she lie about it when in december 1963 the agencies had her address. Sylvia was questioned a number of times in december 1963 about Ruth's visit in or about about august '63. The thing is, what Ruth has said in Orleans, how would it be perjury on Ruth's part ? She was not sure it was Maryland, Falls Church or any other in the region where her sister had lived (see below). Her sister had lived in Falls Church, so that was not a bad statement IMHO I certainly would not call it a perjury, a serious matter And, Jim, It was your invitation (see attached) to me to look up the matter, so I did, and I thank you for reminding me to do so But they had her address, she was in the phonebook, and IMO not hiding from Garrison, at least not that I can tell ? Yes, Silvia was working for the CIA, but was it Ruth's to know or tell ? Ruth did say what she assumed she was doing for those organisations Garrison should have called Sylvia to the stand, I don't know if he did ? But blaming Ruth for perjury ? IMO nope

IMO it is not, but Sandy said Ruth lied when she was asked about her sisters address I referred to you in that topic (if you look at the notices - the bell, next to messages - you get from EF it should be in there)

Some here ( @Sandy Larsen @James DiEugenio have called this perjury (or alleged to it being so), I found that a rather serious accusation Ruth spend a few days at her sisters house in july 1963 (the family tour) In April 1968 she didn't exactly remember the place in first (p 56) when asked by Alcock (before the Orleans Parish Grand Jury) A little later when asked by Garrison se mentioned the place. I would like to hear some opnions on this PS 1 : Falls Church was the correct place, apparently she did not remember the exact street, but she was not asked again about it after she had mentioned Falls Church PS 2 : Perjury is "voluntary violation of an oath or vow either by swearing to what is untrue or by omission to do what has been promised under oath, false swearing" PS 3 : "Like most other crimes in the common law system, to be convicted of perjury one must have had the intention (mens rea) to commit the act and to have actually committed the act (actus reus). Further, statements that are facts cannot be considered perjury, even if they might arguably constitute an omission, and it is not perjury to lie about matters that are immaterial to the legal proceeding." PS 4 : on the side, I think Garrison could have found her anyway, it really wasn't about that, I think all of this was merely his intro for getting to the CIA part in this. Anyway, Garrison went after a dozen or so, I think only Dean got convicted if I remember correctly ?

I would like to know how it was possible for Harold Marks to take the MO to his private home ? Next he makes a phone call : hi guys, I have it here, come and get it.... Really ? By the time an agent got to it, it was certainly not where it was found Taking a piece from the official banking/postal archives to your private home ? Yes it was late in the evening, so what ? He couldn't wait 30 minutes and really had to go home ??? If that's ok to do, I guess anything goes.

They look very good, I even notice you changed the pressure applied to the pen here and there, in fluent writing the pressure varies making thickening the lines or the opposite. Now, that is using old style pens. Most people start with a thick line and end narrow, but it can be different (and there are pauzes in the middel of a long word, etc). Some time ago I read a French book on handwriting, it stated some persons can have a number of styles, it can change when the person is in a hurry, or when there is little space, an official letter or a letter to a friend. The trick is to find the specifics in each of those styles. A very interesting one is the mysterie package (adressed to Oswald Nassau St etc) FAIK Oswald seemed to have 2 ditinct styles, and we know (?) Marina signed some stuff for him (well... she stated she had written Hidell sometimes). Marina has a whole range of writing styles, that doesn't help...

You made some serious accusations. It would be fair to substantiate those before backing out

She didn't remember in first, seemed a little confused, hesitating, but a little later she did mention Falls Church in that interview. @Sandy LarsenSo where is the perjury (a proven one i.r.o. Garrison). Garrison filed charges against some (12?) others, not on Ruth. I´m always willing to learn. Nothing more, just looking for some things she was accused of in articles, but later appeared to be different, to say the least, or based on incorrect data.

You say : probably an unwitting CIA girl. Isn't that in conflict with the powers some have attibuted to her ? The alleged steering and directing of key-persons ? The alleged creating and planting of evidence ? And a bunch of other stuff she has been accused of doing. IMO me thinks there is no hard evidence for any of that. Garrison filed charges agains a dozen or so, I think Dean Andrews got convicted. If he had ANYTHING on Ruth, he would have gone for it, again IMO

Well, I checked, double checked, and I have read her series, and a little more.

Haven´t you read that one other letter that actually prooves things She was offended, and had the right to be. It was concerning another event, yet it was also something lee had done to an outsite party, they came to ruth about it. I gave it to another researcher here. Whatever, not my problem, some day maybe when one is interested in better understanding perhaps.

An actual perjury ? Mmm... not so easy... IMHO. I have to say I'm not sure about the US-laws, but usually Mens rea, Actus reus is pretty much the baseline, take that and a good lawyer.... Again, I haven't checked US-legislation but one can lie about elements if those elements do not influence the legal result (as a general rule). Ruth could have hidden her sisters whereabouts, if those do not influence the legal result or outcome. Later this evening I will check how it is in the US, or perhaps @Cory Santos can tell us about the general rules that apply in the US about that. So what is a perjury and what is not a perjury, could be a nice debate, thanks for picking it up 😃 I'm pretty sure also in the US a lie is not per definition a perjury...

They messed up (on purpose or otherwise). Perhaps not everybody is aware of this, but light works with RGB (photo adjustment includes RGB tuning), paint however uses a CMY color wheel (that's why your printer uses CMY colors). Normally you will not have any problems. Now, when you have someone editing a picture for a bookcover print without having seen the original (car in this case), these things can happen... It could also be because marketing said green is better for sales... who knows...

Nice, there is indeed a pattern. I sometimes wonder where it has it gotten them. Chasing Ruth for 60 years, over and over again, and what's the result ? Yes, I can see some unresolved matters, but given the time that has passed... I hope they'll give the human part some priority now. This should have been tried years ago (I don't think they have ?), but I feel if one could have succeeded in getting Ruth and Marina to talk to each other in private, it could have made a difference IMO

Jim Lunch break here, a few notes First : I can only answer questions on things that I have read about and/or have studied, and I haven’t been along for that long, you should know that Somehow you often seem to think it has to be all black, or all white, all right or all left? I guess we are different on that, I believe that things are often gray. And sometimes it’s one way, on other occasions it’s the other way. Life is a little more complicated that way, but that how it is IMO Like on the curtain rods I said myself Ruth was being evasive and I had a feeling there was more to it one way or the other, put in a tight spot by the FBI if you ask me. On her sister however, I really can not blame her for anything about that. Also, Ruth at least was available for questioning by Garrison it seems a lot of others backed out. Jean: You ignored everything else in my post, and you did not even look up the testimony did you? I told you why, I didn’t ignore anything that I know something about. If you are going to ask me about Mexico : I don’t know, simple Do you really think she did not know where her own sister lived? Again, why would Ruth have to tell anything on her sister ? I would not ! Wasn’t Garrison man enough to deal with that ? On the Oswald MInox camera, after the assassination. I have posted about that, I guess I’ll show you mine if you show me yours. I do see a Minox light meter in the picture that was taken when DPD said there was no Minox lightmeter but a camera… You do know the Russians in the 1950’s had developed their own sub-miniature camera ? That even was a lot cheaper and better. Lee had bought a Cuera-2 (Smena-2), a good camera b.t.w.. For about 1/5 of the price he could have bought a Russian sub-min to go with that. No need for a Minox (an over-priced gadget by the 1960’s, it was a spy-camera, well… up to the early 1950's that was...). Do you think he had a right to an attorney? Yes, please…. On Greg : a true gentleman would not write like what you just wrote on Greg. That was ad hominem and generalizing and totally uncalled for About all the rest : now, this will be a surprise to you, but I have not solved the case yet…

Euh...it was about 2 am here in Belgium and I went to sleep ! No reason for the suggestive "and you did not even look up the testimony did you?" ??? I just now got back up again and had a little breakfast, will do some work (for a living) and this evening I'll be back

So Ruth was evasive on questions about her sister ? IMO she was fully entitled to do so, if she knew her syster had nothing to do with the case. I would do the same, given the fact there was no connection between Ruth and her sister within the JFKA case. Garrison tried making a connection, to sketch Ruth, she defended herself rightfully so IMO

I have only read what has been posted here about Paul Gluc and his letters I noticed his son was referenced to as a Thierry Baudin ? In France it would be really odd for a son to not use his father's surname. Unless he wasn't French or Gluc was an alias

Another matter, Marina told a lot about Lee, Walker, the rifle, etcccccccccccccc large part in accusing Lee. So why would she keep silent on Lee driving ? The connection with Ruth was no longer there, no longer a reason to feel ashame about having abused the hospitality. If anything, Marina followed Lee, so why would Marina lie about Lee driving ?

Let's say I worked for the government (well... that's actually true) and I told my sister. What does this tell you about my sister if SHE was later being accused of having also worked for the government (let it be in some secret dealings) ? IMO if you are reasonable, nothing at all. People looking for conspiracies will use that kind of stuff, as Ruth said herself. Where is the connection between what I did v/s what my sister did. There is no connection, the ONLY thing is she doesn't have to tell on her sister, and her sister doesn't have to tell on her ! That's family... or not ?

Amen

I don't know how the girls are doing these days, but I have found myself thinking, wouldn't it be nice if they had had a meeting between the two of them, just to clear things up perhaps, IF that was needed, I don't know. They were very good friends IMO. And I DO NOT need to know the details. Call me a sentimental fool, I don't care. I know what really matters in my life.

Thanks, this is all very new to me. I'm still trying to figure out on the lateral what is a fracture and what is a suture. Sutures are not all the same on each and every skull, and the JFK pre-11/22 lateral X-ray I have available isn't that clear (I will look for a better copy first). But most of the fractures are clear, so that helps. Part of my problem is that all the documentation available is extremely detailed... I need something like "Skull X-rays for Dummies" !