Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile

[Kathleen Collins]

Kathy,

This is quite fascinating. You are appear to be convinced beyond any doubt that

Robert, who looked exactly like Lee, and Lee, who looked exactly like Robert,

were nonetheless NOT brothers. That rather astounds me. Are you a student

of genetics? Do you think this kind of match could have been purely random?

I am also struck by your definitive identifications of the images in the photo

line up. Having just reviewed "The Many Faces of Lee Harvey Oswald" to be

sure I had not forgotten anything Jack explains there, how do you know who

is who in these photos? Where did they come from and how do you know?

Bear in mind, it would not surprise me at all if Judyth were wrong about some

of these identifications. It is not quite an exact science, even though I think

she is approaching it scientifically. And her vision is not very good. But how

in the world did you figure all this out? How can you possibly be so certain?

Jim

I can't see Robert and Harvey as looking much alike. If possible, Harvey was better looking than Robert.

I have a habit of asserting things and forgetting to say "In My Opinion." Basically, John Armstrong said who was who in each picture of Lee/Harvey. The photos in the military cap are not Lee/Harvey; Rich DellaRosa told me those photos were of Robert in his opinion. The picture of Lee missing a tooth in a fight and sitting in the classroom fooling around is Lee. Lee had a brown tooth later on. I'm suspecting that the young marine at bottom was Lee too, but I could be wrong.

In any event, they are the homliest-looking men I've ever seen in my life. Robert is borderline disgusting. That's why when I first heard there was a woman claiming to be Lee Harvey Oswald's lover before the assassination I- ROTFLMAO. Of all the people in history to say was your lover... But then I got used to a lot of oddities. And began to sympathize with Judyth, though she probably doesn't think so now.

Both Harvey and Lee have strange little mouths, which you must have noticed. Look at the Lee with his brothers and notice how his mouth looks. He's got the same mouth in the Civil Air Patrol. Harvey had a strange, small mouth, which he used to grimace with -- like someone with no teeth. Kathy C

WE HAVE SOME “OVER-PROCESSED” SEPIA-TINTED PHOTOS PURPORTING TO BE

“HARVEY” AND “LEE”. THESE ARE “FUZZY” HOWEVER, COMPARED TO THE BLACK

AND WHITE EXAMPLES BELOW. OF SPECIAL CONCERN IS THAT THE ADULT PHOTOS

ARE NOT SHOWN AT THE SAME HEAD SIZE.

THE BLACK-AND-WHITE PHOTOS AVAILABLE ARE NOT NEARLY AS “FUZZY” AND

HAVE MUCH MORE DETAIL. WE WILL USE THESE CLEARER PHOTOS, OR ONES

IDENTICAL TO THEM, FOR OUR COMPARISON WORK.

FIRST OF ALL, WE WILL ELIMINATE THOSE PHOTOS WHICH ARE OBVIOUSLY NOT

LEE H. OSWALD. SOMEBODY MAY HAVE SAID THAT THEY WERE OF OSWALD:

THE PROVENANCE OF THESE DISPUTED EXAMPLES MUST BE MADE KNOWN TO US.

THERE ARE ONLY TWO PHOTOGRAPHS IN THE COLLECTION ABOVE THAT ARE NOT

LEE H. OSWALD: ONE IS IN THE 2ND ROW, CENTER. THE OTHER IS IN THE FIFTH

ROW, SECOND FROM THE RIGHT.

BOTH PHOTOS ARE QUITE DIFFERENT FROM THE OTHERS. THE “HARVEY” PHOTO

SHOWN IN THIS COLLECTION (ROW FOUR, SECOND FRONM RIGHT), HOWEVER, IS

THE ‘BLOATED’ ONE OF REAL CONCERN. IT SHOULD BE REPLACED WITH THE TRUE,

UNBLOATED VERSION.

WE HAVE MANY MORE “BLOATED PHOTOS” IN THE ABOVE COLLECTION. HOW DID

THIS HAPPEN? IT IS A MATTER OF CONCERN. THE FOLLOWING PHOTOS ARE ‘BLOATED”:

ROW ONE: SECOND FROM LEFT, THIRD FROM LEFT, FOURTH FROM LEFT. (3)

ROW TWO: ALL OKAY, EXCEPT REMOVE THE BOGUS PHOTO, THIRD FROM THE LEFT.

ROW THREE: ALL OF THESE PHOTOS HAVE SUFFERED SOME ‘BLOATING’ DISTORTIONS (5)

ROW FOUR: THIRD FROM THE LEFT AND SECOND FROM THE RIGHT ARE BOTH ‘BLOATED’ (2)

ROW FIVE: ALL OKAY. EXCEPT REMOVE THE BOGUS PHOTO, SECOND FROM THE RIGHT.

TEN OF THE 25 PHOTOS HAVE BEEN DISTORTED IN THIS COLLECTION. TWO OTHERS ARE

BOGUS.

WE WILL USE THE “PRISTINE” PHOTO OF LEE H. OSWALD AS A GUIDE TO CORRECT HEAD

WIDTHS, AS THE WIDTH OF THE HUMAN SKULL CHANGES VERY LITTLE.

Professor Fetzer, there are other photos there that are not LHO. In the second row, #2 is the faked Lee photo, #3 is Lee Oswald (of Harvey and Lee) -- a faked photo. There was someone on this forum who removed the top layer of whatever was used on that photo and it wasn't Harvey. IMO it was Lee. #4 is Robert Oswald.

In the 4th row #1 (left) is of Lee (of Harvey and Lee) IMO.

Another researcher told me about Robert Oswald. It certainly isn't Harvey whom Ruby shot.

The bottom row, #4, doesn't look like Harvey. His eyes are dark, but he's got a brown tooth, which is consistent to Lee Oswald in high school, having had a front tooth punched from his mouth. They may have replanted it. A brown tooth means it's dead. (I was a dental asst.) Look at the sepia-toned ones. Top row, #2 -- Lee Oswald.

While we're there the first row, #1, is of Lee (Harvey and Lee.) Lee is also seen in the civil air patrol picture (not shown here) with David Ferrie. And with the 3 brothers, shown earlier.

Kathy C

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

JIM RESPONDS TO JACK WHITE WITH A FEW QUESTIONS OF HIS OWN

That does appear to be a lapse. But I'm not sure what to make of it, since in the

same post discussing Robert she explains that Lee received an "undesirable" and

not a "dishonorable" discharge, as you are observing here. I'll ask her about this.

I have two questions for you. In post #756, you remark, relative to the question

of Lee's driving ability, you state (categorically), "I do NOT GRANT that JVB knows

more about Lee's driving than John Armstrong". Aren't you simply assuming this?

In particular, IF JUDYTH'S STORY IS CORRECT AND SHE ACTUALLY DROVE PLACES

WITH THE MAN SHE KNEW AS "LEE", WOULD YOU THEN GRANT THAT SHE KNOWS

MORE ABOUT LEE'S DRIVING THAN JOHN ARMSTRONG? Would you admit as much?

Howard Platzman and I had an interesting conversation today. He told me that he

and Martin Shackelford subjected Judyth to multiple forms of questioning and that,

when "60 Minutes" took an interest, CBS also conducted an investigation of its own.

Martin obtained a copy of Mary Ferrell's chronology of the activities of the man she

knew as "Lee" in New Orleans, but he did not share it with her. He spent a lot of

time asking her about what Lee was doing on specific dates and she answered him.

She was very successful in matching the Ferrell chronology. Martin thought that he

had nailed her on mistakes on two occasions. But it turned out that those were days

when the Ferrell chronology was blank. So Judyth apparently was filling in the blanks.

Is there any quantity or quality of evidence such that, were it to be produced, would

be sufficient to convince you that there is the POSSIBILITY that Judyth might be "the

real deal", even if you could care less and can't imagine why it should matter at all?

[[JVB: Robert should know that Lee was not discharged, but placed in the Marine

Reserves, a bit early...]]

Lee Harvey Oswald received an UNDESIRABLE DISCHARGE from the Marines.

[Pamela Brown]

I received an email from David Lifton this morning telling me of some of the significant research he is doing rather than rolling around in the gutter with you and this unfortunate woman. Your continued posts make all the more important what I wrote back to him:

"David, you must understand that you do real research; Glell Viklund does real reserch; Duncan Macrae does real research; Barb Junkkarinen does real research. But James Fetzer doesn't do real research and never has. I don't think it is a personal attack on him to point this out. I think it is just something that can be read off the sum total of his enthusiasms. Instead of actually looking into things and finding out what makes sense and what doesn't, Fetzer prefers another role. He likes being a flack or press agent or cheerleader. His congenial tools are press releases, news conferences, mysterious "intel" authorities, blogs, obscure radio talk shows, and now, "channeling" a woman whose story was holed at the water-line years ago. Since he never gets his hands dirty in real research, he loses perspective and ends up backing ideas that most folks are willing to let sink into obscurity. None of this is very important. It's just some of the noise that accompanies genuine discussion and inquiry. You are wise to stay away from it."

Josiah Thompson

With all due respect, you seem to be blindly enabling the blocking of a valid research process. Anyone who attempts to manipulate research by using personal attacks accomplishes nothing. Lifton's LHO timeline information unfortunately is tainted by his bias against Judyth. Lifton may be slinking away because he grabbed a clue about this. Barb's information is carefully cherrypicked to attempt to discredit Judyth. There are other names for this, but 'research' isn't one of them.

[Jack White]

JIM RESPONDS TO JACK WHITE WITH A FEW QUESTIONS OF HIS OWN

That does appear to be a lapse. But I'm not sure what to make of it, since in the

same post discussing Robert she explains that Lee received an "undesirable" and

not a "dishonorable" discharge, as you are observing here. I'll ask her about this.

I have two questions for you. In post #756, you remark, relative to the question

of Lee's driving ability, you state (categorically), "I do NOT GRANT that JVB knows

more about Lee's driving than John Armstrong". Aren't you simply assuming this?

In particular, IF JUDYTH'S STORY IS CORRECT AND SHE ACTUALLY DROVE PLACES

WITH THE MAN SHE KNEW AS "LEE", WOULD YOU THEN GRANT THAT SHE KNOWS

MORE ABOUT LEE'S DRIVING THAN JOHN ARMSTRONG? Would you admit as much?

Howard Platzman and I had an interesting conversation today. He told me that he

and Martin Shackelford subjected Judyth to multiple forms of questioning and that,

when "60 Minutes" took an interest, CBS also conducted an investigation of its own.

Martin obtained a copy of Mary Ferrell's chronology of the activities of the man she

knew as "Lee" in New Orleans, but he did not share it with her. He spent a lot of

time asking her about what Lee was doing on specific dates and she answered him.

She was very successful in matching the Ferrell chronology. Martin thought that he

had nailed her on mistakes on two occasions. But it turned out that those were days

when the Ferrell chronology was blank. So Judyth apparently was filling in the blanks.

Is there any quantity or quality of evidence such that, were it to be produced, would

be sufficient to convince you that there is the POSSIBILITY that Judyth might be "the

real deal", even if you could care less and can't imagine why it should matter at all?

[[JVB: Robert should know that Lee was not discharged, but placed in the Marine

Reserves, a bit early...]]

Lee Harvey Oswald received an UNDESIRABLE DISCHARGE from the Marines.

Read the book. It was HARVEY that JVB knew. Harvey could not drive. LEE (the REAL Lee) COULD DRIVE.

Armstrong documents this.

JVB might be more believable if she DIDN'T fill in all the blanks. Where there are blanks, she inserts

herself.

In another thread, I commented that I WAS ALWAYS PUZZLED that years ago when I first read

the WR and other books, I was struck by the lack of investigation of how and when LHO got to

NOLA from Dallas. He suddenly decided to leave his pregnant wife and go to look for work in

New Orleans; why not look for work in Dallas? But the FBI and WC did not document when, why

or how this happened. So JVB FILLS IN THIS BLANK by saying he took a bus. How does she know?

She claims he told her he took a bus...and nobody can dispute her because there is no record.

Jack

[Jack White]

Marina Oswald and Ruth and Michael Paine all told the Warren Commission in no uncertain terms that Lee Harvey Oswald did not drive an automobile and did not have a driver's license. But John Armstrong has found many witnesses who said Oswald did drive, including a former employee of the Texas Department of Public Safety License Records Department who issued a signed statement to a Garrison investigator stating that she had processed Oswald's returned driver's license after he was killed. This article explores these seeming contradictions.

Marina Oswald repeatedly told the Warren Commission that her husband did not drive. For example:

Mrs. OSWALD. Never. No; this is all not true. In the first place, my husband couldn't drive, and I was never alone with him in a car. Anytime we went in a car it was with Ruth Paine, and there was never--we never went to any gun store and never had any telescopic lens mounted.

Mr. RANKIN. Did the four of you, that is, your husband, you, and your two children, ever go alone any place in Irving?

Mrs. OSWALD. In Irving the baby was only 1 month old. I never took her out anywhere.

Representative FORD. Did you ever go anytime----

Mrs. OSWALD. Just to doctor, you know.

Representative FORD. Did you ever go anytime with your husband in a car with the rifle?

Mrs. OSWALD. I was never at anytime in a car with my husband and with a rifle. Not only with the rifle, not even with a pistol. Even without anything I was never with my husband in a car under circumstances where he was driving a car. (WC V, 401)

Michael Paine also indicated several times that Lee Harvey Oswald did not drive. For example:

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever see Oswald drive a car?

Mr. PAINE. No; I did not. (WC II, 413)

In her Warren Commission testimony, Ruth Paine stated that as late as the weekend before the assassination of JFK, Oswald had failed to obtain a learner's permit so that he could eventually acquire a valid Texas driver's license.

Mr. JENNER. You did talk with him on the telephone?

Mrs. PAINE. That is my recollection. I am certain that I talked with him, that he was surprised that he didn't need a car. I had to tell him that he didn't need a car to take with him to take his test.

Mr. JENNER. Take his initial test?

Mrs. PAINE. Take his test, and suggested that he go from Dallas himself to take this test. Then he called us Saturday afternoon of the 16th to say he had been and tried to get his driver's permit but that he had arrived before closing time but still to late to get in because there was a long line ahead of him, the place having been closed both the previous Saturday for election day and the following Monday, the 11th, Veterans Day. There were a lot of people who wanted to get permits and he was advised that it wouldn't pay him to wait in line. He didn't have time to be tested.

Mr. JENNER. Could you help us fix, can you recall as closely as possible the day of the week, this is the weekend of the assassination, was it not?

Mrs. PAINE. The weekend before.

Mr. JENNER. The weekend before, and this conversation you are now relating that you had with him in which he said that he had gone to the driver's license station, when did that conversation with you take place?

Mrs. PAINE. That conversation was with Marina, and she told me about it.

Mr. JENNER. When did she tell you about it?

Mrs. PAINE. He called her, it must have been Saturday afternoon, soon after he had been, he went Saturday morning and they closed at noon.

Mr. JENNER. I see. This was the weekend he did not come out to Irving?

Mrs. PAINE. This was the weekend he did not come out. (WC II, 516)

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

No, I don't "get your point". I don't think you have one. What in the world do you think is going on? Do you also question whether David Mantik could have performed his optical density studies? You are off the deep end. This is quite bizarre. JUST EXACTLY WHAT DO YOU THINK IS GOING ON?

After reading all of that blurb below, I am astounded that you still believe that you have answered my questions.

1./Show me in any of your posts, where you have answered how Judyth can analyze a photograph from an inch away, and with a tape measure in front of her eyes and in between her eyes and a photograph.

2./ Show me where you or she have answered if she can read Braille or not. I'm guessing she can't read Braille because of her remark ( since I repeated my unanswered question ) about me bringing up the Braille topic.

3./ Show me where you or she have answered that the question why she does not use a Braille keyboard or Braille keyboard stickers to combat her impairment. ( If she can read Braille )

Like yourself Jim, I expect straight no nonsense answers. These are not forthcoming.

If I asked you, What state Kennedy was in when he was murdered? and I replied with, Oh, he was in a terrible state, I would be giving you a true answer, but not the answer that I require. Get my point?

JIM REPLIES TO DUNCAN MACRAE ABOUT HIS POST RECORD

Apparently I can anticipate more drivel from you in an apparently

hopeless effort to save face. Consider the history of your queries

about how Judyth does her measurements on these photographs:

post #796 at 2:26 PM April 2nd (Duncan)

post #798 at 4:00 PM April 2nd (Jim)

post #802 at 4:51 PM April 2nd (Duncan)

post #817 at 10:50 PM April 2nd (Duncan)

post #821 at 11:14 PM April 2nd (Jim)

post #823 at 11:34 PM April 2nd (Duncan)

post #855 at 2:02 PM Yesterday (Judyth)

post #857 at 2:33 PM Yesterday (Duncan)

post #859 at 3:48 PM Yesterday (Duncan)

post #864 at 4:28 PM Yesterday (Jim)

post #868 at 4:49 PM Yesterday (Duncan)

post #870 at 5:12 PM Yesterday (Jim)

post #872 at 5:59 PM Yesterday (Duncan)

post #875 at 7:20 PM Yesterday (Jim)

post #877 at 11:53 PM Yesterday (Duncan)

One might have thought the matter was settled by Judyth's response:

JUDYTH REPLIES TO DUNCAN MACRAE ON HER PHOTO STUDIES

The comment about how I can analyze these photos with my bad eyesight:

I print them out and measure them with a tape measure. I can see very well

at about an inch from a page.

In fact, I can see details most people cannot because their vision does not

focus so close to a page. I can see details that others would miss without

a magnifying glass.

But I cannot type on a computer with my nose an inch from the keyboard.

Try it sometime for yourself.

JV

But, no, Duncan is not satisfied. Apparently, nothing less than a webcam

recording of Judyth at work will satisfy him. I find this intense pursuit of

the obvious to be extremely interesting. I have made many points about

all of this, but the most important was included in post #876, which this

fellow may have missed, since it explains the pointlessness of his quest:

NOTE: Just in case anyone has any lingering doubts about my replies to Duncan

MacRae, realize that even if Judyth did not have problems with her vision, there

would be the opportunity to confirm or disconfirm her findings by replicating her

research and determining whether or not you obtain the same results. If she is

right, then the results should be the same. And this is the case even if she had

perfect vision, since having perfect vision alone is not sufficient to conduct the

studies that she has reported in the past and continues to report on in this post.

Now the post to which I am replying here, he refers to my answers as "garbage".

But what else is there to explain? What does Duncan MacRae think is going on

here? That I am secretly conducting these photo studies and attributing them to

Judyth? It might help if he would please explain himself. Otherwise, I think he

is setting a new record for complete and utter drivel. These nine posts, I believe,

constitute his complete contributions to this thread. If we measure drivel by the

standard of repetitions of meaningless content divided by number of posts made,

then I believe he has attained a perfect score of 9/9 = 1 (or 100% drivel). You

can't do better than that. So Duncan MacRae appears to have set the standard.

That you are persisting with this offers convincing evidence that you are

simply insincere and are merely clogging the thread with questions

that have already been addressed.

Unfortunately, you are spouting garbage, and Neanderthal insinuations which have not addressed the questions.

Neither you or Judyth have answered how she can make measurements with a measuring tape, while being only one inch from a print out, without blocking out the fine detail which she is attempting to study.

You have not answered if she can read Braille, or why she does not use a Braille keyboard or Braille keyboard stickers.

Edited April 4, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

JIM REPLIES TO JACK ABOUT WHETHER LEE COULD DRIVE

READ THE BOOK! READ THE BOOK! So I start reading the book and discover right away the assertion that Allan Dulles was so clever in manipulating the Warren Commission with regard to the CIA that "in its 26 volumes, the name of the CIA does not even appear in its index"! Maybe you missed the post in which I observed (1) that the 26 supporting volumes does not even have an index and that (2) that the 888-page summary report, known as THE WARREN REPORT, does have an index, where the CIA is listed at least two dozen times! That is not the kind of discovery that inspires confidence in HARVEY & LEE.

Moreover, Armstrong's methodology appears to have been to vacuum up every document he could find in the public domain. You have told me that meant the existence of these documents could not be challenged because they are all in the public domain. But when I asked what principle of selection had been used to determine which were not only (3) authentic documents but also had (4) accurate content, you remained silent. It is as though you and John were oblivious of "The Mighty Wurlitzer' being played by Frank Wisner to flood the media with stories concocted by and managed by the CIA!

Now I discover that, in relation to the question of whether or not the man Judyth knew in New Orleans could or could not drive, you offer (what you imply to be) the definitive testimony of Ruth Paine and of Marina Oswald, yet at the bottom of the post, you include a table with the names of THIRTY-TWO other witnesses who have reported that they had either seen him drive or knew he had the ability to drive. I am sure you are going to resolve this contradiction by appealing to "Harvey" and "Lee". But, frankly, Jack, this looks like a ruse to draw attention from the real "two Oswalds", Robert and Lee!

So far as I am able to discern, HARVEY & LEE begins with a blunder and was created in fashion that was methodologically unsound--at least to the extent to which no effort appears to have been expended to sort out the true documents from the false, the accurate records from the inaccurate, and the genuine photos from the fake. IF YOU WANT ME TO TAKE ANY OF THIS SERIOUSLY, YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO ADDRESS THESE QUESTIONS. How can anyone claim to be an expert on the assassination when they do not even know the difference between the 26 supporting volumes and the summary report?

Why you display such an arrogant and insulting attitude toward Judyth when this book to which you constantly refer commits such a grevious blunder from scratch is beyond me. And to continue to insist that there actually were "two Oswalds" when Judyth has already shown that some of the photos that you have taken for granted are suspect and when the documentary trail on which you rely may have been deliberately created as a false history so the man she knew could eventually return to a normal life in society simply astounds me. Judyth has her flaws, no doubt, but your position is hopelessly indefensible.

Marina Oswald and Ruth and Michael Paine all told the Warren Commission in no uncertain terms that Lee Harvey Oswald did not drive an automobile and did not have a driver's license. But John Armstrong has found many witnesses who said Oswald did drive, including a former employee of the Texas Department of Public Safety License Records Department who issued a signed statement to a Garrison investigator stating that she had processed Oswald's returned driver's license after he was killed. This article explores these seeming contradictions.

Marina Oswald repeatedly told the Warren Commission that her husband did not drive. For example:

Mrs. OSWALD. Never. No; this is all not true. In the first place, my husband couldn't drive, and I was never alone with him in a car. Anytime we went in a car it was with Ruth Paine, and there was never--we never went to any gun store and never had any telescopic lens mounted.

Mr. RANKIN. Did the four of you, that is, your husband, you, and your two children, ever go alone any place in Irving?

Mrs. OSWALD. In Irving the baby was only 1 month old. I never took her out anywhere.

Representative FORD. Did you ever go anytime----

Mrs. OSWALD. Just to doctor, you know.

Representative FORD. Did you ever go anytime with your husband in a car with the rifle?

Mrs. OSWALD. I was never at anytime in a car with my husband and with a rifle. Not only with the rifle, not even with a pistol. Even without anything I was never with my husband in a car under circumstances where he was driving a car. (WC V, 401)

Michael Paine also indicated several times that Lee Harvey Oswald did not drive. For example:

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you ever see Oswald drive a car?

Mr. PAINE. No; I did not. (WC II, 413)

In her Warren Commission testimony, Ruth Paine stated that as late as the weekend before the assassination of JFK, Oswald had failed to obtain a learner's permit so that he could eventually acquire a valid Texas driver's license.

Mr. JENNER. You did talk with him on the telephone?

Mrs. PAINE. That is my recollection. I am certain that I talked with him, that he was surprised that he didn't need a car. I had to tell him that he didn't need a car to take with him to take his test.

Mr. JENNER. Take his initial test?

Mrs. PAINE. Take his test, and suggested that he go from Dallas himself to take this test. Then he called us Saturday afternoon of the 16th to say he had been and tried to get his driver's permit but that he had arrived before closing time but still to late to get in because there was a long line ahead of him, the place having been closed both the previous Saturday for election day and the following Monday, the 11th, Veterans Day. There were a lot of people who wanted to get permits and he was advised that it wouldn't pay him to wait in line. He didn't have time to be tested.

Mr. JENNER. Could you help us fix, can you recall as closely as possible the day of the week, this is the weekend of the assassination, was it not?

Mrs. PAINE. The weekend before.

Mr. JENNER. The weekend before, and this conversation you are now relating that you had with him in which he said that he had gone to the driver's license station, when did that conversation with you take place?

Mrs. PAINE. That conversation was with Marina, and she told me about it.

Mr. JENNER. When did she tell you about it?

Mrs. PAINE. He called her, it must have been Saturday afternoon, soon after he had been, he went Saturday morning and they closed at noon.

Mr. JENNER. I see. This was the weekend he did not come out to Irving?

Mrs. PAINE. This was the weekend he did not come out. (WC II, 516)

Edited April 4, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

JUDYTH DISCUSSES LEE'S "MISSING TOOTH" AND DAVID FERRIE

NOTE: Judyth has provided much more about the man she know and his activities,

including information that helps to round out our understanding of his life in New

Orleans. Lee had met David Ferrie even before he joined the Marine Corps and, as

"The Many Faces of Lee Harvey Oswald" suggests, their relationship may have been

one of the factors that would contribute to his becoming involved in covert activities.

When he returned to New Orleans in 1963, he resumed his relationship with Ferrie.

Part of this was a bit garbled, so Judyth will review it and correct it as appropriate.

Her discussion of "the missing tooth" removes another prop from "HARVEY & LEE".

JUDYTH ADDRESSES "THE MISSING TOOTH":

We have to use some common sense when it comes to claiming that the Oswald skull

should have had a missing tooth. This implies that “Harvey” lost his tooth, which is

supported by one of the photographs that appears in the White/Armstrong collection:

which appears to be contradicted by the denture of the skull that was later exhumed:

But the apparent contradiction arises from considering only two of three possibilities:

1) never replaced it and went with an unnoticed hole in his mouth the rest of his life

2) had an expensive implant done at some time after it was knocked out

Or the real answer—

3) a teenager who cared about losing a front tooth followed directions given to him and

placed the knocked-out tooth in a half-pint carton of milk, or other container and, as

soon as he could, went to the dentist and has the tooth reseated in his mouth.

CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING SUPPORTING EVIDENCE;

We have a dental bill paid by his aunt on record and her version of what happened:

"Another time they were coming out of school at 3 o’clock, and there were boys

in back of him and one of them called his name, and he said, “Lee,” and when

he turned around, this boy punched him in the mouth and ran, and it ran his tooth

through the lip, so she had to go over to the school and take him to the dentist,

and I paid for the dentist bill myself, and that’s all I know about that, and he

was not supposed to have started any of that [fighting] at that time.

"Now, at the Beauregard School at that time, they had a very low standard,

and I had no children going there and never did. My children went to Jesuit

High and Loyola University, but they did have a very bad bunch of boys going

to Beauregard and they were always having fights and ganging up on other

boys, and I guess Lee wouldn’t take anything, so he got in several scrapes like

that."

Lee told me that Dave Ferrie had hit him in the mouth, too, and I do not wish to

argue whether it occurred before or after the hit to the mouth at Beauregard School.

I am not responsible for the exact timing. Why? I wasn’t given enough details and

got jumped on for trying to establish a date. I was simply trying to establish the

dates for two incidents that occurred, concerning Lee getting hit in the front of his

mouth. But exactly which incident occurred first, I don’t know.

1) One incident involved Dave Ferrie beating Lee because Lee thought Ferrie was

making a pass at him, and it infuriated Ferrie; Lee had gone on Ferrie’s Harley

motorcycle to Dave’s house after a CAP meeting. I brought up the ownership of

the Harley and nobody said a peep, but then later Blackburst posted mention of it.

Nevertheless, they said Ferrie could not have known Lee. That’s simply not true.

Ferrie then became terrified as he realized Lee’s mother was dating organized crime

people. He begged Lee not to tell. Lee said, “I never want to see your ugly face again.”

The incident loosened Lee’s tooth and there was a deep cut in the gum that needed

a stitch. Ferrie was afraid Lee might lose it, so he gave Lee some money and I was

under the impression that Dave said he advised Lee that, if it did fall out, he should

put it into milk to save the tooth and get a dentist to reseat it. I always remember

such medical details. Lee told me that he was anxious to save the tooth, but didn’t

tell me if it fell out or not—we got distracted and began talking about how Ferrie

decided to help Lee get early into the Marines, he was so impressed because Lee

never told on him (it didn’t work).

2) Another incident involve a kid who walked up to Lee at school and smacked him

in the face--and others have details about that… Lee’s tooth, I was told, was knocked

out by his blow. I decided that would not have happened unless Dave Ferrie’s hit to

the mouth hadn’t loosened it. But I could have been the other way around, that the

tooth had been reseated and was still loose when Ferrie hit him, and there was danger

it would fall out.

The fact is, though the tooth was knocked out, Lee Oswald, a teenager, had the tooth

saved in milk. I may have mixed up such small details and it happened that a teacher

told him to save it in milk, but save it in milk he did.

Note that reseating a tooth does not mean that it will reseat ‘straight’ due to bone

damage. And indeed, that bone damage was noted on the exhumation dental record

where it says #9 tooth was ROTATED – moved out of its original position.

Are we being asked to believe that “Harvey” Oswald had a false tooth nobody

knew about? Because later photos show no missing tooth. We are told that this

is a way to distinguish LEE from HARVEY.

JUDYTH ELABORATES UPON THE STORY OF LEE'S "MISSING TOOTH":

Here's the photo showing Lee with possible missing tooth (again)—but would he have

just thrown the tooth away? That’s not what he told me. He said he saved it in some

milk and I believed it was after lunchtime, but perhaps it was after school, that his

mother came for him and took him to the dentist. There was some worry that the

tooth would turn black, but it did not. It was saved.

Interestingly, there is a large bulge in Lee Oswald’s pocket. He told me he saved the

tooth in milk, and I decided to blow up the photo—no, you can tell what he blob is,

except that its general shape is octagonal...The same shape as a milk carton with both

both ends pulled out…Just a thought…a mere conjecture, but this might be the milk

carton with Oswald’s tooth inside….

To believe that HARVEY Oswald went all his life without a front tooth being detected as

missing defies logic. And because I learned that Dave Ferrie and Lee Oswald actually

became friends over his incident—Ferrie had intended no harm he said—Lee had gone

to be by himself upstairs to look a Ferrie’s scientific stuff in a upper room, while Ferrie

had a party going on for he CAP boys—they all left and Lee needed a ride home…Dave

came up to get him, and Lee saw him lock he door…Dave said the door-locking was

automatic and he did not mean to frighten Lee, who knocked out a window with his

elbow and grabbed a piece of glass o defend himself. Dave was then furious and

decided to teach Oswald a lesson.

ON THE SCIENCE OF SAVING DISLODGED TEETH:

A tooth inserted into the space and kept in the socket can also survive. Lee may be

holding the tooth temporarily in his left hand. He had about two hours to get to a

dentist from the time the tooth was knocked out, to save it. Obviously, he met the

timeline, and we have the dental record showing the “rotated” notation to prove it.

SOME DENTAL REFERENCES:

“a tooth that suffers physical trauma but does not necessarily break can become

rotated or shifted, occlusally…” www.dental--health.com/bad_teeth_broken.html

(“avulsed” tooth means “knocked –out” tooth) Exarticulation (”avulsed tooth”).

3 Post trauma complications ... 180 degrees rotated

www.jokstad.no/avulsed.pdf

Live Well Live Long

Avulsed (dislodged) teeth. A whole permanent tooth that is ... to its placement so

that it looks like it is in its normal position (i.e. not rotated). ...

www.livewelllivelong.com/Dental%20health.html

12 Jun 2008 ... The occlusal and mandibular planes were rotated more ....

of coconut water: a new storage media for avulsed teeth in Triple O Feb 2008 issue ...

www.healthmantra.com/blog/2008_06_01_archive.html

Edited April 4, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Barb Junkkarinen]

With all due respect, you seem to be blindly enabling the blocking of a valid research process. Anyone who attempts to manipulate research by using personal attacks accomplishes nothing. Lifton's LHO timeline information unfortunately is tainted by his bias against Judyth. Lifton may be slinking away because he grabbed a clue about this. Barb's information is carefully cherrypicked to attempt to discredit Judyth. There are other names for this, but 'research' isn't one of them.

And what do those who attack anyone who attempts to evaluate claims made by a witness do, Pamela? Is that a valid "research process" - especially when documented information provided is seemingly not even looked at, certainly not addressed in return, and instead just circus barker like attacks all about anyone, anything and everything, over, under and around the information that was brought out?

You've accused me of "cherrypicking" in my fact checking constantly....but when asked, you never give an example or an explanation. I recently posted regarding Judyth's claim that she had done no research before coming out with her story, and could not have done any research, because the library at the U Louisiana was under remodeling construction and for a year she had no access to where the books she would need to do such research were on the 4th or 5th floor .... as there was no elevator in service for that entire year and because of her back problems she could not do the stairs.

I posted:

Direct quotes from a named person at the library who worked there at the time of the construction, and still works there.

I posted the link to the library site that includes the story of the construction, the floor plan of the library.

And the librarian I spoke to and the info on the library site make it clear that the library is, was and always has been THREE floors ... and that at least one of their two elevators was always working during that year of construction.

Not a peep in response from Judyth or Fetzer .... or you. What exactly was "cherrypicked"?

You talk a lot, but never on the actual issues or evidence, just airily, and with no specifics, making allegations about other posters and their "process." Your process seems clear.

[Dean Hagerman]

I posted:

Direct quotes from a named person at the library who worked there at the time of the construction, and still works there.

I posted the link to the library site that includes the story of the construction, the floor plan of the library.

And the librarian I spoke to and the info on the library site make it clear that the library is, was and always has been THREE floors ... and that at least one of their two elevators was always working during that year of construction.

Wow, very nice Barb!

I really want to hear Judyth's reply to this

What is she going to say to get out of this one?

[Barb Junkkarinen]

No, I don't "get your point". I don't think you have one. What in the world do you think is going on? Do you also question whether David Mantik could have performed his optical density studies? You are off the deep end. This is quite bizarre.

David Mantik has never claimed to be nearly blind, without appropriate glasses, have double vision, have to use a service dog ... and not be able to see well enough to type his own material.

What's bizarre is your treatment of a valid question given the oft expressed explanations for why she cannot submit her own posts without your editing vs the fine detail of her evaluation of the photos, especially on LHO's eyes. One really cannot expect to have their cake and eat it too, depending on what suits them at the moment.

[Josiah Thompson]

A friendly reminder to all concerned:

(iv) Members should not make personal attacks on other members. Nor should references be made to their abilities as researchers. Most importantly, the motivations of the poster should not be questioned. At all times members should concentrate on what is being said, rather than who is saying it. It is up to the reader to look at the biography submitted by the poster, to judge whether they are telling the truth or not. The word “xxxx” is banned from use on the forum.

Thank you, Evan. I will be more careful in the future.

Josiah Thompson

[Barb Junkkarinen]

I posted:

Direct quotes from a named person at the library who worked there at the time of the construction, and still works there.

I posted the link to the library site that includes the story of the construction, the floor plan of the library.

And the librarian I spoke to and the info on the library site make it clear that the library is, was and always has been THREE floors ... and that at least one of their two elevators was always working during that year of construction.

Wow, very nice Barb!

I really want to hear Judyth's reply to this

What is she going to say to get out of this one?

It was post#305 and includes a quote of Judyth as well as all the data I found about the library and from talking to the librarian.

Happy Easter!

Barb :-)

[Guest James H. Fetzer]

The bad news for Duncan MacRae is that, when Judyth has an explanation and he has no alternative, her explanation is obviously preferable. Apparently, whatever Duncan has imagined, it is apparently so implausible he is not even willing to put it into words. The good news for Duncan, however, is that his two latest posts,

post #887 at 11:00 AM Today

post #892 at 4:35 PM Today

are at least as contentless as his previous nine, which means that his divel quotient for meaningless posts divided by total number of posts now equals 11/11 = 1, so his 100% divel quotient rating remains intact.

Just looking for answers, Jim.

No, I don't "get your point". I don't think you have one. What in the world do you think is going on? Do you also question whether David Mantik could have performed his optical density studies? You are off the deep end. This is quite bizarre. JUST EXACTLY WHAT DO YOU THINK IS GOING ON?

After reading all of that blurb below, I am astounded that you still believe that you have answered my questions.

1./Show me in any of your posts, where you have answered how Judyth can analyze a photograph from an inch away, and with a tape measure in front of her eyes and in between her eyes and a photograph.

2./ Show me where you or she have answered if she can read Braille or not. I'm guessing she can't read Braille because of her remark ( since I repeated my unanswered question ) about me bringing up the Braille topic.

3./ Show me where you or she have answered that the question why she does not use a Braille keyboard or Braille keyboard stickers to combat her impairment. ( If she can read Braille )

Like yourself Jim, I expect straight no nonsense answers. These are not forthcoming.

If I asked you, What state Kennedy was in when he was murdered? and I replied with, Oh, he was in a terrible state, I would be giving you a true answer, but not the answer that I require. Get my point?

JIM REPLIES TO DUNCAN MACRAE ABOUT HIS POST RECORD

Apparently I can anticipate more drivel from you in an apparently

hopeless effort to save face. Consider the history of your queries

about how Judyth does her measurements on these photographs:

post #796 at 2:26 PM April 2nd (Duncan)

post #798 at 4:00 PM April 2nd (Jim)

post #802 at 4:51 PM April 2nd (Duncan)

post #817 at 10:50 PM April 2nd (Duncan)

post #821 at 11:14 PM April 2nd (Jim)

post #823 at 11:34 PM April 2nd (Duncan)

post #855 at 2:02 PM Yesterday (Judyth)

post #857 at 2:33 PM Yesterday (Duncan)

post #859 at 3:48 PM Yesterday (Duncan)

post #864 at 4:28 PM Yesterday (Jim)

post #868 at 4:49 PM Yesterday (Duncan)

post #870 at 5:12 PM Yesterday (Jim)

post #872 at 5:59 PM Yesterday (Duncan)

post #875 at 7:20 PM Yesterday (Jim)

post #877 at 11:53 PM Yesterday (Duncan)

One might have thought the matter was settled by Judyth's response:

JUDYTH REPLIES TO DUNCAN MACRAE ON HER PHOTO STUDIES

The comment about how I can analyze these photos with my bad eyesight:

I print them out and measure them with a tape measure. I can see very well

at about an inch from a page.

In fact, I can see details most people cannot because their vision does not

focus so close to a page. I can see details that others would miss without

a magnifying glass.

But I cannot type on a computer with my nose an inch from the keyboard.

Try it sometime for yourself.

JV

But, no, Duncan is not satisfied. Apparently, nothing less than a webcam

recording of Judyth at work will satisfy him. I find this intense pursuit of

the obvious to be extremely interesting. I have made many points about

all of this, but the most important was included in post #876, which this

fellow may have missed, since it explains the pointlessness of his quest:

NOTE: Just in case anyone has any lingering doubts about my replies to Duncan

MacRae, realize that even if Judyth did not have problems with her vision, there

would be the opportunity to confirm or disconfirm her findings by replicating her

research and determining whether or not you obtain the same results. If she is

right, then the results should be the same. And this is the case even if she had

perfect vision, since having perfect vision alone is not sufficient to conduct the

studies that she has reported in the past and continues to report on in this post.

Now the post to which I am replying here, he refers to my answers as "garbage".

But what else is there to explain? What does Duncan MacRae think is going on

here? That I am secretly conducting these photo studies and attributing them to

Judyth? It might help if he would please explain himself. Otherwise, I think he

is setting a new record for complete and utter drivel. These nine posts, I believe,

constitute his complete contributions to this thread. If we measure drivel by the

standard of repetitions of meaningless content divided by number of posts made,

then I believe he has attained a perfect score of 9/9 = 1 (or 100% drivel). You

can't do better than that. So Duncan MacRae appears to have set the standard.

That you are persisting with this offers convincing evidence that you are

simply insincere and are merely clogging the thread with questions

that have already been addressed.

Unfortunately, you are spouting garbage, and Neanderthal insinuations which have not addressed the questions.

Neither you or Judyth have answered how she can make measurements with a measuring tape, while being only one inch from a print out, without blocking out the fine detail which she is attempting to study.

You have not answered if she can read Braille, or why she does not use a Braille keyboard or Braille keyboard stickers.

Edited April 4, 2010 by James H. Fetzer

[Glenn Viklund]

Barb,

For heavens sake, Mr Fetzer wants to move on. Do not bother him with real research and actual facts.