Review of Judyth Vary Baker Thread

[Dean Hartwell]

JVB EVIDENCE AND CROSS-EXAMINATION

UPDATED

This is a work in progress that focuses on Judyth Vary Baker's four main assertions and their cross-examination:

(1) JVB went to New Orleans during the time Lee Harvey Oswald is known to have been there.

On direct: the work time card mentioned on the main thread and shown on previously named web sites.

Cross-examination: None to date

(2) JVB met Lee Harvey Oswald.

On Direct: Anna Lewis' statements on a previously mentioned video on Google. She states that she and her husband David double-dated with JVB and Lee.

Cross-examination: Stephen says it would help to know more about what, if anything, anyone encouraged Anna to say before she talked on the video.

Barb adds that she believes JVB may have encouraged Anna before she made statements.

JVB responds: Debra Conway unexpectedly asked Lewis to discuss matters on videotape and that evidentiary matters were not discussed with her prior to the taping.

Stephen says Anna should also clarify why she gave a different story to Garrison than her husband regarding how she knew LHO, which may or may not be a problem.

JVB responds: Lewis agreed to taping on grounds it would be her only taping and that she told a representative of Garrison to leave her alone as she was about to have a baby and feared a miscarriage from stress. Husband David was willing to acknowledge contacts with Oswald but did not identify JVB as he did not know where she was.

Barb also states that she is trying to confirm a comment made by Debra Conway as to whether Anna Lewis originally recalled JVB. Barb also claims that JVB sent around a "transcript" of an interview with one witness to another witness.

Re-direct: JVB states the following:

Anna Lewis was not the only witness to verify that Baker and Oswald were intimate friends. William "Mac" McCullough is acknowledged to have been in New Orleans and working as a musician (and later, in other ways) for Carlos Marcello-owned restaurants and lounges. He is on audiotape as having seen Baker and Oswald together, but is consistently ignored. He decided to go on record despite warning Baker against speaking out at all because he had a heart condition.

Also ignored is the Charles Thomas family that has verified that their father/grandfather/uncle worked in clandestine matters and was engaged in activities that Baker described to them, proving she had been with Oswald and Thomas in New Orleans. Baker presented the family with irrefutable proof of having known Charles Thomas. The family lives in a private, hard-to-find location in Louisiana. Charles Thomas' granddaughter assisted Dr. John DeLane Williams in obtaining data on New Orleans for his statistical analysis of Baker and Oswald's activities.

The particulars Baker described were unique regarding Charles Thomas: his work in the 1950's as the Customs agent at the US-Canadian border in Buffalo, New York, at the time Oswald crossed the border there, his moving to Miami and working with Cubans and anti-Castro factions and with the Mafia there, his secrets of which he had been proud, the tattoos on his fingers, his German accent and silvery hair, and, of particular importance, his marriage to a Chitimacha native American Indian, and the fact that Thomas used the name "Arthur Young" in New Orleans --with which information Baker was eventually able to locate the Thomas family.

Thus, there are two living witnesses and the attestations of the Charles Thomas family supporting the fact of Baker's having known Oswald.

(3) JVB and Lee Harvey Oswald had an affair.

On direct: Comments made by Anna Lewis on this topic on the same video.

Cross-examination: See above, to which Jack adds that he believes several agencies and other parties watched LHO very closely in New Orleans and that none of the agencies has produced any report mentioning JVB.

JVB responds: A Department of Defense agent told her that he had looked in files of LHO and JVB and had seen pictures of JVB labeled “Marina Oswald.” The agent had seen a caption in both files noting that Marina was reportedly in Texas when the picture was taken of her in New Orleans.

In addition, Baker POSED as marina Oswald successfully because Marina and Baker had the same hair color and style, eye color, height and many facial resemblances. Marina Oswald was largely sequestered in a small part of New Orleans. The only time Marina Oswald visited the French Quarter in New Orleans, Oswald stayed home--she went, instead, with Ruth Paine, without Oswald.

Baker says Oswald refused to go because someone might have asked where "Marina" was in the presence of Marina. The incident of Oswald failing to accompany Marina and Ruth Paine to the French Quarter in September is described in the anti-Oswald book Marina and Lee.

Oswald only once did not tell marina Oswald the truth about where he worked---this sole time was when he worked with Baker at Reilly’s. Instead, he told Marina that he worked at a different coffee company (Leon Israel Coffee Company)--which McMillan, who wrote Marina and lee, called a "pointless lie." It was not: Oswald did not want Marina to see Baker.

Further, after he was fired from Reilly, Oswald still "went to work" every day and Marina was unaware, for weeks, that Oswald was no longer employed, which can be verified through a letter she wrote to Ruth Paine. There are many more such events which are ignored by the 'research community' indicating Oswald's and Baker's relationship existed. Of course, the statistical analysis indicates that there was a better than 98% chance that Baker and Oswald knew each other 'well' and a 1 in a million chance that their parallel work there was not deliberately pre-planned and arranged.

(4) JVB worked on a lab on a project to collect cancer cells and assess their potency to use to kill Fidel Castro.

On direct: Newspaper clippings posted show her interest in work in a science-related field and her excellence as science student.

Cross-examination: See above.

JVB responds: In addition, her ongoing work after high school is indicated as well (for example, an abstract exists showing she was working with deadly melanoma cancer at St. Francis College after high school.)

Former University of Florida students such as Dr. Kathy Santi and two of her former high school classmates have verified Baker's presence in pre-med courses and in the radiation section of the engineering labs a UF even though her official records do not mention such activities or courses.

Baker was also documented working in a highly advanced chemical research lab in 1963, despite having no degree in chemistry and an official "D" in chemistry on her UF college record

Sources in dispute: LHO: The True Story...

On direct: JVB states the following: The book is unauthorized due to a contract dispute. She submitted corrections that were not made in the publishing of the book. Livingstone did not allow her to see his editing or final edit.

Cross-examination: Barb states the following: The book’s status does not negate everything in it. On page 171 JVB says that Kerry Thornley took a picture of her and LHO together.

JVB responds: Regarding the Thornley picture, Oswald never gave the photo to Baker. The photo was made only to assuage suspicions Thornley had that Baker and Oswald were having an affair.

The statement that she was in a picture with LHO at the Trade Mart was given as speculation by JVB to Livingstone because she did not have good enough photos to make a determination. Researcher Martin Shackelford and Baker thought that she might be in the Rush film. These speculations were given to the editor, Mr. Livingstone, who published them without permission

Evidence rule: Independent corroborating evidence is best. Jack says it is a second source with no stake in the matter (paraphrase). Further questioning made it clear that he believes self-serving interest rules out a witness; I say it should be a factor for finder-of-fact (you) to consider.

Comments on credibility (based on one of the four assertions):

John Dolver asks: "Judyth, when you went to spend some time in Sweden and go through the process of applying for asylum, part of your claim is that you are a socialist. Could you please take time to outline the argument you have for this, as well as state why you consider this a point of relevance. Further, how do you reconcile that with the proposed murder of the head of state of the sovereign nation of Cuba and performing this task with the Central Intelligence Agency of the sovereign nation the United States of America. Please."

JVB replies: "SHOW US THE QUOTATION. This was supposed to be private, personal information. Only the verdict, with some explanatory statements, was supposed to be released to the public. I insist on seeing a copy of the document. Scan it, please.

The events of 1963 involved missiles capable of delivering nuclear warheads to my country, compliments of Castro. I was a 19-year-old American, in 1963, who had written President Kennedy and offered my services to my country."

Where it goes next: All members are free to respond with ideas on evidence that works for or against any of these assertions.

[John Dolva]

So you admit that this is so. The question remains as to how you recincile it, how do you justify it? If you cannot, which I suggest you cannot because it is inherently irreconcilable, then this is a possible indication of a tendency to tell porkies.

[Mike Williams]

So you admit that this is so. The question remains as to how you recincile it, how do you justify it? If you cannot, which I suggest you cannot because it is inherently irreconcilable, then this is a possible indication of a tendency to tell porkies.

John,

What are you referring to?

[John Dolva]

Mike : ''John Dolver asks: "Judyth, when you went to spend some time in Sweden and go through the process of applying for asylum, part of your claim is that you are a socialist. Could you please take time to outline the argument you have for this, as well as state why you consider this a point of relevance. Further, how do you reconcile that with the proposed murder of the head of state of the sovereign nation of Cuba and performing this task with the Central Intelligence Agency of the sovereign nation the United States of America. Please."

JVB replies: "SHOW US THE QUOTATION. This was supposed to be private, personal information. Only the verdict, with some explanatory statements, was supposed to be released to the public. I insist on seeing a copy of the document. Scan it, please.

The events of 1963 involved missiles capable of delivering nuclear warheads to my country, compliments of Castro. I was a 19-year-old American, in 1963, who had written President Kennedy and offered my services to my country." ''

[Mike Williams]

Mike : ''John Dolver asks: "Judyth, when you went to spend some time in Sweden and go through the process of applying for asylum, part of your claim is that you are a socialist. Could you please take time to outline the argument you have for this, as well as state why you consider this a point of relevance. Further, how do you reconcile that with the proposed murder of the head of state of the sovereign nation of Cuba and performing this task with the Central Intelligence Agency of the sovereign nation the United States of America. Please."

JVB replies: "SHOW US THE QUOTATION. This was supposed to be private, personal information. Only the verdict, with some explanatory statements, was supposed to be released to the public. I insist on seeing a copy of the document. Scan it, please.

The events of 1963 involved missiles capable of delivering nuclear warheads to my country, compliments of Castro. I was a 19-year-old American, in 1963, who had written President Kennedy and offered my services to my country." ''

John,

Thanks buddy. I have been following this loosely and got a bit lost. Thanks for the bread crumbs!

Best to you buddy!

Mike

[John Dolva]

No worries, mate.

[Dean Hartwell]

So you admit that this is so. The question remains as to how you recincile it, how do you justify it? If you cannot, which I suggest you cannot because it is inherently irreconcilable, then this is a possible indication of a tendency to tell porkies.

John,

I am not clear what you believe JVB is admitting to here. Is it:

That she perceived Fidel Castro as a threat to the United States and saw nothing wrong with killing him?

That she stated many years later in Sweden that she was a socialist?

How does being a modern Swedish socialist contradict the perception that Castro was a threat and that he should be killed?

Are you going to provide the quotation that you referred to on a scan?

I need clarification before proceeding here.

Thanks,

Dean

[John Dolva]

People shouldn't go around killing each other. Fidel, with Che, Trotsky (btw a fifth interbnational is on the table), Palme, and others will go down in history as amongst the greatest of 20'th century socialists, The scans were linked to in the JVB thread a loooong time ago.''This was supposed to be private, personal information'' is JVB''s answer. however it is in the ''the verdict, with some explanatory statements''.

edit:typo

Edited May 20, 2010 by John Dolva

[Barb Junkkarinen]

JVB EVIDENCE AND CROSS-EXAMINATION

UPDATED

(4) JVB worked on a lab on a project to collect cancer cells and assess their potency to use to kill Fidel Castro.

Former University of Florida students such as Dr. Kathy Santi and two of her former high school classmates have verified Baker's presence in pre-med courses and in the radiation section of the engineering labs a UF even though her official records do not mention such activities or courses.

Please scan and post the verification from all three.

Thanks,

Barb :-)

[Dean Hartwell]

People shouldn't go around killing each other. Fidel, with Che, Trotsky (btw a fifth interbnational is on the table), Palme, and others will go down in history as amongst the greatest of 20'th century socialists, The scans were linked to in the JVB thread a loooong time ago.''This was supposed to be private, personal information'' is JVB''s answer. however it is in the ''the verdict, with some explanatory statements''.

edit:typo

John,

Mona Ingeborg Sahlin née Andersson is a Swedish politician and the current leader of the Swedish Social Democratic Party (Wikipedia).

Is Mona Sahlin a threat to the United States? Does she support the jailing or execution of opposition leaders? Does she forbid free and fair elections?

There appears to be no connection with the modern Swedish Socialist and the socialists that you mentioned. Nor does there appear to be any chance that Sahlin could do something like allowing missiles to be pointed at our nation.

You mention that the scans are in the "JVB thread." I assume you mean the thread which now has almost 3,000 posts. But it does not matter.

JVB's alleged statement of being a socialist in Sweden decades after her belief that killing Castro would be justifiable, even if true does not reasonably raise the issue of credibility.

Dean

[Dean Hartwell]

JVB EVIDENCE AND CROSS-EXAMINATION

UPDATED

(4) JVB worked on a lab on a project to collect cancer cells and assess their potency to use to kill Fidel Castro.

Former University of Florida students such as Dr. Kathy Santi and two of her former high school classmates have verified Baker's presence in pre-med courses and in the radiation section of the engineering labs a UF even though her official records do not mention such activities or courses.

Please scan and post the verification from all three.

Thanks,

Barb :-)

Sure, Barb. Just as soon as you can verify these claims that you have made:

Barb also states that she is trying to confirm a comment made by Debra Conway as to whether Anna Lewis originally recalled JVB.

Barb also claims that JVB sent around a "transcript" of an interview with one witness to another witness.

Barb adds that she believes JVB may have encouraged Anna before she made statements.

[John Dolva]

Of course she cannot allow it and I seriously doubt she would if she could, so why bring that BS up?

You seriously cannot see a contradiction in JVB's story re her asylum application?

[Greg Burnham]

Dean,

Although I commend you for attempting to resolve the issues, I think that the "form" of your mock trial is counter-intuitive to our system of jurisprudence and hence inadequate to the task. Here's the reason why: a "defendant" is not required to prove their innocence; not required to prove they are NOT guilty; not even required to "take the stand" in their own defense. Moreover, such refusal to take the stand is NOT to be considered by a jury as indicative of guilt.

It seems to me that the burden of proof is on those who are claiming she is a fraud (guilty of prevarication).

So far, I am not personally convinced either way. But, by my way of thinking, if faced with "having to choose" definitively one way or another--in the absence of additional evidence--I would choose to believe her. However, I'm not faced with having to make any choice at all. So I don't.

I understand why those who believe her would continue to fight for this information to get widely known...for if true, some of it is important (just not the marginally related to JFK part). But, I fail to understand why those who don't believe her make such a point of loudly declaring her story to be either outright false or too confabulated beyond their concept of reality to even partially accept.

At this stage, IMO, we'd have a mis-trial. Remember, she is "innocent of being untruthful" unless and until she is proven otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt.

That's why I think this "form" is inadequate to the task. Judyth is the one making the positive assertion. Her detractors are accusing her of being guilty of prevarication. She shouldn't be attempting to prove a negative i.e., "I'm not lying" -- Yet that's what she is forced to do in this model.

GO_SECURE

monk

JVB DEBATE IN A "TRIAL" FORM

I have decided to take the comments I am getting on this thread and put it into a new form. We could assign JVB the "plaintiff" status and say that her case is that she is telling the truth about her time in New Orleans in 1963. Her specific assertions and evidence offered for each can be shown, as can "cross-examination" or counter-arguments offered by critics. This is a work in progress and, of course, is subject to my own bias as to what is relevant or debatable evidence.

(1) JVB went to New Orleans during the time Lee Harvey Oswald is known to have been there.

Evidence: the work time card mentioned on the main thread and shown on previously named web sites.

Cross-examination: None

(2) JVB met Lee Harvey Oswald.

Evidence: Anna Lewis' statements on a previously mentioned video. She states that she and her husband David double-dated with JVB and Lee.

Cross-examination: Stephen says it would help to know more about what, if anything, anyone encouraged Anna to say before she talked on the video. She should also clarify why she gave a different story to Garrison than her husband regarding how she knew LHO, which may or may not be a problem. Barb states that she is trying to confirm a comment made Debra Conway as to whether Anna Lewis originally recalled JVB. Barb also claims that JVB sent around a "transcript" of an interview with one witness to another witness.

(3) JVB and Lee Harvey Oswald had an affair.

Evidence: Comments made by Anna Lewis on this topic on the same video.

Cross-examination: See above. Jack adds that he believes several agencies and other parties watched LHO very closely in New Orleans and that none of the agencies has produced any report mentioning JVB.

(4) JVB worked on a lab on a project to collect cancer cells to use to kill Fidel Castro.

Evidence: Newspaper clippings posted show her interest in work in a science-related field and her excellence as science student.

Cross-examination: See above.

Evidence rule: Independent corroborating evidence is best. Jack says it is a second source with no stake in the matter (paraphrase). Further questioning made it clear that he believes pecuniary interest rules out witness; I say it should be a factor for finder-of-fact to consider.

Where it goes next: Members are free to respond with ideas on evidence. Remember we are now only working on JVB's assertions (I will get to other possible evidence later). I need any evidence that works for or against any of these assertions (#1-#4). You do not have to prove it but you must give reason to believe what you are suggesting.

Complaints, rhetorical questions and other distractions will be ignored.

Edited May 21, 2010 by Greg Burnham

[Dean Hartwell]

Of course she cannot allow it and I seriously doubt she would if she could, so why bring that BS up?

You seriously cannot see a contradiction in JVB's story re her asylum application?

John,

I do not understand your first comment.

As to your question, it sounds like a leading question. You already have my answer.

[Dean Hartwell]

Dean,

I think that the "form" of your mock trial is counter-intuitive to our system of juris prudence and hence inadequate to the task. Here's why, a "defendant" is not required to prove their innocence; not required to prove they are NOT guilty; not even required to "take the stand" in their own defense. Moreover, such refusal to take the stand is NOT to be considered by a jury as indicative of guilt.

It seems to me that the burden of proof is on those who are claiming she is a fraud.

So far, I am not personally convinced either way. But, by my way of thinking, if faced with "having to choose" definitively one way or another--in the absence of additional evidence--I would choose to believe her. However, I'm not faced with having to make any choice at all. So I don't.

I understand why those who believe her fight for this information to get widely known...for if she is the real deal, it is important. But, I fail to understand why those who don't believe her make such a point of loudly declaring her story to be either outright false or too confabulated beyond their concept of reality to even partially accept.

At this stage, IMO, we'd have a mis-trial. Remember, she is "innocent of being untruthful" unless and until she is proven otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt.

That's why I think this "form" is inadequate to the task. Judyth is the one making the positive assertion. She shouldn't be attempting to prove a negative i.e., "I'm not lying" -- Yet that's what she is forced to do in this model.

GO_SECURE

monk

---

Hi Monk,

I created this thread because I wanted a form in which I could present Judyth's story before the critics could respond. So I established her four assertions and provided evidence that critics could then cross-examine so as to produce a discussion or dialogue.

On the other thread, too often critics would raise issues not directly related to Judyth's story without an explanation as to the relevance of the issues they raised. That probably explains the extraordinary length of that thread. On this thread, Judyth gets a chance to state her story, critics respond and we keep things coherent as long as we stick to the main points. At a later point, I will consider other ("collateral") issues.

I emphasize direct- and cross-examination rather than the terms plaintiff and defendant. And there is no final verdict on this form. Everyone is a juror and will have to make up their minds as to whether they believe Judyth or not.

Thanks,

Dean