Nelson Delgado

[Greg Parker]

I find Marina's testimony believable (all of it, actually; I would like to see hard proof if I'm mistaken about this.) DeMohrenschildt's testimony confirms Marina's testimony. I feel I am on solid ground as I build my theory on this starting point.

Tragically Paul, this could be the longest thread here if everyone gives just one example...

I'll get the ball rolling...

From Marina's HSCA testimony....

Mrs Porter: We had a short wave radio, I believe that is what you call, when you can listen to the foreign stations.

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=38623

From FBI 62-109060 JFK HQ File, Section 101

An examination of the radio and power supply was made by SA Winton P Walter, Electronics... the dial of the radio is marked "DB" (long wave) and "CB" (medium wave)... the radio will not receive short-wave radio broadcasts...

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=62388&relPageId=15

[William Kelly]

I find Marina's testimony believable (all of it, actually; I would like to see hard proof if I'm mistaken about this.) DeMohrenschildt's testimony confirms Marina's testimony. I feel I am on solid ground as I build my theory on this starting point.

Tragically Paul, this could be the longest thread here if everyone gives just one example...

I'll get the ball rolling...

From Marina's HSCA testimony....

Mrs Porter: We had a short wave radio, I believe that is what you call, when you can listen to the foreign stations.

http://www.maryferre...absPageId=38623

From FBI 62-109060 JFK HQ File, Section 101

An examination of the radio and power supply was made by SA Winton P Walter, Electronics... the dial of the radio is marked "DB" (long wave) and "CB" (medium wave)... the radio will not receive short-wave radio broadcasts...

http://www.maryferre...88&relPageId=15

Also, Paul,

Don't get your Schmidts mixed up. Volkmar Schmidt did come to USA from Germany but to work for the Magnolia Oil company, not for Walker. It was the Schmidt who placed the ad in the newspaper who came to USA from US Army in Germany to infiltrate the Conservative organizations.

JFKcountercoup: Volkmar Schmidt Interview

BK

[Paul Trejo]

I find Marina's testimony believable (all of it, actually; I would like to see hard proof if I'm mistaken about this.) DeMohrenschildt's testimony confirms Marina's testimony. I feel I am on solid ground as I build my theory on this starting point.

Tragically Paul, this could be the longest thread here if everyone gives just one example...

I'll get the ball rolling...

From Marina's HSCA testimony....

Mrs Porter: We had a short wave radio, I believe that is what you call, when you can listen to the foreign stations.

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=38623

From FBI 62-109060 JFK HQ File, Section 101

An examination of the radio and power supply was made by SA Winton P Walter, Electronics... the dial of the radio is marked "DB" (long wave) and "CB" (medium wave)... the radio will not receive short-wave radio broadcasts...

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=62388&relPageId=15

Thanks for the response, Greg. Yet the example you shared might be considered a mistake, rather than a deliberate lie.

It is possible for somebody who is trained in chemistry (as Marina Porter was) to be ignorant about electronics. The differences between short-wave, medium-wave and long-wave radio are not known to everybody. I myself wouldn't count that as a lie.

Best regards...

[Paul Trejo]

Also, Paul,

Don't get your Schmidts mixed up. Volkmar Schmidt did come to USA from Germany but to work for the Magnolia Oil company, not for Walker. It was the Schmidt who placed the ad in the newspaper who came to USA from US Army in Germany to infiltrate the Conservative organizations.

JFKcountercoup: Volkmar Schmidt Interview

BK

Many thanks for the distinction, William. I was getting these two mixed up.

Best regards...

[Thomas Graves]

I find Marina's testimony believable (all of it, actually; I would like to see hard proof if I'm mistaken about this.) DeMohrenschildt's testimony confirms Marina's testimony. I feel I am on solid ground as I build my theory on this starting point.

Tragically Paul, this could be the longest thread here if everyone gives just one example...

I'll get the ball rolling...

From Marina's HSCA testimony....

Mrs Porter: We had a short wave radio, I believe that is what you call, when you can listen to the foreign stations.

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=38623

From FBI 62-109060 JFK HQ File, Section 101

An examination of the radio and power supply was made by SA Winton P Walter, Electronics... the dial of the radio is marked "DB" (long wave) and "CB" (medium wave)... the radio will not receive short-wave radio broadcasts...

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=62388&relPageId=15

Sometimes I wonder if Marina wasn't a KGB agent who was "turned" by the CIA as soon as the Oswalds moved to the U.S.

--Tommy

[Thomas Graves]

I find Marina's testimony believable (all of it, actually; I would like to see hard proof if I'm mistaken about this.) DeMohrenschildt's testimony confirms Marina's testimony. I feel I am on solid ground as I build my theory on this starting point.

Tragically Paul, this could be the longest thread here if everyone gives just one example...

I'll get the ball rolling...

From Marina's HSCA testimony....

Mrs Porter: We had a short wave radio, I believe that is what you call, when you can listen to the foreign stations.

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=38623

From FBI 62-109060 JFK HQ File, Section 101

An examination of the radio and power supply was made by SA Winton P Walter, Electronics... the dial of the radio is marked "DB" (long wave) and "CB" (medium wave)... the radio will not receive short-wave radio broadcasts...

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=62388&relPageId=15

Sometimes I wonder if Marina wasn't a KGB agent who was "turned" by the CIA as soon as the Oswalds moved to the U.S.

--Tommy

bump

[Paul Trejo]

Jim, I'm new to the Education Forum, and have been searching for threads that approximate my own theory. Your comments are interesting because you address most of my main concerns: (1) the April 10th shooting at General Walker; (2) Marina's testimony about the Walker shooting, including the letter she identified as Lee Oswald's in WC evidence; (3) George DeMohrenschildt's testimony about the Walker shooting.

I find Marina's testimony believable (all of it, actually; I would like to see hard proof if I'm mistaken about this.) DeMohrenschildt's testimony confirms Marina's testimony. I feel I am on solid ground as I build my theory on this starting point.

Paul, The whole case against Oswald (as far as the Walker attempt goes) all hinges on Marina's testimony and I'm astonished to find anyone could find it believable. One of my favourite moments is when she testifies that Oswald took his rifle out of the house and buried it somewhere 3 days after the shooting but then realises how absurd this is so changes her mind immediately:

Mrs. OSWALD: Three days after the attempt--3 days after this attempt, he took the rifle from the house, took it somewhere and buried it.

Mr. LIEBELER: Three days after the attempt?

Mrs. OSWALD: Yes, yes.

Mr. LIEBELER: So that he actually took the rifle out of the house and took it away and hid it somewhere?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mrs. OSWALD: No; the day Lee shot at Walker, he buried the rifle because when he came home and told me that he shot at General Walker and I asked him where the rifle was and he said he buried it. (11H293)

The whole idea of Oswald taking a shot at Walker is only believable if he had an accomplice anyway. I mean, he didn't drive so, what, did he take his rifle on the bus? Or was he walking the streets with it?

As far as the hard evidence goes, there is none because the bullet recovered from the scene was quite clearly switched for one fired from Oswald's rifle.

The real bullet that was recovered from Walker's home was so badly mutilated that the Dallas Police Department said they were unable to run any ballistic tests on it. However the police report (found in CE 2001 24H39) did note that the bullet was a "steel jacket." I invite you to look at a colour photo of CE 573, the bullet entered into evidence by the commission, for it is immediately obvious that bullet is not steel jacketed. No one with any knowledge of firearms would describe it as such. Walker himself, a 30 year career army officer with extensive combat experience, knew that CE 573 was not the bullet fired through the window of his study for he had held the real bullet in his hand on the evening of the shooting. When Walker saw CE 573 on television in 1979 he was so outraged that he began a campaign to have the government "withdraw the substituted bullet."

Martin, thanks for the response. I have some questions about your doubts, here. Allen Dulles once suggested that all the truth about the JFK conspiracy is contained within the Warren Commission documents - if we 'split hairs'.

My questions have to do with Marina's fumbling about the Walker shooting. We notice Jeanne DeMohrenschildt fumbling about the incident, also, even worse than Marina. We notice George DeMohrenschildt changing his testimony, too.

But their fumbling betrays the events they tried to hide, I believe. Look at Marina's change of testimony -- she was looking at mental image picture of something that happened approximately "three days" after the April 10th shooting. According to the collective testimony, what event was that? It was the visit by George and Jeanne DeMohrenschildt to the Oswald home at 10pm on Easter Sunday (or perhaps the Saturday before, as some testimony avers).

Yes - Marina fumbled - but she finally spat out the truth. Oswald buried the rifle the night of the shooting. But why did she begin to lie about it? The clue is the "three days" time period. The DeMohrenschildt visit was far more revealing to everybody concerned than the uncomfortable silences conveyed. Marina at that time knew that George and Jeanne knew; and in a way she was relieved that somebody with a more stable head than Lee Oswald was now part of the picture.

Days later, when (as my theory goes) Banister and Ferrie invited Oswald to NOLA for an immediate covert project, he jumped at it, and Marina was relieved to get him out of Dallas. This was when Marina realized that the man she married had changed to the point of no-return. Lee had snapped, for some reason -- maybe it was because, as Jeanne DeMohrenschildt said, George Bouhe was buying Marina too many dresses (as Jeanne testified) and visiting Marina when Lee wasn't at home (as George testified). But he snapped.

So, yes, she began to lie according to her habitual secrecy, but then she stopped herself, remembered where she was, and told the truth.

OK - second point - as for that bullet. Although General Walker himself confirmed that the bullet fragments he found in his house did not match the bullets found in Oswald's rifle - General Walker still believed that Oswald was his April shooter, and maintained that position for the rest of his life. His explanation about the difference in bullets is that there were two shooters, and he always suspected that the CIA supplied the second shooter (and the other rifle). The Briscoe Center for American History has lots of examples of Walker's papers on this topic.

Best regards...

[Paul Trejo]

Hi Paul

I'm a little curious to learn when you think Marina told the whole truth? During her Warren Commission testimony? I had this out not so long ago with David Lifton about how her stories evolved over a period of months and I'm wondering at what point you think she came out with the "whole truth" as it were.

For example - concerning Oswald's alleged revolver - during her Six Flags interviews she claimed she didn't know he owned a pistol. When she was asked why she didn't observe it when she took the backyard photographs she said it was because both the gun and the clothing he was wearing were black - so she couldn't see it. I guess what I'm saying is that you believe she did initially lie (about a great deal) but then came clean on everything?

Also, do you believe she had contact with Robert Webster in the USSR, and if she did what are the implications (both to the Lee/Marina story and also her truthfulness?

Ta

Lee

Thanks for the response, Lee. You say that Marina's stories evolved over a period of months - but this makes sense under her circumstances of intense pressure in those days. Secrecy was how she lived her life. Coming out of her shell took time.

Yet when she confronts her Warren Commission interrogators, she seems to have calmed down quite a bit. The FBI had stopped threatening to deport her, evidently, and everybody calmed down. Also, Marina received lots and lots of money from sympathetic people around the USA who pitied a young widow with two babies, facing a possible prison term. She had security - she had money - her children were being cared for. Finally, she would tell the truth. She started with her life story - in written form - which she submitted to the Warren Commission. It included her family background and her Russian experiences with Lee Oswald.

Also, Lee had changed in Dallas. He never hit her in Russia. Suddenly, he began hitting her; really frightening her, in this far-away land.

So, yes - I guess what I'm saying is that initially she lied to the authorities, but later - during the Warren Commission, she came clean on everything - even with those false starts that Martin identified. I believe she eventually came clean.

As for the Robert Webster connection in the USSR, the data is inconclusive, so I find no implications, yet. But as for previous boyfriends in the USSR, her returned letter to one of them was the reason that Lee first beat Marina, according to her Warren Commission testimony.

Best regards...

[Paul Trejo]

Paul

Quick one. According to your theory - did Oswald/or CIA accomplice intentionally miss Walker because from the story that is told - that was one easy shot.

Cheers

Lee

In my opinion, Lee, the shot was meant to kill, and only Fate saved Walker when he moved suddenly, exactly at the right split second. In Marina's opinion (FWIW) that was, as she said, 'proof that he was meant to live.' (She really didn't want Oswald to try it again. It bothered her, because this was a new Oswald, a different Oswald, than the one she married.)

You're right - it should have been an easy shot, but Fate sometimes steps in with a 'coincidence'. I believe Marina's testimony on this point. (And yes, I allow her a little bit of leeway under the circumstances, whereas strictly speaking in our judicial system, none at all is allowed.)

Best regards...

[Paul Trejo]

Thanks, Paul.

Can the opposite also be true? That she told the truth to begin with and with the pressure and threats against her and the children then her story began to mould itself to the official story?

If what you say is true - that she eventually came clean - then the picture she paints is one of a disturbed psychopath. And a disturbed psychopath can kill the President. And most of us here know he didn't kill the President.

If she told the truth during her Warren Commission appearnaces then I guess you also believe Oswald was going out with his revolver one day to shoot Richard Nixon? And she locked him in the bathroom until his moment of psychopathic lunacy subsided?

On the issue of Webster - let's pretend that a researcher (we'll call him Russell Dick) goes and interviews an elderly Robert Webster. Webster states that he met Marina Oswald while he was in the Soviet Union. He says she could speak English but with a heavy accent.

Where would that leave us?

And Marina constantly claimed that she couldn't speak English, even through her Warren Commission testimony, when we have plenty of witnesses that would suggest otherwise. Now, if this is true - and I'm convinced that it is - why would she want to continue to hide her more than likely fluency in English.

Finally, why were the White Russian community hell-bent on having one of their own near her right through all of the early translations right through to her Dallas Warren Commission testimony - especially if she did in fact have an excellent grasp on the English language?

Regards

Lee

Lee, of course anything is possible, yet we are all weighing the evidence here. Your concern seems to be that Marina finally 'molded herself to the official story.' However, I don't believe that she did.

I'm basing my theory on her Warren Commission testimony. She left large gaps in it, deliberately, because the interrogators would not let her speculate - they only wanted to drive to Hoover's conclusions. Marina repeatedly said that she did not have enough information to arrive at the conclusions they wanted to hear. Lee did not tell her very much, she claimed. Lee would keep her in the dark and lie to her. Lee would tell her he was working at his job (once in Dallas and once in New Orleans) when for many weeks he had been laid off!

Lee Oswald did not tell Marina where he went! He did not tell her how much money he had, or where he got his money. She had rent paid and food for the children and she was content, she says. She got gifts from Bouhe, and she admitted it. This probably made Lee jealous, but she didn't care -- she needed the dresses. She had no idea Lee Oswald had a Minolta camera.

So - as Marina told the Warren Commission, she had very little information to work with, and the FBI would not answer her questions, either. So, she said, based on the little evidence she had, it appeared that Lee shot Kennedy -- however, she repeated, if she had more evidence she might change her opinion!

So, she did not accept the official story.

Now, granting that Marina came clean, so that Lee Oswald was a disturbed man, this in no way (by itself) proves that Lee shot Kennedy. Yet we also find Lee Oswald consorting with Banister and Ferrie in NOLA. That is not innocent behavior. Also, General Walker was convinced that George DeMohrenschildt played a major role in the April shooting. DeMohrenschildt was no angel, either. Lee Oswald was probably violently jealous of George Bouhe, the rich Russian who made eyes at Marina. Yet none of this proves that Lee shot Kennedy.

Not only do I find the account of Lee threatening to shoot Nixon believable, I also believe Ron Lewis' account that Lee threatened to shoot Huey Long in New Orleans. As Volkmar Schmidt said, Lee gave him the impression that he was starved for attention and adulation - from anybody.

Did Lee Oswald shoot Kennedy? I say no. But I do believe that Lee Oswald knew who shot Kennedy, and could name ten of the central conspirators, if he had wanted to.

Here's what I believe Marina Porter did not know -- she did not know at the time that General Walker found out about the April shooting - way back in April - and started a plot with Guy Banister, David Ferrie and Jack Martin to punish Lee Oswald for that crime. The punishment would be to make him the patsy in this conspiracy. Marina did not know it -- and Oswald didn't know it, either.

On the issue of Webster - I'm still skeptical - let's not read into his claims more than he claims. Marina could speak English? Does that mean she could say, 'hello, thank you, please and excuse me?' Does it mean considerably more? What evidence do we have beyond Webster's claims? Did Marina take English courses while in college? We have those records. Marina was no dummy - she was a chemistry graduate. But even chemistry graduates do not automatically master English. This should not be difficult to disprove.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited December 20, 2011 by Paul Trejo

[Ed LeDoux]

Marina showed the rifle to Jeanne De Mohrenschildt in the "closet" so which is it, did Lee bury it or was it in the closet, the closet where Lee kept it in the open...?

Mrs. De MOHRENSCHILDT. And I believe from what I remember George sat down on the sofa and started talking to Lee, and Marina was showing me the house that is why I said it looks like it was the first time, because why would she show me the house if I had been there before? Then we went to another room, and she opens the closet, and I see the gun standing there. I said, what is the gun doing over there?

Mr. JENNER. You say---

Mrs. De MOHRENSCHILDT. A rifle.

Mr. JENNER. A rifle, in the closet?

Mrs. De MOHRENSCHILDT. In the closet, right in the beginning. It wasn't hidden or anything.

Mr. JENNER. Standing up on its butt?

Mrs. De MOHRENSCHILDT. Yes.

OR

Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall the first time that you observed the rifle?

Mrs. OSWALD. That was on Neely Street. I think that was in February.

Mr. RANKIN. How did you learn about it? Did you see it some place in the apartment?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, Lee had a small room where he spent a great deal of time, where he read---where he kept his things, and that is where the rifle was.

Mr. RANKIN. Was it out in the room at that time, as distinguished from in a closet in the room?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, it was open, out in the open. At first I think---I saw some package up on the top shelf, and I think that that was the rifle. But I didn't know. And apparently later he assembled it and had it in the room.

Mr. RANKIN. When you saw the rifle assembled in the room, did it have the scope on it?

Mrs. OSWALD. No, it did not have a scope on it.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you have any discussion with your husband about the rifle when you first saw it?

Mrs. OSWALD. Of course I asked him, "What do you need a rifle for? What do we need that for?"

He said that it would come in handy some time for hunting. And this was not too surprising because in Russia, too, we had a rifle.

Mr. RANKIN. In Russia did you have a rifle or a shotgun?

Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know the difference. One and the other shoots. You men. That is your business.

The CHAIRMAN. My wife wouldn't know the difference, so it is all right.

Mrs. OSWALD. I have never served in the Army.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you discuss what the rifle cost with your husband?

Mrs. OSWALD. No.

Mr. RANKIN. Was the rifle later placed in a closet in the apartment at Neely Street?

Mrs. OSWALD. No, it was always either in a corner, standing up in a corner or on a shelf.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you know what happened to the gun that you had in Russia? Was it brought over to this country?

Mrs. OSWALD. No, he sold it there. I did not say so when I had the first interviews. You must understand this was my husband. I didn't want to say too much.

Mr. RANKIN. Is this rifle at Neely Street the only rifle that you know of that your husband had after you were married to him?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever show that rifle to the De Mohrenschildts?

Mrs. OSWALD. I know that De Mohrenschildts had said that the rifle had been shown to him, but I don't remember that.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall your husband taking the rifle away from the apartment on Neely Street at any time?

Mrs. OSWALD. You must know that the rifle it isn't as if it was out in the open. He would hang a coat or something to mask its presence in the room. And sometimes when he walked out, when he went out in the evening I didn't know, because I didn't go into that room very often. I don't know whether he took it with him or not.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever see him clean the rifle?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. I said before I had never seen it before. But I think you understand. I want to help you, and that is why there is no reason for concealing anything. I will not be charged with anything.

Mr. GOPADZE. She says she was not sworn in before. But now inasmuch as she is sworn in, she is going to tell the truth.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you see him clean the rifle a number of times?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. Could you help us by giving some estimate of the times as you remember it?

Mrs. OSWALD. About four times---about four or five times, I think.

Mr. RANKIN. Did your husband ever tell you why he was cleaning the--that is, that he had been using it and needed to be cleaned after use?

Mrs. OSWALD. No, I did not ask him, because I thought it was quite normal that when you have a rifle you must clean it from time to time.

, and he would say bye-bye, I will be hack soon, and he maMr. RANKIN. Did you ever observe your husband taking the rifle away from the apartment on Neely Street?

Mrs. OSWALD. Now, I think that he probably did sometimes, but I never did see it. You must understand that sometimes I would be in the kitchen and he would be in his room downstairsand he would say bye-bye, I will be hack soon, and he may have have taken it. He probably did. Perhaps he purely waited for an occasion when he could take it away without my seeing it.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever observe that the rifle had been taken out of the apartment at Neely Street---that is, that it was gone?

Mrs. OSWALD. Before the incident with General Walker, I know that Lee was preparing for something. He took photographs of that house and he told me not to enter his room. I didn't know about these photographs, but when I came into the room once in general he tried to make it so that I would spend less time in that room. I noticed that quite accidentally one time when I was cleaning the room he tried to take care of it himself.

I asked him what kind of photographs are these, but he didn't say anything to me.

Mr. RANKIN. That is the photographs of the Walker house that you were asking about?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. Later, after he had fired, he told me about it.

I didn't know that he intended to do it---that he was planning to do it.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you learn at any time that he had been practicing with the rifle?

Mrs. OSWALD. I think that he went once or twice. I didn't actually see him take the rifle, but I knew that he was practicing.

Mr. RANKIN. Could you give us a little help on how you knew?

Mrs. OSWALD. He told me. And he would mention that in passing---it isn't

as if he said, "Well, today I am going"---it wasn't as if he said, "Well, today I am going to take the rifle and go and practice."

But he would say, "Well, today I will take the rifle along for practice."

Therefore, I don't know whether he took it from the house or whether perhaps he even kept the rifle somewhere outside. There was a little square, sort of a little courtyard where he might have kept it.

When you asked me about the rifle, I said that Lee didn't have a rifle, but he also had a gun, a revolver.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall when he first had the pistol, that you remember?

Mrs. OSWALD. He had that on Neely Street, but I think that he acquired the rifle before he acquired the pistol. The pistol I saw twice once in his room, and the second time when I took these photographs.

Mr. RANKIN. What period of time was there between when he got the rifle and you learned of it, and the time that you first learned about the pistol?

Mrs. OSWALD. I can't say.

Mr. RANKIN. When you testified about his practicing with the rifle, are you describing a period when you were still at Neely Street?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you know where he practiced with the rifle?

Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know where. I don't know the name of the place where this took place. But I think it was somewhere out of town. It seems to me a place called Lopfield.

Mr. RANKIN. Would that be at the airport---Love Field?

Mrs. OSWALD. Love Field.

Mr. RANKIN. So you think he was practicing out in the open and not at a rifle range?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall seeing the rifle when the telescopic lens was on it?

Mrs. OSWALD. I hadn't paid any attention initially.

I know a rifle was a rifle. I didn't know whether or not it had a telescope attached to it. But the first time I remember seeing it was in New Orleans, where I recognized the telescope. But probably the telescope was on before. I simply hadn't paid attention.

I hope you understand. When I saw it, I thought that all rifles have that.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you make any objection to having the rifle around?

Mrs. OSWALD. Of course.

Mr. RANKIN. What did he say to that?

Mrs. OSWALD. That for a man to have a rifle since I am a woman, I don't understand him, and I shouldn't bother him. A fine life.

Mr. RANKIN. Is that the same rifle that you are referring to that you took the picture of with your husband and when he had the pistol, too?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. I asked him then why he had dressed himself up like that, with the rifle and the pistol, and I thought that he had gone crazy, and he said he wanted to send that to a newspaper. This was not my business--it was man's business.

If I had known these were such dangerous toys of course you understand that I thought that Lee had changed in that direction, and I didn't think it was a serious occupation with him, just playing around.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall the day that you took the picture of him with the rifle and the pistol?

Mrs. OSWALD. I think that that was towards the end of February, possibly the beginning of March. I can't say exactly. Because I didn't attach any significance to it at the time. That was the only time I took any pictures.

I don't know how to take pictures. He gave me a camera and asked me someone should ask me how to photograph, I don't know.

Mr. RANKIN. Was it on a day off that you took the picture?

Mrs. OSWALD. It was on a Sunday.

Mr. RANKIN. How did it occur? Did he come to you and ask you to take the picture?

Mrs. OSWALD. I was hanging up diapers, and he came up to me with the rifle and l was even a little scared, and he gave me the camera and asked me to press a certain button.

Mr. RANKIN. And he was dressed up with a pistol at the same time, was he?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. You have examined that picture since, and noticed that the telescopic lens was on at the time the picture was taken, have you not?

Mrs. OSWALD. Now I paid attention to it. A specialist would see it immediately, of course. But at that time I did not pay any attention at all. I saw just Lee. These details are of great significance for everybody, but for me at that time it didn't mean anything. At the time' that I was questioned, I had even forgotten that I had taken two photographs. I thought there was only one. I thought that there were two identical pictures, but they turned out to be two different poses.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you have anything to do with the prints of the photograph after the prints were made? That is, did you put them in a photographic album yourself?

Mrs. OSWALD. Lee gave me one photograph and asked me to keep it for June somewhere. Of course June doesn't need photographs like that.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall how long after that the Walker matter occurred?

Mrs. OSWALD. Two, perhaps three weeks later. I don't know. You know better when this happened.

Mr. RANKIN. How did you first learn that your husband had shot at General Walker?

Mrs. OSWALD. That evening he went out, I thought that he had gone to his classes or perhaps that he just walked out or went out on his own business. It got to be about 10 or 10:30, he wasn't home yet, and I began to be worried. Perhaps even later.

Then I went into his room. Somehow, I was drawn into it--you know--I was pacing around. Then I saw a note there.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you look for the gun at that time?

Mrs. OSWALD. No, I didn't understand anything. On the note it said, "If I am arrested" and there are certain other questions, such as, for example, the key to the mailbox is in such and such a place, and that he left me some money to last me for some time, and I couldn't understand at all what can he be arrested for. When he came back I asked him what had happened. He was very pale. I don't remember the exact time, but it was very late. And he told me not to ask him any questions. He only told me that he had shot at General Walker.

Of course I didn't sleep all night. I thought that any minute now, the police will come. Of course I wanted to ask him a great deal. But in his state I decided I had best leave him alone it would be purposeless to question him.

Mr. RANKIN. Did he say any more than that about the shooting?

Mrs. OSWALD. Of course in the morning I told him that I was worried, and that we can have a lot of trouble, and I asked him, "Where is the rifle? What did you do with it?"

He said, that he had left it somewhere, that he had buried it, it seems to me, somewhere far from that place, because he said dogs could find it by smell. I don't know---I am not a criminologist.

Mr. RANKIN. Did he tell you why he had shot at General Walker?

Mrs. OSWALD. I told him that he had no right to kill people in peacetime, he had no right to take their life because not everybody has the same ideas as he has. People cannot be all alike. He said that this was a very bad man, that he was a fascist, that he was the leader of a fascist organization, and when I said that even though all of that night be true, just the same he had no right to take his life, he said if someone had killed Hitler in time it would have saved many lives. I told him that this is no method to prove your ideas, by means of a rifle.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you ask him how long he had been planning to do this?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. He said he had been planning for two months. Yes--perhaps he had planned to do so even earlier, but according to his conduct I could tell he was planning--he had been planning this for two months or perhaps a little even earlier.

The CHAIRMAN. Would you like to take a little recess?

Mrs. OSWALD. No, thank you. Better to get it over with.

Mr. RANKIN. Did he show you a picture of the Walker house then?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. That was after the shooting?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. He had a book---he had a notebook in which he noted down quite a few details. It was all in English, I didn't read it. But I noticed the photograph. Sometimes he would lock himself in his room and write in the book. I thought that he was writing some other kind of memoirs, as he had written about his life in the Soviet Union.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever read that book?

Mrs. OSWALD. No.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you know of anything else he had in it besides this Walker house picture?

Mrs. OSWALD. No. Photographs and notes, and I think there was a map in there.

Mr. RANKIN. There was a map of the area where the Walker house was?

Mrs. OSWALD. It was a map of Dallas, but I don't know where Walker lived. Sometimes evenings he would be busy with this. Perhaps he was calculating something, but I don't know. He had a bus schedule and computed something.

After this had happened, people thought that he had a car, but he had been using a bus.

Mr. RANKIN. Did he explain to you about his being able to use a bus just as well as other people could use a car---something of that kind?

Mrs. OSWALD. No. Simply as a passenger. He told me that even before that time he had gone also to shoot, but he had returned. I don't know why.

Because on the day that he did fire, there was a church across the street and there were many people there, and it was easier to merge in the crowd and not be noticed.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you ask him about this note that he had left, what he meant by it?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes--he said he had in mind that if in case he were arrested, I would know what to do.

Mr. RANKIN. The note doesn't say anything about Walker, does it?

Mrs. OSWALD. No.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you ask him if that is what he meant by the note?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, because as soon as he came home I showed him the note and asked him "What is the meaning of this?"

Mr. RANKIN. And that is when he gave you the explanation about the Walker shooting?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

I know that on a Sunday he took the rifle, but I don't think he fired on a Sunday. Perhaps this was on Friday. So Sunday he left and took the rifle.

Mr. RANKIN. If the Walker shooting was on Wednesday, does that refresh your memory as to the day of the week at all?

Mrs. OSWALD. Refresh my memory as to what?

Mr. RANKIN. As to the day of the shooting?

Mrs. OSWALD. It was in the middle of the week.

Mr. RANKIN. Did he give any further explanation of what had happened that evening?

Mrs. OSWALD. When he fired, he did not know whether he had hit Walker or not. He didn't take the bus from there. He ran several kilometers and then took the bus. And he turned on the radio and listened, but there were no reports.

The next day he bought a paper and there he read it was only chance that saved Walker's life. If he had not moved, he might have been killed.

Mr. RANKIN. Did he comment on that at all?

Mrs. OSWALD. He said only that he had taken very good aim, that it was just chance that caused him to miss. He was very sorry that he had not hit him.

I asked him to give me his word that he would not repeat anything like that. I said that this chance shows that he must live and that he should not be shot at again. I told him that I would save the note and that if something like that

should be repeated again, I would go to the police and I would have the proof in the form of that note.

He said he would not repeat anything like that again.

By the way, several days after that, the De Mohrenschildts came to us, and as soon as he opened the door he said, "Lee, how is it possible that you missed?"

I looked at Lee. I thought that he had told De Mohrenschildt about it. And Lee looked at me, and he apparently thought that I had told De Mohrenschildt about it. It was kind of dark. But I noticed---it was in the evening, but I noticed that his face changed, that he almost became speechless.

You see, other people knew my husband better than I did. Not always--but in this case.

Mr. RANKIN. Was De Mohrenschildt a friend that he told---your husband told him personal things that you knew of?

Mrs. OSWALD. He asked Lee not because Lee had told him about it, but I think because he is smart enough man to have been able to guess it. I don't know---he is simply a liberal, simply a man. I don't think that he is being accused justly of being a Communist.

Mr. RANKIN. That is De Mohrenschildt that you refer to?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you tell the authorities anything about this Walker incident when you learned about it?

Mrs. OSWALD. No.

Mr. RANKIN. You have told the Secret Service or the FBI people reasons why you didn't. Will you tell us?

Mrs. OSWALD. Why I did not tell about it?

First, because it was my husband. As far as I know, according to the local laws here, a wife cannot be a witness against her husband. But, of course, if I had known that Lee intended to repeat something like that, I would have told.

Mr. RANKIN. Did he ask you to return the note to him?

Mrs. OSWALD. He forgot about it. But apparently after that he thought that what he had written in his book might be proof against him, and he destroyed it.

Mr. RANKIN. That is this book that you have just referred to in which he had the Walker house picture?

Mrs. OSWALD. There was a notebook, yes, that is the one.

Mr. RANKIN. What did you do with the note that he had left for you after you talked about it and said you were going to keep it?

Mrs. OSWALD. I had it among my things in a cookbook. But I have two--I don't remember in which.

Mr. RANKIN. Did your relations with your husband change after this Walker incident?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. Will you describe to us the changes as you observed them?

Mrs. OSWALD. Soon after that, Lee lost his job---I don't know for what reason. He was upset by it. And he looked for work for several days. And then I insisted that it would be better for him to go to New Orleans where he had relatives. I insisted on that because I wanted to get him further removed from Dallas and from Walker, because even though he gave me his word, I wanted to have him further away, because a rifle for him was not a very good toy---a toy that was too enticing.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you say that you wanted him to go to New Orleans because of the Walker incident?

Mrs. OSWALD. No. I simply told him that I wanted to see his home town. He had been born there.

Mr. RANKIN. When he promised you that he would not do anything like that again, did you then believe him?

Mrs. OSWALD. I did not quite believe him inasmuch as the rifle remained in the house.

Paul, I would take everything the "Russian's" said with a HUGE grain of salt.

As far as Marina speaking English, read the Neely Street thread where it has been demonstrated that she could understand and converse in English.

Ed

Edited December 20, 2011 by Ed LeDoux

[Greg Parker]

I find Marina's testimony believable (all of it, actually; I would like to see hard proof if I'm mistaken about this.) DeMohrenschildt's testimony confirms Marina's testimony. I feel I am on solid ground as I build my theory on this starting point.

Tragically Paul, this could be the longest thread here if everyone gives just one example...

I'll get the ball rolling...

From Marina's HSCA testimony....

Mrs Porter: We had a short wave radio, I believe that is what you call, when you can listen to the foreign stations.

http://www.maryferre...absPageId=38623

From FBI 62-109060 JFK HQ File, Section 101

An examination of the radio and power supply was made by SA Winton P Walter, Electronics... the dial of the radio is marked "DB" (long wave) and "CB" (medium wave)... the radio will not receive short-wave radio broadcasts...

http://www.maryferre...88&relPageId=15

Thanks for the response, Greg. Yet the example you shared might be considered a mistake, rather than a deliberate lie.

It is possible for somebody who is trained in chemistry (as Marina Porter was) to be ignorant about electronics. The differences between short-wave, medium-wave and long-wave radio are not known to everybody. I myself wouldn't count that as a lie.

Best regards...

Paul,

I understand if you don't respond as it's evident that you've got quite a queue lined up, but the fact is that Marina said it was the type of radio needed to pick up foreign stations, and correctly identified that type of radio as "short wave".

In answer to an inquiry in 1966, the FBI stated that "the radio would tune through and slightly beyond the broadcast band as used on common household radios in the United States. The radio will not receive short wave broadcasts; however, there is no reason to believe this radio would not be capable of receiving stations in Cuba, particularly at night, when located in the southern United States." On the basis of this statement, I doubt it would pick up foreign broadcasts from Minsk. Apart from that, I'd be extremely surprised if radios capable of picking up foreign broadcasts (whether short wave or not) would be available to the average USSR citizen.

Given all this, I cannot grant it was a simple mistake by Marina.

That the radio may have been able pick up Cuba from New Orleans at night is also of little consequence since this same report also states that the radio was not in working condition and no attempt was made to repair it as this would have "changed the physical condition from that in which it was received". In other words, it was not in working condition as at Nov 22, 1963 - and given the description here, as well that given in the original inventory of evidence - it had been a while since it had been in working order.

Edited December 20, 2011 by Greg Parker

[Greg Parker]

On the issue of Webster - I'm still skeptical - let's not read into his claims more than he claims. Marina could speak English? Does that mean she could say, 'hello, thank you, please and excuse me?' Does it mean considerably more? What evidence do we have beyond Webster's claims? Did Marina take English courses while in college? We have those records. Marina was no dummy - she was a chemistry graduate. But even chemistry graduates do not automatically master English. This should not be difficult to disprove.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Hi Paul

Marguerite Oswald really tried to impress upon the Commission that Marina could speak English and that she had many conversations with her in English.

James Martin (who was sleeping with her a few weeks after she buried her husband) stated she could understand everything he said in English.

Robert Oswald stated Marina had conversations with him in English - one about a James Martin business contract.

Robert Webster stated he met Marina and she could speak English (in a heavy accent - much like she still speaks to this very day)

She herself claimed that she called the Reily Coffee Company one day when she was looking for Lee - which would have been tough only being able to say "Hello, how are you?"

The buidling manager at the Elsbeth apartments, M. F. Tobias Snr., said that Marina's English was enough to understand and be understood ( Lost in Translation thread - http://educationforu...opic=17690&st=0 )

Minnie Williams (who lived with the Grays at the Neely Street property) claimed to have English conversations with Marina.

She could probably also write in English: http://www.aarclibra...WH16_CE_110.pdf

George Bouhe said he was "teaching" her English by sending her things through the post to "translate"

I think we can safely assume that Marina spoke good English, Paul - and that being the case, why do you think she continually lied about it? Sitting in front of the Warren Commission with a couple of interpreters when you can actually understand everything that is being asked of you is something of a major porky, don't you think?

The fact that she could speak English before she stepped foot on U.S. soil opens up a hornets nest.

Finally on Webster - skepticism is great, there are many members here who have been served well by it - however, it isn't just a case of Webster claiming he met her (according to Dick Russell who interviewed him) but the fact that the apartment complex in Leningrad where Webster lived was listed in Marina's address book. I know you believe in coincidences but you're going to need an extra-wide neck to swallow that one.

One of the other women who Webster was involved with in the USSR, Vera Ivchenko, was widely suspected as a KGB agent and the ramifications of this scared the HSCA so much that it decided not to name her. They instead called her "Robert Webster's girlfriend."

Regards

Lee

P.S. I think a lot of the other stuff you have written about deMohrenschildt/Bouhe/Walker suffers from evidence omissions and glosses over certain things quite superficially. I'd like to respond to the rest tomorrow if I have a chance.

And I'd like to know how a Walker/Ferrie/Martin revenge plot factors in the CIA/Mexico City shenanigans, the removal of Oswald's FBI FLASH and the segregation of his 201 file.

Lee,

From a post I made back in Oct 2004 when trying to figure out more about Lawrence Orlov... "...But when you add that the above-mentioned Alexander Orlov was working at the University of Michigan at the same time Marina took an eight week course at the English Language Institute at UM, the flag pole needs to be extended."

And the following year, Joan Mellen's book had this to say about it, "Garrison did not raise Marina's having attended the English Language Institute at the University of Michigan, a hotbed of Soviet defectors and CIA assets, although he was aware that she had. He did not ask her if she knew former KGB officer, Alexander Orlov, resident there, placed by the CIA to be debriefed on what he knew about Soviet espionage..."

Given Marina's very likely ability to speak and comprehend English far better than she ever let on, what do we make of the above?

[Paul Trejo]

Marina showed the rifle to Jeanne De Mohrenschildt in the "closet" so which is it, did Lee bury it or was it in the closet, the closet where Lee kept it in the open...?

<long segment of Marina's WC testimony>

Paul, I would take everything the "Russian's" said with a HUGE grain of salt.

As far as Marina speaking English, read the Neely Street thread where it has been demonstrated that she could understand and converse in English.

Ed

Thanks for the response, Ed. Your concern appears to be the apparent contradictions in Marina Oswald’s story. Was the rifle hidden or out in the open? Was it buried, or was it in her closet. The evidence suggests to me that, depending on the day, and on the circumstances, it could either be hidden, out in the open, or buried. Did the interrogator seek to clarify these circumstances, or was he rushing forward toward the conclusions that Hoover wanted to hear?

I appreciate that you supplied a large segment of Marina's testimony to the Warren Commission. So let’s take some of these apparent contradictions one at a time, please:

1.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall the first time that you observed the rifle?

Mrs. OSWALD. That was on Neely Street. I think that was in February.

Mr. RANKIN. How did you learn about it? Did you see it some place in the apartment?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, Lee had a small room where he spent a great deal of time, where he read---where he kept his things, and that is where the rifle was.

Mr. RANKIN. Was it out in the room at that time, as distinguished from in a closet in the room?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, it was open, out in the open...

>>> So, early in February, 1963, she saw a rifle in Lee’s private room, “out in the open”. I have no problem with Marina’s testimony so far.

2.

Mr. RANKIN. Was the rifle later placed in a closet in the apartment at Neely Street?

Mrs. OSWALD. No, it was always either in a corner, standing up in a corner or on a shelf.

>>> Here the interrogator did not clarify the generic term, ‘later’. In the present context, he might easily have meant ‘in those weeks before the Walker trouble.’ I take it that Marina heard that sloppy question in the context of a pre-trouble weeks. So her answer was truthful: ‘before there was any trouble, Lee kept his rifle in his private room, out in the open.’

3.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever show that rifle to the De Mohrenschildts?

Mrs. OSWALD. I know that De Mohrenschildts had said that the rifle had been shown to him, but I don't remember that.

>>> Here the interrogator did not clarify the term, ‘show’. He probably meant, ‘did you ever ‘accidentally show’ the rifle to the De Mohrenschildts?’ But in the present context, he might easily have meant ‘deliberately show it off’. I take it that Marina heard that sloppy question in the context of ‘showing it off,’ so she truthfully denied it. (Her trouble wasn’t with the truth, it was with the English language – but Rankin was insensitive to that. Marina didn’t know if George and Jeanne had told the FBI that she showed it off or not – but she didn’t want to contradict them – and all this confusion in her mind was due to her poor grasp of colloquial English.)

4.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall your husband taking the rifle away from the apartment on Neely Street at any time?

Mrs. OSWALD. You must know that the rifle it isn't as if it was out in the open. He would hang a coat or something to mask its presence in the room. And sometimes when he walked out, when he went out in the evening I didn't know, because I didn't go into that room very often. I don't know whether he took it with him or not.

>>> Here the interrogator changes the topic, and Marina is still pondering the previous question. Her mind was often stuck on the Easter night visit of the De Mohrenschildts, so she said, ‘It isn’t as if the rifle was out in the open.’ Now she is speaking about the post-Walker-shooting, the trouble times. The rifle was buried on April 10th. At some point Lee dug it up and brought it home, said Marina. And now, at this point, it would be absurd to leave it out in the open. Now there was truly something to be ashamed about. So either Lee or Marina or both hid it in the closet. After getting that off her chest, she then answered Rankin’s question – truthfully. She didn’t keep tabs on Lee – presumably because he might beat her for that.

5.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever see him clean the rifle?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. I said before I had never seen it before. But I think you understand. I want to help you, and that is why there is no reason for concealing anything. I will not be charged with anything.

Mr. GOPADZE. She says she was not sworn in before. But now inasmuch as she is sworn in, she is going to tell the truth.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you see him clean the rifle a number of times?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

>>> Here the interrogator changes the topic, and Marina is still pondering whether Rankin is interested in everything she is trying to tell him. Marina knows that she contradicted her original statement to the FBI that she knew utterly nothing at all – because now she’s admitting that she knew a lot about the rifle, and about the Walker shooting. She is still worried that she will be charged with lying to the FBI immediately after the JFK assassination; but her attorney is with her and advises everybody concerned that she was not under oath at that time. Marina calms down and answers the original question.

6.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever observe your husband taking the rifle away from the apartment on Neely Street?

Mrs. OSWALD. Now, I think that he probably did sometimes, but I never did see it. You must understand that sometimes I would be in the kitchen and he would be in his room downstairs and he would say bye-bye, I will be back soon, and he may have taken it. He probably did. Perhaps he purely waited for an occasion when he could take it away without my seeing it.

>>> This is believable to me. They lived upstairs and there was a tool shed downstairs, and sometimes Lee would go there for privacy. That came out in the WC testimony. Lee did not share all of his comings and goings with Marina. He was very possessive, jealous, patriarchal, and yet was not successful; he compensated with excessive bossiness, and in Dallas, even with violence toward Marina. It is believable to me that he would sneak his rifle downstairs and then out of the house without her noticing it.

7.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you learn at any time that he had been practicing with the rifle?

Mrs. OSWALD. I think that he went once or twice. I didn't actually see him take the rifle, but I knew that he was practicing.

Mr. RANKIN. Could you give us a little help on how you knew?

Mrs. OSWALD. He told me. And he would mention that in passing---it isn't as if he said, "Well, today I am going"---it wasn't as if he said, "Well, today I am going to take the rifle and go and practice." But he would say, "Well, today I will take the rifle along for practice."

>>> Here, again, the English language is Marina’s barrier. She’s trying to indicate a nuance of degree, but without expertise in English it falls flat. We see this many times with ESL speakers. This is clear because of the double starts in her response. She meant to say that Oswald didn’t give her explicit signals, but he gave her implicit signals. It is still believable testimony to me.

8.

Mrs. Oswald. Therefore, I don't know whether he took it from the house or whether perhaps he even kept the rifle somewhere outside. There was a little square, sort of a little courtyard where he might have kept it. When you asked me about the rifle, I said that Lee didn't have a rifle, but he also had a gun, a revolver.

>>> Again, it is the English language that compromises her sentence. She omitted the word, “only” as in, “Lee didn’t only have a rifle.” This is also common with ESL speakers.

9.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall when he first had the pistol that you remember?

Mrs. OSWALD. He had that on Neely Street, but I think that he acquired the rifle before he acquired the pistol. The pistol I saw twice, once in his room, and the second time when I took these photographs.

>>> I find this believable.

10.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you make any objection to having the rifle around?

Mrs. OSWALD. Of course.

Mr. RANKIN. What did he say to that?

Mrs. OSWALD. That for a man to have a rifle since I am a woman, I don't understand him, and I shouldn't bother him. A fine life.

Mr. RANKIN. Is that the same rifle that you are referring to that you took the picture of with your husband and when he had the pistol, too?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. I asked him then why he had dressed himself up like that, with the rifle and the pistol, and I thought that he had gone crazy, and he said he wanted to send that to a newspaper. This was not my business--it was man's business.

>>> Marina answers the question, but then she adds more, apparently worried that she will be implicated in the Walker shooting. She knew about it, and she should have told the police, but didn’t, so to some degree she was guilty. (So were George and Jeanne De Mohrenschildt, for that matter.) Her rambling about how crazy Lee with this rifle, saying it was none of her business – this is believable testimony.

11.

Mr. RANKIN. You have examined that picture since, and noticed that the telescopic lens was on at the time the picture was taken, have you not?

Mrs. OSWALD. Now I paid attention to it. A specialist would see it immediately, of course. But at that time I did not pay any attention at all. I saw just Lee. These details are of great significance for everybody, but for me at that time it didn't mean anything. At the time that I was questioned, I had even forgotten that I had taken two photographs. I thought there was only one. I thought that there were two identical pictures, but they turned out to be two different poses.

>>> Marina’s answer is plausible for somebody who is not used to taking photographs. But I find it believable for another reason. Photographic experts have proven scientifically that the two photographs we have of Oswald posing with those weapons were both modified by experts. First of all, the same head is superimposed on two separate bodies, but tilted slightly. So, it is actually likely that Marina took only one photograph as she thought. (It is also possible, even plausible to me, that Lee Oswald himself, while he was at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall actually made those fakes, so that he could later claim – and prove – that they were fakes in case they fell into the wrong hands. I think it is also plausible that Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall fired Oswald when they found out what he was doing, i.e. these photos and his fake ID for Alek Hidell.)

12.

Mr. RANKIN. Did he say any more than that about the shooting?

Mrs. OSWALD. Of course in the morning I told him that I was worried, and that we can have a lot of trouble, and I asked him, "Where is the rifle? What did you do with it?" He said, that he had left it somewhere, that he had buried it, it seems to me, somewhere far from that place, because he said dogs could find it by smell...

>>> I find Marina’s testimony here to be easily believable. Oswald said he buried his rifle rather than bring it home, just in case he was followed by police; simple to understand.

13.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you ask him how long he had been planning to do this?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. He said he had been planning for two months. Yes--perhaps he had planned to do so even earlier, but according to his conduct I could tell he was planning--he had been planning this for two months or perhaps a little even earlier.

>>> This testimony sounds believable to me. He evidently bought his weapons in February, soon after various New Years parties with Dallas Russian Exiles (as I call them), in which Volkmar Schmidt attended and tried to convince Oswald that General Walker was pure evil.

14. Mr. RANKIN. Did he show you a picture of the Walker house then…after the shooting?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. He had a book – he had a notebook in which he noted down quite a few details. It was all in English, I didn't read it. But I noticed the photograph. Sometimes he would lock himself in his room and write in the book. I thought that he was writing some other kind of memoirs, as he had written about his life in the Soviet Union.

>>> This testimony sounds believable to me. Intent on impressing George De Mohrenschildt and Volkmar Schmidt – two of the few men Oswald actually admired – he would carefully plan each move – methodically and even scientifically. He would not share this with Marina for many reasons.

15. Mr. RANKIN. Did you ask him if that is what he meant by the note?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, because as soon as he came home I showed him the note and asked him "What is the meaning of this?"

Mr. RANKIN. And that is when he gave you the explanation about the Walker shooting?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. I know that on a Sunday he took the rifle, but I don't think he fired on a Sunday. Perhaps this was on Friday. So Sunday he left and took the rifle.

>>> Marina is hiding something here, because she changed the subject, and she makes no sense. She was not asked about the day of the shooting, but that is the question she is answering - but at the same time trying to evade. Again - her memory flitters when thinking of this day because it is "three days later" that sticks more firmly in her mind - Easter Sunday - when the De Mohrenschildt's discover the rifle in the Oswald home - and so also discover the shame of Marina, that she was an accessory-after-the-fact in a shooting that is all over the Dallas newspapers, radio and television news. She is still not convinced that she will escape prosecution for this, because she condemns it herself. However, the interrogator does not care about this - he seems to notice it and quickly asks the question she is trying to answer so that they can move onward toward the conclusions that Hoover wants to hear.

16. Mr. RANKIN. If the Walker shooting was on Wednesday, does that refresh your memory as to the day of the week at all?

Mrs. OSWALD. Refresh my memory as to what?

Mr. RANKIN. As to the day of the shooting?

Mrs. OSWALD. It was in the middle of the week.

...By the way, several days after that, the De Mohrenschildts came to us, and as soon as he opened the door he said, "Lee, how is it possible that you missed?" I looked at Lee. I thought that he had told De Mohrenschildt about it. And Lee looked at me, and he apparently thought that I had told De Mohrenschildt about it. It was kind of dark. But I noticed---it was in the evening, but I noticed that his face changed, that he almost became speechless. You see, other people knew my husband better than I did. Not always--but in this case.

>>> Here Marina comes back down to earth and remembers the day: Wed10Apr63. As for the 'how did you miss' remark, I would note that later Marina modified her testimony to agree with George De Mohrenschildt’s testimony. I don’t see dishonesty here – I regard this as an English language barrier combined with emotional confusion. Marina continually sought to evade guilt for any role she might have played in the Walker shooting, e.g. accessory-after-the-fact. She kept bringing this up even when Rankin didn’t ask her about it. George De Mohrenschildt’s main objection was that it was not on the doorstep, but inside the house, after Jeanne had found the rifle and announced it, that he made a similar remark – entirely as a joke. Marina later admitted it was a joke – but it spooked her and Lee because his guess was 100% correct. So that was confusing to her.

>>> (BTW, I also believe George De Mohrenschildt’s testimony – aside from the fact that it was incomplete. For the HSCA he added important details, e.g. that he and Jeanne were worried that Lee was the shooter for days after the Walker shooting. They needed a pretext to go and search the Oswald house. This fear shows up clearly in Jeanne’s testimony, which is the clumsiest of the lot. She was either trying to hide the fact that she and George were accessories-after-the-fact because they didn’t tell the police, or that they were innocent because they actually told the CIA, but had to keep that top secret.)

17. Mr. RANKIN. What did you do with the note that he had left for you after you talked about it and said you were going to keep it?

Mrs. OSWALD. I had it among my things in a cookbook. But I have two--I don't remember in which.

>>> I find this believable. Such a note is not something that you put in a scrap-book. Nor was their life a settled affair, but Marina moved many, many times in 1963. She had this note and she had the note from Oswald to the Russian Embassy – both bargaining chips.

18. Mr. RANKIN. Will you describe to us the changes as you observed them?

Mrs. OSWALD. Soon after that, Lee lost his job---I don't know for what reason.

>>> This is important for my theory – Marina still believed that Oswald lost his job at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall after the Walker shooting, when in fact he lost that job ten days before the shooting. She was lied to continuously. In the USA she rarely knew where Lee Oswald was.

19. Mr. RANKIN. When he promised you that he would not do anything like that again, did you then believe him?

Mrs. OSWALD. I did not quite believe him inasmuch as the rifle remained in the house.

>>> Completely believable; I don’t see why anybody would doubt this.

Best regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited December 21, 2011 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

P.S. I think a lot of the other stuff you have written about deMohrenschildt/Bouhe/Walker suffers from evidence omissions and glosses over certain things quite superficially. I'd like to respond to the rest tomorrow if I have a chance.

And I'd like to know how a Walker/Ferrie/Martin revenge plot factors in the CIA/Mexico City shenanigans, the removal of Oswald's FBI FLASH and the segregation of his 201 file.

Lee, I look forward to your responses. As for the CIA/Mexico connection, I find the memoirs of Harry Dean (a member of this Forum) to be most revealing. Dean says he personally saw General Walker in Mexico during this time-frame, speaking with radical, gun-toting members of the JBS, plotting the Dallas logisitics, and naming Oswald as their patsy. Mexico City was the 'smoke-filled room', according to Harry Dean.

All best,

--Paul

P.S. Correction: Dean says he saw Walker and the JBS in Southern California, at this time, as other members of the JBS were meeting with Oswald in Mexico.

Edited December 23, 2011 by Paul Trejo