How did Ruth Paine know the date the rifle shipped ?

[Greg Parker]

The calendar does indicate that she saw Marina on the 20th. Is it at all possible that the Oct 23 date has nothing to do with the rifle purchase - that it perhaps relates to Marina's "due date"? The baby was born after all, just 3 days prior to that.

One would think that a notation for a date that significant ( a baby due date ) would have remained in her memory. Also, Mrs. Paine makes no mention of a specific "due date" in her testimony, only that the baby was due in mid-October. ( 2 H 458 )

Mrs. Paine was pretty clear in her testimony as to what the date was about:

Mrs. PAINE. I heard on the television that he had purchased a rifle.

Mr. JENNER. When?

Mrs. PAINE. I heard it on November 23.

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mrs. PAINE. And went back to the page for March, put a little star on March 20 as being a small square, I couldn't fit in all I wanted to say. I just put in a star and then referring it to the corner of the calendar.

Mr. JENNER. That is to the entry I have read?

Mrs. PAINE. Put the star saying "LHO purchase of rifle." Then I thought someone is going to wonder about that, I had better put down the date, and did, but it was a busy day, one of the most in my life and I was off by a month as to what day it was.

Mr. JENNER. That is you made the entry October?

Mrs. PAINE. October 23 instead of November.

Mr. JENNER. It should have been November 23?

Mrs. PAINE. It should have been November 23.

( 9 H 458 )

Ruth Paine kept quite a diary on the Oswalds using her calendar. I find that odd. I also find it odd that a woman who kept such a meticulous record and corrected other mistakes on her calendar would have let this one slide by.

Some people might by her story. I don't.

Gil, I fully appreciate where you're coming from and what your concerns are - but no one yet has come up with any satisfactory explanation for the "Oct 23" entry. Like you - I certainly don't buy that she could be out by a month.

So... her WC explanation holds no water. Therefore an alternative explanation is needed for that date - casting vague suspicion about it is not all that helpful in solving what it means.

If we discard her WC testimony regarding this on the basis of "not buying it", and we have no valid alternative explanation, we are left with what she told the FBI prior to that - which was that she did not recall the significance of it. If that can be accepted, the calendar entries can be pieced together - the date makes sense linked to Marina - not to a rifle purchase.

I'm no apologist for Ruth Paine.

She is deeply involved with or without this being "sinister".

[Gil Jesus]

The calendar does indicate that she saw Marina on the 20th. Is it at all possible that the Oct 23 date has nothing to do with the rifle purchase - that it perhaps relates to Marina's "due date"? The baby was born after all, just 3 days prior to that.

One would think that a notation for a date that significant ( a baby due date ) would have remained in her memory. Also, Mrs. Paine makes no mention of a specific "due date" in her testimony, only that the baby was due in mid-October. ( 2 H 458 )

Mrs. Paine was pretty clear in her testimony as to what the date was about:

Mrs. PAINE. I heard on the television that he had purchased a rifle.

Mr. JENNER. When?

Mrs. PAINE. I heard it on November 23.

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mrs. PAINE. And went back to the page for March, put a little star on March 20 as being a small square, I couldn't fit in all I wanted to say. I just put in a star and then referring it to the corner of the calendar.

Mr. JENNER. That is to the entry I have read?

Mrs. PAINE. Put the star saying "LHO purchase of rifle." Then I thought someone is going to wonder about that, I had better put down the date, and did, but it was a busy day, one of the most in my life and I was off by a month as to what day it was.

Mr. JENNER. That is you made the entry October?

Mrs. PAINE. October 23 instead of November.

Mr. JENNER. It should have been November 23?

Mrs. PAINE. It should have been November 23.

( 9 H 458 )

Ruth Paine kept quite a diary on the Oswalds using her calendar. I find that odd. I also find it odd that a woman who kept such a meticulous record and corrected other mistakes on her calendar would have let this one slide by.

Some people might by her story. I don't.

Gil, I fully appreciate where you're coming from and what your concerns are - but no one yet has come up with any satisfactory explanation for the "Oct 23" entry. Like you - I certainly don't buy that she could be out by a month.

So... her WC explanation holds no water. Therefore an alternative explanation is needed for that date - casting vague suspicion about it is not all that helpful in solving what it means.

If we discard her WC testimony regarding this on the basis of "not buying it", and we have no valid alternative explanation, we are left with what she told the FBI prior to that - which was that she did not recall the significance of it. If that can be accepted, the calendar entries can be pieced together - the date makes sense linked to Marina - not to a rifle purchase.

I'm no apologist for Ruth Paine.

She is deeply involved with or without this being "sinister".

"Piecing together" and "making sense" of what Ruth Paine wrote is all speculative.

My argument is that IF Ruth Paine marked "Oct 23" with regard to "Marina's due date", why didn't she tell that to the WC ? Why instead did her testimony connect that to the purchase of the rifle ?

Her testimony clearly connects the notation "Oct 23" to the purchase of the rifle. She simply said that she got the month wrong, that it should have been November 23.

The testimony is there. There is no need for a "valid alternative explanation".

[John Dolva]

I think such faults should not be so readily discounted. " Then I thought someone is going to wonder about that, I had better put down the date, and did, but it was a busy day, one of the most in my life and I was off by a month as to what day it was.'' Busy with what? Particularly what was occupying her mind when she decided to write that entry. The matter of 'freudian slips'?

[Gil Jesus]

I think such faults should not be so readily discounted. " Then I thought someone is going to wonder about that, I had better put down the date, and did, but it was a busy day, one of the most in my life and I was off by a month as to what day it was.'' Busy with what? Particularly what was occupying her mind when she decided to write that entry. The matter of 'freudian slips'?

John, Ruth Paine was a woman with impeccible and meticulous attention to detail. She used her calendar as a diary of the lives of the Oswalds. HOW NORMAL IS THAT ? HOW MANY OF YOU FOLKS OUT THERE HAVE THE LIVES OF YOUR FRIENDS ON YOUR CALENDAR OR APPOINTMENTS BOOK ? --- ROFLMAO

Also, how can someone so precise in detail not find her "error" until February 11, 1964 ?

Her story is just incredible.

She was watching the Oswalds for somebody.

[Pamela Brown]

The calendar does indicate that she saw Marina on the 20th. Is it at all possible that the Oct 23 date has nothing to do with the rifle purchase - that it perhaps relates to Marina's "due date"? The baby was born after all, just 3 days prior to that.

One would think that a notation for a date that significant ( a baby due date ) would have remained in her memory. Also, Mrs. Paine makes no mention of a specific "due date" in her testimony, only that the baby was due in mid-October. ( 2 H 458 )

Mrs. Paine was pretty clear in her testimony as to what the date was about:

Mrs. PAINE. I heard on the television that he had purchased a rifle.

Mr. JENNER. When?

Mrs. PAINE. I heard it on November 23.

Mr. JENNER. Yes.

Mrs. PAINE. And went back to the page for March, put a little star on March 20 as being a small square, I couldn't fit in all I wanted to say. I just put in a star and then referring it to the corner of the calendar.

Mr. JENNER. That is to the entry I have read?

Mrs. PAINE. Put the star saying "LHO purchase of rifle." Then I thought someone is going to wonder about that, I had better put down the date, and did, but it was a busy day, one of the most in my life and I was off by a month as to what day it was.

Mr. JENNER. That is you made the entry October?

Mrs. PAINE. October 23 instead of November.

Mr. JENNER. It should have been November 23?

Mrs. PAINE. It should have been November 23.

( 9 H 458 )

Ruth Paine kept quite a diary on the Oswalds using her calendar. I find that odd. I also find it odd that a woman who kept such a meticulous record and corrected other mistakes on her calendar would have let this one slide by.

Some people might by her story. I don't.

Let's not beg the question that the Oswalds were not living with Ruth Paine when LHO bought the rifle.

[Thomas Graves]

Tom:

I think she is supposed to be saying that she backdated the calendar for the March date and made a mistake for the October one.

These are both hard to buy.

Jim,

That's exactly my point-- "They are both hard to buy." Also, why would LHO's supposed date of purchasing the rifle be important to her anyway???

--Thomas

Why would the date he purchased/ordered the rifle be so important to her that she would feel compelled put it on her calendar?

[John Navin]

The question is better framed "Why was it important for her handlers to make sure it appeared on her calendar?"

[Thomas Graves]

The question is better framed "Why was it important for her handlers to make sure it appeared on her calendar?"

That'll "work"!

--Thomas

[Greg Parker]

If there is a non-innocent explanation for the calendar entries, I believe Richard G's take on it may come closest.

http://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t112-ruth-paine-s-calendar

[John Dolva]

If there is a non-innocent explanation for the calendar entries, I believe Richard G's take on it may come closest.

http://reopenkennedy...aine-s-calendar

Good ole' Harry again...

[Greg Parker]

If there is a non-innocent explanation for the calendar entries, I believe Richard G's take on it may come closest.

http://reopenkennedy...aine-s-calendar

Good ole' Harry again...

Whatever sins Harry committed, he more than made up for by accurately recording Oswald's stated movements at and around the time of the assassination.

[John Dolva]

If there is a non-innocent explanation for the calendar entries, I believe Richard G's take on it may come closest.

http://reopenkennedy...aine-s-calendar

Good ole' Harry again...

Whatever sins Harry committed, he more than made up for by accurately recording Oswald's stated movements at and around the time of the assassination.

The basic thing (imo) about Harry is that he was a very sly guy. There's a kind of self important wannabe sociopath about him. That's just my opinion from years of pondering on him. He wove himself into so much but the clincher is the well known fact that any coup must have an independent communications channel. From my reading the USPO and particularly the confederate leftovers, which I suspect were not inconsiderable, it had everything and it did so much regarding so many matters about the assassination. And : it no longer exists.

edit add:some may seem confusing. some elaboration : Harry described himself as a ''trained suspicioner''. He mixed in words that to me bespeaks a certain arrogance. His testimony outranks just about all in number and volume. The matters he had a finger in is also voluminous. The overall deference to him which he seemed to thrive upon creates a kind of room of mirrors and smoke all by itself.

The mechanism of a successful conspiracy involves absolutely a means of communication. The one most used is perhaps because so prevalent in so many matters of transmission of data in all forms but principally telecommunication and postal services becomes invisible because it is everywhere and becomes invisible. (the history of the USPO (not the USPS) is a bit hard to gather but its formation and role and the split and reformation in the mid 1800's, and things like patronaged spread.) It's role with the CIA particularly re the PI dep, et.c. .

Then the reasons for it no longer existng...

Edited June 29, 2011 by John Dolva

[Thomas Graves]

If there is a non-innocent explanation for the calendar entries, I believe Richard G's take on it may come closest.

http://reopenkennedy...aine-s-calendar

Good ole' Harry again...

Whatever sins Harry committed, he more than made up for by accurately recording Oswald's stated movements at and around the time of the assassination.

The basic thing (imo) about Harry is that he was a very sly guy. There's a kind of self important wannabe sociopath about him. That's just my opinion from years of pondering on him. He wove himself into so much but the clincher is the well known fact that any coup must have an independent communications channel. From my reading the USPO and particularly the confederate leftovers, which I suspect were not inconsiderable, it had everything and it did so much regarding so many matters about the assassination. And : it no longer exists.

edit add:some may seem confusing. some elaboration : Harry described himself as a ''trained suspicioner''. He mixed in words that to me bespeaks a certain arrogance. His testimony outranks just about all in number and volume. The matters he had a finger in is also voluminous. The overall deference to him which he seemed to thrive upon creates a kind of room of mirrors and smoke all by itself.

The mechanism of a successful conspiracy involves absolutely a means of communication. The one most used is perhaps because so prevalent in so many matters of transmission of data in all forms but principally telecommunication and postal services becomes invisible because it is everywhere and becomes invisible. (the history of the USPO (not the USPS) is a bit hard to gather but its formation and role and the split and reformation in the mid 1800's, and things like patronaged spread.) It's role with the CIA particularly re the PI dep, et.c. .

Then the reasons for it no longer existng...

Can anyone tell me why it would be important or whatever (limited hangout? red herring? false flag? LOL?) for Ruthie to write down on her calendar, before OR after the assassination, when the rifle had been shipped to Oswald? What were her stated reasons for doing so? Do you think her reasons were plausible? Did it accomplish anything for the bad guys? Etc, etc...

--Thomas

[Greg Parker]

If there is a non-innocent explanation for the calendar entries, I believe Richard G's take on it may come closest.

http://reopenkennedy...aine-s-calendar

Good ole' Harry again...

Whatever sins Harry committed, he more than made up for by accurately recording Oswald's stated movements at and around the time of the assassination.

The basic thing (imo) about Harry is that he was a very sly guy. There's a kind of self important wannabe sociopath about him. That's just my opinion from years of pondering on him. He wove himself into so much but the clincher is the well known fact that any coup must have an independent communications channel. From my reading the USPO and particularly the confederate leftovers, which I suspect were not inconsiderable, it had everything and it did so much regarding so many matters about the assassination. And : it no longer exists.

edit add:some may seem confusing. some elaboration : Harry described himself as a ''trained suspicioner''. He mixed in words that to me bespeaks a certain arrogance. His testimony outranks just about all in number and volume. The matters he had a finger in is also voluminous. The overall deference to him which he seemed to thrive upon creates a kind of room of mirrors and smoke all by itself.

The mechanism of a successful conspiracy involves absolutely a means of communication. The one most used is perhaps because so prevalent in so many matters of transmission of data in all forms but principally telecommunication and postal services becomes invisible because it is everywhere and becomes invisible. (the history of the USPO (not the USPS) is a bit hard to gather but its formation and role and the split and reformation in the mid 1800's, and things like patronaged spread.) It's role with the CIA particularly re the PI dep, et.c. .

Then the reasons for it no longer existng...

Can anyone tell me why it would be important or whatever (limited hangout? red herring? false flag? LOL?) for Ruthie to write down on her calendar, before OR after the assassination, when the rifle had been shipped to Oswald? What were her stated reasons for doing so? Do you think her reasons were plausible? Did it accomplish anything for the bad guys? Etc, etc...

--Thomas

Thomas, I may have to hand in my Devil's Advocate crown. It seems to me now that the star is almost certainly associated with the "rifle purchase" note, not the "Oct 23" one. Were it the other other way around, then the likelihood is that the date should be associated with Marina.

What can be said about it is that it (the "Oct 23" date) was very likely written at a different time to the "rifle purchase" entry just as Ruth testified because it was written on a different angle. That does not mean we have to accept that it was a mistake which was supposed to read "Nov 23".

A poster at my forum has indicated he recalls that the 40" MC was not available until after June. If that is correct, then it supports the notion that the rifle was purchased on Oct 23 (and the note DOES say "purchased" not "shipped"). Why did she make the note? Why did she make any notes about the Oswalds? But here's some speculation...

Oct 23 was the date of the Walker US Day rally. What if the rifle was obtained that day for a real or fake attempt on Walker? Ruth making that note would certainly help implicate Oswald in such an attempt.

Taking that line of thought further... what if, for whatever reason... Oswald (or someone resembling Oswald) failed to make the attempt? What happens then? After Kennedy is assassinated, they have to backdate the purchase of the rifle in order to implicate Oswald for the previous "attempt" on Walker. One problem: The 40" purchased in Oct was not available in March, so they had to fake the order for a 36" and pretend he'd been sent the 40" instead.

Can anyone confirm whether the 40" was indeed available in March? If it wasn't available until June, why the hell does anyone still believe Oswald ordered a rifle at all?

Edited July 1, 2011 by Greg Parker

[Greg Burnham]

Great points, Greg!

Can anyone confirm whether the 40" was indeed available in March? If it wasn't available until available until June, why the hell does anyone still believe Oswald ordered a rifle at all?

Although many here doubt just about anything and everything that Hemming ever said about anything and everything--FWIW: Gerry told me that the specific gun alleged to have been ordered by Oswald could not have been ordered by ANYONE because none [of that type & size] were available at that time in the United States--specifically, none were available from Klein's. Incidentally, Klein's in Chicago is listed as a "former employer" by Hemming on his application for employment with the CIA.