Oswald Leaving TSBD?

[Bill Miller]

3 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Bill,

Once again -- and I apologize for repeating myself -- we cannot believe that "Oswald said he was on the second floor when Baker-Truly met him."   We have virtually no idea what Oswald actually said while he was in custody.

It is more likely, IMHO, that the Fritz-Holmes-Hosty-Bookhout-Sorrels TEAM claim that "Oswald said he was on the second floor," was forged from DPD affidavits from Officer Baker and Roy Truly, in an effort to make their Fake LHO dialog seem more realistic.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

It may be out of the question 53 years later, but I cannot imagine that there were not others who knew about Oswald being seen on the 2nd floor by Truly and Baker before ever leaving the TSBD that day.  It would sure put a black eye on the forged affidavits theory. My point being that Truly stuck up for Oswald when Baker had a gun on Lee, so at that point there would be no reason to be lying about what happened. So if word quickly got around to the other employees about this that afternoon, then I have no reason to think Truly or Baker lied about that meeting.

Edited February 5, 2017 by Bill Miller

[Paul Trejo]

23 hours ago, Bill Miller said:

It may be out of the question 53 years later, but I cannot imagine that there were not others who knew about Oswald being seen on the 2nd floor by Truly and Baker before ever leaving the TSBD that day.  It would sure put a black eye on the forged affidavits theory. My point being that Truly stuck up for Oswald when Baker had a gun on Lee, so at that point there would be no reason to be lying about what happened. So if word quickly got around to the other employees about this that afternoon, then I have no reason to think Truly or Baker lied about that meeting.

Bill,

It makes sense to me that nobody else knew about LHO being on the 2nd floor.  This "loner" behavior is consistent with his behavior in New Orleans working at the Reily Coffee Company.  

Because LHO was a wide reader, he rarely if ever found "birds of a feather" among the minimum-wage working class with whom he most often worked.  So, LHO did not make friends with them.  He wasn't unfriendly, usually, but he was stand-offish, and widely known as such.  

The workers with whom LHO worked at the TSBD were generally high-school dropouts.   Well, LHO was a high-school dropout, too, except that LHO was also an avid reader.  His cousin, Marilyn Murret, said that LHO "would read Encyclopedias the way other people would read novels."   (LHO got his high-school equivalence in the Marines.)

The evidence shows, also, that LHO taught himself Russian in 1959 by using Berlitz books and Russian newspapers while he was at the El Toro Marine base in Santa Barbara California (Delgado, Thornley, Donovan, Powers, Folsom, Donabedian).   So, LHO was unusually intelligent; and he was probably bitter that less talented people got educational privileges while despite his talents he was left to fend for himself.  

In any case, LHO did not mix well with his peers at minimum wage jobs.  He did not usually take lunch with them -- this is what the TSBD workers consistently testified.  When Harry Holmes said that LHO took "lunch with a Negro" on that day, I reckon he was hoping for a racist reaction.   This was Dallas in 1963, after all.  All the TSDB workers agreed that LHO ate lunch alone that day.

So -- I believe that LHO wanted to be alone, and actually was alone on the 2nd floor enjoying his Coke after his lonely lunch on 11/22/1963.

I also believe that Officer Baker and Superintendent Roy Truly both told the TRUTH to the Warren Commission, and they really met LHO on the 2nd floor of the TSBD on their way upstairs.

This means, again, that Harry Holmes was lying -- nothing less -- when he implied that LHO was on the 1st floor (and thus, as Michael says, the Prayer Man myth was born).

As for Roy Truly himself -- yes, he stuck up for LHO when Baker put a loaded pistol next to LHO's heart.   Roy Truly testified that he believed at that time -- and still believed during his WC testimony -- that the main JFK shots came from the Grassy Knoll.  

Yet Roy Truly could not deny the fact that the DPD cops had possession of LHO's personal rifle -- so he did give up LHO to the DPD cops on the basis that the other TSBD workers in his crew told Truly that the only person missing from their crew was LHO. 

(Some of LHO's work crew were loaded into a DPD car and taken to the station for questioning -- perhaps mainly because most of them were black, and some of them were seen hanging out the 5th floor window when JFK was shot.  This was the actual context of the claim that LHO was the "only one" missing from the TSBD; actually, LHO was the "only one" missing from his particular work crew.)

Roy Truly did his utmost to cooperate with the authorities, and he quickly obtained the known address of LHO -- which for the TSBD at that time was recorded as the address of Ruth Paine. 

In summary -- I agree with you Bill -- that neither Baker nor Truly had any motive to lie about meeting LHO on the 2nd floor of the TSBD.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited February 6, 2017 by Paul Trejo
typos

[Bill Miller]

1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said:

The evidence shows, also, that LHO taught himself Russian in 1959 by using Berlitz books and Russian newspapers while he was at the El Toro Marine base in Santa Barbara California (Delgado, Thornley, Donovan, Powers, Folsom, Donabedian).   So, LHO was unusually intelligent; and he was probably bitter that less talented people got educational privileges while despite his talents he was left to fend for himself.

I think Lee was getting paid over and above what the TSBD was giving him or else there would have been no need to not let others see his tax records. A lone nobody would have been an incentive to have made his tax records available .... for me there was more going on than what we were allowed to know.

[Alistair Briggs]

Just wanted to 'bridge a gap' (just for my own benefit really. lol)

2 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

It makes sense to me that nobody else knew about LHO being on the 2nd floor. 

*It makes sense to me that nobody else knew, before the time or at the time, about LHO being on the 2nd floor.

19 hours ago, Bill Miller said:

I cannot imagine that there were not others who knew about Oswald being seen on the 2nd floor by Truly and Baker before ever leaving the TSBD that day. 

*gap bridged.

(conclusion note to self: Before the encounter nobody knew Oswald was in the lunchroom but after the encounter word may have got round amongst (at least some of) the employees that Oswald had been seen in the lunchroom before he left)

[Paul Trejo]

4 hours ago, Bill Miller said:

I think Lee was getting paid over and above what the TSBD was giving him or else there would have been no need to not let others see his tax records. A lone nobody would have been an incentive to have made his tax records available .... for me there was more going on than what we were allowed to know.

BIll,

I agree to this extent.  The FBI carefully screened LHO in 1962, when he returned from the USSR.   FBI agent John Fain closed the files on LHO, because the FBI agents were satisfied that they could trust him.

At that point, it seems to me, LHO was offered a part-time stipend to be an informant for the FBI.  It was a tiny bit of money, but even Henry Wade, the Dallas DA, at one point claimed that he saw the paperwork proving that LHO had at one point in his life been an FBI informant.  I believe Wade on this point.

Now, in my reading, after FBI agent James Hosty re-opened the case file on LHO in early 1963, all such payments stopped cold.  Hosty was making the argument that LHO was a Communist Sympathizer, and that perhaps Marina Oswald was a "sleeper agent" of the KGB.

So, LHO wouldn't have been an FBI informant in 1963.

So -- it seems to me that there would be on LHO's tax forms the fact that LHO was a part-time informant for the FBI in 1962 -- and that would have totally embarrassed the FBI and J. Edgar Hoover.  

All the facts about this should come out in October, 2017, when the JFK Records Act releases all concealed records about the JFK assassination.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited February 6, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

3 hours ago, Alistair Briggs said:

Just wanted to 'bridge a gap' (just for my own benefit really. lol)

*It makes sense to me that nobody else knew, before the time or at the time, about LHO being on the 2nd floor.

*gap bridged.

(conclusion note to self: Before the encounter nobody knew Oswald was in the lunchroom but after the encounter word may have got round amongst (at least some of) the employees that Oswald had been seen in the lunchroom before he left)

Alistair,

Well, you're right.   My point was that nobody else at the time knew that LHO was in the 2nd floor lunchroom. 

However, after the Baker-Truly confrontation of LHO at about 12:32 PM, it is likely that Roy Truly told a lot of TSBD employees, DPD cops, DPD officials, FBI agents, SS agents and so on.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited February 5, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Bill Miller]

1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said:

So -- it seems to me that there would be on LHO's tax forms the fact that LHO was a part-time informant for the FBI in 1962 -- and that would have totally embarrassed the FBI and J. Edgar Hoover.  

All the facts about this should come out in October, 2017, when the JFK Records Act releases all concealed records about the JFK assassination.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Yet Jim Garrison could not get Oswald's Tax Records due to National Security

[Paul Trejo]

2 hours ago, Bill Miller said:

Yet Jim Garrison could not get Oswald's Tax Records due to National Security

Bill,

Correct.  Not only Jim Garrison in 1967, but also the entire US Congress in 1977, through the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) failed to get Oswald's Tax Records.

This was because, IMHO, the White House in 1964, at the advice of Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren, had refused to send thousands of records about the JFK assassination to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), and suggested that they would be "preserved" and "released" in 75 years.   J. Edgar Hoover agreed -- Allen Dulles agreed -- and LBJ agreed.  So there was a Presidential ban on those records.   The usual reckoned date for their release was the year 2039.

However, in 1992, President GHW Bush signed the JFK Records Act, moving that date upward to 25 years after the signing of the Act -- which would make the new release year, 2017.  Also, the exact date that President Bush signed this Act was October 26, 1992.  So, on precisely Thursday 26 October 2017, the JFK Records Act comes to full maturity.

I am one of those optimists who believes that because of this Presidential Act, that the JFK records will finally be released; including Oswald's Tax Records.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited February 6, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Michael Clark]

12 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Bill,

Correct.  Not only Jim Garrison in 1967, but also the entire US Congress in 1977, through the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) failed to get Oswald's Tax Records.

..........................................

I am one of those optimists who believes that because of this Presidential Act, that the JFK records will finally be released; including Oswald's Tax Records.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul, Do you know if the pending records release includes WC documents?

Edited February 6, 2017 by Michael Clark

[Paul Trejo]

9 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

Paul, Do you know if the pending records release includes WC documents?

Michael,

To the very best of my knowledge, the pending records release includes each and every document still withheld -- including WC documents, FBI documents, CIA documents and Dallas local documents.

If the US Government doesn't release them all, as I read the JFK Records Act, they must give a public explanation for their continued withholding.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited February 6, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Michael Clark]

1 minute ago, Paul Trejo said:

Michael,

To the very best of my knowledge, the pending records release includes each and every document still withheld -- including WC documents, FBI documents, CIA documents and Dallas local documents.

If the US Government doesn't release them all, as I read the JFK Records Act, they must give a good explanation for their continued withholding.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Thank you!

[Bill Miller]

2 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

I am one of those optimists who believes that because of this Presidential Act, that the JFK records will finally be released; including Oswald's Tax Records.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

They will be released with every line that you would want to read being all blacked out.   

[Alistair Briggs]

7 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Well, you're right.   My point was that nobody else at the time knew that LHO was in the 2nd floor lunchroom. 

However, after the Baker-Truly confrontation of LHO at about 12:32 PM, it is likely that Roy Truly told a lot of TSBD employees, DPD cops, DPD officials, FBI agents, SS agents and so on.

I'm not sure if Truly was jumping around telling everyone he encountered. lol Maybe he was such a 'chatterbox' that is exactly what he did. lol I do think word would have got around though, at least to the extent that some people would have heard the story. (We seem to be in agreement) Whoever actually heard about it or not, I think it's safe to say that it wasn't unknown.   And as Bill mentions earlier, that speaks to Baker and Truly being truthful about the meeting.

Anyroads,

11 hours ago, Bill Miller said:

I think Lee was getting paid over and above what the TSBD was giving him or else there would have been no need to not let others see his tax records. A lone nobody would have been an incentive to have made his tax records available .... for me there was more going on than what we were allowed to know.

&

7 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

So -- it seems to me that there would be on LHO's tax forms the fact that LHO was a part-time informant for the FBI in 1962 -- and that would have totally embarrassed the FBI and J. Edgar Hoover. 

The thing about his tax record that I don't quite understand is, if Oswald was being paid as an informant (by whoever) would that have been declared on his tax records? Seems to me that it wouldn't be declared - it would be kept off the records. Perhaps it would have been declared. It does make sense as to why his tax records haven't been released. Whatever the reason, I reckon it was for something that was happening before he started work at the TSBD (for example, what Paul says about being a 'part-time informant for the FBI in 1962'.

Hopefully Oswald's tax records will be released in October this year - (I have a gut feeling that whatever it does show it might not have much to do with the assassination directly, but something indirectly - the reason it was 'locked away' had something to do with what Paul said about being an 'embarrassment' (to someone, somewhere, sometime)... idk)

On the subject of the records being released in October...

7 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

All the facts about this should come out in October, 2017, when the JFK Records Act releases all concealed records about the JFK assassination.

Alas it doesn't look like ALL concealed records will be released, as this passage from Wikipedia attests:

Quote

All remaining assassination-related records (approximately 5,000 pages) are scheduled to be released by October 2017, with the exception of documents certified for continued postponement by the President under the following conditions: (1) "continued postponement is made necessary by an identifiable harm to the military, defense, intelligence operations, law enforcement, or conduct of foreign relations" and (2) "the identifiable harm is of such gravity that it outweighs the public interest in disclosure."

However, it has to be noted, that the Assassination Records Review Board have read ALL the documents and have stated that the ones that won't be released (under the two above exceptions) don't impact the facts of the JFK assassination.

Quote

There is some concern among researchers that significant records, particularly those of the CIA, may still remain classified after 2017.Although these documents may include interesting historical information, all of the records were examined by the Review Board and were not determined to impact the facts of the Kennedy assassination

Regards

[Sandy Larsen]

42 minutes ago, Alistair Briggs said:

 

Quote

There is some concern among researchers that significant records, particularly those of the CIA, may still remain classified after 2017.Although these documents may include interesting historical information, all of the records were examined by the Review Board and were not determined to impact the facts of the Kennedy assassination

 

 

That is what Bugliosi said.

So according to what Bugliosi said, the Review Board did not determine that the unreleased documents impact the facts of the Kennedy Assassination.

That's a meaningless statement. Since when do documents affect the facts of something? And even if they could, the Review Board did not determine that they did, according to Bugliosi. I imagine that the Review Board did not determine that they didn't, either.

Can somebody explain this to me? Am I reading it wrong?

[Alistair Briggs]

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Can somebody explain this to me?

Probably not I. lol

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Am I reading it wrong?

Yes and no, but mostly no. It's just when you put it in to your own words you made a slight nuanced big change to it (unintentionally of course)...

The statement in question read: " all of the records were examined by the Review Board and were not determined to impact the facts of the Kennedy assassination "

When you restated it as:

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

...the Review Board did not determine that the unreleased documents impact the facts of the Kennedy Assassination.

The (big) change is you have the Review Board did not determine something, when it is the  Review Board's examination of the records that determined the records did not impact the facts. The Review Board did determine something, they determined that the unreleased documents did not impact the facts of the Kennedy assassination.

Move the 'did not' to before 'impact the fact';

Quote

... the Review Board determined that the unreleased documents did not impact the facts of the Kennedy Assassination.

That is the meaning of the original statement!

if you want, change 'determined' to 'found' to maybe make it easier to spot.

Quote

...the Review Board found that the unreleased documents did not impact the facts of the Kennedy Assassination.

doing the same with the original statement for simplicity:
(NB: 'records' = unreleased documents)

Quote

all of the records were examined by the Review Board and were not found to impact the facts of the Kennedy assassination

Let's try to rephrase that for simplicity without changing the meaning.

Quote

When examined by the Review Board, all of the records were not found to impact the facts of the Kennedy assassination.

I really hope that 'clears it up'.

(P.S. Sandy just in case you raise an objection about my changing (for simplicity) the word 'determined' to 'found', keep in mind you changed the word 'impact' to 'affect'. lol Changing words to help with clarification can be a good way to do it - if done correctly, of course. )

Anyway,

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

That's a meaningless statement.

The statement only became 'meaningless' (that is to say, lost it's original meaning) after you (unintentionally) changed the meaning of it.

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Since when do documents affect the facts of something?

* although 'affect' and 'impact' are synonyms of each other there could be a nuanced difference.

On the face of it a reasonable question to ask. However it has to be noted that we are talking about as yet unreleased documents and how they may or may not affect/impact on the currently known 'facts'. it's a moot point (until the unreleased documents are released)... but yes unreleased documents could affect the known 'facts' of something, that should be axiomatic.

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

... the Review Board did not determine that they did,

The Review Board did determine that the unreleased documents did not impact on the facts of the Kennedy assassination!

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I imagine that the Review Board did not determine that they didn't, either.

The Review Board did determine that the unreleased documents did not impact on the facts of the Kennedy assassination!

(Of course, the Review Board could be wrong with their determination - that is to say, the unreleased documents, when released, may have an impact on the known  'facts' of the Kennedy assassination. We won't find out for sure until they are released. In the meantime all we have to go on is that the Review Board have stated that the unreleased documents do not impact on the facts of the Kennedy assassination).

*Reading between the lines, and trying to speculate as to what the documents released in October will contain; if they don't have an impact on the facts of the Kennedy assassination, thats not to say they have no impact on the case as a whole, it's just that they don't have an impact on the known 'facts' of the Kennedy assassination. I'm very much looking forward to seeing what they contain (as I'm sure you all are too ). I have a gut feeling that it will be the proverbial 'much ado about nothing' and won't actually help 'solve' anything either way... and if that is the case, then it moves the spotlight straight on to the records that are still held back under the two exceptions previously noted.