Judyth Vary Baker to be on Coasttocoastam tomorrow night

[David G. Healy]

I think the main things that concern many parties - LN and CT alike - are that her claims are mixing into the good evidence stream, and some newbies are citing them as established facts; and that she seems to be trying to legitimize herself by holding conferences.

You've long been a very partisan guy, and I see you trying to make it an "LN thing," but the current wave of concern over her story has lots of CTs. The most recent was Greg Parker; there are rumors of an impending article by Jim DiEugenio; and there are lots of other CTs who mistrust her stories (Lifton, Conway, Junkkarinen, etc).

nice dodge on the "why"...

You do know Gerald Ford could rise from the dead and state, Judyth has a credibility problem--and that same old nutter faction would continue the same old relentless, useless assault...

Someone, someplace needs to rewrite the script.

So now its rumors about impending articles concerning Judyth? Feed that grist mill, dude!

Nothing to do with partisanship ma-man... Judyth is simply a clever, finely tuned, steam rollin' PR machine, who may or may not have a story to tell...

Edited January 27, 2015 by David G. Healy

[Douglas Caddy]

http://www.reopenkennedycase.org/apps/forums/topics/show/13114623-why-judyth-baker-must-be-shut-down?page=last

The above lengthy statement by Greg Parker (whom I do not know) was posted on Facebook. It appears that not only Judyth must be "shut down", but also TrineDay books and Kris Millegan and others. Cannibalism is running amok.

It all reminds me of why John Simkin at one time shut down this forum after even he was attacked on his own forum by one of the moderators no less.

The JFK assassination community is comprised of an infinitely small number of persons in contrast to the U.S. and foreign country populations. This Operation Genocide against Judyth and others is self-defeating and will turn off thoughtful persons who might be interested in learning more about JFK when they conclude their time can be spent better elsewhere.

I support the First Amendment's right to freedom of speech and the concept of the free marketplace of ideas. I can say this without reservation even though I have never met Judyth or read her books. I have a long list of books I want to read, including Judyth's and those of forum members, if I ever get the opportunity to do so.

[Stephen Roy]

If, by the "why," you mean: "True lone nutters just can't seem to leave her and her tales of woe alone, why?", I don't know the answer.

David, you ARE trying to make it partisan, saying it is ONLY the LNs, whom you hate, who are behind this. But not so, and if you care for truth and some degree of consensus in the research community, you'll drop the partisanship. Let's work together, not against each other.

The source of the rumor that DiEugenio is writing a JVB article is...DiEugenio himself, in a DPForum post.

[Stephen Roy]

http://www.reopenkennedycase.org/apps/forums/topics/show/13114623-why-judyth-baker-must-be-shut-down?page=last

The above lengthy statement by Greg Parker (whom I do not know) was posted on Facebook. It appears that not only Judyth must be "shut down", but also TrineDay books and Kris Millegan and others. Cannibalism is running amok.

It all reminds me of why John Simkin at one time shut down this forum after even he was attacked on his own forum by one of the moderators no less.

The JFK assassination community is comprised of an infinitely small number of persons in contrast to the U.S. and foreign country populations. This Operation Genocide against Judyth and others is self-defeating and will turn off thoughtful persons who might be interested in learning more about JFK when they conclude their time can be spent better elsewhere.

I support the First Amendment's right to freedom of speech and the concept of the free marketplace of ideas. I can say this without reservation even though I have never met Judyth or read her books. I have a long list of books I want to read, including Judyth's and those of forum members, if I ever get the opportunity to do so.

Douglas, a very important question:

If a new witness emerged, and their accounts were determined by specialists and experts in the field to be unreliable, possibly false information, WHAT SHOULD RESPONSIBLE RESEARCHERS DO? Just let it happen? Take the (foolish) "evidence equivalency" path, that all evidence is equal?? Let the unreliable evidence FOREVER mix in with the reliable evidence? Accept any and all evidence as equal, even if it might be disinfo, designed to lead us off the trail. Certainly an experienced attorney is not advocating these things. WHAT SHOULD WE DO???

If that's the way you really feel, Douglas, then I politely, publicly, unequivocally disagree with you.

[Larry Hancock]

Free speech is a right...but it also has consequences. If you say something incorrect or cannot corroborate factual claims then someone else has the right and duty to point it out. And if you keep doing it, it needs to be made very visible. Now I know this does not happen with a lot of today's radio talk show hosts and TV personalities, but still, it should be done even if their readers and supporters refuse to listen - for whatever reason.

Not to be too serious but to make a point, their used to be a saying here on the frontier ....."speak your mind, but have a fast horse". Listeners were assumed to be skeptics, not fans.

[David G. Healy]

"If, by the "why," you mean: "True lone nutters just can't seem to leave her and her tales of woe alone, why?", I don't know the answer."

...

Of course WE know the answer. Simple: a conspiracy murdered JFK on the streets of Dallas, Texas., 22 Nov 1963, that's it! All the nonsense is about destroying LHO, guilty of murder or not--by association or NOT! Preserve the conclusion of the 1964 Warren Commission Report

Seeya 'round kiddo! You'se guys have worn this undecided, LHO *did it all by his lonesome* oldtimer out!

[Stephen Roy]

"If, by the "why," you mean: "True lone nutters just can't seem to leave her and her tales of woe alone, why?", I don't know the answer."

...

Of course WE know the answer. Simple: a conspiracy murdered JFK on the streets of Dallas, Texas., 22 Nov 1963, that's it! All the nonsense is about destroying LHO, guilty of murder or not--by association or NOT! Preserve the conclusion of the 1964 Warren Commission Report

Seeya 'round kiddo! You'se guys have worn this undecided, LHO *did it all by his lonesome* oldtimer out!

Very hard to follow, Dave: Why do LNs obsess about JVB? I don't know. You may be right that they see it as a way of discouraging conspiracy thought. Capisce??

[David G. Healy]

"If, by the "why," you mean: "True lone nutters just can't seem to leave her and her tales of woe alone, why?", I don't know the answer."

...

Of course WE know the answer. Simple: a conspiracy murdered JFK on the streets of Dallas, Texas., 22 Nov 1963, that's it! All the nonsense is about destroying LHO, guilty of murder or not--by association or NOT! Preserve the conclusion of the 1964 Warren Commission Report

Seeya 'round kiddo! You'se guys have worn this undecided, LHO *did it all by his lonesome* oldtimer out!

Very hard to follow, Dave: Why do LNs obsess about JVB? I don't know. You may be right that they see it as a way of discouraging conspiracy thought. Capisce??

capisci ...

[Larry Hancock]

I'm a little confused on this, is Judyth saying that in numerous places she did have end notes showing herself as the source of information and Trine Day deleted those?

Or is it that she has other sources to support things that she was making personal remarks about and Trine Day left those off?

[Larry Hancock]

Well it should be easy for her to rectify it then. She must still have her original which had all the sources cited, should be quick enough to pull them out.

Actually in that event she could just ask Kris to issue an addenda sheet with them or to put it on her book web site.

[Larry Hancock]

Well yes, I know that when authors start getting notes about either errors or asked for clarifications and citations the first thing you do is think addenda and start asking the publisher about

posting addenda or putting errata sheets in the book. Also, these days with print on demand, you can usually fix such things quickly and the publisher simply hands off an update for

electronic printing...easy to make corrections even in between editions. Its a lot easier than it used to be to make fixes these days. Well generally it is - for print at least. When it comes to Amazon and Kindle it can

be much more challenging.....

[Pamela Brown]

Hey Larry and Kathy,

Indeed a lot of rewriting and most of her Me and Lee "sources" are unproven. She could be quite successful without the evidence with a genre change. She can call it a memoir, a biographical collection, 50 Shades of Oswald, just not research or fact without evidence in my view.

I appreciate you both offering your view and insights about the print business.

Agreed. If Judyth had moved forward with a work she acknowledged to be 'historical fiction' (where fictional characters are inserted into historical events) and then just left the door open to the possibility that someone migjht wonder if there was more to her story than meets the eye, her trajectory througjh the research community would have been, not only consistent with the dramatic narrative she was hawking, but less painful to Marina and her daughters. Ironically, had this been the case, Judyth's book probably would have been published earlier and her movie out by now, and she could have been rolling in riches without having tried to discredit Marina. Judyth claims that she is smarter than everyone else, but her actions prove otherwise -- she has spent over 15 years hoisting herself on her own petard in front of everyone and now most people are just fed up with her tactics and want her to go away...:-0

[Pamela Brown]

Pamela,

Indeed. Instead of admitting she cannot prove her many assertions, she dispatches her often unprepared minions upon people to attempt distractions. Rather than actually correcting her mistakes she adds to them by redoubling her claims despite the unverifiable nature of most of them. Whether some like it or not her information and claims prove little, and cause far greater distortion than clarity on the subject in my view. All of us should be held to the standard of proving our contentions. Belief is not enough. The greater the claim, the greater the evidence required. I respect you and everyone reasonably disputing her, it takes commitment to fighting these tiresome claims and unproven tales.

Well said, Carmine. Judyth is all about *belief*. If everyone simply refuses to *believe* or *disbelieve* her, but simply (if we can stand it) allow the babbling to flow through our minds, we will not be deceived by anything she says, nor will we feel we have no choice but to become hysterical in our condemnation of her lies. Judyth is, to me, unfortunately, an example of a great deceiver, not unlike others who have even led a nation astray. Once one is pulled into her web it can be difficult to negotiate a serene path. She uses every trick in the book to try to keep you *hooked* into *believing* her. And then, if you dare question her credibility, she does her best to viciously discredit you.

There were many times during the seven years when i was a part of Judyth's camp, especially when reputable researchers whom I respected decided to lump me in with her (though I told everyone exactly what I was doing) and try to kill two birds with one stone, so to speak, that I despaired of ever finding any value in that turbulent experience. But now, seeing how everyone, even including some of those who tried to destroy my credibility along with Judyth's, are working together to restore balance and sanity into the JFK research community has started to make it all seem worthwhile...

Edited February 4, 2015 by Pamela Brown

[David Josephs]

So much is tossed around related to JVB and she always has an answer - or one of her minions has...

So let's put the only two pieces of evidence to rest - or see if she can address them

(NOTE: There's actually another evidence question she needs to address as well - she claims to have taken the bus with Lee to work at Reily. Has she ever given the address of this apartment or which bus she would meet Lee upon? )

The W-2 has a host of problems with it...

The forms from these years did not look like the one she offers: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/fw2--1963.pdf

In addition, COPY B would have been filed with the return. If this was how it was mailed to her, COPY A would be on top and COPY C would remain in her possession.
Has anyone seen this tax return? The COPY A or C of this document?

There is not a Withholding Tax Statement during the 60's that puts the income info below the name




In addition, the page on top of this book (she would not have been sent a book of W-2's. This appears to be Reily's book since we can see the blled thru of Reily and other info.
When I superimpose this sheet back into position onto this book, lining up the holes to the right - it doesn't fit.



Finally, This is a link to an interview page where she claims to have been interviewed by Conway.

http://doctormarysmonkey.com/jvb/pages/Witnesses%20to%20Anna%20Lewis%20interview.htm

"

In early January 2000, Debra Conway (owner and co-founder of JFK Lancer) volunteered to video-tape Anna Lewis in New Orleans. In the videotape, Anna said that she and her husband David Lewis had socialized frequently with Judy Baker and Lee Oswald in New Orleans in the Summer of 1963, including a visit to The Five Hundred Club, where they met with Carlos Marcello. Anna stressed that she thought Judy and Lee were lovers at that time. Anna's filmed testimony was witnessed by Anna's daughter Sondra, Dr. Joseph Riehl, Dr. Howard Platzman, historian Martin Shackelford, Judyth Baker, and Debra Conway who asked Anna questions as she filmed her.

The photo shown about was taken immediately following the Anna Lewis interview.

Has Debra Conway forgotten that she interviewed Anna Lewis?"

Has Debra forgotten??

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyN37x3OfHs is the Debra interview posted by Wim.

At 1:45 - "In about Feb 1962, I met Lee Harvey Oswald in the Park" (by Bannister's place where she went for a date with he husband to be David Lewis, a friend of Jack Martin who was pistol whipped by Bannister.
The park as you can see from the map above, was Lafayette park.

In Feb 1962 Ozzie was in Minsk. She goes on to say she and David leave NOLA in April 1962...

Problem is that even if she meant 1963... in Feb, March and April 1963 Ozzie is in Texas.
He does not get to New Orleans until the end of April 1963.


This woman is completely lost... she ways Jack Martin and David were NOT working for Bannister when they moved back to New Orleans sometime later in 1962.
She then tells stories of Lee in NOLA in 1962...

The man Ruby killed and the claimed lover of JVB does not get to New Orleans until the end of April 1963. and NEVER lives in New Orleans in 1962...

Fromwhat I can tell - that's the sum total of the evidence which puts her in Harvey's world... and not a soul who has read her book or supports her story has addressed these conflicts.

The Evidence IS the Conspiracy... especially here.

DJ

[Pamela Brown]

Pamela,

Everyone who is standing up to JVB and her minions and their claims is proud to help in my view. For too long unproven claims have muddied the waters of the case. Without substantial evidence no claim should enjoy devoted belief without evidentiary verification. Whether it is the Commission's often problematic assertions or the tales of JVB. I and others are thankful to have many here who had prior experiences and support cleaning up the unproven stories. To further the collective inquiry the bad leads need to be set aside in my view. As you know we politely asked questions and got the expected vulgar and irrelevant responses. Thus, what other choice beyond challenging claims with evidence was left to us? She gave us no choice and thus the current backlash is of her own making. She often tells people to read her book, well some have and it just creates more unverifiable questions.

It is humbling to see that everyone is able to work together as a team and bury our personal differences.

I have updated a post at my Finding Judyth blog to include a screenshot of what she is telling her *believers* about what happened when Sherry Feister asked her to leave the book area of NID 2013, as she had not filled out the paperwork needed to hawk her book there:

http://findingjudyth.blogspot.com/2015/01/oh-dear-judyth-vary-baker-wrongly-tried.html

Anyone can see from this how Judyth takes a situation and twists and turns it to her advantage, running rampant over the truth...:-0