The Real Ruth and Michael Paine

[Greg Parker]

...I don't know where the Oswald's lived. I only know it wasn't in that Neely St apartment.

So on the date that Ruth Paine was allegedly visiting that address and taking Marina off for an outing, the meter reader was reporting the place as vacant.

On March 29, the same meter reader allegedly scrawls the name Lee Harvey Oswald in the margin of the file for the address, but nothing is done regarding contacting this alleged new resident until after another visit on April 19 - at which time he reports the apartment as "occupied". They do this by sending a letter on April 24 (the same day LHO moves to New Orleans) - not addressed to Oswald - but to "the occupant." On yet another visit on May 1, the the premises are again vacant and the April 24 letter is still sitting in the mail box.

The only evidence here connecting Oswald to that address at all is his name hand-written in the file - allegedly on March 29. But what is not explained is how Fish got that name. His last visit was 9 days before that and he had asserted at that time that the place was vacant. Meter readers, as far as I know, do not make extensive inquiries regarding the occupants of buildings. Nor would a meter reader be the one to take a phone call from a new occupant advising they'd moved in. Someone supplied that name to fish, seemingly in an "off the record" manner, he jotted the name down, but was not prepared to run with that without the occupant themselves confirming it - thus the letter to "the occupant".

Now over to you and Paul.

Evidence. Hard physical evidence please that Oswald lived there.

----------------------

Well, Greg, I'm still seeking Utility Company Records for 214 West Neely Street, Dallas, between March 2 and April 23, when the Oswald's allegedly lived there, according to Marina Oswald, Ruth and Michael Paine, and George and Jeanne DeMohrenschildt, as well as Captain Will Fritz and several DPD officers who searched the apartment.

But you posted something very interesting here, and I'd like to review all seven sentences -- sentence by sentence. Evidently it is a report from the Utility Company meter reader. Let's bear in mind the dates: March 2nd the Oswalds allegedly moved in, and on April 23rd the Oswald's evidently skipped town without telling their landlord or anybody. Let's look at the meter reader summary:

------------------- BEGIN OFFICIAL METER READER NOTATION --------------------

1. "On March 20, 1963, when the meter was read again, it reflected 36 kilowatt hours had been used, however, the meter reader reported the premises vacant."

This note skips what happened before March 20th, but we'll start from here. It shows only 36 kilowatt hours since March 2nd -- suggesting the occupants didn't have a television, or many electric appliances. (The Oswalds come to mind.). Now, the meter reader reported the premises were vacant -- but based on what? Did he peek in the window? If so, could he have been mistaken?

2. "This meter was read again on April 19, 1963 reflecting 66 kilowatt hours had been used and the meter reader reported the premises were occupied."

This report, four weeks later, shows only 66 kilowatt hours were used in a 28 day period -- again suggesting that the occupants didn't have a television, or many electric appliances. But this time the meter reader recognizes clearly that the premises are NOT vacant.

3. On April 24, a letter addressed to the occupant of 214 West Neeley was sent by the Power and Light Company as a user of electricity and requesting this person to make a deposit.

The problem with this entry is the date -- Ruth Paine says she moved Marina and baby June out of this apartment on 23 April 1963 -- and so this apartment would have been almost totally EMPTY on the 24th. Certainly there would be nobody there to receive a note to reply.

4. No response was received.

This fact squares with Ruth Paine's testimony -- she had moved Marina and June to her own house in Irving on April 23, there was nobody to receive the notice from the Power and Light Company sent on April 24, in order to send any response.

5. On May 1, 1963, a personal representative of the Power and Light Company was sent to the address of 214 West Neely, at which time the letter mailed by the Power and Light Company on April 24, 1963 was observed still in the mail box.

This fact also squares with Ruth Paine's testimony -- since the Oswald's had abandoned the apartment on the 23rd of April, naturally the note from the Power and Light Company would still be in the mail box!

6. As a result, a cut off order was issued for the electrical services on May 1, 1963 and service was discontinued on May 2, 1963.

In this case the joke was on the Power and Light Company, because LHO was no longer at this address, and had no need for further service -- and besides that, LHO would almost certainly skip out on any money he owed the big Power Company.

7. FISH stated that there was a handwritten note in the Power and Light Company's file in his handwriting that on March 29, 1963, 214 West Neely was occupied by LEE HARVEY OSWALD.

This is the most important sentence of all. An actual official of the Power and Light Company, named Mr. FISH wrote in his own handwriting that on March 29th, 1963, the apartment at 214 West Neely in Dallas was occupied by none other than LHO.

------------------- END OFFICIAL METER READER NOTATION ---------------------

Isn't it perfectly clear by the very records of the Power and Light Company, that LHO was living in that apartment during the period that Marina and Ruth claimed, namely, from March 2nd through April 23rd 1963?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Nope. It is not.

Moreover, Oswald had allegedly paid up to May 1st and that is when BOTH the owner and the downstairs neighbors claimed that Oswald vacated. See previous post.

[Paul Trejo]

<snip>

Isn't it perfectly clear by the very records of the Power and Light Company, that LHO was living in that apartment during the period that Marina and Ruth claimed, namely, from March 2nd through April 23rd 1963?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Nope. It is not.

Moreover, Oswald had allegedly paid up to May 1st and that is when BOTH the owner and the downstairs neighbors claimed that Oswald vacated. See previous post.

Wait a minute, please, Greg. Are you saying that the Oswalds never lived at the Neely Street address from March through April 1963, or that their rent was paid up until May 1st?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

[Greg Parker]

Thanks Greg and Gene.

Greg, I was curious about what you said about the Neely home and did some digging for more info. I found a 2011 thread and a 2013 one. You and Richard Gilbride were bouncing ideas off one another. I'm curious what your current thinking is on the following:

1. The use of 36 kW (if I recall correctly) of electrical power at the Neely property in March 1963. Apparently not billed to Oswald. Off the cuff I'd say it was for safe house usage and being billed to the owner of the property, Mr. George, who is a supicious character given his apparent use of an alias (different set of initials). What do you think?

2. Gordon Wayne Smith, who told Richard Gilbride he had seen Oswald and Marina at the Neely house a number of times. What do you think of that?

3. According to Gale Nix Jackson: George B. Gray and his wife "Clydie" were the Oswalds' downstairs neighbors. Clydie saw Oswald many times, and saw Marina walking the baby in front of the house. Unfortunately Gale's reference for that info links to somebody's PC hard drive, presumably her own (drive C:). I don't believe the Grays were questioned by any authority.

Gayle, I think may have got herself confused. The Grays (also listed as Brays) never mentioned seeing her walking the baby. That was Wayne Smith in his chat with RG. The Grays WERE interviewed. But under the name of BRAY.

---------------

I agree - it was a safe house. Someone was paying for that electricity.

[Greg Parker]

<snip>

Isn't it perfectly clear by the very records of the Power and Light Company, that LHO was living in that apartment during the period that Marina and Ruth claimed, namely, from March 2nd through April 23rd 1963?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Nope. It is not.

Moreover, Oswald had allegedly paid up to May 1st and that is when BOTH the owner and the downstairs neighbors claimed that Oswald vacated. See previous post.

Wait a minute, please, Greg. Are you saying that the Oswalds never lived at the Neely Street address from March through April 1963, or that their rent was paid up until May 1st?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

I'm saying they never lived there.

I'm also saying that owner claimed rent was paid until May 1 and that was the date that the Grays (aka Brays) downstairs claimed the "Oswald's" vacated.

[Gene Kelly]

Paul:

I'm not quite sure what to make of you. I hesitate to be critical, as I appreciate reading some of your earlier work on Walker and your take on the plot, as it is different than mainstream. I wish to respect your views.

You play this devil's advocate role in the Ruth Paine threads. You add nothing useful or insightful ... I can learn nothing from your rebuttals, as you offer nothing original. You simply refute, critique and lecture... then challenge others to bring "facts" when you have nothing yourself to offer except contrarian conjecture. I am here to learn as much as possible about the Paines, because I believe that they're suspicious and important to the underlying truth in the JFK's murder. Unfortunately, I cannot learn anything from you about them.

To address your comments on my post, I have no clue as to what Mrs. Paine really was/is ... her affiliation, motive, even her religion. I have no particular insight as to her motives, and whether she was CIA, KGB, FBI, ACLU, KKK, FPCC, YWCA or Republican. I grew up and live near where she and Michael come from, and I know plenty of folks who are Quakers in the Philadelphia area. I drive by Friends Meetinghouses every day in my travels. I went to school close by Paoli PA (the so-called wealthy Main Line of suburban Philadelphia) and therefore find the Paines/Hydes and Young's to be interesting. I have no desire to brand or typecast Ruth. Those titles and characterizations are meaningless ... rebuttable presumptions (in Latin, praesumptio iuris tantum) to be debated ad nauseum.

The Forum should be a healthy, engaging group dynamic. If you have nothing of value to offer with respect to the Paines, I respectfully suggest that you find a Walker thread where like minds deliberate on the radical right and their role in the murder of JFK.

Gene

[James DiEugenio]

Amen.

[Paul Trejo]

Paul:

I'm not quite sure what to make of you. I hesitate to be critical, as I appreciate reading some of your earlier work on Walker and your take on the plot, as it is different than mainstream. I wish to respect your views.

You play this devil's advocate role in the Ruth Paine threads. You add nothing useful or insightful ... I can learn nothing from your rebuttals, as you offer nothing original. You simply refute, critique and lecture... then challenge others to bring "facts" when you have nothing yourself to offer except contrarian conjecture. I am here to learn as much as possible about the Paines, because I believe that they're suspicious and important to the underlying truth in the JFK's murder. Unfortunately, I cannot learn anything from you about them.

To address your comments on my post, I have no clue as to what Mrs. Paine really was/is ... her affiliation, motive, even her religion. I have no particular insight as to her motives, and whether she was CIA, KGB, FBI, ACLU, KKK, FPCC, YWCA or Republican. I grew up and live near where she and Michael come from, and I know plenty of folks who are Quakers in the Philadelphia area. I drive by Friends Meetinghouses every day in my travels. I went to school close by Paoli PA (the so-called wealthy Main Line of suburban Philadelphia) and therefore find the Paines/Hydes and Young's to be interesting. I have no desire to brand or typecast Ruth. Those titles and characterizations are meaningless ... rebuttable presumptions (in Latin, praesumptio iuris tantum) to be debated ad nauseum.

The Forum should be a healthy, engaging group dynamic. If you have nothing of value to offer with respect to the Paines, I respectfully suggest that you find a Walker thread where like minds deliberate on the radical right and their role in the murder of JFK.

Gene

Gene, I appreciate your conversational tone.

I feel certain I am adding useful information and insight. By criticizing Carol Hewett's mere speculation, this is a step forward, since Carol Hewett has carried the Paine conversation forward from the 1990's into the second edition of James DiEugenio's Destiny Betrayed (2012).

As for "facts," Gene, I am obliging readers here to actually read Ruth Paine's WC testimony, instead of making stuff up.

You claim, for example, that you were raised near the place where Ruth Paine was raised, and that you know the people, including the Quakers there. Ruth doesn't seem like the other Quakers to you, am I right?

Yet a careful reading of Ruth Paine's WC testimony shows that she wasn't raised as a Quaker, but she converted when she was in high school. Thus Ruth's interpretation of Quaker ethics will be more individual in her case, which has both positive and negative implications.

Ruth also believed that she got a "calling from God" to learn the Russian language. Those are her own words, perhaps you knew that. The reason was that the Cold War was raging, and international human understanding was at a low point, and she thought she could help better if she knew how to speak Russian. That was her high-school motivation.

Finally, the most important aspect of the relationship between Ruth Paine and Marina Oswald that I perceive from WC "facts" is that Marina Oswald initiated the relationship and its main dynamic, namely, Ruth Paine's mission to "save" Marina Oswald.

That didn't come from Ruth Paine, as Roy and others have suggested, but from Marina Oswald herself. This was in early March 1963, when Marina told Ruth that: (1) she was pregnant, and not to tell anybody else; and (2) that LHO was threatening to send her back to the USSR without him.

This was a shot between the eyes to Ruth Paine, who simply wanted a friend with whom to share conversational Russian, and expand her commitment to God to learn the Russian language. But Marina Oswald threw a monkey wrench into Ruth Paine's world. Now, suddenly, Ruth Paine had to respond ethically to this challenge -- would she let a "refugee" be mistreated in this way?

Ruth Paine wanted to protect Marina from LHO. Now, she didn't know LHO very well -- she had only seen him once at a party, and she didn't interact with him at that party. He seemed full of himself, and pleased only when he was the center of attention.

Ruth Paine simply believed Marina Oswald -- and from that moment on, Ruth Paine had another moral mission -- to "save" Marina Oswald.

Ruth Paine is innocent of all these charges against her, that she is somehow an FBI or CIA agent, trying for MONTHS to frame LHO.

I think, therefore, that my contribution here is valuable. Those who think I should go away also have no response to my challenges. I think that is why you get an Amen from them. But this FORUM exists to hear BOTH SIDES of the issues -- not just Carol Hewett's side.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited January 22, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[James DiEugenio]

1.) Greg recently showed that when you said you were referring to her testimony in discussion with me and him, you did not have it.

2.) Ruth Paine was the single most questioned person by the WC. In a homicide case, probably the most important forensic evidence is the autopsists. Do some simple arithmetic: compare the number of questions asked of FInck, with the number of questions asked of Ruth. Then ask yourself: Wonder why they are ignoring that part of the case i.e. how JFK was actually terminated, and concentrating on that lady's garage?

Especially because the WC never even asked FInck, Humes or Boswell this question: Why did you not dissect the president's back wound?

When Jim Garrison did ask Finck that question we found out why Specter did not.

3.) The only person more accommodating of the Paines than you are is Caufield. If I have to read one more time a variation on this sentence: "Ruth Paine, the kindly Quaker lady who helped Lee and Marina Oswald" I will throw up right on his book.

BTW, Caufield says that Oswald ordered that rifle, and he brought it to work that day. It then gets worse.

This is what I mean about his book: He wants to take us back to the sixties. Its like the guy has worked up there in Moreland Ohio by himself for all these years. Because he felt so superior in his ideas and his concepts that he didn't need any of those wacky JFK researchers around. After all they have been misleading us for over a half century.

One more observation: Caufield's book is a hatchet job on Jim Garrison. With the built in presumption that he had what was left of Garrison's files.

He did not.

Edited January 22, 2016 by James DiEugenio

[Tom Neal]

Paul:

I'm not quite sure what to make of you. I hesitate to be critical, as I appreciate reading some of your earlier work on Walker and your take on the plot, as it is different than mainstream. I wish to respect your views.

You play this devil's advocate role in the Ruth Paine threads. You add nothing useful or insightful ... I can learn nothing from your rebuttals, as you offer nothing original. You simply refute, critique and lecture... then challenge others to bring "facts" when you have nothing yourself to offer except contrarian conjecture. I am here to learn as much as possible about the Paines, because I believe that they're suspicious and important to the underlying truth in the JFK's murder. Unfortunately, I cannot learn anything from you about them.

To address your comments on my post, I have no clue as to what Mrs. Paine really was/is ... her affiliation, motive, even her religion. I have no particular insight as to her motives, and whether she was CIA, KGB, FBI, ACLU, KKK, FPCC, YWCA or Republican. I grew up and live near where she and Michael come from, and I know plenty of folks who are Quakers in the Philadelphia area. I drive by Friends Meetinghouses every day in my travels. I went to school close by Paoli PA (the so-called wealthy Main Line of suburban Philadelphia) and therefore find the Paines/Hydes and Young's to be interesting. I have no desire to brand or typecast Ruth. Those titles and characterizations are meaningless ... rebuttable presumptions (in Latin, praesumptio iuris tantum) to be debated ad nauseum.

The Forum should be a healthy, engaging group dynamic. If you have nothing of value to offer with respect to the Paines, I respectfully suggest that you find a Walker thread where like minds deliberate on the radical right and their role in the murder of JFK.

Gene

Gene,

Your response is PERFECT. I envy your ability to communicate dispassionately.

Tom

[Greg Parker]

Yet a careful reading of Ruth Paine's WC testimony shows that she wasn't raised as a Quaker, but she converted when she was in high school. Thus Ruth's interpretation of Quaker ethics will be more individual in her case, which has both positive and negative implications.

Can you give us the lists of positives and negatives?

Ruth also believed that she got a "calling from God" to learn the Russian language. Those are her own words, perhaps you knew that. The reason was that the Cold War was raging, and international human understanding was at a low point, and she thought she could help better if she knew how to speak Russian. That was her high-school motivation.

A "Calling from God" marks her as evangelical and not Hicksite. Evangelical Quakers look upon service to humanity as "social work" rather than religion. Anti-Communism on the other hand, would be a service to God and Church. The shallowness of your "understanding" is obvious.

[Greg Parker]

But this FORUM exists to hear BOTH SIDES of the issues -- not just Carol Hewett's side.

You're conflating hearing both sides with accepting both sides. It exists to help find the facts of what happened. The tribe has now heard both sides and the tribe has spoken. The facts cannot in the end, exist as a two-sided coin.

You called and you lost. House wins.

[Paul Trejo]

...Moreover, Oswald had allegedly paid up to May 1st and that is when BOTH the owner and the downstairs neighbors claimed that Oswald vacated...

I'm saying they never lived there.

I'm also saying that owner claimed rent was paid until May 1 and that was the date that the Grays (aka Brays) downstairs claimed the "Oswald's" vacated.

Well, Greg, on the one hand you said, "No receipts, no utility bills, no neighbor confirmation."

Then you yourself produced material evidence from the Utility Company, which specifically named Lee Harvey Oswald as the occupant in the time period in question.

Now you're stating that "the owner claimed the rent was paid until May 1st."

You are also stating that the neighbors (the Grays downstairs) claimed the Oswald's "vacated" -- which arguably means they lived there in April.

You yourself are supplying all the data you said was missing!

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited January 22, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Greg Parker]

...Moreover, Oswald had allegedly paid up to May 1st and that is when BOTH the owner and the downstairs neighbors claimed that Oswald vacated...

I'm saying they never lived there.

I'm also saying that owner claimed rent was paid until May 1 and that was the date that the Grays (aka Brays) downstairs claimed the "Oswald's" vacated.

Well, Greg, on the one hand you said, "No receipts, no utility bills, no neighbor confirmation."

Then you yourself produced material evidence from the Utility Company, which specifically named Lee Harvey Oswald as the occupant in the time period in question.

Now you're stating that "the owner claimed the rent was paid until May 1st."

You are also stating that the neighbors (the Grays downstairs) claimed the Oswald's "vacated" -- which means they lived there in April.

You yourself are supplying all the data you said was missing!

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Smoke and mirrors.

• The only two who said Oswald lived there and who were actually associated with the place, went under multiple names and had suspect employment backgrounds. Additionally, the Gray/Brays avoid actually saying outright that they ever saw the Oswalds - only their visitors. Recall also that they claimed that the couple upstairs moved out IN EARLY MAY. Other neighbors didn't recall them, or recalled a couple with TWO kids. You also have Oswald acting against character paying rent up to May 1st and not seeking a refund.
• A scrawled name in the margin of a file is hardly an official record. If it was, it would have been acted upon and Oswald would have been billed. We do not know the circumstances through which that name was written.

[Greg Parker]

"No receipts, no utility bills, no neighbor confirmation."

Show me a receipt.

Show me a utility bill made out to Oswald for that address.

Show me a confirmation from a neighbor that a man with a foreign wife and ONE small child lived at that address from early March until April 23/24 and that they will swear that this couple was Lee and Marina Oswald.

Edited January 22, 2016 by Greg Parker

[Paul Trejo]

Smoke and mirrors.

• The only two who said Oswald lived there and who were actually associated with the place, went under multiple names and had suspect employment backgrounds. Additionally, the Gray/Brays avoid actually saying outright that they ever saw the Oswalds - only their visitors. Recall also that they claimed that the couple upstairs moved out IN EARLY MAY. Other neighbors didn't recall them, or recalled a couple with TWO kids. You also have Oswald acting against character paying rent up to May 1st and not seeking a refund.

• A scrawled name in the margin of a file is hardly an official record. If it was, it would have been acted upon and Oswald would have been billed. We do not know the circumstances through which that name was written.

Well, Greg, you keep supplying data against your own case.

There were two, you say, who actually said "that Oswald lived there and who were actually associated with the place," The fact that they were shady characters is secondary -- this was the poor side of town (and still is today).

You say that the neighbors, the Gray/Brays avoid actually saying outright that they ever saw the Oswalds. That makes sense given LHO's reputed behavior towards Marina. He reputedly didn't want her out there, socially, and kept her from learning English. LHO didn't at that time, strike me as the sort of guy who was outgoing and palsy-walsy with his neighbors.

Also, according to the White Russian community, LHO was furious with George Bouhe, one of the leaders of the White Russian community, for being extra nice to Marina Oswald. LHO told George DeMohrenschildt that he was going to rip up the dresses Bouhe gave her, and smash the baby crib that Bouhe gave her.

It was also during that period that reports arose that LHO struck Marina. Marina said he never struck her before or after that period. At that point, George Bouhe and George DeMohrenschildt separated them, so that Marina could be safe with her baby. This is when LHO was at the Ellsbeth address (which is walking distance from the Neely Street address.)

Then LHO and Marina reconciled, and they lived in the Ellsbeth apartment for awhile, and then (allegedly) moved down the block to Neely Street. My point is that LHO was wary of strangers at that moment in time. He was protective of Marina. So -- I'm not surprised that they didn't interact with their neighbors at Neely (if they were there).

The neighbors did claim, however, to have seen "their visitors."

Also, they claimed that the Oswalds moved out in "early May," but that is so close to "late April" that accuracy might not be obtainable.

The Power and Light Company, on the other hand, said that their pay-up notice was still in the mailbox on the 24th when they returned.

Also, since the Oswald's didn't interact much with these neighbors, it's not surprising that some reported that never saw them, and some reported they "recalled a couple with TWO kids." It's hard to remember neighbors when you see them so rarely.

Also, if LHO really did shoot at General Walker, as Marina swears he did, then it isn't so odd that he rushed to get out of Dallas, ASAP, and leave a week's rent with the landlord. Besides that, what landlord allows any tenant a ZERO day notice, and refunds the final week of the final month at a moment's notice? I never heard of that, myself.

Finally, while a "scrawled name in the margin of a file is hardly an official record," it is certainly better than NOTHING, which is what you claim we have.

Why didn't they bill Oswald? Well, you had to FIND him first. LHO did not give a forwarding address! Ya' think?

There's PLENTY of evidence now, to argue that LHO lived there -- especially given five character witnesses to the WC, and several DPD witnesses to the WC.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited January 22, 2016 by Paul Trejo