Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

Paul,

Testimony that is NOT subjected to cross-examination is not legal testimony. It is but one unchallenged side of the story.

You can accept anything that you wish, but that doesn't make it supporting evidence. Marina Oswald's testimony has no corroboration. It has no support and would have been disallowed in a court of law due to spousal privilege, thus, once again it is not legal testimony that you are relying on.

You sound similar to a WC supporter to, but I don't mean that as a derogatory statement as you are entitled to believe what you want. What you or anyone else doesn't have a right to do is misrepresent the evidence. You are claiming that unsupported and uncoroborated claims are evidence and that is simply untrue.

Furthermore, CE 573 has no chain of custody and that means you cannot support the claim that it was the bullet recovered from the EAW house on the night of April 10, 1963. Moreover, nine contemporaneous DPD reports mention a steel-jacketed bullet and CE 573 is copper-jacketed. Contemporaneous media reports cite that a .30.06 bullet was recovered. This has substantially more weight than what Marina, Ruth or any other witness claimed. You yourself have said that CE 573 could not be linked to CE 139. That is damning for the claim that LHO fired at EAW as you can't link him in anyway ballistically to the crime (of course you can't link CE 139 to LHO in anyway).

The license plate issue was not solved. We know it was cut out in official custody and that is suspicious. Despite your repeated claims of EAW saying that LHO was the shooter that is simply not true as he is on record as saying that CE 573 was not the bullet that he held and saw on the night of the shooting and he never said that he thought LHO was the shooter.

I appreciate you telling me what you are relying on as that confirms for me that you simply are offering an unsupported opinion which you have a right to do, but is of no help to us in learning the truth of what actually occurred.

Thanks for the discussion.

Rob,

Thanks for the discussion. You're right that the WC testimony was more accurately a series of depositions. There were 488 witnesses, from a wide variety of backgrounds -- taxi drivers and surgeons -- bus drivers and FBI ballistics experts -- landladies and the Secretary of State.

Further, the WC did not investigate only the shooting at JFK, they investigated five separate shootings, in this order: (1) the shooting at General Walker; (2) the shooting at JFK; (3) the shooting at Governor Connally; (4) the shooting of J.D. Tippit; and (5) the shooting of Lee Harvey Oswald.

The witnesses appeared largely at the convenience of the WC, in a largely mix-and-match fashion. It was a chaos.

The only uniting thread was Hoover's original report which the FBI insisted upon: (i) that Oswald was the Lone Shooter; and (ii) there were only three shots from the 6th floor TSBD. Although alternative accounts were heard, they were all squashed until the alternative witnesses admitted they were not experts and could be mistaken.

Now, Marina's testimony has lots of corroboration, Rob. She has George and Jeanne De Mohrenschildt at the Oswald house on the Saturday following the Wednesday shooting at General Walker, in which George confronted Oswald with the question, "did you take that pot shot at General Walker??" There were four people observing that scene.

Also, Ruth Paine testified to the Walker Note -- she didn't know of its existence until the Secret Service came banging on her door, practically shouting to her about this Russian writing that they had just found in the care-package of books and things that Ruth had sent to Marina through the Irving Police Department. Yes, the Secret Service had initially thought that Ruth was passing secret Communist codes and messages in Russian -- but they backed off when FBI handwriting experts concluded that the Russian writing was from Oswald's hand.

Although the Walker Note did not mention the Walker shooting directly -- it was indirectly clear, because Oswald said he might get arrested that night.

Oswald's bizarre behavior in October and November of 1963 was also clear when Ruth Paine confirmed the Russian Embassy note typed on her typewriter by Oswald. Oswald was stepping over the lines, and Ruth Paine had no problem telling the FBI about it -- even before the JFK assassination.

By the way, Rob, your argument about Marina's testimony is self-contradictory, IMHO, because you say: (1) it has no support; and yet (2) it would have been disallowed in a court of law due to spousal privilege. Which is it? If it is unsupportable, then there is no motivation to disallow it. But if you insist on disallowing it, then it must be supportable, IMHO.

Again, I must insist that LHO was a patsy in a conspiracy to kill JFK, and there is no way LHO acted alone. At the same time, the best way to tell a lie is to cover it with 99% truth. That's what the WC is, in my reading. It's 99% true, and that's why the lies inside the WC volumes continue to persist after a half-century and countless proofs.

Critics go too far, and want to reject the entire WC record, just because of the 1% of lies in it. But that's not feasible. Marina told the truth. Ruth told the truth. The DeMohrenschildt's told the truth. The Russian Expatriates in Dallas told the truth. The Parkland Hospital staff told the truth.

If you want to read the fibbers, read the WC testimonies of General Walker; Robert Allen Surrey; Bernard Weissman; Robert Krause; Warren Reynolds; and Revilo Oliver.

Once again, I agree 100% that there is no physical evidence against Oswald in the Walker shooting. The bullet is irrelevant because it is too mutilated. There is nothing there. I don't think we need the bullet to make a case, however, since we have Marina's testimony, the corroboration by the DeMohrenschildts and Oswald's Walker Note.

As for EAW insisting that LHO was his shooter -- that is proved by EAW's own writings. My problem is that they all appear after the JFK assassination; even those that refer to EAW's knowledge before the JFK assassination.

You point out that EAW's testimony to the WC denies that LHO was the shooter -- but I am saying that EAW lied under oath. You choose to believe that Marina Oswald lied under oath. You believe him, I believe her. That's where we differ.

My proof is that EAW contradicted himself in his later writings and interviews, while Marina Oswald never contradicted herself in her later writings or interviews.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • Replies 71
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

So a real question for Mr. Trejo:

 

Was there a faction of Klanners or other White Nationalists in the Dallas Police force? Was the little white cross in a white circle worn by many officers on their lower left sleeve and photographed on 11/22/63 a symbol of this association?

 

see Officer Ellis in this photo or the Officers escorting the "Tramps":

jfkMcIntire1_Motorcycles.jpeg

 

 

Example of modern symbol used on major white nationalist website today:

 

klan_symbol.jpg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know Ian Grigg's explored that and I was with him when he questioned one DPD officer on the patch; as I recall the officers  response was that it related to emergency medical assistance training/qualification of some sort.  Its something that has come up over and over again through the years, wish I had a more concrete reference to offer. Its been bandied about for a long time

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Larry Hancock said:

as I recall the officers  response was that it related to emergency medical assistance training/qualification of some sort

Hey Larry,

I had heard that account too. I appreciate that the DPD Officer said that but I find it hard to believe nonetheless. A red cross in a white or red circle could be interpreted as the international symbol for a "medic" but my common sense tells me that the white cross has another meaning.

Since Paul is up to speed with the white supremacists and they are central to his theory I'm wondering what his take is on this..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎9‎/‎22‎/‎2016 at 11:06 AM, Thomas Graves said:

...Here's a new question for you, and then sometime I'll go back and re-ask some of the above questions that I don't think you answered, or at least not very well.

How could anyone (a DPD Lieutenant, the FBI, a Dallas White Russian, Marina Oswald, etc) know for sure so quickly that LHO had shot at Walker? Did someone see him do it? Or is it simply that he confessed to Marina, and she ratted him out? ...

 -- Tommy :sun

Tommy,

I've been re-reading the WC testimony of Baron George De Mohrenschildt, who was often called Lee Harvey Oswald's "best friend" in Dallas in late 1962 and early 1963.  Here's the clues that George left us:

------ BEGIN EXTRACT GEORGE DE MOHRENSCHILDT WC TESTIMONY 4/22/1964 ------------

Mr. De MOHRENSCHILDT. [Oswald] was ferociously, maybe too much so, for integration, advocate of integration. He said that it was hurting him, the fact that the colored people did not have the same rights as the white ones, and this is my opinion also, you see. I was very strongly opposed to segregation, and I am sometimes very violent on that subject, because it hurts me that I live in Texas you know and I do not have colored friends I cannot afford to have colored friends, you see...On that point Oswald and I agreed...

Mr. JENNER. I would like to return to this gun, this weapon incident, the Walker incident.

Mr. De MOHRENSCHILDT. Yes.

Mr. JENNER. Was there ever an occasion after this time, when you and Mrs. De Mohrenschildt came to see the Oswalds, that as soon as you opened the door, you said, "Lee, how is it possible that you missed?"

Mr. De MOHRENSCHILDT. Never... 

Mr. JENNER. You have now given me your full recollection of that entire...weapon incident, and what you said to him?

Mr. De MOHRENSCHILDT. Yes, yes, yes, yes; that is right. How could I have...said that when I didn't know that he had a gun...I was standing there and then Jeanne told us...that here is a gun...I remember very distinctly saying, "Did you take the potshot at General Walker?"  The same meaning you know, "Did you miss him," about the same meaning?  I didn't want him to shoot Walker. I don't go to that extent you see.

Mr. JENNER. You didn't want him to shoot anybody?

Mr. De MOHRENSCHILDT. Anybody. I didn't want him to shoot anybody. But if somebody has a gun with a telescopic lens you see, and knowing that he hates the man, it is a logical assumption you see.

Mr. JENNER. You knew at that time that he had a definite bitterness for General Walker?

Mr. De MOHRENSCHILDT. I definitely knew that...from some conversations we had on General Walker, you know -- this was the period of General Walker's, you know, big showoff...
 
------ END EXTRACT GEORGE DE MOHRENSCHILDT WC TESTIMONY 4/22/1964 ------------

Notice that George De Mohrenschildt placed the Walker shooting in the context of the racial segregation issue.  Lee Oswald hated General Walker, because of the race segregation issue, and he and George talked openly about it. 

Furthermore, George placed the Walker shooting in the context of "Walker's big showoff," which in 1964 was easily remembered as an allusion to the 9/30/1962 racial riots at Ole Miss University, where hundreds were wounded and two were killed in a melee led by General Walker.

After 50-years of CT's, it may be difficult for us to see these factors from 1962-1963, but if we focus only on the news events of those days, it becomes clearer.  George didn't see LHO shoot at Walker, and Marina didn't rat him out -- George merely guessed it, and joked about it, because of what Lee himself had told George.

In his manuscript, I'm a Patsy! I'm a Patsy! (1977), George De Mohrenschildt adds that he and Lee Oswald used to call General Walker, "General Fokker."

So -- how did this "Lieutenant" or other "high government official" learn about it, according to General Walker himself?  The best answer, IMHO, was given by Dick Russell in his classic CT book, The Man Who Knew Too Much (1992).   Dick Russell interviewed George's friends, Igor and Natasha Voshinin, and they told Dick Russell that George visited them early the next morning, after visiting the Oswalds and seeing Lee's rifle.  George was worried that Lee was Walker's shooter, and they urged George to tell the FBI.  But George said he would never rat out his friend.   Too late.  After George left, Natasha Voshinin called the FBI that moment, and told them what George said.

So, if Dick Russell's story is correct, then here's the timeline:

Wed10Apr1963 -- LHO shoots at General Walker
Sat13Apr1963 -- George and Jeanne De Mohrenschildt find Lee's rifle and make a joke about it.
Sun14Apr1963 -- George tells the Voshinins, and Natasha Voshinin tells the FBI.

This could explain how General Walker learned that Lee Harvey Oswald was his April shooter -- if Natasha told the FBI, then the FBI most likely told General Walker that very day -- Easter Sunday, April 14, 1963.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
typos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Mr. De MOHRENSCHILDT. Anybody. I didn't want him to shoot anybody. But if somebody has a gun with a telescopic lens you see, and knowing that he hates the man, it is a logical assumption you see.

I have plenty of friends with rifles equipped with a scope. I've even heard some of them disparage other people. When I see their weapons I don't "logically" assume that they are going to assassinate anyone. "Baron" GdM is drama queen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/23/2016 at 4:18 PM, Chris Newton said:

I have plenty of friends with rifles equipped with a scope. I've even heard some of them disparage other people. When I see their weapons I don't "logically" assume that they are going to assassinate anyone. "Baron" GdM is drama queen.

Chris,

To some degree we all agree with you -- but this was not before the shooting, this was after the shooting, and in the same city, Dallas.  The newspapers, radio and TV were all buzzing with the fact that somebody had tried to kill General Walker at his home in the Oak Lawn neighborhood.  People who lived in Oak Lawn (like Igor and Natasha Voshinin, and like relatives of H.L. Hunt) were all talking about it, and were concerned, because of the violence going on in their own neighborhood.

What George DeMohrenschildt noted -- and we should take as a clue -- was that Lee Harvey Oswald hated General Walker.  It wasn't just some "disparaging" words -- it was hatred.  More to the point, George joined Lee in this hatred, and would mock General Walker by calling him "General Fokker."

By the way -- Michael Paine also said in his WC testimony that Lee Harvey Oswald showed strong negative feelings against General Walker on April 2, 1963.   They couldn't agree on much, but on this point Michael and Lee agreed.

This underscores my theory of the JFK assassination in relation to the Walker shooting.   Oswald had actually said positive things about JFK in 1963, specifically about Civil Rights. Even the FBI admitted they could find no motive for Oswald killing JFK.

Things begin to fit together better when we realize (cf. Chris Cravens, 1997) that General Walker and Robert Alan Surrey coordinated the attacks on Adlai Stevenson exactly one month before the JFK assassination, and that FBI agent James Hosty knew this very well -- but swore he didn't.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

What George DeMohrenschildt noted -- and we should take as a clue -- was that Lee Harvey Oswald hated General Walker.  It wasn't just some "disparaging" words -- it was hatred.  More to the point, George joined Lee in this hatred, and would mock General Walker by calling him "General Fokker."

I agree with you to a point as well. I don't want to "beat" this subject much, I just wanted to point out that this type of "evidence" is the flimsiest "evidence". It's innuendo, hearsay and rumor.

 

How about my query about the DPD and the Klan? This would seem to be central to your theory - the penetration of law enforcement by the most virulent right wingers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/26/2016 at 3:59 PM, Chris Newton said:

I agree with you to a point as well. I don't want to "beat" this subject much, I just wanted to point out that this type of "evidence" is the flimsiest "evidence". It's innuendo, hearsay and rumor.

How about my query about the DPD and the Klan? This would seem to be central to your theory - the penetration of law enforcement by the most virulent right wingers.

Chris,

If it was just George DeMohrenschildt saying this, it would be flimsy -- but we also find this same evidence in the WC testimony of Michael Paine.  The one thing that Michael and LHO could agree upon, evidently, was that General Walker was an enemy of freedom.

As for your question about the DPD and the KKK, there is a great book about this topic by a late member of this Forum who was also a former FBI agent, namely, the well-known Bill Turner, in his book, Power on the RIght (1973).   In that book, Turner said, IIRC, that one could not join the DPD in the early 1960's without membership in either: (1) the KKK; (2) the White Citizens Council; or (3) the John Birch Society; and preferably all three.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
grammar
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...
On 11/21/2016 at 2:11 PM, Larry Hancock said:

I know Ian Grigg's explored that and I was with him when he questioned one DPD officer on the patch; as I recall the officers  response was that it related to emergency medical assistance training/qualification of some sort.  Its something that has come up over and over again through the years, wish I had a more concrete reference to offer. Its been bandied about for a long time

58e2859fdd3c4_firstaidpatchfromDPDuniforminDPandthetramps.jpg.4521ef2f2da8305c89f602653aa9dd49.jpg

I recall the same thing Larry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

I find Trejo's use, just now, of a death notice thread of a forum member, to defend his contested claims, to be distasteful, to say the least.

 

Dear Michael,

I saw Chuck Berry perform a free concert in a medieval square in Brno, Czech Republic, in 1996.

He even did the "Duck Walk".

It was awesome.

--  Tommy :sun

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...