Jump to content
The Education Forum

Ruth - a typewriter - 15 days


Recommended Posts

No problem Sandy and thanks.

2. While Ruth was putting her child in a nearby high chair,  Lee covered and obscured the "draft" that he was typing from Ruth's view.

3. This act of hiding his "draft" raised Ruth's suspicions about what Lee was doing. She did not observe either the draft or the typed document at that time.

I have doubts about this little addition to Ruth's story. Ruth never elaborates about the conversation they had when Lee asks to use the typewriter.  We have no context in which to frame anyone's expectations.

Is privacy waived when you use someone else's typewriter?

Did Ruth crowd in close enough that it seemed she was trying to read something? (snooping?)

I have a full size hard copy of Lee's draft and there's no way anyone could read it unless they picked it up. You are not going to casually read it standing three feet away. Ruth admits that she never saw the typed document or the draft, so why is she so suspicious of Lee's use of the typewriter? We've established he had permission.

This part of the story seems like a dramatic fabrication to support the actions she's going to describe next. (IMHO).

Edited by Chris Newton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 265
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Thanks for sharing your theory. I am intrigued by it and would like to know more, for example how Hosty gained possession of the original draft.

Sandy,

pure speculation...

If we accept that Ruth stole Oswald's draft sometime in early November, she could have dropped the draft off at the FBI downtown as early as Monday the 11th when she had an appointment with her lawyer about her divorce. If it was written on an earlier weekend she could have given it to Hosty on Nov. 1st.

If she did not steal the Oswald draft, well that opens up a can of worms I've considered but not given thought to, yet.

Again, I'm just trying to understand how these events relate and why they happened like they did. Why did she withhold both versions of Oswald's draft from the Detectives searching her home? Where did she hide them? Why aren't they mentioned in her first statement? Why did she allegedly give Oswald's version to one FBI Agent and then later on give her version to a different Agent? Why didn't she ever mention the letter to her best bud, Marina?

I, obviously, still have a lot of unanswered questions.

Edited by Chris Newton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4. Sometime after everyone, Ruth, Marina, Lee and their children, returned home from shopping on Saturday Nov. 9th, Ruth noticed a paper folded in half resting on the corner of her desk secretary in the living room.

5. The paper remained there untouched until Sunday morning Nov. 10th when Ruth awoke before the rest of the household and read the paper.

6. The first line she knew to be untrue.

7. At some point she made a copy of the paper.

8. She left the paper where it "resided" on her little desk secretary all day Sunday.

 

All of the above assertions are in Ruth's testimony and I have citations in my previous thread "where's Ruth's Couch?".

My main issues with the above portion of her story are:

a). Ruth has admitted that she never saw the draft or the letter that was being typed. But... she immediately "knows" that the paper, that is folded in half, that appeared on top of her living room desk secretary is the draft of the letter that was typed that morning. Despite protests about this fact from other so-called-researchers, that it was obvious that this paper found in another part of the house was the same paper that was typed, no one has provided a logical explanation, nor was Ruth asked in any of her testimony how she "knew" this.

b). Oswald spent a great deal of time in that little living room. Ruth complained about how much time he spent watching TV. He also spent some time playing with Ruth's child on the floor in the living room, something that Marina pointedly remarked that Michael Paine was loathe to do. David Lifton has suggested to me that Oswald left the draft as a "provocation" towards Ruth but if that was the case, please explain the purpose of provoking the woman that provided Lee and his family shelter and provided a place to store Lee's belongings ( and weapon?).

c). Marina. Marina Oswald helped Ruth with the housework, the laundry and child care in addition to her Russian language assistance. Marina Oswald was shown Oswald's draft of his letter and told the FBI that she had never seen it before. Marina told the FBI, as noted in the 302 describing this interview, that she recognized Lee's handwriting and expressed shock that Ruth had been in possession of Lee's draft. (note to Ruth: this is probably the moment when your "friendship" with Marina went south, when the FBI revealed to Marina that you were a thief).

No explanation is offered by Ruth as to how this draft goes unnoticed by Lee or Marina for a day and a half.

I've listened to Ruth tell her story in many of the video clips that are available online. She has even given talks to groups about her experience in fairly recent times. It's telling, to me, that she generally skips over this part of her story. Here is the moment that she transformed from a simple housewife to an intelligence operative, she has surreptitiously acquired  Lee's draft which reveals some kind of collusion with the Russians, lies about his dealings in Mexico and his distaste for the "notorious" FBI. According to her, she does nothing with this information, she doesn't even do what seems obvious, pick up the phone and call the number Hosty left and ask if this would help the FBI.

Think about this for a minute...

She is focused on what Oswald was typing.

She is upset that Oswald wouldn't share what he wrote with her.

The draft appears like magic in her living room.

She reads it before anyone wakes up on Sunday.

She concocts an elaborate scheme to steal the draft.

She makes her own copy of it.

She hides both copies really well.

She does nothing with the information she possesses until after the assassination.

She has saved this "intel" for the FBI and withheld it from local Dallas law enforcement.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/18/2017 at 0:22 AM, Ron Bulman said:

Yes, Michael Paine was no wall flower.  He Took Lee Harvey Oswald to a ACLU (left) meeting and he took him to a John Birch Society meeting and/or a General Walker (right) speech I can't remember which at the moment.  The point is Oswald didn't drive.  Michael Paine Took his new found willing acquaintance to these events.  They didn't go watch football or baseball.  Why would Michael do this?.

Ron,

In my reading, the motive for Michael Paine to spend any time at all with Lee Harvey Oswald was because his wife had closely befriended Marina Oswald.

There was no other reason that I could see.  Marina Oswald and baby June were actually living with Ruth Paine.  What else, in propriety, could Michael Paine do than spend time with Lee?

Now -- they had very little in common.  This is what Michael Paine said.   Lee Oswald was a Fake Leftist, and Michael Paine saw right through that facade.

However -- they did have one thing in common (besides Marina Oswald's friendship to Ruth), namely, their disdain for Ex-General Edwin Walker.   This is what Michael testified.

They were also both interested in how the Dallas Right Wing operated -- being liberals in a reactionary city like Dallas.

So, on October 23rd, Michael Paine drove Lee Harvey Oswald to listen to General Walker plot the humiliation of Adlai Stevenson at the Dallas Memorial Auditorium (as Adlai was scheduled to appear there the very next evening).   

After dropping Oswald off there, Michael himself drove to the local John Birch Society meeting to see what they were all about.   Perhaps they would compare notes later.  It seems that most of the JBS members were at the Walker rally, so the JBS meeting that Michael attended was fairly boring -- as I read it.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris,

I hope you will indulge me as I lay out a theory that might work. In fact, I hope you will study the theory briefly and see if it fits the testimony as you understand it.

I have a hard time believing that Oswald would have written that letter on his own. So I believe the CIA plotters directed him to write the draft, in order that it would be in his handwriting. Likewise, I believe the CIA directed Ruth to the things she did.

(If you don't believe this could have been a CIA scripted thing, then I will certainly understand your not wanting to spend the time studying my theory.)

Here's my theory:

The CIA wanted the FBI (not DPD) to find the draft and get the impression from it that Oswald was friendly with the Russians, and had met with assassin Kostikov. Because they want Russia to be implicated.

So, this is what the plotters directed Oswald and Ruth to do:
       [Text in brackets are comments and NOT part of the story that Ruth would later tell.]

  • Oswald wrote the draft.
  • Oswald asked to use the typewriter. And he typed the letter from the draft.
  • He later mailed the typed letter.
  • [Oswald gave the draft to his handler, and Ruth's handler gave it to her to copy.]  Ruth made a handwritten copy of the draft.
  • After the assassination, Ruth gave the original draft -- which is in Oswald's handwriting -- to Hosty.     [Maybe she gave it to Hosty secretly, according to your theory.]
  • Ruth gave her copy of the draft to FBI agent Odum.

 

Now, the following is the story that Ruth Paine is supposed to tell the FBI and WC, as instructed by her handler. The parts in black are truthful and identical to the list above. Fabrications and related comments are in red. So read the red parts. The long paragraph in the middle is the most important one, as it explains why Ruth treated Oswald's original draft the way she did.

  • Oswald wrote the draft.
  • Oswald asked to use the typewriter. And he typed the letter from the draft.
  • He later mailed the typed letter.
  • FABRICATION: Oswald was careless with his draft and Ruth found it.  [The draft was really given to Ruth for her to copy.]  Ruth made a handwritten copy of the draft. FABRICATION: Because it looked like Ozzie was up to no good.
  • [THIS IS NOT PART OF THE STORY:  At this point, the logical thing to happen would be for Ruth to return the original draft where she found it, so that Oswald could find it and retake possession. BUT THIS STORY LINE WOULD CAUSE PROBLEMS. It would require the draft to be planted among Oswald's belongings (the timing for this could be problematic), in which case the DPD would discover it! This was not acceptable. Most importantly because the CIA didn't want the DPD to see the shenanigans going on between Oswald and the Russians. The CIA wanted the FBI to get the draft if at all possible, as it was written in Oswald's handwriting. So the story was written as follows to accomplish this goal:]     FABRICATION: Ruth returned the original draft from where she found it. But later she changed her mind and stole it.  [With the intention of somehow getting it into the FBI's hands in an innocent looking way. If that could not be accomplished, then at least the FBI would get the copy Ruth made.]
  • After the assassination, Ruth gave the original draft -- which is in Oswald's handwriting -- to Hosty.  FABRICATION: She claimed that she found it in Lee's bedroom.  [This lie is best forgotten. Because it begs the question as to why the DPD didn't find the draft when they searched the bedroom. So Hosty didn't mention it in his report.]
  • Ruth gave her copy of the draft to FBI agent Odum.

 

Edited by Sandy Larsen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

If you don't believe this could have been a CIA scripted thing, then I will certainly understand your not wanting to spend the time studying it.

I want to discuss and beat around all the possibilities. Let me digest your theory and I'll respond soon.

One quick comment, Hosty didn't offer a time period for when the draft may have been discovered in Marina's bedroom but I think that would have occurred long before the DPD search. During one of the searches, I think on 11/23, Ruth left local Detectives alone in her house while she went "grocery shopping". Could she have taken the document(s) out in her purse at that time?

It's curious to note that Life Photographer Alan Grant tells that when he found the Paine home the evening of 11/22 (after dark),  Michael was unloading grocery bags from the trunk of his car at the curb out in front of the house.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Chris,

I hope you will indulge me as I lay out a theory that might work. In fact, I hope you will study the theory briefly and see if it fits the testimony as you understand it.

I have a hard time believing that Oswald would have written that letter on his own. So I believe the CIA plotters directed him to write the draft, in order that it would be in his handwriting. Likewise, I believe the CIA directed Ruth to the things she did.

(If you don't believe this could have been a CIA scripted thing, then I will certainly understand your not wanting to spend the time studying it.)

Here's my theory:

The CIA wanted the FBI (not DPD) to find the draft and get the impression from it that Oswald was friendly with the Russians, and had met with assassin Kostikov. Because they want Russia to be implicated.

So, this is what the plotters directed Oswald and Ruth to do:
       [Text in brackets are comments and NOT part of the story that Ruth would later tell.]

  • Oswald wrote the draft.
  • Oswald asked to use the typewriter. And he typed the letter from the draft.
  • He later mailed the typed letter.
  • [Oswald gave the draft to his handler, and Ruth's handler gave it to her to copy.]  Ruth made a handwritten copy of the draft.
  • After the assassination, Ruth gave the original draft -- which is in Oswald's handwriting -- to Hosty.     [Maybe she gave it to Hosty secretly, according to your theory.]
  • Ruth gave her copy of the draft to FBI agent Odum.

 

Now, the following is the is the story that Ruth Paine is supposed to tell the FBI and WC (as instructed by her handler). The parts in black are truthful and identical to the list above. Fabrications and related comments are in red. So read the red parts. The long paragraph in the middle is the most important one, as it explains why Ruth treated Oswald's original draft the way she did.

  • Oswald wrote the draft.
  • Oswald asked to use the typewriter. And he typed the letter from the draft.
  • He later mailed the typed letter.
  • FABRICATION: Oswald was careless with his draft and Ruth found it.  [The draft was really given to Ruth for her to copy.]  Ruth made a handwritten copy of the draft. FABRICATION: Because it looked like Ozzie was up to no good.
  • [THIS IS NOT PART OF THE STORY:  At this point, the logical thing to happen would be for Ruth to return the original draft where she found it, so that Oswald could find it and retake possession. BUT THIS STORY LINE WOULD CAUSE PROBLEMS. It would require the draft to be planted among Oswald's belongings (the timing for this could be problematic), in which case the DPD would discover it! This was not acceptable. Most importantly because the CIA didn't want the DPD to see the shenanigans going on between Oswald and the Russians. The CIA wanted the FBI to get the draft if at all possible, as it was written in Oswald's handwriting. So the story was written as follows to accomplish this goal:]     FABRICATION: Ruth returned the original draft from where she found it. But later she changed her mind and stole it.  [With the intention of somehow getting it into the FBI's hands in an innocent looking way. If that could not be accomplished, then at least the FBI would get the copy Ruth made.]
  • After the assassination, Ruth gave the original draft -- which is in Oswald's handwriting -- to Hosty.  FABRICATION: She claimed that she found it in Lee's bedroom.  [This lie is best forgotten. Because it begs the question as to why the DPD didn't find the draft when they searched the bedroom. So Hosty didn't mention it in his report.]
  • Ruth gave her copy of the draft to FBI agent Odum.

 

Sandy, you echo some of my own thoughts but even my own conflict on one point.  I don't think the Paines where whiting CIA assets in an assassination plot prior to 11/22/63.  It is entirely conceivable they knew they were doing work for the Company shepherding the Oswald's in terms of observing their actions and directing some of them.  IMHO the letter was presented to them and after the assassination they were fully on board with what they were told to say to save themselves.  In addition the FBI figured out that Something was going on, before the assassination, then covered it up afterward to cover their own asses.

Edited by Ron Bulman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/19/2017 at 1:57 PM, Chris Newton said:

9. Sunday evening she decided to re-arrange furniture in the living room and asked Lee and Michael to help do so.

perjury1.jpg

"On the 22nd, the sofa was where it is now, as is true of all the other furniture in the room."

"now" was March 23rd, 1964.

 

The image below is a capture from CE 430. It still has marks placed by Ruth Paine during her testimony. There is a large "X" in the middle of the north wall, there are two marks that may have been "XX", (and now are barely discernible), along the opposite wall (south wall), there are also two tick marks along the south wall east of the "XX".

xxx1.jpg

 

"I just want you to put an "X" as to where the sofa is, and put a double "X" as to where the television set is"

 

xxxxex.jpg

 

I just want to make it clear that there was no confusion. Ruth Paine says the sofa was in the middle of the north wall of her living room on 11/22/63 and remained there until at least 3/23/64.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right.  Like I said, Ruth's couch was normally against the North Wall. 

If it was ever moved, it was during that Veterans Day weekend when Lee Harvey Oswald and Michael Paine moved her furniture around for her -- presumably for housekeeping and cleaning.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Jenner. Anyone entering your home from the outside walking up your driveway and looking in the windows, would they see anybody sitting on the sofa you have described?

Mrs. Paine. No.

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

Mr. Rose. ....and I could see two people sitting inside the living room on the couch,

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

 

This is the first "crack" in Mrs. Paine's "Oswald's draft story". The first time I read this section of testimony,  back in the early 1990's, I could not comprehend why this particular piece of testimony was even germane to the investigation. It seems silly to testify about what someone could see from the driveway as opposed to the sidewalk. Who cares? Back then I was just a systems analyst, I had not begun my secondary career in litigation support and I didn't have the tools needed to read a transcript with a critical eye. What I know, now, is this -- There is very little testimony that is superfluous. In this case, the testimony of the Detectives that were the first to arrive at the Paine residence on the afternoon of 11/22/63 conflict with Ruth Paine's story surrounding her "acquisition" of the "Oswald draft". In this particular section, Jenner is indirectly referencing the observations made in written statements by DPD Detective Guy Rose and Buddy Walthers. Both these Detectives were called as WC witnesses and both would contradict Ruth Paine in testimony.

rose_paines_porch.jpg

 

 

Edited by Chris Newton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Jenner. Is the desk secretary in the position now as it was on that Sunday morning?

Mrs. Paine. No; it is not.

Mr. Jenner. Will you locate in your living room where that desk secretary was, if it is not here?

Mrs. Paine. It was on the middle of the space between the --the middle of the north wall of the living room.

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

Mrs. Paine That sofa has exchanged places with the small desk secretary.

Mr. Jenner. And the desk secretary is now on the east wall of your living room : is that correct?

Mr. Paine. That is correct.

 

desk_location.jpg

 

So let's be clear.

Sunday morning the sofa was on the east wall of the living room and the small desk secretary was in the middle of the north wall.

Sunday evening, per Ruth's story, she asked Michael and Lee to re-arrange the furniture and these two pieces of furniture swapped locations.

Just prior to the re-arranging, Ruth slipped the "Oswald draft" inside the small desk secretary.

 

Note: there is a large desk secretary in the dining room just to the right of the garage door. It can be found in the extant FBI photos.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pain_grant1.jpg

 

In this cropped photograph (see note) we see Ruth, Marguerite, Marina with baby and Michael's legs.

This picture was taken on the evening of 11/22/63 after the Paines and Oswalds had returned from the DPD by Life Photographer Alan Grant.

Over Ruth's right shoulder we can see the little desk secretary. Ironically, it seems to have a note "residing" on it.

Between Ruth and Maguerite we see a closed door and the lamp on the side table.

The sofa is on the east wall of the living room.

How do we know this?

The closed door is the biggest clue. There are three exits from the living room. Two of those exits have a door, the front door and the doorway to the east bedroom hallway.

The hallway door opens inward and to the left against the living room north wall (see photo below).

There is no door for the exit to the dining/kitchen area and there never has been one. The moldings around the door are original and without scars from mounting hardware.

 

Here is the hallway door, open, in another picture taken by Ruth Paine at Christmas in 1964.

kids%20in%20recliner%20Christmas%201964.

 

 

So... the furniture was not in the configuration that Ruth claims on 11/22,  DPD Detective Rose who stated that he could see people sitting on the couch from the corner of the garage before stepping on the porch was being truthful and observant and the story about how Ruth ended the "residence" of the note on the little desk secretary was perjury.

 

note: I have an uncropped "thumbnail" of the Alan Grant photo taken from the original negative strip along with four other unpublished thumbnails. They are of poor quality but they reveal much more than the version we are used to seeing. I will be revealing these for the first time in an upcoming piece.

Edited by Chris Newton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Chris Newton said:

Mr. Jenner. Anyone entering your home from the outside walking up your driveway and looking in the windows, would they see anybody sitting on the sofa you have described?

Mrs. Paine. No.

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

Mr. Rose. ....and I could see two people sitting inside the living room on the couch,

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

 

This is the first "crack" in Mrs. Paine's "Oswald's draft story". The first time I read this section of testimony,  back in the early 1990's, I could not comprehend why this particular piece of testimony was even germane to the investigation. It seems silly to testify about what someone could see from the driveway as opposed to the sidewalk. Who cares? Back then I was just a systems analyst, I had not begun my secondary career in litigation support and I didn't have the tools needed to read a transcript with a critical eye. What I know, now, is this -- There is very little testimony that is superfluous. In this case, the testimony of the Detectives that were the first to arrive at the Paine residence on the afternoon of 11/22/63 conflict with Ruth Paine's story surrounding her "acquisition" of the "Oswald draft". In this particular section, Jenner is indirectly referencing the observations made in written statements by DPD Detective Guy Rose and Buddy Walthers. Both these Detectives were called as WC witnesses and both would contradict Ruth Paine in testimony.

rose_paines_porch.jpg

 

 


Chris,

Are we supposed to see a contradiction in the above Ruth  vs. Rose testimonies? I don't see it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Are we supposed to see a contradiction in the above Ruth  vs. Rose testimonies? I don't see it.

Sorry Sandy, for not making it clearer.

Ruth is sticking to her story here. That if someone walked up the driveway and came around the corner of her garage; they could not see anyone sitting on a sofa on the north wall of the living room. I agree, If the sofa was on the north wall.

If you're persuaded otherwise by the Alan Photo, Det. Rose's testimony and my analysis, the couch is on the east wall right next to the window and anyone sitting on it could easily have been seen from the corner of the garage.

Rose testimony:

"We walked up to the house...

...and I could hear the TV was playing,

and I could see the door was standing open...

...and I could see two people inside sitting on the couch,

and just as soon as we walked up on the porch,

Ruth Paine came to the door."

2515_w_5th_st.jpg

 

Edited by Chris Newton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Chris Newton said:

Pain_grant1.jpg

 

In this cropped photograph (see note) we see Ruth, Marguerite, Marina with baby and Michael's legs.

This picture was taken on the evening of 11/22/63 after the Paines and Oswalds had returned from the DPD by Life Photographer Alan Grant.

Over Ruth's right shoulder we can see the little desk secretary. Ironically, it seems to have a note "residing" on it.

Between Ruth and Maguerite we see a closed door and the lamp on the side table.

The sofa is on the east wall of the living room.

How do we know this?

The closed door is the biggest clue. There are three exits from the living room. Two of those exits have a door, the front door and the doorway to the east bedroom hallway.

The hallway door opens inward and to the left against the living room north wall (see photo below).

There is no door for the exit to the dining/kitchen area and there never has been one. The moldings around the door are original and without scars from mounting hardware.

 

Chris,

Are you sure that that thing on the left in the above photo is a desk secretary. Because if it is, either it is against the west wall (opposite wall from where Ruth said it was), or the arrangement of the desk secretary and couch are opposite of what Ruth testified to. As though Michael and Oswald never swapped their positions. You say it's the latter. I don't know how you determined that. But for now I'll assume you are right.

 

Quote

Here is the hallway door, open, in another picture taken by Ruth Paine at Christmas in 1964.

kids%20in%20recliner%20Christmas%201964.

 

 

So... the furniture was not in the configuration that Ruth claims on 11/22,  DPD Detective Rose who that stated he could see people sitting on the couch from the corner of the garage before stepping on the porch was being truthful and observant and the story about how Ruth ended the "residence" of the note on the little desk secretary was perjury.

 

Detective Rose said that the front door was open. So it would have been possible for him to see (from the porch area) the couch on either the north wall (through the front door) or the east wall (through the window). But I'm still assuming you are right. So he had to have seen (through the window) the couch against the east wall.

So Ruth perjured herself about the location of the couch and desk secretary. I'm not sure how it follows that she perjured herself about how she ended the "residence" of the note. Do you say that because there was no reason to lie about the furniture, and therefore the lie really had to do with the item of interest, i.e. the note?

EDIT: Actually, after seeing a photo of the house, I can tell that Detective Rose could not have gotten a decent view of the couch through the front door. Therefore he must have seen it through the window. And that confirms that Chris is right, the the couch was against the east wall of the livingroom. Therefore Ruth lied about its position and the position of the desk secretary. So was her story about rearranging the furniture a lie as well? Or did Oswald and Michael move the two items completely opposite from the way Ruth testified? I'm pretty sure it's the former.

 

Quote

note: I have an uncropped "thumbnail" of the Alan Grant photo taken from the original negative strip along with four other unpublished thumbnails. They are of poor quality but they reveal much more than the version we are used to seeing. I will be revealing these for the first time in an upcoming piece.

 

Edited by Sandy Larsen
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...