Jump to content

Marina Oswald's Viewpoint


Recommended Posts

Nic,

Good stuff. The note in Anthony Summers' book, Not In Your Lifetime, page 424, reveals the following:

"It was an intercepted phone call between the phone numbers of Ruth Paine and her husband Michael - after the assassination - which picked up the curious remark 'We both know who is responsible' (other than Oswald)."

Tim

Since I don't happen to have a copy, can anyone shed more light on this remark in Summers' book? Who "intercepted" the call? Who made the comment, "We both know who is responsible."? Do we know that they were talking about the assassination? If anyone can shed further light on this passage, I'd be grateful. Thanks. :secret

Edited by Greg Wagner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peter Lemkin Posted Today, 06:19 AM

  QUOTE(John Geraghty @ Dec 6 2004, 01:49 PM)

I just thought that I would start some discussion on why Marina Oswald fingered Lee and now claims that lee did not kill the president and was set up? Any thoughts to her initial claims?

I have interviewed Marina and also regard her as a friend. She was sequestered in motels with intellignece related persons who for months over and over drilled her on what she 'had seen' - with the explicit and implicit threats of deportation to the USSR if she was not cooperative. Then for a long time she wanted only to live a semi-normal life. Later in her life she again became active in clearing Lee's name and getting to the truth. She knows the true story but sometimes chooses not to be too visible with it....remember she has children to protect. The times I spoke with her [in person] I was left with a sense of a really wonderful human being who had been through real hell and had survived with her morality and sanity intact. Add to that she understood the broad outline of exactly what had happened in the assassination [a conspiracy in which her husband was NOT the assassin]. From time to time she has actively worked to get at the truth, and at other times she has chosen to be less visible and just live out her life...but she never [to my knowledge] has 'given up' nor thought she had 'done all she could'. She is a very private person and wants it that way...she will not work with many people on the matter for personal reasons. She has my respect.

Mr. Lemkin,

I understand Marina's point of view and some of her actions regarding her own efforts. One of the discrepancies in her testimony I have always thought to be of the oddest nature, is the back yard photos. Many researchers assume they are fakes, that some of the items seen in the pictures have been added afterwards.

According to Marina's WC testimony:

Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall the day that you took the picture of him with the rifle and the pistol?

Mrs. OSWALD. I think that that was towards the end of February, possibly the beginning of March. I can't say exactly. Because I didn't attach any significance to it at the time. That was the only time I took any pictures.

I don't know how to take pictures. He gave me a camera and asked me someone should ask me how to photograph, I don't know.

Mr. RANKIN. Was it on a day off that you took the picture?

Mrs. OSWALD. It was on a Sunday.

Mr. RANKIN. How did it occur? Did he come to you and ask you to take the picture?

Mrs. OSWALD. I was hanging up diapers, and he came up to me with the rifle and l was even a little scared, and he gave me the camera and asked me to press a certain button.

Mr. RANKIN. And he was dressed up with a pistol at the same time, was he?

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.

Mr. RANKIN. You have examined that picture since, and noticed that the telescopic lens was on at the time the picture was taken, have you not?

Mrs. OSWALD. Now I paid attention to it. A specialist would see it immediately, of course. But at that time I did not pay any attention at all. I saw just Lee. These details are of great significance for everybody, but for me at that time it didn't mean anything. At the time' that I was questioned, I had even forgotten that I had taken two photographs. I thought there was only one. I thought that there were two identical pictures, but they turned out to be two different poses.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you have anything to do with the prints of the photograph after the prints were made? That is, did you put them in a photographic album yourself?

Mrs. OSWALD. Lee gave me one photograph and asked me to keep it for June somewhere. Of course June doesn't need photographs like that.

END

Now at this time, roughly one year later from the time she first took photos, she recalled taking two photos. In fact we know that at least 4 poses exist.

According to Gary Mack:

Quote:

Here is the HSCA photo panel report on the backyard photos: http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...l6/html/HSCA_Vo

l6_0072b.htm

Issued 25 years ago, no one has refuted their findings or duplicated the work and found discrepancies. The precise angle of the sun for that date and location is easily found and one can re-create the shadow angles precisely. No one who has done so has found any error.

Marina still says she took pictures of LHO in the backyard, though she remembers some other poses without the guns that he apparently threw away. Marina and Marguerite admitted under oath and to others, including myself, that they destroyed a fourth pose BEFORE Dallas Police found the other pictures. And Oswald is known to have sent prints to others, including the ACLU in New York (one of the employees remembered it, but found that it was missing from their file).

What you are reading on the Forum and elsewhere are the comments from people who do not fully understand photo interpretation and the physics of photography.

Gary 12/10/04

End Quote

This means there were pose(s) with the gun over Lee's head, poses with no guns at all, and 3 more poses with the guns. I suppose a half of a roll of film was spent, but yet she recalls taking one or two photos, and this is only 1 year after the fact?

It would be interesting to hear from her what the truth is regarding these photos, because as far as I can tell, we haven't heard it from her yet. Perhaps, you can ask her if she could elaborate on this issue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My problem with Marina is that although her inconsistent, fantastic Warren Commission testimony did irreperable harm to her husband, she has never really recanted any of the things she said. She has mentioned being scared, and used by the authorities, which I readily understand and can sympathize with. However, I think she owes it to the memory of her husband to at least admit some of the things she testified to were untrue. For instance, the ridiculous tale about holding the bathroom door so that Lee wouldn't leave and try to shoot Nixon. Or her testimony about the attempt on General Walker. Or her claim that she did take the obviously faked backyard photos.

It should always be remembered that almost all the damning evidence about Oswald's character comes from either Marina or Ruth Paine (with a bit of DeMohrenschildt thrown in as well). Since Ruth and Michael Paine certainly aren't going to come clean at this point, it would be nice if Marina would tell us everything she knows about the strange relationship she shared with them. I don't believe Marina has commented publicly about Ruth Paine in years, if ever, or addressed the speculation that has surrounded her possible role in setting Lee up. If Marina is genuinely interested in the truth, and in clearing the name of her childrens' father, then she should directly answer the questions we have about her testimony, the Paines, and anything else she knows.

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...