Was it really just a MOLE HUNT about "Oswald?"

[Mark Stevens]

9 minutes ago, James Norwood said:

Mark,

I have studied the same documents as Jim Hargrove and Sandy Larsen, and I have come to the same conclusions as they have.  In your critique above, you are not looking carefully enough at what the eyewitnesses stated in recalling the young Oswald (and not Robert) who was in attendance at Stripling.  It is clear that we are missing key pieces of documentary evidence, especially in the disappearance of the school records.  But that is the case for almost any aspect of the JFK case.  In this instance, I believe the evidence supports two essential points:  (1) Oswald attended Stripling Junior High School and (2) the time he was enrolled in the school was fall 1954.  The inevitable conclusion that that this student was not the same Lee Harvey Oswald concurrently attending school in New Orleans.  Here is a summary of Stripling that I have written.  Please let me know if you believe that I have misread or mistated any of the evidence.

Again, either I am misunderstanding (and no one has yet corrected me) or the goal posts are being moved to suit the argument.

As I understand the "debate" it centers upon whether LHO and HLO were both attending 2 separate schools for the school year 52-53. According to H&L proponents, during this time LHO? was in Ft. Worth attending Stripling and HLO? was in NYC attending school there. Is this not the debate? If not, then I completely misread something and I'll just take a seat, if so then please address my points as they relate to the 52-53 school year and what I understand the debate to be about.

[James Norwood]

Mark,

There has been no debate.  Jim, Sandy, and I have provided evidence and articulated conclusions based on the evidence.  The others are offering biased opinions and referring readers to other websites, as opposed to subjecting the evidence to close scrutiny. 

You need to look evidence with greater care and make up your own mind, as opposed to asking us to explain it all to you.

'Nuff said.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

5 hours ago, Mark Stevens said:

If you look at Robert's comments in context, his "mistake" becomes clear as do all of comments and what they truly mean as well as the timeline.

Thank you for your comments which make perfect sense.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

50 minutes ago, James Norwood said:

Mark,

There has been no debate.  Jim, Sandy, and I have provided evidence and articulated conclusions based on the evidence.  The others are offering biased opinions and referring readers to other websites, as opposed to subjecting the evidence to close scrutiny. 

You need to look evidence with greater care and make up your own mind, as opposed to asking us to explain it all to you.

'Nuff said.

Yes, it's all a great misunderstanding on your part Mark. The great Doctor Norwood has spoken. There is no debate-only the "facts" provided by the H&L team that us mere mortals fail to comprehend. If you will only study their "evidence" you will become enlightened.

What utter nonsense!

[Sandy Larsen]

2 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

3 hours ago, James Norwood said:

Mark,

....You need to look evidence with greater care ....

'Nuff said.

Yes, it's all a great misunderstanding on your part Mark. The great Doctor Norwood has spoken. ....

What utter nonsense!

 

Tracy,

Mark couldn't even get a simple date right. For which he seems to blame James.

James had barely told Mark:  "...the time [Oswald] was enrolled in [Stripling] school was fall 1954."

To which Mark replied:  "As I understand the 'debate'....LHO and HLO were both attending 2 separate schools for the school year 52-53. ....either I am misunderstanding .... or the goal posts are being moved to suit the argument."

What goal posts being moved? And what debate? It's just Mark bitching about James supposedly moving goal posts.

 

Edited June 22, 2020 by Sandy Larsen

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Sandy,

I think you are being too charitable in your assessment. The way I read Norwood's comment, he is saying there is no debate about H&L in general. You guys are offering facts (according to him) and the rest of us are offering "biased opinions" only. If he wants to clarify he can.

[Mark Stevens]

2 hours ago, James Norwood said:

Mark,

There has been no debate.  Jim, Sandy, and I have provided evidence and articulated conclusions based on the evidence.  The others are offering biased opinions and referring readers to other websites, as opposed to subjecting the evidence to close scrutiny. 

You need to look evidence with greater care and make up your own mind, as opposed to asking us to explain it all to you.

'Nuff said.

You're right in that you've all provided some articulated conclusions, articulated in the sense that they bend and turn as necessary.

3 hours ago, James Norwood said:

Mark,

I have studied the same documents as Jim Hargrove and Sandy Larsen, and I have come to the same conclusions as they have.  In your critique above, you are not looking carefully enough at what the eyewitnesses stated in recalling the young Oswald (and not Robert) who was in attendance at Stripling.  It is clear that we are missing key pieces of documentary evidence, especially in the disappearance of the school records.  But that is the case for almost any aspect of the JFK case.  In this instance, I believe the evidence supports two essential points:  [1] Oswald attended Stripling Junior High School and [2] the time he was enrolled in the school was fall 1954.  The inescapable conclusion is that this student was not the same Lee Harvey Oswald concurrently attending school in New Orleans for which we do have documentary evidence.  Here is a summary of Stripling that I have written.  Please let me know if you believe that I have misread or mistated any of the evidence.  

I of course disagree and believe it is you who is not looking at the carefully enough at what the "eyewitnesses" stated. Based on the evidence (I'm guessing we are both talking about the same general evidence without knowing specifically which documents you are referring to) I see nothing that suggests anything remotely near the existence of two separate Oswald's.

Quote

Robert Oswald told attorney Albert  Jenner that “junior high school there was from the seventh to the ninth grades.  And as soon as he was through with his sixth year, he started attending W. C. Stripling Junior High School.”  Robert was confused about the timeline, apparently forgetting the period his younger brother had spent in the New York public school system and at Beauregard Junior High School in New Orleans.  But other eyewitnesses have established beyond doubt that Robert was correct in identifying one of the schools attended by Harvey Oswald in Fort Worth in junior high school.  In fall 1954, Harvey attended part of the ninth grade at Stripling at a time when Lee Oswald was a student at Beauregard Junior High School in New Orleans. 

You are intentionally bending this statement to meet your needs. Context is incredibly important:

Mr. JENNER. And, at that time, I take it your brother Lee was attending Arlington Heights High School? That would be 1952?
Mr. OSWALD. Just a minute, please.
In 1952 Lee was 13 years old. He would be attending W. C. Stripling Junior High School then.
Mr. JENNER. I see. For the school year 1951-52?
Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir. Junior high school there was from the seventh to the ninth grades. And as soon as he was through with his sixth year, he started attending W. C. Stripling Junior High School.
Mr. JENNER. As soon as he finished the sixth year at Ridglea Elementary School, he entered W. C. Stripling High School, as a seventh grader?
Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir--junior high school.

You intentionally left out the qualifier that disqualifies this statement from being used in your argument, the years. The statement you are referencing does not even pertain to the years you are referencing and have stated this all pertains to; "the time he was enrolled in the school was fall 1954" and "In fall 1954, Harvey attended part of the ninth grade at Stripling..."

 

Quote

Harvey’s enrollment at Stripling followed his completion of the eighth grade at Beauregard in New Orleans the previous spring, where he was remembered by his homeroom teacher Myra DaRouse.  If the Warren Commission had carefully followed through in interviewing the Stripling students, Robert Oswald’s testimony could have potentially exposed the two Oswald boys who were attending two different schools in two different cities in fall 1954.  In addition to the testimony of Robert Oswald, a total of six eyewitnesses (Frank Kudlaty, Fran Schubert, Richard Galindo, Mark Summers, Bobby Pitts, and Douglas Gann) clearly recalled Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School.  In a videotaped interview, student Fran Schubert told John Armstrong that she recalled Oswald attending Stripling in fall 1954, and she noted that he resided with his mother across the street from the school.

Never mind the fact that we have already proven that you intentionally misled by omitting key portions of Robert Oswald's testimony to suit your needs and that the testimony does not even reference the fall of 1954

What exactly were these "total of six"(!) eyewitnesses, eyewitness to?

Kudlaty: eyewitness to the transfer of records allegedly pertaining to LHO to FBI personnel; eyewitness to "did not know or remember Oswald; thought Oswald attended 9th grade..."

Not really possible to confirm or refute. Something I guess you have to weigh against the totality of the other evidence and make your own conclusion on. It is clear though that Kudlaty did not actually know of Oswald's attendance at the school and his knowledge was solely the alleged records. With this in mind it is hard to use his statements as "eyewitness accounts of Oswald's presence at Stripling" when he never actually saw Oswald attending the school.

Schubert/Tubbs: eyewitness to seeing Oswald walk across the playground when she was 12, 40 years after the fact.

No context of how she knows the person walking across the playground and into a house he doesn't actually live in (according to Armstrong he lived in the rear house). It is important to know how she knew the person walking across the playground was LHO in 1954. What relationship did she have to be able to look across the playground and say "oh hey, that's Lee walking home for lunch, strange he's walking into that house when he lives in the rear, but hey Lee's a weird guy." Or, did she see a photo on TV 9 years after the fact, and get asked about it 40 years after the fact, and think it looked like a guy who walked into that house way back then?

There is an easy way to get some semi clarity into this statement. That would be her comments regarding Delbert McClinton. Contact him, ask him if he remembers hanging out at this house with anyone. He is alive, one of you H&L proponents could put a real nail in the coffin with a statement from him saying oh yeah, me and Lee used to hang there often.

Galindo: eyewitness to "it was 'common knowledge' that Lee Harvey Oswald attended Stripling."

To the best of my knowledge, this is the totality of his knowledge of LHO and Stripling. Is there some context I'm missing, much like with Schubert/Tubbs, this context of how it was "common knowledge" is important. Also, since according to H&L proponents a total of six eyewitnesses can place LHO as attending Stripling, common knowledge doesn't seem to really fit.

Summers: eyewitness to thinking he taught Oswald in the 7th grade.

Again, to the best of my knowledge this is the totality of Summers' knowledge, he thought he taught LHO in the 7th. Never mind the fact that merely thinking something does not make it true nor me an eyewitness to the thought, this statement does not even reference the years in question. Again, you intentionally mislead by even including this statement when it does not even pertain to the years.

Pitts: eyewitness to "when he and some of the neighborhood boys played touch football in his front yard, Lee Harvey Oswald would stand on the porch at 2220 Thomas Place and watch."

Again, this is the totality of Pitts' knowledge of LHO attending Stripling. This totality is actually him knowing absolutely nothing about LHO attending the school. His knowledge is strictly limited to remembering a boy who resembled LHO standing on the porch of 2260 Thomas Place watching them play. Never mind the fact that according to Armstrong, HLO lived in the rear apartment, and would be unlikely to be sitting on the porch of a house he didn't actually live in. If you live in the rear apartment of a front/rear duplex, there is clear separation of a porch. It would not be shared, the rear tenant would not hang out on the front porch and definitely would not just walk into the front apartment, without some preexisting relationship which allowed this type of behavior.

Gann: eyewitness to attending 9th grade at Stripling with LHO; seeing LHO shoot basketballs on the courts.

He falls into the same category as Schubert/Tubbs. This needs some kind of context which explains whether Gann saw LHO on a photo on TV 9 years after the fact, and got asked about it 40 years after the fact, and thought it looked like a guy who walked into that house way back then, or information which explains that he knew him because they conversed daily, or were in a study group, or _anything_at_all_ which helps explain his statement.

We started with a total of six eyewitnesses who "clearly recalled Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School." Based on your previous statements, during 1954. What we are left with though, is something a little different than that.

I'm not saying they have to be ignored. They though are not eyewitnesses. What they are is 1 eyewitness to LHO attending the school in 1954 (Kudlaty), 1 eyewitness to LHO attending in 1952 (Summers), 3 people who at best remember someone they think might be LHO going to the school (Schubert/Tubbs, Galindo, Gann), and 1 person who saw him at a house across the street (Gann). Take it for whatever it may be. This mishmash of ambiguity and unclear, unhashed characters is not though a total of six eyewitness to LHO attending Stripling. Exclaiming otherwise is disingenuous, at best.

Articulated conclusions indeed.

Please let me know if you believe that I have misread or misstated any of the above evidence.  

[Mark Stevens]

3 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Tracy,

Mark couldn't even get a simple date right. For which he seems to blame James.

James had barely told Mark:  "...the time [Oswald] was enrolled in [Stripling] school was fall 1954."

To which Mark replied:  "As I understand the 'debate'....LHO and HLO were both attending 2 separate schools for the school year 52-53. ....either I am misunderstanding .... or the goal posts are being moved to suit the argument."

What goal posts being moved? And what debate? It's just Mark bitching about James supposedly moving goal posts.

 

The post I just posted at 10:14 Central was began around 3pm Central. I migrated between it and other activities. The same was true then, likely anyways. In any event, I did make some serious errors in a post I made, which could be the one you are referencing. Many were due to not paying attention, and others were due to my own confusion (some confusion from the not paying attention part). I do plan on editing the post in a manner that references the mistakes while correcting them.

"Mark couldn't even get a simple date right." is definitely ironic though, considering the post I just made referencing James' inability to correctly identify a date. Much of which comes from Armstrong and H&L dogma which does the same.

[Jim Hargrove]

18 hours ago, James Norwood said:

Mark,

I have studied the same documents as Jim Hargrove and Sandy Larsen, and I have come to the same conclusions as they have.  In your critique above, you are not looking carefully enough at what the eyewitnesses stated in recalling the young Oswald (and not Robert) who was in attendance at Stripling.  It is clear that we are missing key pieces of documentary evidence, especially in the disappearance of the school records.  But that is the case for almost any aspect of the JFK case.  In this instance, I believe the evidence supports two essential points:  [1] Oswald attended Stripling Junior High School and [2] the time he was enrolled in the school was fall 1954.  The inescapable conclusion is that this student was not the same Lee Harvey Oswald concurrently attending school in New Orleans for which we do have documentary evidence.  Here is a summary of Stripling that I have written.  Please let me know if you believe that I have misread or mistated any of the evidence.  

Robert Oswald told attorney Albert  Jenner that “junior high school there was from the seventh to the ninth grades.  And as soon as he was through with his sixth year, he started attending W. C. Stripling Junior High School.”  Robert was confused about the timeline, apparently forgetting the period his younger brother had spent in the New York public school system and at Beauregard Junior High School in New Orleans.  But other eyewitnesses have established beyond doubt that Robert was correct in identifying one of the schools attended by Harvey Oswald in Fort Worth in junior high school.  In fall 1954, Harvey attended part of the ninth grade at Stripling at a time when Lee Oswald was a student at Beauregard Junior High School in New Orleans. 

Harvey’s enrollment at Stripling followed his completion of the eighth grade at Beauregard in New Orleans the previous spring, where he was remembered by his homeroom teacher Myra DaRouse.  If the Warren Commission had carefully followed through in interviewing the Stripling students, Robert Oswald’s testimony could have potentially exposed the two Oswald boys who were attending two different schools in two different cities in fall 1954.  In addition to the testimony of Robert Oswald, a total of six eyewitnesses (Frank Kudlaty, Fran Schubert, Richard Galindo, Mark Summers, Bobby Pitts, and Douglas Gann) clearly recalled Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School.  In a videotaped interview, student Fran Schubert told John Armstrong that she recalled Oswald attending Stripling in fall 1954, and she noted that he resided with his mother across the street from the school.

Shortly after the assassination, Stripling assistant principal Frank Kudlati was instructed by his supervisor, Weldon Lucas, to meet with two FBI agents, who requested the academic records for Oswald.  Kudlati dutifully surrendered the transcripts after perusing them himself.  The records collected by the FBI agents disappeared and were never seen by the Warren Commission or the American public.  In the aftermath of the assassination, the FBI should have been investigating the murder of the thirty-fifth president of the United States.  Instead, the valuable time of the FBI agents was being spent in rounding up Oswald’s employment and school records, which, at face value, had no bearing on either the guilt or innocence of a suspect who had been shot to death on live television.  But it had everything to do with concealing for posterity the identities of the two Oswald boys.  A testimonial on behalf of Kudlaty comes from historian James DiEugenio, who writes the following in the second edition of his book Destiny Betrayed:  JFK, Cuba, and the Garrison Case: 

Kudlaty’s credentials are beyond reproach.  After leaving Stripling, he became Superintendent of Schools in Waco, Texas.  He stayed there until his retirement in 1987.  When the State Department selected a group of school administrators to advise the Chinese government on education, he was one of those chosen to attend….One of the most disturbing aspects of Kudlaty’s testimony is that the FBI had to have known Oswald attended Stripling ten years previous.  Or else how could they have called Weldon Lucas the morning after the assassination. [3]

Robert Oswald also attended Stripling, but there was no way that he could have been confused with his much younger brother, given the brothers’ age difference and the fact that multiple witnesses attending the school in fall 1954 remembered Harvey Oswald long after Robert had graduated.

NOTES:

[1] Warren Commission Hearings, Vol. 1, 299.

[2] Baylor University, Taped Interviews by John Armstrong Related to Lee Harvey Oswald, Francetta Schubert: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVxa1B2wJjA&t=30s
[3] James DiEugenio, Destiny Betrayed:  JFK, Cuba, and the Garrison Case, second edition (New York:  Skyhorse Publishing, 2012), 124.

 

Dr. Norwood,

Thank you for that clear summary of the evidence that one LHO attended Stripling School in Fort Worth in the fall semester of 1954 while the other was still at Beauregard School in New Orleans. Your point about the FBI contacting Stripling principal Weldon Lucas less than 24 hours after the assassination is a clear indication that someone in the Bureau, probably Hoover himself, understood the danger of the Stripling evidence and in all likelihood planned from the beginning to make it all disappear. Small wonder the agents didn't offer Mr. Kudlaty a receipt!

Let's step back a couple of years and summarize the evidence leading up to the mysterious junior high school years of "Lee Harvey Oswald."

According to the records published by the WC, prior to moving to New Orleans and attending Beauregard Junior High School, Classic Oswald® attended school in New York City. There is considerable evidence that both Lee Harvey Oswald's attended New York schools, though the Russian-speaking youth was habitually truant and eventually had to flee the city to escape possible exposure in the NYC legal system.

Without in this post getting into the evidence for two Oswalds attending New York City schools, I'd just like to remind readers that the surviving evidence clearly shows that the original school records of Lee Harvey Oswald disappeared while in FBI custody. I've summarized that evidence earlier in this thread in THIS POST.

Which brings us to New Orleans, or I should say brings half of us to New Orleans, because school records published by the Warren Commission clearly show that in the fall semester of 1953, one Oswald attended Beauregard School in Louisiana at the very same time the other Oswald attended Public School 44 in the Bronx, one of the five boroughs of New York City. Here are the details:

Fall Semester, 1953:

One LHO attended Beauregard JHS in New Orleans for 89 school days.

The second LHO was enrolled in Public School 44 in New York City, where he was present for 62 full days and 5 half days, was absent 3 full days and 8 half days, for a total accounting of 78 days.

The very next year, for the fall semester starting in 1954, we have one Oswald at Stripling, the other, according to the school records, still at Beauregard.  No one should be surprised by this.

Hoover’s FBI “lost” all the original NYC school records and replaced them with far easier to modify photostatic copies.  What were they hiding?  

For the very next year, the Bureau apparently failed to notice that the Beauregard and PS 44 NYC records exposed two different LHOs.

And so why should anyone be surprised that one LHO attended Stripling at the same time the other LHO was still at Beauregard? It fits a well established pattern.  

Instead, several H&L critics want us to believe that Robert Oswald was wrong about LHO attending Stripling, that Stripling assistant principal Frank Kudlaty was lying about handing over Oswald’s records, that Fran Schubert was lying about watching Oswald walk home from Stripling to the now well-known address of  2220 Thomas Place (she actually points to it during her 1997 interview), and that five different articles in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram saying LHO attended Stripling School were ALL wrong.

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Wow. The 'Harvey and Lee' belief system really is a cult, isn't it?

Mark Stevens has demonstrated the flimsiness of Messrs Hargrove and Norwood's witnesses:

Quote

We started with a total of six eyewitnesses who "clearly recalled Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School." ... What we are left with though, is something a little different than that ... What they are is 1 eyewitness to LHO attending the school in 1954 (Kudlaty), 1 eyewitness to LHO attending in 1952 (Summers), 3 people who at best remember someone they think might be LHO going to the school (Schubert/Tubbs, Galindo, Gann), and 1 person who saw him at a house across the street (Gann). Take it for whatever it may be. This mishmash of ambiguity and unclear, unhashed characters is not though a total of six eyewitness to LHO attending Stripling.

What does Jim do? Does he come up with arguments to counter Mark's analysis? No, because of course he can't; Mark is clearly correct.

Instead, Jim puts his head in the sand and pretends that nothing has happened! He doesn't even acknowledge the evidence Mark put forward. He simply regurgitates the same 'Harvey and Lee' talking point all over again. It's as though Mark's comments don't exist.

If anyone has ever debated religious fundamentalists, you'll recognise the same mentality here. Fundamentalists, a category which evidently includes 'Harvey and Lee' cult members, cannot accept that they might be wrong.

Praise Armstrong! We know in our hearts that we are right, and that's the end of it. Whatever evidence the unbelievers put forward cannot, by definition, be correct. We know that the unbelievers are wrong, so let's keep quoting more Scripture at them, and eventually they'll understand the error of their ways.

Will Jim at least have the honesty to deal with the points Mark made? Take each of the six witnesses in turn and explain how Mark was wrong, or admit that Mark was right.

[Jim Hargrove]

What Mr. Bojczuk above calls “’Harvey and Lee’ talking point(s)” is actually the overwhelming evidence that one Lee Harvey Oswald attended Stripling School.  According to evidence produced by the FBI/WC, this is simply impossible if there was only one LHO.  Mr. Bojczuk considers all evidence about the topic of two Oswalds a “distraction,” unless, of course, that evidence is about the mastoidectomy and ignores evidence of two Oswalds.

Mr. Bojczuk demands that I defend my position in reference to this statement by Mark Stevens: “We started with a total of six eyewitnesses who ‘clearly recalled Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School,’" when, in fact, the only person here who made any statement at all in reference to “six eyewitnesses” was Mr. Stevens himself. 

Mr. Stevens apparently created the “six eyewitness” strawman argument by reading the John A’s raw notes about Stripling and drawing his own conclusion that John had identified “six eyewitness.”  I did make reference to John’s notes about gym teacher Mark Summers and student Doug Gann, but neither I nor Dr. Norwood nor Sandy Larsen would make a blanket statement about “six eyewitnesses” here, not because we don’t believe it, but because we can’t prove it with recorded testimony.  If Mr. Stevens insists on putting words that were never spoken into our mouths, would he at least make an effort to show where we allegedly said such things?

Here’s what we can say: In a November 15, 1959 Fort Worth Star-Telegram story entitled “My Values Different, Defector Told Mother,” Marguerite was quoted as saying: "He quit school at 14 …. he quit in the eighth grade ….. but was so set on getting an education, he quit and returned three times."  That, of course, hardly matches the WC record of Classic Oswald®  But it makes perfect sense if we understand that the Russian-speaking Oswald attended, and later quit, Stripling JHD, Warren Easton High School, and Arlington Heights High School.

We can also say, with absolute certainty, that in this 1997 interview, former Stripling student Fran Schubert said she watched LHO walk home across the street from Stripling to the duplex that once stood at 2220 Thomas Place, the same address where Marguerite Oswald was living on November 22, 1963.  What a coincidence!

We can also say that, in this 1997 interview, former Stripling School assistant principal Frank Kudlaty, who went on the become Superintendent of Schools for Waco Texas, said that he met two FBI agents at Stripling less than 24 hours after the assassination and handed over LHO’s Stripling records. 

We can also point to this additional evidence:

"Teachers and classmates remember him as attending Stripling, though there is no official record.”

--2017 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article

This 1959 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article indicates LHO attended Stripling.

This 1962 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article indicates LHO attended Stripling.

Published two days after the assassination of JFK, this Fort Worth Star-Telegram article reported: “He attended Stripling Junior High School and Arlington Heights High School before joining the Marines.”

In his 1964 Warren Commission testimony, Robert Oswald said that LHO attended Stripling School.

This May 11, 2002 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article indicated that “a boy walked to Stripling from a home nearby.  His mother was living in a home behind the school on Thomas Place by 1963, when the world learned the name Lee Harvey Oswald.”

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram is and was hardly a hotbed of conspiracy theories.  Many of its articles make the assumption that LHO killed JFK.  But it is also the local paper that covered events at Stripling School, and one of the conclusions it clearly reached was that LHO was Stripling's "best-known" student.

[Mark Stevens]

 

7 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Wow. The 'Harvey and Lee' belief system really is a cult, isn't it?

Mark Stevens has demonstrated the flimsiness of Messrs Hargrove and Norwood's witnesses:

What does Jim do? Does he come up with arguments to counter Mark's analysis? No, because of course he can't; Mark is clearly correct.

Instead, Jim puts his head in the sand and pretends that nothing has happened! He doesn't even acknowledge the evidence Mark put forward. He simply regurgitates the same 'Harvey and Lee' talking point all over again. It's as though Mark's comments don't exist.

If anyone has ever debated religious fundamentalists, you'll recognise the same mentality here. Fundamentalists, a category which evidently includes 'Harvey and Lee' cult members, cannot accept that they might be wrong.

Praise Armstrong! We know in our hearts that we are right, and that's the end of it. Whatever evidence the unbelievers put forward cannot, by definition, be correct. We know that the unbelievers are wrong, so let's keep quoting more Scripture at them, and eventually they'll understand the error of their ways.

Will Jim at least have the honesty to deal with the points Mark made? Take each of the six witnesses in turn and explain how Mark was wrong, or admit that Mark was right.

It would have to be for him to read this, and everything else, and then make the following post...

3 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

What Mr. Bojczuk above calls “’Harvey and Lee’ talking point(s)” is actually the overwhelming evidence that one Lee Harvey Oswald attended Stripling School.  According to evidence produced by the FBI/WC, this is simply impossible if there was only one LHO.  Mr. Bojczuk considers all evidence about the topic of two Oswalds a “distraction,” unless, of course, that evidence is about the mastoidectomy and ignores evidence of two Oswalds.

 

This alleged "overwhelming evidence" has been discussed, or at the least attempted to be discussed numerous times. It quickly devolves into diverting topics when they become untenable. Anytime the witness statements are rightfully questioned, it quickly becomes a mastectomy argument or school record argument. All points can be addressed, stop derailing conversations, address points at hand, and then move on to the next points.

Quote

Mr. Bojczuk demands that I defend my position in reference to this statement by Mark Stevens: “We started with a total of six eyewitnesses who ‘clearly recalled Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School,’" when, in fact, the only person here who made any statement at all in reference to “six eyewitnesses” was Mr. Stevens himself. 

Mr. Stevens apparently created the “six eyewitness” strawman argument by reading the John A’s raw notes about Stripling and drawing his own conclusion that John had identified “six eyewitness.”  I did make reference to John’s notes about gym teacher Mark Summers and student Doug Gann, but neither I nor Dr. Norwood nor Sandy Larsen would make a blanket statement about “six eyewitnesses” here, not because we don’t believe it, but because we can’t prove it with recorded testimony.  If Mr. Stevens insists on putting words that were never spoken into our mouths, would he at least make an effort to show where we allegedly said such things?

 

Apparently you missed the part where I clearly quoted Dr. Norwood who made the assertion that there were a total of 6 eyewitnesses. Since, you apparently missed it, I quote him here again:

Quote

Harvey’s enrollment at Stripling followed his completion of the eighth grade at Beauregard in New Orleans the previous spring, where he was remembered by his homeroom teacher Myra DaRouse.  If the Warren Commission had carefully followed through in interviewing the Stripling students, Robert Oswald’s testimony could have potentially exposed the two Oswald boys who were attending two different schools in two different cities in fall 1954.  In addition to the testimony of Robert Oswald, a total of six eyewitnesses (Frank Kudlaty, Fran Schubert, Richard Galindo, Mark Summers, Bobby Pitts, and Douglas Gann) clearly recalled Oswald attending Stripling Junior High School.  In a videotaped interview, student Fran Schubert told John Armstrong that she recalled Oswald attending Stripling in fall 1954, and she noted that he resided with his mother across the street from the school.

 

You have quoted this post, thanked him for what he wrote in it, then turned right around and told this forum he didn't write the words in it.

This highlights the cornerstone of what I, and many others who do not believe the H&L tale constantly tell you and other H&L proponents attempt to explain as the root of all of this, the consistent misreading and misrepresentation of what actually has been said.

No sir, I did not put words in anyone's mouth.

I guess this another, "articulated conclusion" from the H&L crowd.

Quote

Here’s what we can say: In a November 15, 1959 Fort Worth Star-Telegram story entitled “My Values Different, Defector Told Mother,” Marguerite was quoted as saying: "He quit school at 14 …. he quit in the eighth grade ….. but was so set on getting an education, he quit and returned three times."  That, of course, hardly matches the WC record of Classic Oswald®  But it makes perfect sense if we understand that the Russian-speaking Oswald attended, and later quit, Stripling JHD, Warren Easton High School, and Arlington Heights High School.

Which Marguerite? Besides, if she's part of some government conspiracy why should her words be trusted? Why would you use the words of a government agent who literally lives a daily life of lying to everyone about the core nature of who she is, why she exists, and her purpose on earth as the words of a person who shouldn't be trusted to tell you the sky is blue?

The minor issue of your cognitive dissonance aside, I can't comment fully since I can't find the article "My Values Different, Defector Told Mother." What I can safely state is that when LHO was in 8th grade coincided with his time in NYC, in which he did in fact have truancy issues.

Quote

We can also say, with absolute certainty, that in this 1997 interview, former Stripling student Fran Schubert said she watched LHO walk home across the street from Stripling to the duplex that once stood at 2220 Thomas Place, the same address where Marguerite Oswald was living on November 22, 1963.  What a coincidence!

At no point have I questioned whether she said that. I don't think any logical person would question whether she said that. What is being questioned is what qualifies her to say that. You know, what evidentiary fact, how she knew the person was LHO, which establishes the ultimate fact that she saw LHO walk across the parking lot? When someone asks her "how did you know that was LHO"? Is her reply, "Oh when I saw the picture on TV I realized it looked like the same guy." Or, did she state "Oh, I talked to Lee everyday I knew it was him." Also, it is important to note the fact that she allegedly saw LHO enter the front apartment when the person (HLO) lived in the rear apartment according to Armstrong. If HLO, or anyone for that matter, lived in the rear apartment, they would not under normal and common circumstances enter into the other residence, or hang out on that porch without some pre-existing relationship.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/evidentiary_fact

Quote

We can also say that, in this 1997 interview, former Stripling School assistant principal Frank Kudlaty, who went on the become Superintendent of Schools for Waco Texas, said that he met two FBI agents at Stripling less than 24 hours after the assassination and handed over LHO’s Stripling records. 

We can also state, that weighed against the totality of all evidence, as highlighted ad nauseum, this amounts to literally nothing more than either the mistaken, or fabricated memories of a single person. A person who also states he has no knowledge of Oswald attending the school.

Quote

 

We can also point to this additional evidence:

"Teachers and classmates remember him as attending Stripling, though there is no official record.”

--2017 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article

This 1959 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article indicates LHO attended Stripling.

This 1962 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article indicates LHO attended Stripling.

Published two days after the assassination of JFK, this Fort Worth Star-Telegram article reported: “He attended Stripling Junior High School and Arlington Heights High School before joining the Marines.”

In his 1964 Warren Commission testimony, Robert Oswald said that LHO attended Stripling School.

This May 11, 2002 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article indicated that “a boy walked to Stripling from a home nearby.  His mother was living in a home behind the school on Thomas Place by 1963, when the world learned the name Lee Harvey Oswald.”

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram is and was hardly a hotbed of conspiracy theories.  Many of its articles make the assumption that LHO killed JFK.  But it is also the local paper that covered events at Stripling School, and one of the conclusions it clearly reached was that LHO was Stripling's "best-known" student.

 

Finally, we've arrived at the unimpeachable credentials and reporting history of the storied Ft. Worth Star-Telegram.

For the 2017 article there are schools with named teachers and students who can remember him, but only nameless, faceless students and teachers regarding Stripling. This in no way provides evidence of anything other than people (what people?) thinking something. Without any tangible information to actually discuss, what are we to discuss? Some unknown amount of people remembering something? Surely time can be better spent on something which can be tangibly proven in one regard or another. If other information comes to light which identifies "who" remembers him and "what" they remember (outside of the 6 which have been discussed ad nauseum), then this should just be moved on from instead of constantly brought up when it is a position that cannot really be "attacked" or "defended" All we can prove is the newspaper said some people remember some things without clarifying who those people were, or what they believed.

For the 2002 article, it states "Yet a 1956 student would become the school's best-known. For a few weeks - his mother moved several times across Fort Worth - a boy walked to Stripling from a home nearby."

Unless I am mistaken (which we all know I have been, at least I admit it), in 1956 LHO was attending Arlington Heights. If he was walking to Stripling, it was to catch the bus.

Why though would you use this, if the case in point is LHO/HLO attending in 1954? What point does it make? Will you continue to unabashedly use it? Or, will you at least modify your stance to "While this doesn't actually have anything to do with LHO/HLO attending Stripling at all, much less in 1954, it does have Stripling and Oswald in the same sentence. Close enough?"

The other 4 articles, from 59-64 all likely reference the same error in reporting made in the original 1959 article. The wording is too similar not not have the same source. Eventually what you have is the same error being referenced in different years. Not a whole new round of investigative reporting each time a new story popped up. Every time they wrote an article and found it fitting, they inserted the blurb from the 1959 article into the new report. This isn't anything wild or crazy, newspapers make mistakes (as referenced and evident in their "Yet a 1956 student" error), and they also use archival information when reporting on historical characters on a fairly regular basis.

Lee Harvey Oswald is likely the "best-known student" at almost every school he went to. Not because we was "well known at school," but because he was involved in (and accused of) the assassination of an American President.

In agreement with Mr. Bojczuk below, I'm going to have to ask the same. Can you take the six witness statements and explain how I was wrong?

Quote

Will Jim at least have the honesty to deal with the points Mark made? Take each of the six witnesses in turn and explain how Mark was wrong, or admit that Mark was right.

I await your articulated conclusion.

[Jim Hargrove]

LHO AT STRIPLING SCHOOL
FITS THE PATTERN OF EVIDENCE
ABOUT “LEE HARVEY OSWALD”

Mark Stevens argues against the existing evidence that one “Lee Harvey Oswald” attended Stripling School in Fort Worth at the very same time the other LHO was at Beauregard School in New Orleans.  By extension, he needs readers to believe that the assistant principal at Stripling School in 1963 was lying when he said in a 1997 interview now on YouTube that he gave the Stripling records of Lee Harvey Oswald to the FBI less than 24 hours after the assassination.

This post will show the following:

I.  It is entirely likely that two different LHOs attended both Stripling and Beauregard schools in the fall semester of 1954 since there is clear evidence that, just one year earlier, two different LHOs had attended schools in New York City and New Orleans for the full term of the fall semester of 1953.

II. The FBI’s destruction of the the original Stripling records for LHO follows a familiar pattern.  The original New York City school records for Oswald also disappeared, as did all other school and early employment original records of LHO, all while in FBI custody.

III. Even though LHO’s attendance at Stripling was covered up by the FBI/WC, clear evidence has survived even decades later that it was common knowledge among local residents, teachers, and students that LHO attended Stripling School.

Now, on to the details….

I. The fall 1964 Stripling/Beauregard simultaneous attendances is merely a continuation of the fall 1963 NYC/Beauregard attendances.  We’ve presented the 1963 NYC/Beauregard evidence many times, but no one has ever debunked it, and so here it is again:

In the fall semester of 1953, one LHO attended Public School 44 in the Bronx borough of New York City, where he was present for 62 full days and 5 half days, was absent 3 full days and 8 half days, for a total accounting of 78 days.

Also in the fall semester of 1953, the other LHO was present at Beauregard Junior High School in New Orleans for 89 school days.

Both of the records above are printed in the Warren volumes.  Many times it has been claimed that someone else, somewhere else has debunked this, and so, again, I invite any interested party to show the debunking evidence right here on this forum so that we can all see it.

II. The FBI destroyed all of Lee Harvey Oswald’s original school and early employment records, including the New York City school records.

The ARRB’s Joe Freeman wrote in a July 10, 1995 memo: “Let me state at the start that all the school and employment records I looked at in the Warren Commission Exhibit files at Archives II were copies, not originals.”  Where did those original records go?  If you want to argue that the originals were returned to the sources, please show me your evidence for that.  Why did the FBI lose the records for LHO’s schooling in 1964?

Without repeating the details here, I’ve posted the evidence that the FBI destroyed LHO’s original NYC school records in THIS POST earlier in this thread.

III. It was, and remains, common knowledge among local Stripling School district residents and current and former students and teachers that Lee Harvey Oswald attended Stripling School in the 1950s.

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram confirmed this simple fact in an article published in 2017 and updated in 2019.

Once again, 

This 1959 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article indicates LHO attended Stripling.

This 1962 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article indicates LHO attended Stripling.

Published two days after the assassination of JFK, this Fort Worth Star-Telegram article reported: “He attended Stripling Junior High School and Arlington Heights High School before joining the Marines.”

In his 1964 Warren Commission testimony, Robert Oswald said that LHO attended Stripling School.

This May 11, 2002 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article indicated that “a boy walked to Stripling from a home nearby.  His mother was living in a home behind the school on Thomas Place by 1963, when the world learned the name Lee Harvey Oswald.”

And then, of course, there is the Fort Worth Star-Telegram article from 2017 mentioned above.

Way back on December 27, 1993, John Armstrong wrote to Ricardo Galindo, the then current principal of Stripling School, asking if there were any records for Lee Harvey Oswald's attendance the school.  Mr. Galindo telephoned John back and said that, although there were no records, it was “common knowledge” that LHO had attended the school. [Harvey and Lee, p. 97]

And, of course, in a 1997 interview, the assistant principal of Stripling School described how he met two FBI agents at Stripling less than 24 hours after the assassination and gave them the records for LHO.  Mr. Stevens can only say that Frank Kudlaty, who went on to become the Superintendent of Schools for Waco, Texas, was mistaken (about his entire story of meeting FBI agents hours after the assassination???) or lying.

A few other details....

17 hours ago, Mark Stevens said:

 

Finally, we've arrived at the unimpeachable credentials and reporting history of the storied Ft. Worth Star-Telegram.

For the 2017 article there are schools with named teachers and students who can remember him, but only nameless, faceless students and teachers regarding Stripling. This in no way provides evidence of anything other than people (what people?) thinking something. Without any tangible information to actually discuss, what are we to discuss? Some unknown amount of people remembering something? Surely time can be better spent on something which can be tangibly proven in one regard or another. If other information comes to light which identifies "who" remembers him and "what" they remember (outside of the 6 which have been discussed ad nauseum), then this should just be moved on from instead of constantly brought up when it is a position that cannot really be "attacked" or "defended" All we can prove is the newspaper said some people remember some things without clarifying who those people were, or what they believed.

For the 2002 article, it states "Yet a 1956 student would become the school's best-known. For a few weeks - his mother moved several times across Fort Worth - a boy walked to Stripling from a home nearby."

Unless I am mistaken (which we all know I have been, at least I admit it), in 1956 LHO was attending Arlington Heights. If he was walking to Stripling, it was to catch the bus.

Why though would you use this, if the case in point is LHO/HLO attending in 1954? What point does it make? Will you continue to unabashedly use it? Or, will you at least modify your stance to "While this doesn't actually have anything to do with LHO/HLO attending Stripling at all, much less in 1954, it does have Stripling and Oswald in the same sentence. Close enough?"

The other 4 articles, from 59-64 all likely reference the same error in reporting made in the original 1959 article. The wording is too similar not not have the same source. Eventually what you have is the same error being referenced in different years. Not a whole new round of investigative reporting each time a new story popped up. Every time they wrote an article and found it fitting, they inserted the blurb from the 1959 article into the new report. This isn't anything wild or crazy, newspapers make mistakes (as referenced and evident in their "Yet a 1956 student" error), and they also use archival information when reporting on historical characters on a fairly regular basis.

Lee Harvey Oswald is likely the "best-known student" at almost every school he went to. Not because we was "well known at school," but because he was involved in (and accused of) the assassination of an American President.

In agreement with Mr. Bojczuk below, I'm going to have to ask the same. Can you take the six witness statements and explain how I was wrong

First, let me say that Mr. Bojczuk’s demand that I explain a comment by James Norwood confused me a bit.  I thought he was ascribing the statement to me.  Dr. Norwood is entirely capable of speaking for himself, if he cares to make the effort.

On the subject of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram (FWST) articles, there would have been no confusion over the actual dates of LHO’s attendance at Stripling if the FBI hadn’t destroyed the school’s records.  The fact that differing dates are presented is a clear indication that all the reports were not based on just information from Robert Oswald.

The fact that Mr. Stevens does not find the five reports of the FWST up to his standards for this discussion does not negate the fact that they exist, along with other evidence.

For more than 60 years, the Fort Worth Star-Telegram has been reporting that Lee Harvey Oswald attended Fort Worth’s Stripling Junior High, a school that this very same newspaper regularly covers.  If Fort Worth’s biggest and longest existing daily newspaper made so many glaring errors about this famous student, it is pretty reasonable someone in the Fort Worth area would have noticed and corrected it, which would surely have been published by the FWST itself.

By all means, please show us that retraction, or ANY evidence from Fort Worth that all those reports were wrong.
 

[Mark Stevens]

29 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Now, on to the details….

 

18 hours ago, Mark Stevens said:

This alleged "overwhelming evidence" has been discussed, or at the least attempted to be discussed numerous times. It quickly devolves into diverting topics when they become untenable. Anytime the witness statements are rightfully questioned, it quickly becomes a mastectomy argument or school record argument. All points can be addressed, stop derailing conversations, address points at hand, and then move on to the next points.

 

As if on cue, Mr. Hargrove enters and does the exact thing, literally everyone knew he was going to do.

Never mind the witness statements in my right hand, what about these school records in my left? No Mr. Hargrove, not on to the details. How about back to the questions you've been asked and which you continue to avoid?

STOP DERAILING CONVERSATIONS. ADDRESS POINTS AT HAND. THEN MOVE ON TO THE NEXT POINT.

Will you, Mr. Hargrove, answer the question that has been put forth multiple times and please stop answering a question which wasn't even asked?

Quote

Will Jim at least have the honesty to deal with the points Mark made? Take each of the six witnesses in turn and explain how Mark was wrong, or admit that Mark was right.

I will gladly discuss the topic of the school records with you. I will not though allow you to continue to use "sleight of hand" to divert from the conversation at hand and wiggle out of answering questions presented to you.

Also, while you ask about "retractions," you clearly made an error. Where is your retraction? You clearly accused me of putting words in peoples mouths, then righteously exclaimed how none of you would dare to make such an assertion without evidence (lollerskates) when it was quite clearly made. At no point have you retracted or corrected that statement, like all your errors you just move on like you didn't actually say the words you actually said. The point being is that often mistakes are made which aren't addressed, especially by the people making them. It does in no manner mean a mistake wasn't made because you didn't acknowledge it.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

By extension, he needs readers to believe that the assistant principal at Stripling School in 1963 was lying when he said in a 1997 interview now on YouTube that he gave the Stripling records of Lee Harvey Oswald to the FBI less than 24 hours after the assassination.

I'm only going to say this one more time. Kudlaty wasn't "lying" in the traditional sense of the word. He was told by his friend Jack White about the amazing "evidence" that Armstrong had developed. After being coached by White, Kudlaty "remembered" the "confiscated" records that he had previously never mentioned to anyone or given a second thought or bothered to secure a receipt for. 

Contrary to what most people believe, memory is not like a snapshot from a camera. It is an mixture of what you remember and your subsequent experiences. Kudlaty was influenced by White to "remember" the whole scenario. Now please quit repeating the same nonsense over and over and address the real evidence.