Anna Marie Kuhns Walko

[Richard Booth]

3 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

Wow. Getting this last picture up was worth the wait.

I couldn't make out a thing in the full picture, but this blow up is really intriguing.

There's the "trench coat/head scarf lady" again, walking over to the knoll side of Elm. She really gets around.

It looks to me like a man wearing a suit who does not look like Oswald, it's just a guy in a suit in the background who looks no different than any other guy in a suit.

It was represented on BOR as an Oswald double and if it were the man supposedly seen by Roger Craig I would expect a man in a white t-shirt, not a main wearing a suit coat with a receeding hairline who does not appear, to me, to look anything like LHO.

[Richard Booth]

14 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

No documents should be "sold". We have too many paper silos that are inaccessible to researchers. Everyone should scan their docs and make them publicly available. There may researchers focusing on  issues that an "owned " document might be relevant that the owner might not realize.

 

These docs have no inherent value. They aren't like an autographed baseball or a letter written by a president. They should be part of the " commons"

I don't think any of this is germane to the subject. I posted looking for a photo that was part of a collection so I went to the source: the collection

I don't care if someone wants to sell documents. I personally wouldn't do it, and I'm not looking to buy documents either. The point was to say that these were indeed once sold as a collection and the photo I was looking for was in this collection.

[Richard Booth]

10 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

Looks good Mark, if its not Oswald its certainly someone who could be mistaken for him. 

It's definitely not Oswald given the receeding hairline and the suit he's wearing. I wouldn't mistake that guy for Oswald on the basis of the suit jacket alone and the age of the man based on the hairline.

I think to the contrary this is a man that no rational person would look at and say "it's an Oswald double" - that is absurd to me.

[Richard Booth]

15 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

the vast majority it if was documents from NARA available as of the eighties and nineties

 

 

I read an article about her in The Fourth Decade published in 1994. The amount of dedication, time, and effort she put in at the Archives is worthy of massive respect.

She and Malcolm Blunt would both be fascinating to listen to, to hear stories about their efforts in the archives. 

My understanding of the documents that were sold in these "collections" is they were things she found in her many hours going through documents at NARA. 

It is people like her, and Malcolm Blunt, who I think have some wonderful stories to tell, but I'm weird like that. I would read a book if it were just about a person's lifelong journey in the archives and what they found.  It's one reason I loved Barry Ernest's book so much: it had so many details about his journey (not in archives, but in research) and that was a pleasant surprise. 

To me, AMKW is a hero.

[Richard Booth]

Speaking of selling documents:

I spoke to Sherman Skolnik on the phone in the mid 90s (I was a teenager at the time) and he offered to send me some documents on Abraham Bolden for $10.  I didn't bite.

In my research on Oklahoma City I spent a couple years collating news reports on the case: Every news report on the OKC bombing of any value published between April 19th, 1995 and the present. This took many hours using several services, some paid, some not, to get all the clippings.

I took my clippings, and all of the court transcripts, FBI document, and ATF documents I had amassed over several years and I donated all of them to a website which put them all online for everyone. 

Though I spent many hundreds of hours gathering materials and even spent my own money to get what I needed, in the end, I wanted other students of the case to be able to access my research materials and that's why I donated them online. 

I never considered selling my documents. 

On the other hand, if I had spent 7 hours a day in NARA and spent hundreds of dollars on making copies, for several years, I can see a situation whereby selling a collection of the best things you got would be okay. Anna Marie spent hundreds of hours of her life doing this and selling collections for a small fee could have allowed her to recoup some of the money she spent making copies. Seems reasonable to me.

Ultimately if someone wants to sell documents that's their choice. I wouldn't do it, but that's just me and I'm not going to tell someone else what to do.

Edited September 5, 2020 by Richard Booth

[Larry Hancock]

Well Richard, I will close out by simply saying the image discussed here is the same as that from a negative I obtained from AMKW and I received it as the photo she described as being of someone discussed as possibly being Oswald.  My and others take on the resemblance is subjective.  Clearly  you have a different view and attitude about it.  

Your take is your own but I was simply trying to be helpful; I have attempted to contact AMKW about her collection but so far with no luck.   I will post if I hear something from her but otherwise I'm done with this thread.

[Joe Bauer]

There are two men walking side by side in the photo.

I'll admit that the more visible man closest to the viewer wearing what looks like a suit or darker top doesn't strike me as a clearly strong Oswald look-a-like, but what about the shorter fellow behind him? Looks like he is wearing a light top, maybe even a T-shirt?

With all the photos being taken between the grassy knoll and the TXSBD building in the minutes after the shooting, you'd hope that one of these may have been snapped of the area and at the exact time that Roger Craig says he saw an Oswald look-a-like running down the grass and getting into a Rambler station wagon. But, alas, no such luck.

[Richard Booth]

6 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

Well Richard, I will close out by simply saying the image discussed here is the same as that from a negative I obtained from AMKW and I received it as the photo she described as being of someone discussed as possibly being Oswald.  My and others take on the resemblance is subjective.  Clearly  you have a different view and attitude about it.  

Your take is your own but I was simply trying to be helpful; I have attempted to contact AMKW about her collection but so far with no luck.   I will post if I hear something from her but otherwise I'm done with this thread.

I really appreciate your identifying the photo, and others posting it.  My disagreement over it looking like Oswald shouldn't construe as a reflection upon you guys trying to be helpful, and I am grateful for that.

I also appreciate Rob posting the photo. 

On the internet, context is sometimes hard to infer. I hope folks realize that me thinking this photo doesn't look like Oswald is no personal comment on them and I find everyone here to be really helpful, agreeable, and wiser than I am for the most part. 

My salt was directed at that darn photo, not you guys.

Edited September 5, 2020 by Richard Booth

[Richard Booth]

I should add here that I believe Roger Craig, and I find the H&L book to be absolutely fantastic. There is so much excellent research in that book from Mexico City to the rifle, beyond the central thesis.

If a person doesn't believe the central thesis of H&L, that's fine, and I would argue that what John uncovered in all the dual records is in and of itself incredibly curious. If a person doesn't believe the H&L thesis then they've got a whole bunch of records that put a man in two places at the same time to explain.

I personally dislike arguing back and forth on things like that. 

In this thread, I was excited to hear about a photo that was represented as something that it doesn't look like, to me, and I think my replies conveyed that disappointment.

I don't wish to be mistaken, so please understand I've no issues with anyone here and I am very grateful for the identification of the photo by the experienced and knowledgeable folks here. 

[John Deignan]

I believe the men walking in the photo are Jerry Coley and Charlie Maulky. They can be seen in the Hughes film and Jerry explains his movements in Dealey Plaza that day on the youtube video "additional pools of Blood were found in Dealey Plaza"

[Joe Bauer]

22 minutes ago, John Deignan said:

I believe the men walking in the photo are Jerry Coley and Charlie Maulky. They can be seen in the Hughes film and Jerry explains his movements in Dealey Plaza that day on the youtube video "additional pools of Blood were found in Dealey Plaza"

Didn't Jerry Coley claim that he was sitting on some type of higher up structure as JFK drove by?

If so, then one of the higher up seated fellows in this photo ( one in grey suit, one in a dark suit ) is Coley...correct?

[John Deignan]

In the previous posted photo. I didn't make the markings. Disregard the red circle. Coley and Maulky are standing on a "concrete bowl" above the crowd.

[John Deignan]

11 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

Didn't Jerry Coley claim that he was sitting on some type of higher up structure as JFK drove by?

If so, then one of the higher up seated fellows in this photo ( one in grey suit, one in a dark suit ) is Coley...correct?

yes. I believe so.

[John Deignan]

I guess Jerry Coley is the man in the lighter colored suit that seems to resemble Oswald in those earlier photos.

[Richard Booth]

Thanks for the additional details John & Joe. It's too hard for me to know if the man in the blow-up of the photo is any particular person, given the size and quality of the images. It could be many different people,to my eye.

About the only thing I can discern in the blow-up is the man appears to be wearing a suit-jacket, which rules out Oswald right away for me.