"The Assassination & Mrs. Paine" comes out this month

[Max Good]

After seven years of work, the film is finally being released to the public on June 14.  It's available for pre-order now on iTunes and any sales will really help the film rise up the charts and give it better exposure.  If you're excited to see it, please consider pre-ordering and spreading the word.  Anyone in the Bay Area is also invited to the local premiere at the Roxie Theater next Tuesday, June 7 at 6:30pm as part of the SF Docfest Film Festival.  There will be a Q&A after the show.

UPDATE

The film is now available to rent or buy on:

iTunes

Amazon

Vimeo

Google Play

Much thanks to many of you here who have participated and supported the project over the years.  It has been a thoroughly independent production and a labor of love.  Anyone accusing me of doing this for the money doesn't understand the economics of independent documentary film.

I get the impression that the film will be sparking many heated discussions!

 

Edited June 15, 2022 by Max Good
Added links for film release.

[James DiEugenio]

The film is  well done considering its an independent production and Max did not have a lot of resources at his call.

It also tries to present both sides e.g. Max Holland, Gerry Posner. And it covers a lot of ground.

When you think of it, its really kind of surprising that it took so long to get a film like this out there.  I mean: why?

 

[Greg Doudna]

Max, I posted my separate one one minute after yours here, by accident, unaware of this one. Would it be possible to address my question? I tried to reach you by email but received no response.

[James DiEugenio]

By accident?  

GD lives here.

I guess I should reply for Max.

I do not think he will answer GD directly for kind of obvious reasons.

There is no point in arguing with someone who had their mind made up on the subject before the film came out.  Or was even finished.

Its why I stopped replying to Steve Roe.

Also, if the query was already posted what was the point of positing it here?

 

Edited June 1, 2022 by James DiEugenio

[Greg Doudna]

1 minute ago, James DiEugenio said:

By accident?  

GD lives here.

I guess I should reply for Max.

I do not think he will answer GD directly for kind of obvious reasons.

There is no point in arguing with someone who had their mind made up on the subject before the film came out.  Or was even finished.

Its why I stopped replying to Steve Roe.

Also, if the query was already posted what was the point of positing it here?

 

The point was to inform that I did not know this was posted, when I posted mine, so that it would not be thought to be an intentional ambush on his announcement of his film. It was an accident. I discovered it only after I posted mine. If I had known he was announcing his film at this moment, I would have delayed on the timing of mine. 

[Ron Bulman]

Congratulations Max.  I admire your perseverance and look forward to seeing the film.  Will it be available anywhere besides iTunes?

[James DiEugenio]

I think Max may have said Amazon could be carrying it.

I am sure he will let us know if that occurs. 

[Matt Allison]

Seeing as Ruth Paine is still alive, I assume she's been questioned recently about this movie and any other new questions about her role?

And if so, is she just more sly and adept than any of her interviewers? Or is there no "there" there?

[Greg Doudna]

2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

I guess I should reply for Max.

I do not think he will answer GD directly for kind of obvious reasons.

This is not acceptable. The request is for a source, a footnote, to a published claim. There is no "obvious reason" why you should be advising Max Good to refuse to identify a source for a published erroneous claim that has not been retracted. Unless that source was you. Was it? 

Your declaration that a questioner has a bias is irrelevant and has nothing to do with ethical responsibility of an author to provide a source or footnote for a published claim.

I do not accept your standing to speak for Max Good on this unless Max Good has specifically said so which he has not. 

(https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/27802-an-inquiry-to-max-good-concerning-an-allegation-published-by-max-good-concerning-ruth-paine/. )

 

[Denny Zartman]

Excellent news. I'm looking forward to seeing the film. Thanks for being on the forum @Max Good. I appreciate it.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

6 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

There is no "obvious reason" why you should be advising Max Good to refuse to identify a source for a published erroneous claim that has not been retracted. Unless that source was you. Was it? 

Of course, Greg is 100 percent correct. There is no "obvious" reason for Good to not answer regardless of who the questioner is. The source likely was Jim D or another Paine critic.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

I contacted Robert Reynolds and he was kind enough to provide this information for the forum. For those who don't know, Reynolds is a professor in the Department of Foreign Languages and Literature at National Chi Nan University in Puli, Taiwan. He is an expert on the JFK Assassination Records Collection. His website is:

jfkarc.info | Notes on the John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection

I asked Robert about his research regarding the Paine files and here is his response:

[quote on]

I looked for the total number of files related to the Paines that are still withheld or redacted. My basis for this was the most recent update of the JFK database from NARA (May 2021). Here's how I looked for Paine-related files. I checked records where the title, subject, series name, comments or "file number" fields had the string "PAINE" anywhere in them. I then checked the same fields for the names "HYDE" (Ruth's family name), and for "HOKE" (the family name of Ruth's brother-in-law, John Hoke, who married Ruth's sister Sylvia). I also did the same for the name "Bielefeldt," a CIA employee who was apparently a friend of John Hoke's father. Finally, I checked FBI records for all docs with the case file numbers for Ruth Paine (105-126128) and Michael Paine (105-126129)

Leaving out the withheld in full tax returns (these were all in the Warren Commission numbered files under RIF prefix 179-), here are the results of my search:

I found lots of records using the name Paine, but only one document with the name Paine which still had redactions. This was a 12/05/63 memo. There are several copies of this memo in the ARC, here is an example: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=150359. There is only one name redacted in this memo, someone on the CIA's Counterintelligence staff who provided info to the FBI about Ruth's father which they obtained during a 1950s investigation.  That's it.

For the name Hyde, only the 12/05/63 memo mentioned above came up with redactions.

For the name Hoke, one more relevant record came up in the updated JFK database. Ruth's brother-in-law John Hoke applied for a position at the CIA and his application papers are in the ARC (104-10218-10011). This doc is a poor quality copy, but we can see that Hoke was not hired. The only redactions in this record are the names of a couple of CIA staff members who reviewed his application. 

Searching on the case file numbers for the Paines, there are four FBI records still redacted; three on the Paines' 1064 tax returns and one on their 1957 tax returns. These are redacted, not withheld in full according to the JFK database, so some of this material may be accessible.  All the other records with the Paine case file numbers are released: "open in full".

After my original post, I also found three more records relating to John Hoke that still have redactions, but which did not turn up in the Paine/Hyde/Hoke searches. These are 104-10120-10303 to 10305. These are all requests from CIA technical services to consult with Hoke, who at the time was employed in the Agency for International Development. To talk to him, they had to first get approval, and on these three forms the name of the person(s) who approved the request to consult with Hoke is redacted.

Total: Ruth Paine: one document (multiple copies) has one name redacted. Michael Paine: zero documents redacted. John Hoke: four docs have CIA employee names redacted.  All other documents for the Paines which are still redacted/withheld are tax related.

The updated JFK database is still not one hundred percent accurate. Those who doubt whether specific records are available can of course request them from NARA. I am very curious about cases where records said to be open in the updated database are not. Let me know if you find something. There may also still be other records on RHP or related to her family which are redacted but did not turn up in my keyword/name searches.  I would be very curious to know of those as well.

Max Good claims that there are dozens of withheld/redacted records on the Paines and Ruth specifically. If he knows this is true, he should know what the records/RIFs are. Please provide! If these are records which are withheld but are not in the JFK collection, please give details. [emphasis added by W. Tracy Parnell]

[quote off]

[James DiEugenio]

I really wish the ARRB had called in the Paines.

Carol Hewitt offered to make up a whole evidence book for them in advance and go over it with them to prepare them.

They got a lot of letters on this.  In fact, Tunheim actually had to address it later.

He said they simply did not have the means to do both the medical evidence and the Paines.

It was a wasted opportunity.  Made worse by the fact that the HSCA also failed to examine them.  Which is really incredible.

[Denny Zartman]

It seems to me they didn't want to go to where an honest investigation would have led them.

[Allen Lowe]

“Ruth's brother-in-law John Hoke applied for a position at the CIA” - that’s about all we need to know. Does anyone here know anyone who ever applied for job in the CIA? These guys were trying to make it a family business. Even if he did get turned down. Who do you supposed suggested he apply in the first place?

And re: “Max Good claims that there are dozens of withheld/redacted records on the Paines and Ruth specifically. If he knows this is true, he should know what the records/RIFs are. Please provide! If these are records which are withheld but are not in the JFK collection, please give details. [emphasis added by W. Tracy Parnell]”  How about the records that remain withheld and unseen by anyone? What is your (and Greg’s) source?

Edited June 2, 2022 by Allen Lowe