Jump to content
The Education Forum

Did Ruth Paine knowingly refuse to inform Oswald of a Trans Texas Airways better job? No. Another baseless smear.


Recommended Posts

Did Ruth Paine knowingly fail to inform Oswald of a Trans Texas Airways better job? No. The baselessness of the accusation that Ruth Paine wilfully obstructed Oswald from learning of a better job opportunity

There is an allegation, believed and repeated by many as if it is a known fact, that Ruth Paine deliberately failed to pass on a message to Lee Oswald from Robert Adams of the Texas Employment Commission of a better job opportunity, in order to prevent Lee from learning of that job.

According to the reasoning of this allegation, if Oswald had learned of the better job offer, he would have flown the coop, taken the better job and left the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD), and that would have meant the carefully-planned JFK assassination with all the elaborate planning put into setting up Lee's role in it would have been ruined, just like that.

Ruth or her handlers (so the theory goes) were not going to let a planned killing of the president Ruth had voted for and supported be thwarted in that way.

So Ruth deliberately failed to pass on the information of the better job to Lee. Lee, not knowing of the better job, did not leave the TSBD for it.

It was a close call there, but the assassination plot was preserved and went forward. Thanks to Ruth Paine preventing Lee from learning of the higher-paying job.

This or something close to it is what many of this community have believed in their bones to be fact. Because it is repeated and repeated in books and articles as if it is fact.

But there is no evidence it is true, and no plausibility it is true. It is another fabrication by which Ruth Paine has been smeared within this community. 

It is one more in the class of beliefs held and circulated about Ruth Paine founded on imagination, unanchored on any judicious reading of facts or evidence. The allegation has no substance underlying the certainty with which the belief is claimed and expressed.

Robert Adams, a placement interviewer of the Texas Employment Commission (TEC), told of having had three job referrals for Lee, on Oct 7, 9, and 15, in 1963. The first two Lee applied for but was not hired. The third, and the one of interest here, was a cargo handlers' job at Trans Texas Airways, which would have paid better than Lee's pay at the TSBD--a more desirable job. On this third job offer, on Tue Oct 15, 1963 (the day Lee applied at the TSBD), Adams called the Ruth Paine home in Irving asking for Lee. Ruth answered the phone and said Lee was not there. Adams left a message for Lee to call, so that he could tell Lee of the Trans Texas Airways job offer. Adams did not hear back from Lee the rest of that day. Not having heard back from Oswald, Adams tried again the next morning, Wed Oct 16, to reach him, at about 10:30 am, the same day that was Lee's first day of work at the TSBD.

Ruth answered the phone both times. The first time (Tue Oct 15, the day Lee was hired at TSBD) Ruth took a message for Lee. The second time (Wed Oct 16, Lee's first day of work at TSBD) Ruth told Adams that Lee had found a job, which Adams did not know until told by Ruth on Wed Oct 16. Adams then ceased further followup at that point. He had left his message, Lee had not returned the call, and now he learned Lee was employed, the objective of TEC for him; Adams considered his task concluded and wrote up his paperwork accordingly.

The paperwork--the Texas Employment Commission's records--showed Oswald as a "non-report" on the Trans Texas Airways job referral. Although that notation commonly indicated a client who had received a job referral but failed to appear for a job interview, Adams told the Warren Commission that that was not what happened in Oswald's case, that the notation reflected that he, Adams, had not gotten the Trans Texas Airways job referral to Oswald and he did not believe anyone else at the TEC had done so either, such that he did not believe the third job referral had ever been given to Oswald at all. That was Robert Adams' testimony and belief.

In Ruth Paine's testimony, Warren Commission counsel Jenner told Ruth the details of the Trans Texas Airways job including its higher pay level and asked what she knew about it. Ruth Paine responded three times with puzzlement and no knowledge or recognition of any such Trans Texas Airways or cargo handling job referral for Lee. Under continued questioning Ruth then said she did remember something--she remembered a job for which Lee had gone into Dallas to apply. 

Note what is critically important here. Lee's going into Dallas to apply for a job cannot have occurred on or after Wed Oct 16 when Lee started work at the TSBD on Wed Oct 16! But that is the date of the second and final phone call attempt by Robert Adams to reach Lee.

The memory of Ruth of Lee going into Dallas to apply for a job in her reply to Jenner, Ruth said explicitly, she remembered as having occurred before Lee started work at TSBD

Therefore the job application to which Ruth referred in her answer to Jenner--in which Ruth recalled Lee had gone into Dallas to apply, before he started at TSBD--was either one of the two earlier job referrals (#1 or #2) of Robert Adams, or some non-Texas Employment Commission job referral or application such as the one of Lee to the Wiener Lumber Company on Mon Oct 14--some job application before Lee started work at TSBD. Adams' #1 of Oct 7 was a high-paying job at Solid State Electronics Company (Lee interviewed for that one but did not get it). Ruth's description could be either the Adams' #1 or #2, or else the Wiener Lumber Company, but what Ruth recalled to Jenner was not the Trans Texas Airways (Adams #3) of Robert Adams' phone calls to Ruth of Oct 15 and 16. This is important because it shows Ruth Paine and Jenner were not talking of exactly the same thing.

The central point is that Robert Adams did not deliver the Trans Texas Airways job information or referral, intended for Lee Oswald, in either of his phone calls to Ruth Paine. Adams would not have told Ruth any details, not the name of the employer, nature of the job, pay level, anything--it was none of Ruth's business, why should he? Adams likely would not have even known who Ruth was answering the phone. The job referral was not to her, it was to Lee. Robert Adams was simply attempting to reach Lee, leaving a message asking to have Lee call him back.

At the time of that first call on Tue Oct 15 Adams does not know of Lee's TSBD job and Ruth does not know of Adams' job offer which he has in mind for Lee or its pay level. Ruth Paine does not know of any Texas Airways cargo handler's job with its good pay, benefits, and opportunity for advancement. Nor is that what she is recalling when she is pressed by Jenner to try to remember--she cannot recall a Texas Airways job opportunity because she never did know of it--not until the Warren Commission questioning of Jenner.

There is no evidence, likelihood, or reason to assume that Adams would have told Ruth any details of job offer #3 at all, not even that there was a job offer. Most likely, only a message for Oswald that Robert Adams of the Texas Employment Commission wanted him to call him back. 

Ruth therefore would not--could not, unless she had been told which she was not-- have known specifics of the Trans Texas Airways job opening, its better pay level, or anything about it, not even the name "Trans Texas Airways", in agreement with Ruth's first three answers to the Warren Commission's questioning--only a message from Robert Adams of TEC for Lee to call back.

With Lee not living at Ruth Paine's house and gone all day Tue Oct 15 and returning that evening not to Irving but to his rented room in Oak Cliff, Lee would not have gotten any message during business hours that day on Tue Oct 15 (no way for Ruth to have been in communication with him by phone). This gives Tue evening Oct 15 as the earliest window of opportunity for Ruth to have conveyed the message to Lee that Robert Adams had called.

The logical time for that message to have gotten to Lee would have been Tue eve Oct 15. Now set aside the decades of smearing of Ruth Paine concerning what happened and instead focus on facts known from documents and testimony. In terms of facts and testimony, It is neither confirmed nor excluded that Ruth talked to Lee in Oak Cliff by phone that evening.

In light of Ruth's conscientiousness on other matters, as her usual practice, it is likely Ruth would have passed on the message.

If Ruth tried to call Lee, it is unknown whether she got through to Lee. Because this is unknown, we can only reconstruct what is most likely to have happened or which we would expect to have happened.

We would expect Ruth to try to get the message to Lee, and the time that would occur would be Tue evening Oct 15 after Lee was home in Oak Cliff. The most likely way this would have worked is this: Ruth elsewhere testified that Lee would usually call every evening, to speak to Marina and also Ruth, just to keep in touch and fill in the day's news. It is reasonable that Ruth would plan on telling Lee when he called that evening, Tue eve. Although there is no specific confirmation that Lee phoned that evening, the most likely scenario is Lee did call, and in that phone call Ruth would have passed on the Robert Adams phone message.

Therefore I believe Ruth did convey the message to Lee on Tue eve Oct 15 that Robert Adams of TEC had called and wanted Lee to call him back. If Lee asked, "What is it about? Do you know?" Ruth would have said something like, "No I don't know what its about, he just asked you to call." Lee: "OK, thanks." Some form of that is what I think happened, simply because that falls into expected behavior. There is no evidence anything different from that occurred, even if we lack direct information. That Ruth would not remember some of these details when being questioned months later is attributable to imperfect memory, on a matter for which no written notes would have been preserved.  

But the notion that Ruth never passed on that message to Lee, intentionally, because she knew how great of a job offer it was (can't have Lee getting a good job offer after getting him into the TSBD!), that is just a smear inflicted on Ruth Paine from some circles in the JFK assassination research community.

What would have happened next? Lee cannot call Robert Adams that evening (Tue eve Oct 15) because it is after-hours. The first chance Lee would have to call Robert Adams would be the next morning, Wed Oct 16. But Wed morning Lee is at work at the TSBD. In any case Lee did not call Adams back, not Wed morning and not ever. This is established from the testimony of Adams. Not receiving any call from Lee by 10:30 am that morning (Wed AM, Oct 16) Adams made his second try to reach Lee by calling again to Ruth Paine's house in Irving. That is when Adams learned from Ruth that Lee was employed--news to Adams--and Adams thereupon marked his records accordingly and did no further followup.

Those who are intent upon accusing Ruth Paine have assumed that Oswald's failure to return Robert Adams' call could only have been because Lee never learned of it from Ruth, and that Ruth withheld it intentionally. But the more likely scenario is Ruth passed on the message and Oswald for whatever reason did not return the call from his choice.

If Lee was happy with his new job at TSBD, or had some other reason for wishing to remain situated at that location (n.b. many conspiracy theories suppose this), either of those could be reasons why he would not return Adams' call. But what did not happen is either Ruth or Lee ever became aware that what Adams had was a better job opportunity, because neither Ruth nor Lee ever learned any details, not even the name "Trans Texas Airways". And the reason Lee never learned was because Lee never called Robert Adams back.

Here is Ruth's Warren Commission testimony in which it is clear she has confused an earlier actual job application on the part of Oswald (either Adams' #1 or #2 or Wiener Lumber or some other employment agency's referral) before Lee started work at TSBD, whereas the later Trans Texas Airways job (Adams' #3) of the Warren Commission's interest--Ruth knows nothing of it.

JENNER: Did you ever hear anything by way of discussion or otherwise by Marina or Lee of the possibility of his having been tendered or at least suggested to him a job at Trans Texas, as a cargo handler at $310 per month?

PAINE: No, in Dallas?

JENNER: Yes.

PAINE: I do not recall that. $310.00 per month.

JENNER: Yes. This was right at the time that he obtained employment at the TSBD.

PAINE: And he was definitely offered such a job?

JENNER: Well, I won't say it was offered - that he might have been able to secure a job through the Texas Employment Commission as a cargo handler at $310.00 per month.

PAINE: I do recall some reference of that sort, which fell through--that there was not that possibility.

JENNER: Tell us what you know about it. Did you hear of it at any time?

PAINE: Yes.

JENNER: How did it come about?

PAINE: From Lee, as I recall.

JENNER: And was it at that time, or just right –

PAINE: It was at the time, while he was yet unemployed.

JENNER: And about the time he obtained employment at the Texas School Book Depository?

PAINE: It seems he went into town with some hopes raised by the employment agency - whether a public or private agency I don't know - but then reported that the job had been filled and not available to him.

JENNER: But that was –

PAINE: That is my best recollection.

JENNER: Of his report to you and Marina?

PAINE: Yes.

JENNER: But do you recall his discussing it?

PAINE: I recall something of that nature. I do not recall the job itself.

It is obvious there is some confusion here, in this testimony in mid-1964, in Ruth recalling the exact sequence in those days of mid-Oct 1963. The Adams #3 job referral, which Oswald never learned or received, cannot be what Ruth is referring to or recalling in the above, in her answer to Jenner. Because what Ruth is remembering cannot have occurred after Lee started work at TSBD, which was when Robert Adams called trying to reach Lee about the Texas Airways job. Whatever Ruth was remembering was something before Lee started work at TSBD, either the Adams #1 or #2 or some other pre-TSBD job referral--before Lee started at TSBD. 

As noted, for the first two job referrals handled by Robert Adams of Oct 7 and 9, Lee applied but was not hired. As for Adams' #3, the Trans Texas Airways of Adams' phone calls of Tue Oct 15 and Wed Oct 16, Adams stated, 

“Inasmuch as I did not talk with Oswald either by telephone or in person in connection with this job order, I do not know whether he was ever advised of this referral, but under the circumstances I do not see how he could have been.” 

That should be read, not as referring to Ruth Paine not advising Lee as to the specifics, pay level, etc., but to fellow staff at the Texas Employment Commission not advising Lee of that, the only ones who would have been in a position to advise Oswald of that job referral. Robert Adams is saying he did not advise Oswald of the Trans Texas Airways job opening and he did not see how anyone else (at TEC) could have either. 

Ruth Paine, who did so much to help that family--she drove Lee places, spent time teaching him parallel parking so he could pass a driving test, made him a birthday celebration, tried to find Lee job leads from neighbors, made a phone call to try to help Lee get a job from one of those leads learned from the neighbors, assisted Marina in having her baby--Ruth would not have knowingly obstructed Lee from learning of an opportunity for a better job. The notion is really absurd. It would be the opposite of all of her other actions and behavior with Lee prior to the assassination. The charge, the smear--this belief which has been fixated for so long in some circles--that Ruth Paine did so is without evidential basis or grounds. Its only basis for continued perpetuation is an insistence, unanchored to reason, on imagining the worst and projecting it onto Ruth Paine, for reasons that go into the realm of psychology rather than forensic investigation.

Robert Adams’ affidavit to the Warren Commission of Aug 4, 1963, can be seen at https://www.jfk-assassination.eu/warren/wch/vol11/page481.php.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are making an assumption that Mr. Adams  did not tell Ruth that he was calling about a job. you say it was none of her business. but if that was the number that Lee gave, then he certainly would have left  a message as to why he was calling even if he did not disclose the name of the potential employer. he wanted Lee to call back so he would have left a message as to why. 

You are succumbing to the Steve Roe cognitive bias problem. You are so determined to exonerate Ruth Paine that you are stretching to find innocent explanations and using different standard of proof to excuse her from responsibility. Yes- she may have been confused in her testimony or she could have been prevaricating. If she was confused, it could also mean she did not pass on the phone message from Lee. Her confusion is not proof of anything. And the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.    

and didnt Ruth indeed call the boarding house where Lee was staying and then supposedly called the FBI to tell them that Lee was using an assumed name?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

Did Ruth Paine knowingly fail to inform Oswald of a Trans Texas Airways better job? No. The baselessness of the accusation that Ruth Paine wilfully obstructed Oswald from learning of a better job opportunity

There is an allegation, believed and repeated by many as if it is a known fact, that Ruth Paine deliberately failed to pass on a message to Lee Oswald from Robert Adams of the Texas Employment Commission of a better job opportunity, in order to prevent Lee from learning of that job.

According to the reasoning of this allegation, if Oswald had learned of the better job offer, he would have flown the coop, taken the better job and left the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD), and that would have meant the carefully-planned JFK assassination with all the elaborate planning put into setting up Lee's role in it would have been ruined, just like that.

Ruth or her handlers (so the theory goes) were not going to let a planned killing of the president Ruth had voted for and supported be thwarted in that way.

So Ruth deliberately failed to pass on the information of the better job to Lee. Lee, not knowing of the better job, did not leave the TSBD for it.

It was a close call there, but the assassination plot was preserved and went forward. Thanks to Ruth Paine preventing Lee from learning of the higher-paying job.

This or something close to it is what many of this community have believed in their bones to be fact. Because it is repeated and repeated in books and articles as if it is fact.

But there is no evidence it is true, and no plausibility it is true. It is another fabrication by which Ruth Paine has been smeared within this community. 

It is one more in the class of beliefs held and circulated about Ruth Paine founded on imagination, unanchored on any judicious reading of facts or evidence. The allegation has no substance underlying the certainty with which the belief is claimed and expressed.

Robert Adams, a placement interviewer of the Texas Employment Commission (TEC), told of having had three job referrals for Lee, on Oct 7, 9, and 15, in 1963. The first two Lee applied for but was not hired. The third, and the one of interest here, was a cargo handlers' job at Trans Texas Airways, which would have paid better than Lee's pay at the TSBD--a more desirable job. On this third job offer, on Tue Oct 15, 1963 (the day Lee applied at the TSBD), Adams called the Ruth Paine home in Irving asking for Lee. Ruth answered the phone and said Lee was not there. Adams left a message for Lee to call, so that he could tell Lee of the Trans Texas Airways job offer. Adams did not hear back from Lee the rest of that day. Not having heard back from Oswald, Adams tried again the next morning, Wed Oct 16, to reach him, at about 10:30 am, the same day that was Lee's first day of work at the TSBD.

Ruth answered the phone both times. The first time (Tue Oct 15, the day Lee was hired at TSBD) Ruth took a message for Lee. The second time (Wed Oct 16, Lee's first day of work at TSBD) Ruth told Adams that Lee had found a job, which Adams did not know until told by Ruth on Wed Oct 16. Adams then ceased further followup at that point. He had left his message, Lee had not returned the call, and now he learned Lee was employed, the objective of TEC for him; Adams considered his task concluded and wrote up his paperwork accordingly.

The paperwork--the Texas Employment Commission's records--showed Oswald as a "non-report" on the Trans Texas Airways job referral. Although that notation commonly indicated a client who had received a job referral but failed to appear for a job interview, Adams told the Warren Commission that that was not what happened in Oswald's case, that the notation reflected that he, Adams, had not gotten the Trans Texas Airways job referral to Oswald and he did not believe anyone else at the TEC had done so either, such that he did not believe the third job referral had ever been given to Oswald at all. That was Robert Adams' testimony and belief.

In Ruth Paine's testimony, Warren Commission counsel Jenner told Ruth the details of the Trans Texas Airways job including its higher pay level and asked what she knew about it. Ruth Paine responded three times with puzzlement and no knowledge or recognition of any such Trans Texas Airways or cargo handling job referral for Lee. Under continued questioning Ruth then said she did remember something--she remembered a job for which Lee had gone into Dallas to apply. 

Note what is critically important here. Lee's going into Dallas to apply for a job cannot have occurred on or after Wed Oct 16 when Lee started work at the TSBD on Wed Oct 16! But that is the date of the second and final phone call attempt by Robert Adams to reach Lee.

The memory of Ruth of Lee going into Dallas to apply for a job in her reply to Jenner, Ruth said explicitly, she remembered as having occurred before Lee started work at TSBD

Therefore the job application to which Ruth referred in her answer to Jenner--in which Ruth recalled Lee had gone into Dallas to apply, before he started at TSBD--was either one of the two earlier job referrals (#1 or #2) of Robert Adams, or some non-Texas Employment Commission job referral or application such as the one of Lee to the Wiener Lumber Company on Mon Oct 14--some job application before Lee started work at TSBD. Adams' #1 of Oct 7 was a high-paying job at Solid State Electronics Company (Lee interviewed for that one but did not get it). Ruth's description could be either the Adams' #1 or #2, or else the Wiener Lumber Company, but what Ruth recalled to Jenner was not the Trans Texas Airways (Adams #3) of Robert Adams' phone calls to Ruth of Oct 15 and 16. This is important because it shows Ruth Paine and Jenner were not talking of exactly the same thing.

The central point is that Robert Adams did not deliver the Trans Texas Airways job information or referral, intended for Lee Oswald, in either of his phone calls to Ruth Paine. Adams would not have told Ruth any details, not the name of the employer, nature of the job, pay level, anything--it was none of Ruth's business, why should he? Adams likely would not have even known who Ruth was answering the phone. The job referral was not to her, it was to Lee. Robert Adams was simply attempting to reach Lee, leaving a message asking to have Lee call him back.

At the time of that first call on Tue Oct 15 Adams does not know of Lee's TSBD job and Ruth does not know of Adams' job offer which he has in mind for Lee or its pay level. Ruth Paine does not know of any Texas Airways cargo handler's job with its good pay, benefits, and opportunity for advancement. Nor is that what she is recalling when she is pressed by Jenner to try to remember--she cannot recall a Texas Airways job opportunity because she never did know of it--not until the Warren Commission questioning of Jenner.

There is no evidence, likelihood, or reason to assume that Adams would have told Ruth any details of job offer #3 at all, not even that there was a job offer. Most likely, only a message for Oswald that Robert Adams of the Texas Employment Commission wanted him to call him back. 

Ruth therefore would not--could not, unless she had been told which she was not-- have known specifics of the Trans Texas Airways job opening, its better pay level, or anything about it, not even the name "Trans Texas Airways", in agreement with Ruth's first three answers to the Warren Commission's questioning--only a message from Robert Adams of TEC for Lee to call back.

With Lee not living at Ruth Paine's house and gone all day Tue Oct 15 and returning that evening not to Irving but to his rented room in Oak Cliff, Lee would not have gotten any message during business hours that day on Tue Oct 15 (no way for Ruth to have been in communication with him by phone). This gives Tue evening Oct 15 as the earliest window of opportunity for Ruth to have conveyed the message to Lee that Robert Adams had called.

The logical time for that message to have gotten to Lee would have been Tue eve Oct 15. Now set aside the decades of smearing of Ruth Paine concerning what happened and instead focus on facts known from documents and testimony. In terms of facts and testimony, It is neither confirmed nor excluded that Ruth talked to Lee in Oak Cliff by phone that evening.

In light of Ruth's conscientiousness on other matters, as her usual practice, it is likely Ruth would have passed on the message.

If Ruth tried to call Lee, it is unknown whether she got through to Lee. Because this is unknown, we can only reconstruct what is most likely to have happened or which we would expect to have happened.

We would expect Ruth to try to get the message to Lee, and the time that would occur would be Tue evening Oct 15 after Lee was home in Oak Cliff. The most likely way this would have worked is this: Ruth elsewhere testified that Lee would usually call every evening, to speak to Marina and also Ruth, just to keep in touch and fill in the day's news. It is reasonable that Ruth would plan on telling Lee when he called that evening, Tue eve. Although there is no specific confirmation that Lee phoned that evening, the most likely scenario is Lee did call, and in that phone call Ruth would have passed on the Robert Adams phone message.

Therefore I believe Ruth did convey the message to Lee on Tue eve Oct 15 that Robert Adams of TEC had called and wanted Lee to call him back. If Lee asked, "What is it about? Do you know?" Ruth would have said something like, "No I don't know what its about, he just asked you to call." Lee: "OK, thanks." Some form of that is what I think happened, simply because that falls into expected behavior. There is no evidence anything different from that occurred, even if we lack direct information. That Ruth would not remember some of these details when being questioned months later is attributable to imperfect memory, on a matter for which no written notes would have been preserved.  

But the notion that Ruth never passed on that message to Lee, intentionally, because she knew how great of a job offer it was (can't have Lee getting a good job offer after getting him into the TSBD!), that is just a smear inflicted on Ruth Paine from some circles in the JFK assassination research community.

What would have happened next? Lee cannot call Robert Adams that evening (Tue eve Oct 15) because it is after-hours. The first chance Lee would have to call Robert Adams would be the next morning, Wed Oct 16. But Wed morning Lee is at work at the TSBD. In any case Lee did not call Adams back, not Wed morning and not ever. This is established from the testimony of Adams. Not receiving any call from Lee by 10:30 am that morning (Wed AM, Oct 16) Adams made his second try to reach Lee by calling again to Ruth Paine's house in Irving. That is when Adams learned from Ruth that Lee was employed--news to Adams--and Adams thereupon marked his records accordingly and did no further followup.

Those who are intent upon accusing Ruth Paine have assumed that Oswald's failure to return Robert Adams' call could only have been because Lee never learned of it from Ruth, and that Ruth withheld it intentionally. But the more likely scenario is Ruth passed on the message and Oswald for whatever reason did not return the call from his choice.

If Lee was happy with his new job at TSBD, or had some other reason for wishing to remain situated at that location (n.b. many conspiracy theories suppose this), either of those could be reasons why he would not return Adams' call. But what did not happen is either Ruth or Lee ever became aware that what Adams had was a better job opportunity, because neither Ruth nor Lee ever learned any details, not even the name "Trans Texas Airways". And the reason Lee never learned was because Lee never called Robert Adams back.

Here is Ruth's Warren Commission testimony in which it is clear she has confused an earlier actual job application on the part of Oswald (either Adams' #1 or #2 or Wiener Lumber or some other employment agency's referral) before Lee started work at TSBD, whereas the later Trans Texas Airways job (Adams' #3) of the Warren Commission's interest--Ruth knows nothing of it.

JENNER: Did you ever hear anything by way of discussion or otherwise by Marina or Lee of the possibility of his having been tendered or at least suggested to him a job at Trans Texas, as a cargo handler at $310 per month?

PAINE: No, in Dallas?

JENNER: Yes.

PAINE: I do not recall that. $310.00 per month.

JENNER: Yes. This was right at the time that he obtained employment at the TSBD.

PAINE: And he was definitely offered such a job?

JENNER: Well, I won't say it was offered - that he might have been able to secure a job through the Texas Employment Commission as a cargo handler at $310.00 per month.

PAINE: I do recall some reference of that sort, which fell through--that there was not that possibility.

JENNER: Tell us what you know about it. Did you hear of it at any time?

PAINE: Yes.

JENNER: How did it come about?

PAINE: From Lee, as I recall.

JENNER: And was it at that time, or just right –

PAINE: It was at the time, while he was yet unemployed.

JENNER: And about the time he obtained employment at the Texas School Book Depository?

PAINE: It seems he went into town with some hopes raised by the employment agency - whether a public or private agency I don't know - but then reported that the job had been filled and not available to him.

JENNER: But that was –

PAINE: That is my best recollection.

JENNER: Of his report to you and Marina?

PAINE: Yes.

JENNER: But do you recall his discussing it?

PAINE: I recall something of that nature. I do not recall the job itself.

It is obvious there is some confusion here, in this testimony in mid-1964, in Ruth recalling the exact sequence in those days of mid-Oct 1963. The Adams #3 job referral, which Oswald never learned or received, cannot be what Ruth is referring to or recalling in the above, in her answer to Jenner. Because what Ruth is remembering cannot have occurred after Lee started work at TSBD, which was when Robert Adams called trying to reach Lee about the Texas Airways job. Whatever Ruth was remembering was something before Lee started work at TSBD, either the Adams #1 or #2 or some other pre-TSBD job referral--before Lee started at TSBD. 

As noted, for the first two job referrals handled by Robert Adams of Oct 7 and 9, Lee applied but was not hired. As for Adams' #3, the Trans Texas Airways of Adams' phone calls of Tue Oct 15 and Wed Oct 16, Adams stated, 

“Inasmuch as I did not talk with Oswald either by telephone or in person in connection with this job order, I do not know whether he was ever advised of this referral, but under the circumstances I do not see how he could have been.” 

That should be read, not as referring to Ruth Paine not advising Lee as to the specifics, pay level, etc., but to fellow staff at the Texas Employment Commission not advising Lee of that, the only ones who would have been in a position to advise Oswald of that job referral. Robert Adams is saying he did not advise Oswald of the Trans Texas Airways job opening and he did not see how anyone else (at TEC) could have either. 

Ruth Paine, who did so much to help that family--she drove Lee places, spent time teaching him parallel parking so he could pass a driving test, made him a birthday celebration, tried to find Lee job leads from neighbors, made a phone call to try to help Lee get a job from one of those leads learned from the neighbors, assisted Marina in having her baby--Ruth would not have knowingly obstructed Lee from learning of an opportunity for a better job. The notion is really absurd. It would be the opposite of all of her other actions and behavior with Lee prior to the assassination. The charge, the smear--this belief which has been fixated for so long in some circles--that Ruth Paine did so is without evidential basis or grounds. Its only basis for continued perpetuation is an insistence, unanchored to reason, on imagining the worst and projecting it onto Ruth Paine, for reasons that go into the realm of psychology rather than forensic investigation.

Robert Adams’ affidavit to the Warren Commission of Aug 4, 1963, can be seen at https://www.jfk-assassination.eu/warren/wch/vol11/page481.php.   

Thanks Greg for, as usual, giving us info which proves the OPPOSITE of what you think it proves. Your method always saves me a lot of time. You have helped us establish that Adams spoke to Ruth and told her about the other, higher paying job.

just please be sure I never hire you to defend ME. I hope you’ll continue working for the other side. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

You are making an assumption that Mr. Adams  did not tell Ruth that he was calling about a job. you say it was none of her business.

And the people that are denigrating Ruth are making an assumption that Adams did tell her what the job was and how much it paid. And they have been running around for years saying that which is somehow ok. Let's say this-no one knows what Adams told Ruth. So, Greg's assertion has as much validity as the other side's. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

do you guys ever actually read the stuff that you post? From Greg's post:

"Adams called the Ruth Paine home in Irving asking for Lee. Ruth answered the phone and said Lee was not there. Adams left a message for Lee to call, so that he could tell Lee of the Trans Texas Airways job offer. "

Hello? HELLO? ANYBODY HOME? (Besides Ruth, I mean).

Edited by Allen Lowe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

let'd go to the Adams affadavit - he called TWICE and advised who he was and why he was calling. He was obviously talking to Ruth, whom you would have thought, if she really cared about LHO and his family, would have told LHO and given him a chance at this other (and, as we know, higher paying) job. She never told him. If you had been looking for work, and even if you found work, wouldn't you want to be advised that somebody else was offering you a job? Of course you would. But you wouldn't hear a thing if Ruth Paine was hiding the information. She knew about the offer, she took TWO calls about the other job, but she never said a word to LHO. Come on guys, use your heads and your logic. Why are LN'ers so intellectually dishonest?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Allen Lowe said:

do you guys ever actually read the stuff that you post? From Greg's post:

"Adams called the Ruth Paine home in Irving asking for Lee. Ruth answered the phone and said Lee was not there. Adams left a message for Lee to call, so that he could tell Lee of the Trans Texas Airways job offer. "

Hello? HELLO? ANYBODY HOME? (Besides Ruth, I mean).

The wording was poor. What I meant was that was Adams' purpose in leaving the message, not that he conveyed information about the job in the message to Ruth. That was what I meant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Allen Lowe said:

let'd go to the Adams affadavit - he called TWICE and advised who he was and why he was calling. He was obviously talking to Ruth, whom you would have thought, if she really cared about LHO and his family, would have told LHO and given him a chance at this other (and, as we know, higher paying) job. She never told him. If you had been looking for work, and even if you found work, wouldn't you want to be advised that somebody else was offering you a job? Of course you would. But you wouldn't hear a thing if Ruth Paine was hiding the information. She knew about the offer, she took TWO calls about the other job, but she never said a word to LHO. Come on guys, use your heads and your logic. Why are LN'ers so intellectually dishonest?

How do you know Ruth never told Lee of Adams' call, and Lee never bothered to call Adams to find out what the job was? Only because you are predisposed to view Ruth as nefarious, and then you create a narrative out of ambiguity in keeping with that predisposition.

What you are doing is making a claim that Ruth Paine was part of a JFK assassination plot, as if that is the most plausible explanation for why Oswald never returned the call from Adams. Here there is a disconnect, for according to Bill Simpich, nobody in this community--no researcher known to him--thinks Ruth was part of the assassination plot. But this idea that Ruth would intentionally keep Lee from learning about a phone call from Adams, which of course was likely to be a job lead whether or not Adams said so (as he may have without giving the details) . . . Ruth was helpful to Lee otherwise, no previous record of screwing Lee over by not passing on phone messages, so why does that become regarded not simply as plausible but certain in this case? Because you are meaning what according to Simpich no one in this community supposedly thinks, that she is part of an assassination plot involving keeping a hapless, unwitting Oswald manipulated into being there at the TSBD as part of the plot to kill JFK. Isn't that what this is really about?

I just finished watching today's Jan 6 hearing, and I see parallels between the Big Lie that Trump won the 2020 election, and the big lie that there are known facts establishing that Ruth Paine committed treason or perjury or criminal wrongdoing or working as an intelligence agency operative. Like the election fraud claims, as Giuliani put it, they had a lot of theories but no evidence. Similarly with Ruth Paine, there are a lot of theories but no evidence. Or rather, there are claims of evidence in the case of Ruth Paine which are as insubstantial as Trump's claims to evidence that he won the election by a landslide, or claims of Obama birtherism believers of evidence that Obama was born in Africa. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

How do you know Ruth never told Lee of Adams' call, and Lee never bothered to call Adams to find out what the job was? Only because you are predisposed to view Ruth as nefarious, and then you create a narrative out of ambiguity in keeping with that predisposition.

What you are doing is making a claim that Ruth Paine was part of a JFK assassination plot, as if that is the most plausible explanation for why Oswald never returned the call from Adams. Here there is a disconnect, for according to Bill Simpich, nobody in this community--no researcher known to him--thinks Ruth was part of the assassination plot. But this idea that Ruth would intentionally keep Lee from learning about a phone call from Adams, which of course was likely to be a job lead whether or not Adams said so (as he may have without giving the details) . . . Ruth was helpful to Lee otherwise, no previous record of screwing Lee over by not passing on phone messages, so why does that become regarded not simply as plausible but certain in this case? Because you are meaning what according to Simpich no one in this community supposedly thinks, that she is part of an assassination plot involving keeping a hapless, unwitting Oswald manipulated into being there at the TSBD as part of the plot to kill JFK. Isn't that what this is really about?

I just finished watching today's Jan 6 hearing, and I see parallels between the Big Lie that Trump won the 2020 election, and the big lie that there are known facts establishing that Ruth Paine committed treason or perjury or criminal wrongdoing or working as an intelligence agency operative. Like the election fraud claims, as Giuliani put it, they had a lot of theories but no evidence. Similarly with Ruth Paine, there are a lot of theories but no evidence. Or rather, there are claims of evidence in the case of Ruth Paine which are as insubstantial as Trump's claims to evidence that he won the election by a landslide, or claims of Obama birtherism believers of evidence that Obama was born in Africa. 

That’s interesting Greg. So if Ruth never let LHO know about the phone call(s), and you knew that for a fact, you might question her motive for not doing so, or at least find fault with her decision? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tracy-i agree with you that like with so many of the interviews conducted by the WC in this case, the testimony is less that clear so people can read into the historical record what they are inclined to believe. These were smart lawyers who knew what they were doing. They were engaging in damage control with each of the interviews. Without the benefit of opposing counsel, the record was not clarified.

so the best we can really say is that Adams called Paine residence to leave a message about a job opportunity and for some reason, LHO was never told about it. 

Jeff Meek did interview her in 2020 and asked her if she had informed Lee of this job offer Her response was " I don’t recall an offer like that being made. I have heard this rumor, but it’s certainly unknown to me.” Does this mean she denies a message saying he had a job opportunity or that she was unaware of the terms of the opportunity? this is another example of inexact questioning and inadequate follow-up.    

"https://www.swtimes.com/story/lifestyle/around-town/2020/07/29/paine-answers-allegations-of-cia-connections-in-jfk-assassination-part-2/42605369/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Greg,

Curious on your take of the infamous phone call between the Paines on the day of the assassination.  At 1:00 pm on November 22. 1963, Michael Paine placed a collect call to his wife to discuss Oswald's involvement in the assassination. While the telephone operator remained on the line, Michael Paine told his wife that he “Felt sure Lee Harvey Oswald had killed the President but was not responsible.” He added, “We both know who is responsible.” (FBI report of Robert C. Lish, November 26, 1963, JFK Document No. 105-82555-1437) This call took place one hour before Oswald's arrest.

Note that when Paine was interviewed by Wesley Liebeler, the attorney changed the date of the call to the following day even though he had phone records and the FBI report indicating when the call occurred:

LIEBELER: Did you talk to your wife on the telephone at any time during Saturday, November 23?
PAINE: I was in the police station again, and I think I called her from there.
LIEBELER: Did you make any remark to the effect that you knew who was responsible?
PAINE: And I don't know who the assassin is or was; no. So I did not. (2H428)
 
Just another curious loose end with the Paines and Liebeler.
 
Finally, i wonder what you think of the following:
 
Buried in volume 19 of the Warren Commission hearings and exhibits is report written by Dallas Deputy Sheriff Buddy Walthers on the day of the assassination stating that upon searching the Paine's garage, officers found “a set of metal file cabinets that appeared to be names and activities of Cuban Sympathizers.” (19H520).
 
Of course, these metal file cabinets did not make it onto the Dallas Police inventory sheets and were never entered into evidence along with Lee Harvey Oswald's belongings. If they did not belong to Oswald, then they must have belonged to the Paines. Do you know why Ruth and Michael Paine might have had a “set of metal file cabinets” containing “the names and activities of Cuban sympathizers”?  
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

How do you know Ruth never told Lee of Adams' call, and Lee never bothered to call Adams to find out what the job was? Only because you are predisposed to view Ruth as nefarious, and then you create a narrative out of ambiguity in keeping with that predisposition.

What you are doing is making a claim that Ruth Paine was part of a JFK assassination plot, as if that is the most plausible explanation for why Oswald never returned the call from Adams. Here there is a disconnect, for according to Bill Simpich, nobody in this community--no researcher known to him--thinks Ruth was part of the assassination plot. But this idea that Ruth would intentionally keep Lee from learning about a phone call from Adams, which of course was likely to be a job lead whether or not Adams said so (as he may have without giving the details) . . . Ruth was helpful to Lee otherwise, no previous record of screwing Lee over by not passing on phone messages, so why does that become regarded not simply as plausible but certain in this case? Because you are meaning what according to Simpich no one in this community supposedly thinks, that she is part of an assassination plot involving keeping a hapless, unwitting Oswald manipulated into being there at the TSBD as part of the plot to kill JFK. Isn't that what this is really about?

I just finished watching today's Jan 6 hearing, and I see parallels between the Big Lie that Trump won the 2020 election, and the big lie that there are known facts establishing that Ruth Paine committed treason or perjury or criminal wrongdoing or working as an intelligence agency operative. Like the election fraud claims, as Giuliani put it, they had a lot of theories but no evidence. Similarly with Ruth Paine, there are a lot of theories but no evidence. Or rather, there are claims of evidence in the case of Ruth Paine which are as insubstantial as Trump's claims to evidence that he won the election by a landslide, or claims of Obama birtherism believers of evidence that Obama was born in Africa. 

There you go, Greg. Ruth did not recall getting the phone call, so she clearly didn’t pass the information onto Oswald, and we know Adams told her where he was from and why he was calling. Or is it like that Marina CIA/FBI mixup? He told her he was calling about a job, and she thought he was asking for a job. Yeah that’s the ticket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lawrence Schnapf, you raise two issues that go afield from the issue of this thread but briefly, about the "we both know who is responsible" phone call, Ruth has said that both her and Michael's initial thought was that the radical right wing must be responsible for the assassination and that was the sense meant. I accept that explanation of Ruth as reasonable. On the metal file cabinets to which Buddy Walthers referred see https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/27780-the-incredible-allegation-that-ruth-paine-did-surveillance-on-castro-sympathizers/.

Speaking of Jeff Meek, I just today received his book, The Manipulation of Lee Harvey Oswald and the Cover-Up That Followed (2021). Like David Talbot, Meek thinks the CIA was deeply involved with Oswald and the assassination and cover-up but that Ruth Paine was not part of that. Summarizing Meek's interviews with Ruth Paine,

"Although there is little doubt family members had direct CIA or CIA-related associations, I was not able to directly connect Ruth Hyde Paine to any such connection. None of the many allegations directed at Paine, in my opinion, warrant a conclusion of her being a CIA contact." (p. 147)

You see--and you are an attorney with "Innocence Project" expertise--after all this time, Ruth Paine's worst critics have failed to establish a single incriminating allegation as fact to the satisfaction of consensus of CT researchers, let alone mainstream legal analysts. I suspect the reason Ruth Paine has become such a lightning rod for character attack and vicious smearing in CT circles even though to the present day there is no evidence she did anything, is because she believed the Warren Commission's finding that Oswald did it. For holding that particular belief sincerely held by tens of millions of intelligent Americans and by America's accredited institutions--a belief which she certainly did not create--in the view of some that is considered unforgiveable, beyond-the-pale unpardonable--maybe even justification for any manner of rhetorically horrible and untrue things that might be said of her. It is a sad situation.

Rene Girard, scapegoat theory. The theory in anthropology that all cultures scapegoat innocent sacrificial victims as a means of resolving conflict, that that is a cultural universal--and that cultures when they do so are literally incapable of seeing what they are doing when they do it. The application in the CT ecosytem is Ruth Paine. The innocent scapegoat, in response to trauma of which Ruth Paine had nothing to do in creating, but which the weight of that trauma is cast upon her by the traumatized tribe.

 

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...