The 2nd-Floor Baker/Oswald Encounter Has Been Debunked

[Gil Jesus]

18 hours ago, Ron Ege said:

Gil, thanks.

'Tis difficult for me to get around this:

I believe that a person's earliest description of a scene/incident to be more valid, than later recalls.

From Officer Marion Baker's first day, handwritten Affidavit in Fact:

" . . . . The man I saw was a white man appeared 30 years old 5 - 9 - 165 dk hair and wearing a lt brown jacket . . . ."

Baker being unfamiliar with the building, thinking he was on the 3rd or 4th floor, I do get it.

However, as a trained police officer, I do not buy that he could get LHO's weight description that wrong - by what, some 30 pounds?

And then the "jacket".  Even with a shirt being worn outside the trousers, I do not believe that it would appear to be a jacket (and no proof Oswald owned such a jacket).

Baker looks at the person, very close-up (3-4 feet away), while questioning Truly, yet still describes the guy's outerwear as a jacket?

First of all, Oswald's work shirt that day, to me, appears more of a medium brown.  I do realize that is subjective - but 

How many jackets sport an Ivy League type, button down collar?  

And how about those fairly miniscule - for a jacket anyway - obvious, eight white buttons - 2 on the collar and six down the shirt's center, contrasted against the dark shirt fabric?  Not very noticeable?

According to Baker, he confronted the man and asked Truly if the guy belonged there.  That scene is much more than a "fleeting glimpse".

I can't buy it.

 

Don't forget, Ron, when Mrs. Reid saw Oswald on the second floor just before the so-called Lunchroom Encounter, Oswald wasn't even wearing his brown shirt. She testified he was wearing a "white t-shirt and some kind of wash trousers". When shown, she would not identify CE 150 ( the brown shirt ) as one he was wearing when she saw him, saying " I have never, so far as I know, ever seen that shirt". And she testified also that when she saw Oswald "He did not have any jacket on". ( 3 H 276 )

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0142b.htm

The man Baker saw "on the third or fourth floor" who was "walking away from the stairway" ( btw, no mention of a lunchroom ) wearing a "light brown jacket" was not Oswald. And Roy Truly vouched for that man.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217800#relPageId=160

 

Edited October 24, 2022 by Gil Jesus

[Jonathan Cohen]

41 minutes ago, Gil Jesus said:

Here's a good article on why people believe lies. You'll recognized some of the traits as those of "lone nutters" ( # 5 especially is one I've cited in the past ).

https://goodfaithmedia.org/why-do-good-people-believe-lies/

Gil Jesus spreading around listicles about why "good people believe lies" is pretty ironic considering he likes to post transphobic lies such as "God determined that kid's sex. Not a kindergarten teacher, God Almighty. And he doesn't make any mistakes."

[Ron Ege]

12 minutes ago, Gil Jesus said:

Don't forget, Ron, when Mrs. Reid saw Oswald on the second floor just before the so-called Lunchroom Encounter, Oswald wasn't even wearing his brown shirt. She said he was wearing a "white t-shirt and some kind of wash trousers". She would not identify CE 150 ( the brown shirt ) as one he was wearing when she saw him, saying " I have never, so far as I know, ever seen that shirt". And she testified also that when she saw Oswald "He did not have any jacket on". ( 3 H 276 )

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0142b.htm

The man Baker saw with the light brown jacket was not Oswald. And Truly vouched for that man.

 

Gil, of course.  That would be a double "ouch" for Officer Baker.

But even if Mrs. Reid was mistaken (and I don't believe she was) and Oswald was some kind of "quick change artist" that day, ala Superman and somehow had put on his shirt right before the "encounter", Baker's description still does not "wash".

I am curious if someone here may have an idea as to how/why Baker could've been so mistaken, writing in his own hand, "lt brown jacket", in his first day Affidavit in Fact, quite soon after the "encounter" - when his memory would still have been quite vivid.

There is a stark visual difference between a man dressed in a medium brown ivy league, button down collar shirt with eight contrasting white buttons or a white tee shirt and one who is wearing a "lt brown jacket".

I'm probably misremembering, but wasn't there a report from someone at street level, prior to the shots, saying they saw a man in the sixth-floor window dressed in a jacket?

 

[Tom Gram]

25 minutes ago, Gil Jesus said:

Don't forget, Ron, when Mrs. Reid saw Oswald on the second floor just before the so-called Lunchroom Encounter, Oswald wasn't even wearing his brown shirt. She testified he was wearing a "white t-shirt and some kind of wash trousers". When shown, she would not identify CE 150 ( the brown shirt ) as one he was wearing when she saw him, saying " I have never, so far as I know, ever seen that shirt". And she testified also that when she saw Oswald "He did not have any jacket on". ( 3 H 276 )

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh3/html/WC_Vol3_0142b.htm

The man Baker saw with the light brown jacket was not Oswald. And Truly vouched for that man.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217800#relPageId=160

 

I wonder if the man with the light brown jacket could be the “tan jacket man” seen by Richard Carr and others. 

One witness told the FBI she saw a guy running from the TSBD ditch a tan jacket in the bushes while running from the TSBD on television that day, but hadn’t seen that scene in any subsequent footage. Probably bogus but who knows. Eyewitnesses did see a man in a tan jacket running from the TSBD. 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11575#relPageId=234

There’s also this “maintenance worker” that allegedly shows up in the DPD basement during the Oswald shooting. 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=816

[Ron Ege]

3 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

I wonder if the man with the light brown jacket could be the “tan jacket man” seen by Richard Carr and others. 

One witness told the FBI she saw a guy running from the TSBD ditch a tan jacket in the bushes while running from the TSBD on television that day, but hadn’t seen that scene in any subsequent footage. Probably bogus but who knows. Eyewitnesses did see a man in a tan jacket running from the TSBD. 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11575#relPageId=234

There’s also this “maintenance worker” that allegedly shows up in the DPD basement during the Oswald shooting. 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=816

Tom, thanks for the reminder.

It seems the guy in the jacket that day - got around quite a lot that day.

I wonder if Officer Baker would've recognized him and given the same description, had he run into him again? 🙄

[Gil Jesus]

9 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

I wonder if the man with the light brown jacket could be the “tan jacket man” seen by Richard Carr and others. 

One witness told the FBI she saw a guy running from the TSBD ditch a tan jacket in the bushes while running from the TSBD on television that day, but hadn’t seen that scene in any subsequent footage. Probably bogus but who knows. Eyewitnesses did see a man in a tan jacket running from the TSBD. 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11575#relPageId=234

There’s also this “maintenance worker” that allegedly shows up in the DPD basement during the Oswald shooting. 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=217812#relPageId=816

 

10 minutes ago, Ron Ege said:

Gil, of course.  That would be a double "ouch" for Officer Baker.

But even if Mrs. Reid was mistaken (and I don't believe she was) and Oswald was some kind of "quick change artist" that day, ala Superman and somehow had put on his shirt right before the "encounter", Baker's description still does not "wash".

I am curious if someone here may have an idea as to how/why Baker could've been so mistaken, writing in his own hand, "lt brown jacket", in his first day Affidavit in Fact, quite soon after the "encounter" - when his memory would still have been quite vivid.

There is a stark visual difference between a man dressed in a medium brown ivy league, button down collar shirt with eight contrasting white buttons or a white tee shirt and one who is wearing a "lt brown jacket".

I'm probably misremembering, but wasn't there a report from someone at street level, prior to the shots, saying they saw a man in the sixth-floor window dressed in a jacket?

 

Howard Brennan told the FBI that the man he saw in the window with the rifle was a "white male, early 30's, appeared to be 5-10/165 lbs., no hat, wearing light colored clothes, possibly khaki, could have been wearing a sweater or light weight jacket."

Edited October 24, 2022 by Gil Jesus

[Benjamin Cole]

I respect all the great work shown here, and thanks to Sandy Larsen for kicking off a great discussion. 

But I do have a couple questions.

OK, let's posit LHO was in the first floor lunch room when the JFKA happened.

1. Really? LHO was a photographer, with an intense interest in politics and and an admirer of JFK. So, in that rare moment when one could actually see a US President, and even get a photograph...LHO sits inside and eats lunch. 

2. LHO had been in the Marines, was a CIA asset, and knew the sound of gunfire. So, after hearing gunshots, at or near the time the President is expected to pass by, LHO then goes and buys a coke. 

Human nature is inexplicable, and sure, someone could go buy a coke after hearing three or four gunshots. 

But...methinks LHO was up to something in the TSBD. He was a CIA asset while the CIA-JFKA plot was unfolding, in part, inside the TSBD.

Just IMHO....

If not on the Sixth floor, was LHO turning off the TSBD power? A look out? 

Yes, they made LHO the lone-gunman-patsy....but to make LHO a patsy, they had to make sure LHO was not outside taking pictures....

Just thinking out loud...

 

[Gil Jesus]

7 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

 

Yes, they made LHO the lone-gunman-patsy....but to make LHO a patsy, they had to make sure LHO was not outside taking pictures....

Just thinking out loud...

 

And that could have been done by telling him to expect a phone call. He would have been forced to stay close to a phone and remain in the building. Just an opinion.

[John Cotter]

1 hour ago, Gil Jesus said:

Thank you. Here's a good article on why people believe lies. You'll recognized some of the traits as those of "lone nutters" ( # 5 especially is one I've cited in the past ).

https://goodfaithmedia.org/why-do-good-people-believe-lies/

Thanks for sharing that article, Gil.

It’s no wonder so many people swallow and regurgitate official falsehoods, given all the reasons for it as set out so clearly in the article.

As Plato said over 2,500 years ago, “No one is more hated than he who speaks the truth”, as the Turkish proverb goes, “He who speaks the truth is expelled from nine villages”, or as TS Eliot wrote, “humankind cannot bear very much reality”.

The Milgram obedience experiment showed that the majority of people are willing to murder innocent strangers merely on the say so of an authority figure.

We’ve seen this pervasive gullibility, intolerance and viciousness – deliberately fomented by the authorities – manifested in the authoritarian groupthink of the past few years. We seem to be biologically hard-wired as a species so that a majority of us are so susceptible, and this susceptibility facilitates hierarchical control, domination and abuse.

Specifically, the thought has occurred to me that I should forward your video by email direct to the FBI and the White House explaining that it proves beyond any doubt that there was a JFKA conspiracy and that there was an official cover-up of the conspiracy and requesting a response.

What would there be to lose by doing that? They can pretend that this proof doesn’t exist if they’re not confronted with it.

If they are confronted with it, they can no longer pretend and the matter could be pursued further.

Edited October 24, 2022 by John Cotter

[Sandy Larsen]

33 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

OK, let's posit LHO was in the first floor lunch room when the JFKA happened.

1. Really? LHO was a photographer, with an intense interest in politics and and an admirer of JFK. So, in that rare moment when one could actually see a US President, and even get a photograph...LHO sits inside and eats lunch. 

2. LHO had been in the Marines, was a CIA asset, and knew the sound of gunfire. So, after hearing gunshots, at or near the time the President is expected to pass by, LHO then goes and buys a coke. 

 

Ben,

Earlier you argued that the second-floor encounter DID occur. Now it sounds like you are arguing against the second-floor encounter. Because your #1 and #2 above are what is believed by those who believe the encounter DID occur.

Did you change your mind?

Those of us who don't believe the second-floor encounter occurred, believe that Oswald bought a coke first, then ate lunch on the main floor, and then went outside to watch the presidential parade. (And I believe he  had a camera in his hands.)

 

33 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Yes, they made LHO the lone-gunman-patsy....but to make LHO a patsy, they had to make sure LHO was not outside taking pictures....

 

I don't believe the CIA plotters set Oswald up as a gunman. I believe they set him up as a member of a hit team. It was the U.S. Government who made him out as a gunman. A lone one.

 

[Gil Jesus]

deleted

Edited October 24, 2022 by Gil Jesus

[Michael Griffith]

Here's what Sylvia Meagher said about the Coke issue:

         The timing of Oswald's purchase of a coke from the dispensing machine on the second floor is very important in evaluating the assertion that he had sufficient time to descend from the sixth floor and encounter Truly and Officer Baker, and in assessing Oswald's "escape." The original story out of Dallas was that Oswald had a bottle of coke in his hand when he was stopped by Baker. Leo Sauvage wrote in Commentary (ibid., p. 56) that the "police officer and the manager of the building had described Oswald as holding a Coca-Cola bottle in his hand," and that that was one of the details announced by Chief of Police Jesse Curry on Saturday, November 23. The Warren Report, however, insists that Oswald had nothing in his hands when Baker and Truly saw him. (WR 151) That is what both Baker and Truly said when they testified before the Commission, whatever they may have said on earlier occasions.

          Baker, for some reason, was asked to provide a further statement attesting to his
encounter with Oswald, only a few days before the Warren Report was released. In that
brief handwritten statement of September 23, 1964, Baker states that he entered the Book
Depository to determine if the shots might have come from that building and that on the
second floor he "saw a man standing in the lunchroom drinking a coke." However, a line
is drawn through the phrase "drinking a coke," so as to delete it, the deletion being initialed
by Baker. (CE 3076) The very fact that Baker said spontaneously that Oswald was drinking
a coke, regardless of the later deletion, has self-evident significance of great persuasiveness. (Accessories After the Fact, p. 74)

[Benjamin Cole]

11 hours ago, Gil Jesus said:

And that could have been done by telling him to expect a phone call. He would have been forced to stay close to a phone and remain in the building. Just an opinion.

Yes, IMHO, at a minimum, someone that LHO trusted played a ruse, and had him wait somewhere or a phone call. 

 

[Benjamin Cole]

11 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Ben,

Earlier you argued that the second-floor encounter DID occur. Now it sounds like you are arguing against the second-floor encounter. Because your #1 and #2 above are what is believed by those who believe the encounter DID occur.

Did you change your mind?

Those of us who don't believe the second-floor encounter occurred, believe that Oswald bought a coke first, then ate lunch on the main floor, and then went outside to watch the presidential parade. (And I believe he  had a camera in his hands.)

 

 

I don't believe the CIA plotters set Oswald up as a gunman. I believe they set him up as a member of a hit team. It was the U.S. Government who made him out as a gunman. A lone one.

 

OK, thanks for the clarification. 

IMHO, I am uneasy with the "LHO was on the street or TSBD steps " when shots rang out 11/22. 

Not one person has ever said they were with or saw LHO when shots rang out, and there are zero photographs of LHO outside the TSBD on 11/22. 

IMHO, LHO's whereabouts when shots rang out is a mystery. I suspect the sixth floor window (someone was there), or possibly he was cutting off the power to the TSBD. Maybe he responded to a simple ruse, and went to answer a phone call. 

Yes, it could be the original intel-plan was to make LHO the patsy in a larger commie plot, and that would explain LHO being on the street, feigning innocence---obviously not the gunman---on 11/22. Then plans changed, and the new cover story was LHO was the lone gunman. 

We can contend that documents were forged, and certainly affidavits were monkeyed with (in terms of content), and certainly the WC was a prosecutorial body (not an investigative body), with lawyers whose job it was to convict LHO, and LHO alone, and present that narrative.  All true, and probably even more. 

Just IMHO, but before I assent LHO was outside the TSBD taking pictures...well, it would be nice to have a photograph of that. 

As for LHO's total un-involvement in the JFKA---I am uneasy, as LHO went home and got a gun in the JFKA aftermath. 

An ugly possibility: Yes, LHO was a CIA asset and the CIA murdered JFK. LHO was a good soldier and participated in the plot. The WC was created to cover that up. 

A second possibility: LHO was a CIA asset, and the CIA murdered JFK. LHO was a JFK admirer and patriot, and so was hoodwinked into a CIA plot, rogue or otherwise, to murder the president. The WC was created to cover that up. 

A remote possibility: LHO was a CIA asset and knew nothing at all about a CIA plot to murder the President, unfolding, in part, inside the very building he worked. The CIA made LHO the patsy. The WC covered that up. 

If LHO was totally un-involved in the JFKA, was there a need to murder him? 

Interesting topic. 

 

 

 

 

But t

 

 

[Ron Ege]

17 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Yes, IMHO, at a minimum, someone that LHO trusted played a ruse, and had him wait somewhere or a phone call. 

 

Exactly - as has been mentioned.

LHO liked JFK.  What would be his reason to not take the opportunity to see the POTUS pass by the TSBD and instead - just loll around inside on the first floor, eating?

Oh, maybe it was his biography: former marine with access to classified U-2 intel, who, allegedly, turned defector, and having returned home, faced no legal repercussions;  landed a job as a JS employee with possible access to classified info; established his bona fides as a FPCC officer/activist passing out leaflets with Banister's address; offering his help to Bringuier as a would be "soldier of fortune" to help the DRE; called a specific FBI agent after he, Ozzie, is jailed for the "street brawl"; reportedly, on more than one occasion, passed documents to FBI agents.

We are familiar with the list - it could be longer.

LHO was immersed in the world of intelligence and seemingly, fairly cozy (less Hosty) with the FBI

Much evidence after almost six decades, indeed, factual/provable - and tons and tons more - though maybe circumstantial, quite telling - all pointing to it.

Has there ever been anyone else, just 24 years old, ostensibly just an average "Joe Blow" with Oswald's history?

Nothing to see folks; move along.  Lee was just "off his rocker".

Regardless of the depth of his knowledge of and/or his involvement (as a player) in the JFK Assassination, at a minimum, it was certainly enough that he left work within a few minutes after.

Maybe you were alive and at work on 11/22/63.  If you were, I'll bet you didn't leave work almost immediately, go home, change your clothes, "pack your gat", and go to the movies, in a 600 or so seat theatre with only 20 or so patrons in attendance, and serially sit down precisely next three or four people, moving on after several seconds to the next.  And Oswald was quite bookish, and IMO saw himself as a bit of an intellectual.  Does anyone know if he routinely went to movie matinees that featured war films? 

Over the past almost 60 years, I have talked to 100s of people of every age and from every walk of life, and no one did.

When they heard the news report, every one of them, at the least, exchanged some brief thoughts/words of shock/grief/outrage/despair over what happened, and then went home as soon as they were able/allowed - to family or to friends to listen to the radio or watch TV. 

Oswald stayed in the TSBD (ala Prayer Man, I will allow that he may have stepped out for seconds, no one noticing in the excitement of the moment, before ducking right back in). 

Remember, the motorcade was running late.  If LHO had been told a "disturbance" would happen at "X time" and he would receive a call at that specific time, and he didn't - he could've gone outside, very momentarily, to check as to why.

He was on the first floor "eating and having a coke" - for a reason.

My vote continues to be - waiting for that aforementioned phone call.