Can Oswald's denials be reconciled with the Lone Nut position?

[Matthew Koch]

30 minutes ago, Lance Payette said:

No, it wasn't, but whatever.

 

2 hours ago, Steve Roe said:

Yet given all that, how can a man be so stupid to get himself framed with his own rifle? 

Lance I'm right about this just like the other stuff I told you.. 

[David Von Pein]

16 minutes ago, Lance Payette said:

Neither "sociopathic" nor "loser" is a term I would apply to him [Lee Oswald].

Boy, I disagree with you there, Lance. Oswald was most definitely both of those things (IMO).

[Pat Speer]

49 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

LP---

Marina was under intense personal and organizational pressure, even threats of deportation, and was generally wildly inconsistent in her commentary to the WC, which came to regard her as a useless witness. This was before she went to some JFKA conferences. 

I really can't blame Marina (or anyone else) for perhaps mentally struggling in the aftermath of the JFKA. She went through an experience no one should. 

Sure, you can speculate about LHO's character-personality. I can too, and so can the next guy.

LHO was boy who joined astronomy and chess clubs in high school, went through Marine boot camp at age 17, and then at a very young age was assigned skilled, secret work at the Marine Atsugi base in Japan. 

This is a sociopathic loser? 

Forgotten today is how many young people could not afford college in the 1950s, and joined the military as a type of higher education. 

 

As a relative newbie--in that I only started really researching the case in 2003--I felt self-conscious about my newbie status, and bought up many a DVD from old Lancer Conferences and COPA conferences. And I don't recall Marina speaking at any of them. It is my understanding, moreover, that she shied away from most everyone with an interest in the case outside David Lifton and Debra Conway. So I don't think Lance's implication she changed her impressions after going to conferences is fair, or accurate.

I do think Lifton showed her some stuff that influenced her, but that's not the same as her going to conferences--which would suggest she was seeking attention and perhaps even the affection of the research community, when she was not. 

Edited December 14, 2022 by Pat Speer

[Benjamin Cole]

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

As a relative newbie--in that I only started really researching the case in 2003--I felt self-conscious about my newbie status, and bought up many a DVD from old Lancer Conferences and COPA conferences. And I don't recall Marina speaking at any of them. It is my understanding, moreover, that she shied away from most everyone with an interest in the case outside David Lifton and Debra Conway. So I don't think Lance's implication she changed her impressions after going to conferences is fair, or accurate.

I do think Lifton showed her some stuff that influenced her, but that's not the same as her going to conferences--which would suggest she was seeking attention and perhaps even the affection of the research community, when she was not. 

PS-

She also granted a confused live interview to the old columnist Jack Anderson, who produced a pretty good documentary (for the time and place) on the JFKA a few decades back. I think by then Marina had decided LHO had not done the deed. 

I think you are right---I have watched a lot of the JFKA conferences on Youtube or where-ever, and Marina does not haunt them, nor did she ever really try to parley her fame into becoming a celebrity of sorts. Very understandably, she seemed to want obscurity. 

Well, you are no newbie anymore. Your website is a formidable body of work. 

Edited December 14, 2022 by Benjamin Cole

[Benjamin Cole]

3 hours ago, Lance Payette said:

I am getting a wee bit tired of people mischaracterizing what I've said about Oswald. I would daresay the Oswald I've come to know is a far more well-rounded and fully-developed man than the cardboard cut-out of most conspiracy theories. Neither "sociopathic" nor "loser" is a term I would apply to him. I doubt very seriously that any pressure Marina was under would have distorted her fundamental view of him as a grandiose misfit who would find happiness "only on the Moon, perhaps."

Clarke's typology characterizes Type I as possessing extremism that is "rational, selfless, principled and without perversity." Type II are "are persons with overwhelming and aggressive egocentric needs for acceptance, recognition and status.  There is none of the cognitive distortion associated with psychoses." I don't say either of these is Oswald to a T, but they are far closer than "sociopathic loser."

Did anyone actually read Clarke's profiles, I wonder? They specifically concern political assassins and are quite insightful.

Well, fine. I wonder how you (or others, LN'ers or CT'ers) "come to know" a man you never met, but so be it. We will have to agree to disagree on this one. 

 

[Tom Gram]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Well, fine. I wonder how you (or others, LN'ers or CT'ers) "come to know" a man you never met, but so be it. We will have to agree to disagree on this one. 

 

I agree. Let’s assume for the sake of argument that Lance is right and Oswald was so emotionally fragile that he’d kill a President to either prove to his wife that he was a historically important figure, or prove to the Cubans who rejected his Visa application that he was a legit Marxist, possibly with the hope that he’d be let into Cuba. 

Let’s also consider the supposed Type I and Type II “political assassin profiles”. The obvious armchair psychology implication of Lance’s motive(s) is that Oswald had low self-esteem and the assassination was an emotional reaction to repeated belittling, failure and rejection. Type I describes a completely rational political fanatic, so we can comfortably toss that one out the window. Type II fits the bill though, since Lance is proposing that Oswald was trying to generate the attention he’d been denied in the past from Marina and/or the Cubans by killing JFK. So what’s the problem here? 

Oswald’s original plan could not have been to be taken into custody, otherwise we have a big, big, problem with the Tippit murder. Also, if he just wanted to go out in a blaze of glory he could have just kept running or turned the Texas Theater into the OK Corral. Thus, our best option is that Oswald originally intended to escape - and Cuba seems like a likely destination.

If we’re correct about Cuba, Oswald must have believed that he’d be welcomed with open arms and offered asylum or something after killing the American President. Is it reasonable to assume that Oswald was that much of an idiot? We’ll go with yes for now.  

Oswald’s plan fails miserably and he gets captured by the DPD after killing an officer in a desperate attempt to escape. He immediately has an epiphany that sharing his political philosophy with an American audience could fulfill his secondary Type II ideological needs, so he puts the emotions on hold that just drove him to double murder, channels an almost superhuman level of self-control and Oscar-worthy acting skills that let him outwit the best interrogators in the region, and decides to deny everything until he can espouse the virtues of Marxism in a high profile trial. 

TL:DR: Lance’s theory suggests that Oswald transformed from a purely emotional homicidal egomaniac with crippling anxiety into a purely rational political fanatic with the self control of a Zen master in the span of a couple minutes. 

[Kirk Gallaway]

7 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

In January 1964, Jack Ruby choked back tears at a press conference and said: "I couldn't understand how a great man like that could be lost."  (See the video of it here.)

I'm not sure why you included this dialog?

Well first off, he looks pretty hopped up 2 months later.  Right out of the gate,he looks like a xxxx. Straining to tell us "anger is not in my vocabulary:" But he was a very angry and violent man. Witnesses have accounted numerous incidents. Why did the they called him "Sparky?"

So you bank this all on this performance?  So you find him credible in this performance? Well what about this performance below. "The world will never know the true facts."  So you go with Posner's explanation that this is about a worldwide Jewish conspiracy? 

I know you know the same things as me. Why he was pleading with Justice Warren to get out of Dallas where he could then tell him and Ford "everything?"  What was "everything". What's your explanation?

Have you seen this?.

Dallas Police Officer Billy Grammer, who was on communications duty on the night before Ruby murdered Oswald, claims to have received a phone call from a man threatening "we are going to kill him" in reference to Oswald. Grammer said that the caller knew the details of the transfer and also knew his name. After Ruby shot Oswald, Grammer realized that the caller he spoke to was Jack Ruby. This call proves that Ruby's murder of Oswald was premeditated and not spontaneous.

 

[Benjamin Cole]

2 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

I agree. Let’s assume for the sake of argument that Lance is right and Oswald was so emotionally fragile that he’d kill a President to either prove to his wife that he was a historically important figure, or prove to the Cubans who rejected his Visa application that he was a legit Marxist, possibly with the hope that he’d be let into Cuba. 

Let’s also consider the supposed Type I and Type II “political assassin profiles”. The obvious armchair psychology implication of Lance’s motive(s) is that Oswald had low self-esteem and the assassination was an emotional reaction to repeated belittling, failure and rejection. Type I describes a completely rational political fanatic, so we can comfortably toss that one out the window. Type II fits the bill though, since Lance is proposing that Oswald was trying to generate the attention he’d been denied in the past from Marina and/or the Cubans by killing JFK. So what’s the problem here? 

Oswald’s original plan could not have been to be taken into custody, otherwise we have a big, big, problem with the Tippit murder. Also, if he just wanted to go out in a blaze of glory he could have just kept running or turned the Texas Theater into the OK Corral. Thus, our best option is that Oswald originally intended to escape - and Cuba seems like a likely destination.

If we’re correct about Cuba, Oswald must have believed that he’d be welcomed with open arms and offered asylum or something after killing the American President. Is it reasonable to assume that Oswald was that much of an idiot? We’ll go with yes for now.  

Oswald’s plan fails miserably and he gets captured by the DPD after killing an officer in a desperate attempt to escape. He immediately has an epiphany that sharing his political philosophy with an American audience could fulfill his secondary Type II ideological needs, so he puts the emotions on hold that just drove him to double murder, channels an almost superhuman level of self-control and Oscar-worthy acting skills that let him outwit the best interrogators in the region, and decides to deny everything until he can espouse the virtues of Marxism in a high profile trial. 

TL:DR: Lance’s theory suggests that Oswald transformed from a purely emotional homicidal egomaniac with crippling anxiety into a purely rational political fanatic with the self control of a Zen master in the span of a couple minutes. 

I tend to agree with you, but really, this psycho-analysis of LHO, based on smattering of observations by others and his writings...is amateur-hour Rorschach testing, decades after the fact. 

I congratulate on your efforts to find out more about LHO's many, many associations leading up to 11/22. 

For me, the right context is that there were literally thousands of CIA assets in the US at that time, due to the Cuba situation. Anti-Castro exiles, anti-communists, private police embedded in corporate allies, mercenaries, former military, active military on loan, and so forth. Hundreds, and perhaps thousands, had received weapons training or had actually experienced battle. The Miami station of the CIA was a jumbo, with 400 officers. 

If a sliver of that group, angered at what they perceived as JFK's betrayal....

Edited December 14, 2022 by Benjamin Cole

[Pete Mellor]

5 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

I'm not sure why you included this dialog?

Well first off, he looks pretty hopped up 2 months later.  Right out of the gate,he looks like a xxxx. Straining to tell us "anger is not in my vocabulary:" But he was a very angry and violent man. Witnesses have accounted numerous incidents. Why did the they called him "Sparky?"

So you bank this all on this performance?  So you find him credible in this performance? Well what about this performance below. "The world will never know the true facts."  So you go with Posner's explanation that this is about a worldwide Jewish conspiracy? 

I know you know the same things as me. Why he was pleading with Justice Warren to get out of Dallas where he could then tell him and Ford "everything?"  What was "everything". What's your explanation?

Have you seen this?.

Dallas Police Officer Billy Grammer, who was on communications duty on the night before Ruby murdered Oswald, claims to have received a phone call from a man threatening "we are going to kill him" in reference to Oswald. Grammer said that the caller knew the details of the transfer and also knew his name. After Ruby shot Oswald, Grammer realized that the caller he spoke to was Jack Ruby. This call proves that Ruby's murder of Oswald was premeditated and not spontaneous.

 

Yes, I have to agree with you Kirk.

18 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

And in many ways, Ruby's killing of Oswald was the same in the "perfect opportunity" departmant as Oswald's killing of Kennedy. Ruby was presented the perfect opportunity on Sunday morning (via pure chance and ideal timing).

Also we are told on the Friday evening Ruby attempted to enter the office where Oswald was being interrogated and told by an officer "You can't go in there Jack" or words to that effect.  I would also like to have explained how this night club owner could know of Oswald's link to 'Fair Play for Cuba Committee' at the Friday midnight press interview.  I have also read that Ruby was seen on that Friday evening up on the 4th floor of the DPD HQ.  All these incidents don't indicate that Ruby's killing of Oswald was just pure chance and ideal timing.

Dallas Deputy Sheriff Al Maddox claimed: "Ruby told me, he said, 'Well, they injected me for a cold.' He said it was cancer cells. That's what he told me, Ruby did. I said you don't believe that bullshit. He said, 'I damn sure do!' [Then] one day when I started to leave, Ruby shook hands with me and I could feel a piece of paper in his palm, [In this note] he said it was a conspiracy and he said, "if you will keep your eyes open and your mouth shut, you're gonna learn a lot." And that was the last letter I ever got from him. In the note, Ruby claimed he was part of a conspiracy, and that his role was to silence Oswald. Not long before Ruby died, according to an article in the London Times, he told psychiatrist Werner Teuter that the assassination was "an act of overthrowing the government" and that he knew "who had President Kennedy killed". He added: "I am doomed. I do not want to die. But I am not insane. I was framed to kill Oswald.

Most strange to me is why such a character as Jolly West should be a visitor to Ruby in his jail cell.  Is it any wonder conspiracy theories abound in this case?

[Bob Ness]

On 12/13/2022 at 4:33 AM, Lance Payette said:

No, there are not. I was just going to post that article myself. I do see that my own County Attorney supposedly said I'd "served as legal advisor to the Navajo County Sheriff's Office and the Navajo County Major Crimes Apprehension Team for over thirteen years. Lance is always available night and day to answer legal questions from officers in the field." Alas. that was 100% false unless he was talking about answering civil questions like "Can I fire my secretary?" - which are typically not posed in the middle of the night by officers in the field.

One Phil Hawk, whom I don't recall ever meeting, supposedly said "The men and women behind the scenes are an integral part of our operations. In our war against the drug cartels, one of the people I want at my side giving legal advice is Lance Payette." Alas, that was also 100% false. I frankly think the war on drugs, at least insofar as the criminal justice system is concerned, is pretty much a waste of time and resources. I had no more to do with said war than Winnie the Pooh.

I recall at the ceremony that some genial Black guy, possibly Phil Hawk, slapped me on the back and said "You da man! What did you do to deserve this?" When I answered "Absolutely nothing, I have no idea why I'm here," he smiled nervously and moved away. The award was so bogus that I donated the fairly nice piece of crystal to Goodwill when I retired. It possibly now decorates some hogan on the Navajo Reservation.

Having spent seven years in journalism, I assume the above are invented quotes from some news release by a PR hack. If this was your "research," I will concede it could have misled you. The last time you misused this claim and were informed it was bogus, you went so far as to have me being an expert on some specific rule of criminal procedure. I was always proud to say throughout my career that I know and care precisely zero about criminal law.

Why don't you have them taken down?

[Bob Ness]

22 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

...Oswald protesting his innocence is inconclusive...

It most certainly is conclusive that Oswald would have proclaimed his innocence in a courtroom where he would have had the opportunity to present his case. Unfortunately, he was marched out into a garage to be executed by a Texas court and then a slipshod investigation by the KKK and a Keystone Cops autopsy followed that.

Lance, David et al tend to skip over that detail in their rush to burnish a "committee investigation" almost entirely focused on falling on a foregone conclusion, by order of the President.

Oswald still remains innocent and the investigation incomplete not only because of Oswald's death but because he was never represented in spite of his demand for an attorney. You can hear that by listening to the interview tapes and reading the transcript of his interrogation.

Edited December 14, 2022 by Bob Ness

[Bob Ness]

2 hours ago, Pete Mellor said:

Dallas Deputy Sheriff Al Maddox claimed: "Ruby told me, he said, 'Well, they injected me for a cold.' He said it was cancer cells. That's what he told me, Ruby did.

I used to think this was baloney, but I made the mistake of asking my wife if it was possible. We didn't get into it too much but she said it was. I can just imagine them cooking up the right serum at Fort Detrick. Aggressive cells. Able to fight of antibodies or whatever. I could see the wheels spinning in her head on how you'd have to do it. I changed the subject quickly hahaha!

Weird.

Edited December 14, 2022 by Bob Ness

[James DiEugenio]

4 hours ago, Bob Ness said:

Why don't you have them taken down?

It has been up there for years on end.  And he only now is aware of it now that I posted it?

LOL, nice one Lance. 😜

[James DiEugenio]

The idea that Ruby just happened to be there at the right time and walked down the Main Street ramp is utterly false.

Ruby was there earlier that morning and four witnesses saw him.  He even asked when Oswald was going to be brought down.  He went up and down the elevator and a churchman saw him.  When his maid called his home, she said she thought someone else answered the line.

And there is no way on earth that Ruby came down the Main street ramp.  The HSCA proved that with Sgt. Don Flusche.

Finally, in the film Evidence of Revision, you can see Ruby hiding behind Blackie Harrison, awaiting Oswald. 

Al Mattox was correct.

Edited December 14, 2022 by James DiEugenio

[David Von Pein]

14 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

So you find him [Ruby] credible in this [crying] performance?

You bet I do. Absolutely. He's not "acting" there.

 

14 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Well what about this performance below. "The world will never know the true facts."  So you go with Posner's explanation that this is about a worldwide Jewish conspiracy? 

I know you know the same things as me. Why was he pleading with Justice Warren to get out of Dallas where he could then tell him and Ford "everything?"  What was "everything"?  What's your explanation?

Ruby had gone a little cuckoo in the head by that point in time, IMO.

But there's no way Ruby was "acting" his way through this crying jag:

https://drive.google.com/file/Jack Ruby Video

 

Edited December 14, 2022 by David Von Pein