Huge Ruth Paine news or not?

[John Cotter]

On 5/21/2023 at 9:03 AM, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Those markings on Ruth Paine's calendar may have a mundane explanation:

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t112p25-ruth-paine-s-calendar#42052

I see that Greg Parker has posted an interesting reply to my question, which includes the following extract.

Quote:

So what could she possibly be hiding here?

I think she was hiding the fact that she knew the person she had only just met, and who was well below her in the all-important social pecking order, would still be in her life almost 9 months later...

End quote.

That might explain it alright. It did cross my mind, but I thought it might be a bit tenuous. However, the fact that it independently crosses two people’s minds lends it greater credibility.

Insofar as I understand the rest of GP’s reply, it seems to resolve another problem I saw with the “mundane” explanation, namely, the assumption that Ruth Paine knew the date when Marina had become pregnant two months earlier with enough accuracy to predict roughly the date of birth seven months later.

I wasn’t aware – though I’m not surprised – that the Paines were interested in neo-paganism and what Jungians call lunar consciousness. That might help to explain Ruth Paine’s attentiveness to menstrual cycles and such matters.  

I’m not surprised, because east coast WASP “liberal” types such as the Paines were known to dabble in “right brain” stuff. This social phenomenon was prefigured in “fin-de-siecle occultism”, the title of a chapter in Richard Noll’s book, The Jung Cult, which contains the following paragraph:

“Given the weakening of traditional ecclesiastical authority and the greater emphasis on personal decision making and individual action so typical of the Protestant ethic, it is no coincidence that the spiritualist movement arose in a largely Protestant America, a “Protestant Empire”, to use historian Sydney Ahlstrom’s metaphor, whose increasingly distant ties with the Old World made the spirit world seem so accessible – especially since it did not require clerical intercessors.”

And then there’s the Paines’ connections to the CIA and Allen Dulles specifically. As noted in Deirdre Bair’s biography of Carl Jung (p 486), Jung became Dulles’s “sort of senior adviser on a weekly, if not almost daily, basis”, while Dulles was in Switzerland during WWII.

As for The Wicker Man, it must be at least three decades since I watched that brilliant film. It’s one of many films from that era that I’d love to have time to watch again.

Edited May 23, 2023 by John Cotter

[Vince Palamara]

On 5/22/2023 at 1:38 AM, Lawrence Schnapf said:

@Vince Palamara is there a RIF number for Shanklin memo and where is the blue page titled Marina from? Not much info in your post.  

I received these from researcher Johnny Cairns as-is.

[Benjamin Cole]

Just IMHO--

My take is several Dallas figures pre-JFKA were handlers, with no knowledge of pending events. 

J Walton Moore and his cut out, Mohrenschildt, come to mind.

Through a cut out in the Quakers, or some other organization, Ruth Paine may have been induced to take wife and baby off LHO's hands for the duration. Which she did. 

I have wondered if Mohrenschildt was a cut out between LHO and confederates in the Walker non-shooting. 

Mohrenschildt chided LHO the next day about the Walker missed shooting and then may have written a "hunter of fascists" note on a copy of the famous backyard photograph. Seems awful close to the event. 

Late in life Mohrenschildt said LHO was innocent, and then he was shot dead days before he could testify before the HSCA. 

Was Mohrenschildt silenced as he knew too much about the Walker shooting? 

 

 

Edited May 24, 2023 by Benjamin Cole

[Max Good]

I actually cut a little scene about this but it didn't make it into the movie.  This issue appears to be inconclusive.  Ruth's story is that she heard the March 20 date on TV on 11/23/63 and wrote it down in her calendar.  I found the footage where that date is announced.  The issue of the mixup between October/November is odd though.

You can see it (for free) on my Patreon:

https://www.patreon.com/posts/deleted-scene-73267969

 

Edited May 25, 2023 by Max Good

[Jonathan Cohen]

On 5/24/2023 at 3:51 AM, Benjamin Cole said:

Mohrenschildt chided LHO the next day about the Walker missed shooting and then may have written a "hunter of fascists" note on a copy of the famous backyard photograph. Seems awful close to the event. 

So... you'd rather de Mohrenschildt to have waited a few days to politely speak to Oswald about the incident? What difference would that have made? Are you questioning the provenance of the inscription on the backyard photograph in question?

On 5/24/2023 at 3:51 AM, Benjamin Cole said:

Was Mohrenschildt silenced as he knew too much about the Walker shooting? 

No....

[James DiEugenio]

1 hour ago, Max Good said:

I actually cut a little scene about this but it didn't make it into the movie.  This issue appears to be inconclusive.  Ruth's story is that she heard the March 20 date on TV on 11/23/63 and wrote it down in her calendar.  I found the footage where that date is announced.  The issue of the mixup between October/November is odd though.

You can see it (for free) on my Patreon:

https://www.patreon.com/posts/deleted-scene-73267969

 

That's what is so puzzling Max.  On November 23rd she had still not flipped her calendar?

[Benjamin Cole]

6 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

So... you'd rather de Mohrenschildt to have waited a few days to politely speak to Oswald about the incident? What difference would that have made? Are you questioning the provenance of the inscription on the backyard photograph in question?

No....

JC--

 

Not sure what you are driving at.

If Mohrenschildt was a handler of LHO (Mohrenschildt was asked to keep on eye on LHO by Moore), then yes, checking up on him on April 11 makes sense. How are his nerves? Does he look like he might squeal? 

Others have examined the Mohrenschildt death, and relate that there was some sort of suspicious security breach before he died. 

I have reasonable suspicions about the deaths of Ferrie and Mohrenschildt. 

I doubt either knew details about the JFKA. But they knew LHO was being handled. 

 

[Jonathan Cohen]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

JC--

 

Not sure what you are driving at.

If Mohrenschildt was a handler of LHO (Mohrenschildt was asked to keep on eye on LHO by Moore), then yes, checking up on him on April 11 makes sense. How are his nerves? Does he look like he might squeal? 

Others have examined the Mohrenschildt death, and relate that there was some sort of suspicious security breach before he died. 

I have reasonable suspicions about the deaths of Ferrie and Mohrenschildt. 

I doubt either knew details about the JFKA. But they knew LHO was being handled. 

 

What I'm driving at is that all this nonsense is built on a mountain of "if..." this and "well, maybe..." that. You see conspiracy in literally everything! Why is that? Why is it so hard to believe the wealth of evidence that Oswald did indeed shoot at General Walker?

[Benjamin Cole]

24 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

What I'm driving at is that all this nonsense is built on a mountain of "if..." this and "well, maybe..." that. You see conspiracy in literally everything! Why is that? Why is it so hard to believe the wealth of evidence that Oswald did indeed shoot at General Walker?

I guess we disagree on this matter. 

For one, the extensive official evidence that what was found in the Walker home on April 10 was a "steel jacketed bullet." And that is what Chief Curry believed, in addition to the two patrolmen and two detectives who worked that case that night. 

There is no official evidence, or indeed any evidence---such as contemporary photographs or lab reports, or even a newspaper interview---to indicate the Walker Bullet was copper jacketed. 

If LHO shot at Walker that night, it was likely with a 30.06 rifle using a steel-jacketed bullet. 

BTW, I am entirely open to the idea LHO was being handled on April 10, and shot to intentionally miss at Walker. 

Just not with the M-C rifle. 

The official evidence is, indisputably, that a steel-jacketed bullet was found in the Walker residence on April 10. 

Do you believe LHO fired the steel-jacketed bullet? 

 

 

[Jonathan Cohen]

15 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

LHO was being handled on April 10, and shot to intentionally miss at Walker.

To believe the above means you believe both Marina and Lee lied about every aspect of this incident not only in their contemporaneous conversations and record-keeping, but also after the fact. Do you believe that?

[Lawrence Schnapf]

well Marina did lie. her story only changed when she was presented with the late discovered "oswald note" whose provenance is in question. And he was never asked about the Walker shooting while in custody as he had not yet been linked to it. so any alleged statements he made are pure hearsay, 

[Lawrence Schnapf]

@Jonathan Cohen because the body of evidence actually does not point to LHO being the shooter from every aspect of the shooting and investigation.

My quesiton is why the knee jerk reaction of those like you when faced with new information is to discount it? The original case was a house of cards built on manufactured evidence and reports that papered over holes in the case. Yet you insist on rejecting evidence that does not accord to your view. That is not the action of a person interested in the truth but instead that of a person with reinforced convictions and unexamined assumptions.

There was a conspiracy to pin the assassination on LHO and the Walker shooting was critical in that narrative to show that he had  the capability of attempting to commit murder.   

[Tom Gram]

28 minutes ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

well Marina did lie. her story only changed when she was presented with the late discovered "oswald note" whose provenance is in question. And he was never asked about the Walker shooting while in custody as he had not yet been linked to it. so any alleged statements he made are pure hearsay, 

Even the WC thought that Marina lied her head off under oath. The internal WC memos on Marina’s testimony are quality entertainment - the staff attorneys thought she was full of it. Example A: 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=233350#relPageId=26

Marina’s testimony is far from correct and does not ring 100% true with respect to the Walker incident.

I really don’t get why people try to defend her honesty like she was some sort of nun. Here’s another one from three months later: 

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=233350#relPageId=274

Perhaps Mrs. Oswald and her attorney should be alerted to these variations prior to her second appearance so that she will be fully prepared. 

“Fully prepared.” Right. 

[Benjamin Cole]

2 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

To believe the above means you believe both Marina and Lee lied about every aspect of this incident not only in their contemporaneous conversations and record-keeping, but also after the fact. Do you believe that?

All we have, in terms of witnesses, regarding LHO's activities on April 10 are Marina's recollections, which everyone at the WC soon disregarded, as Marina changed her story so often on every topic. LHO was dead before he could tell officials his version of what he did on April 10. 

However, even if Marina's recollections are correct, that does not rule out LHO using a 30.06 rifle with steel-jacketed bullets, and having confederates. 

Marina did not see a weapon that evening. She was entirely absent from LHO activities that night, and his travels. 

What you can't dance around is what four different DPD officers attested to, and in writing, on official reports they signed on April 10, that they found a steel-jacketed bullet at the Walker residence. Detective Van Cleave would go on to tell the media he found a 30.06 slug in the Walker residence. 

And, as I have posted, that makes sense: under duress of WWII copper shortages, the US Army did manufacture steel-jacketed 30.06 bullets, which were then sold as surplus after WWII. An usual bullet, generally held in low regard. 

If a detective collecting evidence at the scene of an attempted murder found a steel-jacketed bullet in the early 1960s, he would note that in his report. A relatively rare bullet. 

Take a look at the photo of CE573 posted above. Does that strike you as a steel-jacketed bullet? 

 

[Greg Doudna]

2 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

well Marina did lie. her story only changed when she was presented with the late discovered "oswald note" whose provenance is in question. And he was never asked about the Walker shooting while in custody as he had not yet been linked to it. so any alleged statements he made are pure hearsay, 

That Marina did not always tell the truth is not in any question. But the question is: was there ever subornation of perjury of Marina, that is, was she ever coached or told or incentivized to say anything specific under oath she flatly knew was not true?

It is not enough to say "Marina lied". The issue is was she lying on her own, or was she being marionette-stringed by others highly illegally instructing her to lie under oath.

Do you, Larry, think Marina was ever suborned to perjury by anyone in law enforcement or acting as a cutout for anyone in law enforcement? (i.e. not acting on her own in the instances in which she was untruthful)

Is there any evidence she was ever suborned to perjury, i.e. not free-lancing her own untruthful testimony on her own in the cases that happened?

Is it plausible Marina on her own would come up with the entire elaborate story of what she says Lee told her regarding the Walker shooting? Isn't it more plausible that (a) there never was subornation of perjury of Marina (no evidence or plausibility of such, due to extremely high legal consequences if ever found out, plus Marina not so reliable a channel to do such through and not tell of it, or keep straight when she was scripted to lie and when she was being asked to really, really, tell us the truth now of what actually happened); and (b) any free-lance lying of Marina would be basically self-serving to minimize her involvement in whatever?

Does a from-scratch full-blown creation of the entire Oswald shooting at Walker story sound like something Marina on her own free-lance creativity would come up with on her own?

There are the FBI interviews of Marina telling of the Walker shooting. How does that work if she is being suborned to lie: "Now Mrs. Oswald, for this interview we want you to tell us this untruthful story which we will write up for our interview report and submit to headquarters so that decades later we will have this false paper trail for researchers. But later, off the record, would you tell us really, really the truth?" (and were there any notes taken of those requests of Marina to be truthful, and what happened to that second file of reconstructed reports when she was asked to tell what really happened?)

Do you see ... it is a logical non sequitur to say because Marina's testimony has known credibility issues, that therefore she invented the entire Walker shooting story, swore it under oath, stuck to the story for decades including to the present day even after she now advocates for Lee's innocence in the JFK assassination ... and it never would come out in all this time any evidence that she was ever suborned to perjury?

When there never has been proof of any instance of subornation of perjury in the case of Marina at all?

I think what Marina told of Lee shooting Walker was what Lee told her. Whether what Lee told her was truthful or the full truth is a distinct issue, but that's where Marina got that. What I think. 

Marina shows no signs otherwise of wholesale gratuitous dishonest incrimination of Lee. The known free-lanced dishonesties in her testimony if anything were to minimize Lee's perceived guilt, e.g. destruction of backyard photographs in the motel room.

I don't think Oswald tried to kill Walker, i.e. was part of working with Walker people in a staged shot. I But I think Marina for the most part reflects what Lee told her. I have written on that. But never mind what I think which isn't really too important. The issue is this whole idea in some circles that Marina fabricated the entire Walker shooting of Lee, and whether it is supposed she would do that entirely on her own initiative (why??), or whether it is seriously being supposed that some unseen handlers were secretly putting her through acting lessons and line-learning lessons in preparing her for blatant direct perjury in her testimony, to tell a fabricated Walker shooting story of Lee.

What do you think?