Response to Roe re staged Walker shot

[Benjamin Cole]

3 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

Well, four officers reflected one officer's mistake on identifying a Carcano as a Mauser (definitely a mistaken ID and not a real Mauser, as shown in the Alyea film). Was that kind of mistake in the name of four officers believable? Well it happened. One identifies (the mistake), three others copy. Is that an analogy to here? I don't know. 

To me, I consider four things as facts of the case: that the Walker Note was written by Oswald and genuine; that Marina's story of Lee telling her he shot at Walker was unprompted and uncoerced from Marina and default assumption is her story reflects what Lee told her; that the photos of the Walker house in Oswald's belongings are from Oswald (since match to the camera; and Marina's story of Oswald's notebook of documentation); and Robert Surrey was present at the time of the shot (because seen there by Kirk Coleman). The last point plus what Kirk Coleman saw of his man No. 1 supports the staged shot in which Oswald was working with Surrey and one other person on the staged shot, both confirming Oswald took the shot while clearing him of having attempted murder, simultaneously.  

So Oswald taking the Walker shot comes out after the assassination, first from reasonable general suspicion as early as that question of a reporter to Curry on Sat Nov 23, then from the Note of Oswald found by the Secret Service in the book where Marina admitted she had hid it. Marina at first denies, then spills her beans.

With that setup, I suppose the argument for a switch in the bullet would be that it would seal incrimination of Oswald on the Walker shot to have the bullet switched for one that matched or could match to the Carcano found in the TSBD which had been Oswald's rifle. Oswald is already wrapped up tight on JFK and Tippit, so this would be just further icing on the LN cake--frame him still further, dig his hole deeper, motive? But isn't the FBI running things at this point--did the FBI have means to do the switch without it being noticed by others? Who exactly would have done the switch and how? What about the risk of it backfiring--going awry, someone leaks and it comes out that Oswald was being framed by a switched bullet? Was the payoff at that point worth that risk? If there were multiple officers at large who knew the bullet was steel-jacketed, what was the risk one would blow the whistle on the switch to a copper-jacketed one?  

But there ought to be a way to easily check--compare photos of the bullet the night of the Walker shot, to the copper-coated evidence bullet in the Archives today, see if its the same bullet by comparing closeup photos. Simple enough, right? Photos of the bullet taken immediately and also that weekend at the crime lab, right? Except supposedly there are no photos? Really? Shouldn't there have been photos? Were there photos? Is it believable that no photos would be taken of that bullet? But if there were photos, what happened to them? If there were photos and those have been disappeared, that raises the suspicion-meter for me.

But I don't know--what was customary practice on taking photographs of key physical evidence such as a Walker bullet by the DPD in 1963? Do you or anyone else know?

"But there ought to be a way to easily check--compare photos of the bullet the night of the Walker shot, to the copper-coated evidence bullet in the Archives today, see if its the same bullet by comparing closeup photos. Simple enough, right? Photos of the bullet taken immediately and also that weekend at the crime lab, right? Except supposedly there are no photos? Really? Shouldn't there have been photos? Were there photos? Is it believable that no photos would be taken of that bullet? But if there were photos, what happened to them? If there were photos and those have been disappeared, that raises the suspicion-meter for me."---GD

GD---

Thanks for commenting.

Yes, see the original article and my comments above. 

The DPD took seven photographs of the Walker crime scene, which were sent to the FBI. If the DPD took a photo of the original Walker bullet, it has disappeared.

The DPD lab received the Walker bullet and prepared a report. The surviving pages of the DPD lab report do not ID the Walker bullet as copper- or steel-jacketed. 

That is why I say, "At every turn to prove the provenance of CE573, one meets a roadblock." 

That may also be why even the FBI and WC appeared dubious about CE573. 

[Tom Gram]

Haven’t logged in in a while but a lot to go through in this thread. The issue with the initials is it’s not even clear who handled the bullet and when, but the most likely chain is Norvell and Tucker’s story of Norvell->McElroy->Brown->Day. So at the very least you have two of the four first responders physically handling the bullet. Tucker and Van Cleave obviously saw the bullet too, but as far as I know there’s no documentation of them handling and/or initialing the slug.

That said, I think the record is clear that all four officers got a good look at the bullet that night, as did everyone else in the chain of custody like Brown, Day, Anderson and Alexander. Not one of these people was asked to describe the bullet on the record, so all we have to go on are the initial police reports.

If any of these guys actually said that Norvell told them the bullet was steel jacketed, or that they didn’t get a very good look at it, or that they regularly used “steel-jacketed” to describe all FMJ bullets it’d be one thing, but we don’t. Thanks to the FBI we have diddly squat. 

[Lawrence Schnapf]

@Greg Doudna The rifle id is very different situation. only Day and Fritz handled the rifle. the other officers said they heard Fritz or someone say it was a Mauser. this is apples to oranges.

Ithink you need to review the chronology of Marina's statements before you find her credible about the Walker shooting. This is what happened (excerpted from my evidentiary analysis for the mock trial):

 Marina had been under the protective custody of the Secret Service at the Six Flags motel in Fort Worth. She was interviewed 46 times without the benefit of counsel.  During this period she had not linked Oswald to the Walker shooting. 

On November 28^th,  the FBI team began interrogating Marina to clear up some of the loose angles in the case. William C Sullivan, chief of the bureau's domestic intelligence division and the official in charge of handling oswald's widow, told the team to “bear down on her”.^[4] 

FBI headquarters dispatched an Immigration and Naturalization service agent to Fort Worth to join the FBI team. The INS agents assignment was to impress upon Marina that now that her husband was dead, she was an alien without a permanent visa and could face deportation if she did not cooperate with the government (Marina had  made it clear to the Dallas police through Ruth Paine that she wanted to remain in the United States with her two children and did not want to be sent back to the Soviet Union. ^[5]) 

Discovery of the Note 

On November 30th Ruth Paine sent to Marina via the Irving County police the Russian housekeeping book amongst other things. Materials that the DPD had previously searched the weekend of the assassination. 

Magically, the Secret Service agents examines these materials and discovers the note written in  poor Russian. The note was not dated and was not signed. It was only after she was confronted with this note at this time that Marina confirmed that her husband had written it and had confessed to her that he was the one who had made the attempt on Walker’slife.^[6] 

Initial FBI Report   

On December 6^th, Katzenback back told Pierre Salinger to go ahead with a press a White House press release confirming that Oswald had been the sniper who took a shot at the general. That same day FBI section chief James L Hanley informed the head of the FBI Dallas office Gordon Shanklin that he could expect a memorandum. 

The memorandum contained the copy of the Walker note with Marina’s account and instructions to Ed Bachner that the FBI report would conclude that Oswald was a sniper in the Walker case and that the Bureau expected the Dallas police to fully support the official version. It was imperative that FBI headquarters move quickly to tie up all loose ends because the Dallas police were not privy to the conclusions in the FBI report and there were still uncertainty about whether Carr and the Texas court of inquiry could be trusted to stay with the official line.^[11] 

Belmont told Katzenbach DPD had not considered LHO a suspect.^[12] 

All DPD witnesses pointed to 2 or 3 conspirators with car. 

Warren Commission Issues with FBI Initial Report 

In February 1964, chief Curry told a Reporter from the Dallas times Herald that the police were ready to name Oswald as the assailant in the Walker case based not on the ballistic evidence but solely on Marina oswald's testimony. 

In  May 1964, , Rankin wrote Hoover a 6-page letter complaining that marina's testimony on the Walker shooting to the FBI and Secret Service was given the Commission lawyers fits because it was riddled with contradictions. He requested that the Bureau undertake an extensive investigation concerning the Walker allegations. Rankin’s letters spelled out in detail six areas that needed clarification and asked to direct that Marina questioned again. Shanklin who thought the Walker case was closed now  had to assign two agents to interview Marina all over again because “her statements “just don't jibe”. ^[13] 

^[4] Shanklin to file (11/20/ 1963) , 89 - 43 - 1297; HEITMAN to file (11 /30/ 1963) file number 89 - 43 - 1421. 

^[5] Forrest V. Sorrels  to Jesse Curry (12/26/63); ser no. 2-34-34,000. DPD Files V12. 

^[6] WCR 183-14; Leon I. Geopadze 12/3/63 serial #2-34.303. Secret Service document 322 

^[11] 89-43 -2613a (12/06/1963 (Shanklin to fil)e 

^[12] 62-109060-1623  (12/6/63) 

^[13] Shanklin to file 2/191964 100 - 10461 - 3537 ; Ranking to Hoover (5/20/1964) Oswald file 105 - 82555 - 3 ? 92; Shangqing to file 6/10/19 64 100 - 104 61 - 6620. 

*******

You are a decent guy who seems to look for the goodness in witnesses which is admirably. But this was the murder of a president with enormous pressures applied to investigators and witnesses to build a case that supported Hoover's conclusion on the afternoon of the 22nd that Oswald was the lone gunman. I think you continue to be overcredulous or uncritical about how Marina's testimony was extracted from her.

the WC called her back 4 times because of how frustrated they were with her testimony. Phil Shenon's book has some quotes about how the WC felt she was not being truthful. And Bert Grifin told me how they used Ruth Paine to cabin Marina's testimony. 

In this case, one cannot take the evidence at face value but see how it was developed. Again, all the "mistakes" go in one direction. that is not normal or likely from a statisical standpoint.      

 

[Benjamin Cole]

Marina Oswald, in the weeks and months after 11/22, was understandably disoriented and fearful, and also sequestered. With a one-month old baby, and entirely at the mercy of authorities and the good-will of others. 

Her testimony reflects the tremendous pressures she was under, and was often evolving and  erratic. 

[Greg Doudna]

8 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

@Greg Doudna The rifle id is very different situation. only Day and Fritz handled the rifle. the other officers said they heard Fritz or someone say it was a Mauser. this is apples to oranges.

Ithink you need to review the chronology of Marina's statements before you find her credible about the Walker shooting. This is what happened (excerpted from my evidentiary analysis for the mock trial):

 Marina had been under the protective custody of the Secret Service at the Six Flags motel in Fort Worth. She was interviewed 46 times without the benefit of counsel.  During this period she had not linked Oswald to the Walker shooting. 

On November 28^th,  the FBI team began interrogating Marina to clear up some of the loose angles in the case. William C Sullivan, chief of the bureau's domestic intelligence division and the official in charge of handling oswald's widow, told the team to “bear down on her”.^[4] 

FBI headquarters dispatched an Immigration and Naturalization service agent to Fort Worth to join the FBI team. The INS agents assignment was to impress upon Marina that now that her husband was dead, she was an alien without a permanent visa and could face deportation if she did not cooperate with the government (Marina had  made it clear to the Dallas police through Ruth Paine that she wanted to remain in the United States with her two children and did not want to be sent back to the Soviet Union. ^[5]) 

Discovery of the Note 

On November 30th Ruth Paine sent to Marina via the Irving County police the Russian housekeeping book amongst other things. Materials that the DPD had previously searched the weekend of the assassination. 

Magically, the Secret Service agents examines these materials and discovers the note written in  poor Russian. The note was not dated and was not signed. It was only after she was confronted with this note at this time that Marina confirmed that her husband had written it and had confessed to her that he was the one who had made the attempt on Walker’slife.^[6] 

Initial FBI Report   

On December 6^th, Katzenback back told Pierre Salinger to go ahead with a press a White House press release confirming that Oswald had been the sniper who took a shot at the general. That same day FBI section chief James L Hanley informed the head of the FBI Dallas office Gordon Shanklin that he could expect a memorandum. 

The memorandum contained the copy of the Walker note with Marina’s account and instructions to Ed Bachner that the FBI report would conclude that Oswald was a sniper in the Walker case and that the Bureau expected the Dallas police to fully support the official version. It was imperative that FBI headquarters move quickly to tie up all loose ends because the Dallas police were not privy to the conclusions in the FBI report and there were still uncertainty about whether Carr and the Texas court of inquiry could be trusted to stay with the official line.^[11] 

Belmont told Katzenbach DPD had not considered LHO a suspect.^[12] 

All DPD witnesses pointed to 2 or 3 conspirators with car. 

Warren Commission Issues with FBI Initial Report 

In February 1964, chief Curry told a Reporter from the Dallas times Herald that the police were ready to name Oswald as the assailant in the Walker case based not on the ballistic evidence but solely on Marina oswald's testimony. 

In  May 1964, , Rankin wrote Hoover a 6-page letter complaining that marina's testimony on the Walker shooting to the FBI and Secret Service was given the Commission lawyers fits because it was riddled with contradictions. He requested that the Bureau undertake an extensive investigation concerning the Walker allegations. Rankin’s letters spelled out in detail six areas that needed clarification and asked to direct that Marina questioned again. Shanklin who thought the Walker case was closed now  had to assign two agents to interview Marina all over again because “her statements “just don't jibe”. ^[13] 

^[4] Shanklin to file (11/20/ 1963) , 89 - 43 - 1297; HEITMAN to file (11 /30/ 1963) file number 89 - 43 - 1421. 

^[5] Forrest V. Sorrels  to Jesse Curry (12/26/63); ser no. 2-34-34,000. DPD Files V12. 

^[6] WCR 183-14; Leon I. Geopadze 12/3/63 serial #2-34.303. Secret Service document 322 

^[11] 89-43 -2613a (12/06/1963 (Shanklin to fil)e 

^[12] 62-109060-1623  (12/6/63) 

^[13] Shanklin to file 2/191964 100 - 10461 - 3537 ; Ranking to Hoover (5/20/1964) Oswald file 105 - 82555 - 3 ? 92; Shangqing to file 6/10/19 64 100 - 104 61 - 6620. 

*******

You are a decent guy who seems to look for the goodness in witnesses which is admirably. But this was the murder of a president with enormous pressures applied to investigators and witnesses to build a case that supported Hoover's conclusion on the afternoon of the 22nd that Oswald was the lone gunman. I think you continue to be overcredulous or uncritical about how Marina's testimony was extracted from her.

the WC called her back 4 times because of how frustrated they were with her testimony. Phil Shenon's book has some quotes about how the WC felt she was not being truthful. And Bert Grifin told me how they used Ruth Paine to cabin Marina's testimony. 

In this case, one cannot take the evidence at face value but see how it was developed. Again, all the "mistakes" go in one direction. that is not normal or likely from a statisical standpoint.      

Larry, all you say about the pressures and the INS leverage and threat is true, but where are you going with that? Are you supposing the FBI wanted Marina to lie to them and make up stuff about Lee out of whole cloth, or to tell them the truth (be forthcoming), as the outcome of that pressure?

Are you supposing Marina out of that pressure on her own creatively made up Lee involved in the Walker shot, and Lee writing the Walker Note, or are you supposing she was told what story to tell? Rehearsed in it? Directly and illegally suborned to perjury? 

Doesn't it make more sense that the pattern was: Marina started out not truthful and cooperative, with denials and minimization, at the outset, and FBI could tell that-- and so there was pressure to "get her to talk" and "cooperate" and "open up" in telling what she knew? As in, tell what she knew of what really happened?

Not, Marina we want you to (a) make up stuff out of whole cloth or (b) here, we have already made it up for you, now you learn these lines and say this made-up stuff, "or else"?

Are you saying "b"? Or "a"? Or neither?

How would that work? Was Marina secretly rehearsed on telling fake stories created out of whole cloth at FBI instigation? That's what is is sounding like where you go with this, and that makes no sense to me in the absence of actual evidence something of that nature was going on.

Do you think the FBI had two sets of files on her, one of her false stories that they had given her which the FBI knew was false. And another file where they asked Marina to "really, now, this is secret, but really tell us the truth here of what happened"? 

If you were the FBI, would you trust Marina with all her personal turmoil and credibility issues, to keep a two-track series of interviews straight, one both Marina and FBI know is untrue for dissemination, and another secret set internal to FBI in which Marina supposedly tells the opposite "truth" to them, but never to see the light of day?

Marina tried to destroy a BYP, later told of how the photo was taken (not necessarily fully truthful there either). 

Marina did not volunteer Lee involved in the Walker shot, then at first denied knowledge of it when it turned up according to reports. Then she admitted it and told of it. Which direction was in the direction of "the truth" there? 

[Lawrence Schnapf]

I am very clearly saying that FBI was in the process of finalizing its December 5th report on the assassination in the hopes of influcening the WC investigation and Hoover needed to have his 11/22 conclusion that LHO was the lone gunman firmly established. The Walker shooting was a key underpinning of that conclusion because it supposedly demonstrated his tendency towards violence and planning for the murder attempt.

so absolutely yes-in a circumstantial evidence case, Marina was the key witness and she was pressured by all possible means to produce testimony to support the desired conclusion. end of story.

Regarding documentation, the FBI 302s in this case were replete with "perjury traps" where FBI investigators altered the accounts of the witnesses and then when they read their statements and complained, they were told it was a federal crime to lie to a federal official. so the inaccurate 302s remained intact. 

Moreover, Warren allowed the use of unrecorded preliminary interviews of witnesses. This was where many witnesses were told that their accounts were wrong or did not happen. 

If you dont believe that this happed, then you need to read the comments of witnesses . I dont have time today to share the names. perhaps others here can do so.

The historic record cannot be taken on its face --which can be frustrating to a historian like you. but this was not an objective investigation. The US had to show its allies that we were not a bannana republic. this was actually more important than convincing citizens that Oswald was the only assassin. All you need to do is see the acounts coming in from Europe in the winter of 64 to see the real concerns of our leadership. 

[Greg Doudna]

19 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

I am very clearly saying that FBI was in the process of finalizing its December 5th report on the assassination in the hopes of influcening the WC investigation and Hoover needed to have his 11/22 conclusion that LHO was the lone gunman firmly established. The Walker shooting was a key underpinning of that conclusion because it supposedly demonstrated his tendency towards violence and planning for the murder attempt.

so absolutely yes-in a circumstantial evidence case, Marina was the key witness and she was pressured by all possible means to produce testimony to support the desired conclusion. end of story.

Regarding documentation, the FBI 302s in this case were replete with "perjury traps" where FBI investigators altered the accounts of the witnesses and then when they read their statements and complained, they were told it was a federal crime to lie to a federal official. so the inaccurate 302s remained intact. 

Moreover, Warren allowed the use of unrecorded preliminary interviews of witnesses. This was where many witnesses were told that their accounts were wrong or did not happen. 

If you dont believe that this happed, then you need to read the comments of witnesses . I dont have time today to share the names. perhaps others here can do so.

The historic record cannot be taken on its face --which can be frustrating to a historian like you. but this was not an objective investigation. The US had to show its allies that we were not a bannana republic. this was actually more important than convincing citizens that Oswald was the only assassin. All you need to do is see the acounts coming in from Europe in the winter of 64 to see the real concerns of our leadership. 

I agree with what you say happened re the methods of unrecorded preinterviews and so on. I just can't see that that converts to a conclusion that Marina was suborned to tell a false story fabricated out of whole cloth.

Are you supposing this was a case of Marina pressured to confess to what actually was the case--Oswald involved in the shot? Or a case of Marina pressured to fabricate something false? In the latter case you are then talking forgery of physical evidence too, the Walker Note and the photographs, and not a shred of actual credible positive evidence for claims of forgery of those or suborning of perjury. Only argument from motive and suspicion alone which is not a reliable method of producing accurate conclusions.

I could see what you say in terms of the former however--Marina pressured to spill her beans, which is basically what happened when she was shown the Walker Note. 

And all this defense attorney argument on your part (with respect incidentally; thank you for your current work on the MFF legal actions)--all for a proposition that not only is a tough sell but also simply unlikely to be true (that not only Marina's testimony but the Walker Note and Walker house photographs were forged, if that is where you are going with this) ... all to attempt to disassociate Oswald from involvement in a faked shot which was not attempted murder to begin with.

They had photos of Walker's house among Oswald's belongings which are narrowly dated to ca. April 1963. They had the Walker Note which although it does not mention Walker, from its contents is dated to that time and consistent with involvement in the Walker shooting and in Oswald's handwriting. De Mohrenschildt thought Lee had shot at Walker. They didn't have, but there existed, a BYP with "ha ha hunter of fascists" which had to have been written by Marina even though she denied it, and which was given to De Mohrenschildt by Marina in April 1963 according to Epstein's final interview of De Mohrenschildt which was the truth underlying De Mohrenschildt's dissembling about being surprised to discover it in his belongings years later. They didn't have, but we do, Michael Paine telling that Oswald told him he was spying on Walker--what else is that talking about but sounding like Oswald was mixed up with Surrey and company, a context of involvement in a faked shot. There was the fact that Lee and Marina quickly moved to New Orleans following the Walker shot for no obvious reason, which Marina later said was because of the Walker shot.

Do you have any good theory on why Marina, so adamant in her later years in changing to say that Lee was innocent after all of the JFK assassination, has continued to say directly that Lee did tell her he took a shot at Walker, that that was still true? Bugliosi tells of that in his interview of Marina, and I believe Marina has told others the same.

Here is my theory on that: Marina continues to say that today because Lee did tell Marina he took a shot at Walker, told her that because he intended for her to believe that, maybe intended to prompt her to turn him in. 

Edited June 16, 2023 by Greg Doudna

[Lawrence Schnapf]

@Greg Doudna Marina cannot recant her sworn testimony or she could be subject to perjury charges. while it is unlikely that she would be prosecuted, her Soveit origins no doubt makes her scared of the government.

I dont understand why you find it difficult that Marina would agree to lie about her dead husband. She was a young mother with two girls. She had a choice to protect her dead husband's reputation in the face of aggressive government pressure or protect her two babies. 

The note was not discovered during the initial search of the Paine house. it mysteriously shows up 5 days before the FBI is to send its report to the President and after 46 interviews with Marina where she does not disclose her alleged conversations with her dead husband about the walker shooting.  suddenly, it shows up and when confronted with it, she fesses up. So yes, i think it is as equally possible that the note was fabriacted as it being genuine. Moreover, remember that Bert Griffin told me that the WC used Ruth Paine to put guardrails on Marina's testimony.

Finally, I dont know if there is actual evidence of the  police finding the photo in Oswald's possessions at the rooming house. Is there a photo of the photo of his possessions? The photo could easily have come from the DPD April investigation and then the DPD placed it into the Oswald inventory. that could explain the missing license plate number. DPD was not only inept but also crooked.   

 

[Steve Roe]

41 minutes ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

DPD was not only inept but also crooked.   

Larry, may I quote you on this statement? 

[Lawrence Schnapf]

@Steve Roe you may quote me on anything i post on EF. it is a public forum but thanks for asking. Obviously, I am not saying the entire DPD was crooked but we know some of the officers were compromised by the local mafia and others were willing to engage in unethical behavior to nail a "cop killer", Ad even the honest ones were under incredible pressure from FBI to go along with the offical story. 

BTW- I'm still working on a Walker panel for Novermber. you are in Dallas area?

Edited June 16, 2023 by Lawrence Schnapf

[Steve Roe]

9 minutes ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

@Steve Roe you may quote me on anything i post on EF. it is a public forum but thanks for asking. Obviously, I am not saying the entire DPD was crooked but we know some of the officers were compromised by the local mafia and others were willing to engage in unethical behavior to nail a "cop killer", Ad even the honest ones were under incredible pressure from FBI to go along with the offical story. 

BTW- I'm still working on a Walker panel for Novermber. you are in Dallas area?

 No Larry I am not in Dallas. I do travel over there from time to time to see family and friends. 

Who were these DPD officers compromised by the "local mafia"? Names?

[Mark Ulrik]

@Lawrence Schnapf Is it difficult to imagine Marina being less than cooperative because she was afraid the truth could be used against her? Back in the Soviet Union, she would likely have faced serious trouble if it was discovered that she had failed to report on her husband for having tried to shoot a political figure. The defense lawyerly temptation to attack her claims is understandable, I guess, but pretty weak sauce (IMO).

[Lawrence Schnapf]

@Mark Ulrik I think you are looking at this the wrong way or at least differently than me. I am not attacking her for lying. I I dont believe this is a case of her failing to tell the government that she knew her husband took a pot shot at Waker but that he did not and she was pressured to say that he did.  It was strongly suggested to her that If she did not tell the government want it wanted to hear, she could be deported. 

Indeed, she makes a point at the beginning of her first deposition before the Warren Commission of saying she will now tellt he truth. And that truth is the "political truth" the government wanted IMHO.  

[Mark Ulrik]

7 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

after 46 interviews with Marina where she does not disclose her alleged conversations with her dead husband about the walker shooting.

4 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

I dont believe this is a case of her failing to tell the government that she knew her husband took a pot shot at Waker

Didn't you tell us a few moments ago that she failed 46 times?

[Lawrence Schnapf]

@Mark Ulrik yes- she did not say her husband took a shot at walker in her prior 46 interviews. I view that as her telling the truth and when she was confronted with the late discovered note allegedly written by her husband, then she said he did fire the shot. 

I suspect you and I have a different view  of when she was lying.