Brian Baccus on Ruth Paine

[Greg Doudna]

2 hours ago, Miles Massicotte said:

Hi Greg, hope you are doing well.

From my perspective, it is not Lee's driving ability, nor Lee and Marina's willingness to lie to Ruth. 

As far as Lee's driving ability, I don't put much into that. As you correctly mention, Ruth mentioned that Lee could probably pass a driver's test. I personally don't think that driving is such a difficult task that, even if Lee was completely terrible at it, that he could make to the Furniture Mart for example, even if it was a bumpy ride.

I also have my reasons to suspect that both Lee and Marina would have their own perfectly sufficient reasons to lie to Ruth. Lee, because he was secretive. Because he was certainly hiding something. I have no doubt he lied even to Marina about that (i.e. the Walker shooting). Marina on the other hand, I feel it is a 50/50 scenario: 50% she would be willing to lie because she felt she had to be a good wife to Lee (as she told the press) and 50% because Ruth was physically attracted to her and it made her uncomfortable. That, at least, is the thesis of part of my own Oswald thesis. I don't believe Ruth Paine has lied about anything important, but I do have a feeling that she has kept something away from the public, and it is her inordinate kindness towards Marina which was ultimately born from physical attraction. If I had felt similarly, I probably would have acted the same way Ruth did. I think Ruth was a kind and sincere individual, but he letters to Marina hint at more than kindness and sincerity, in my opinion. 

In any case, no, I don't have any qualms about the Oswalds' ability to lie to Ruth, or about Lee's driving ability. 

Gertrude Hunter was insistent that she saw a Ford. As you know, the Paine's car was an Oldsmobile. If Mrs. Hunter's recollection was "it was some kind of older American car", then I would be with you. But she was quite sure it was a Ford.

Was it blue and white? Yes, but it's not like there was a massive range of colors in those days. A blue and white two tone car is not horribly specific. I tend to think that the positive identification of the car as a Ford outweighs the color.

I also take some issue with the following paragraph:

"It is not necessary to know exactly how Lee or (perhaps more likely) Marina knew where that key was and obtained it without Ruth’s knowledge, only that that is what happened. 
We know that happened, because the car was driven. Lee was seen driving it: the blue and white Olds, that car, the one parked in front of Ruth Paine’s house on the morning of Nov 11 before Lee drove it to the Furniture Mart."

For me, this is a bit circular. As I am not convinced that the same blue and white car is being referenced, I can't accept that it is not necessary to know exactly how the Oswald's got the key. In fact, such knowledge would ultimately aid in convincing me that perhaps Mrs. Hunter was mistaken in her identification of the car as a Ford. 

So, I'm not saying that your thesis is wrong by any means, just that I wasn't convinced by it, and this is why. It is entirely plausible. But I imagine if Ruth Paine herself wasn't convinced, it might be something along these lines. 

Hi Miles, thanks for explaining your thinking. On where they got the key, that would be out of some drawer in Ruth’s room where Ruth had it. The car was not in use, it was just always parked in front of the house, so Ruth had no need to carry the key with her. Ruth leaves the key at home in a drawer somewhere, no particular need to hide (it doesn’t occur to her that Marina and Lee might enter her room and take the key and drive the car without asking). They go into her room, look into her desk or dresser drawers until they find it, which may have taken only seconds to find it. From my point of view this is easy and what happened.

On the car model, in the earliest reports there was less than certainty. Hunter’s earliest she thought it was a Ford or Chevrolet. Mrs Whitworth thought it was a Ford or Plymouth. Both agreed it was blue and white and a sedan and mid-1950s. Michael’s was a blue and white mid-1950s Olds sedan. To me that’s close enough to be what those witnesses actually saw, and it has to be if they were seen driving a car, which they were, because that is the only one to which they had access. 

[Tony Krome]

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

The second guy Kittrell spoke to could not have been Curtis Craford, for these reasons:

1. Kittrell opened the Oswald file when she spoke to the second guy. Obviously the guy had to have said he was Oswald.
2. Later, when Kittrell wondered if it had been Craford who had impersonated Oswald, she checked for and found his file at the TEC. She discovered that it was inactive. The Oswald file was still active. So she in fact did open Oswald's file when the imposter visited.
3. Kittrell said that the Oswald impersonator laughed boisterously. She saw that the impersonator had no missing teeth,* yet Curtis Craford had two missing front teeth. So he couldn't have been the impersonator. (Kittrell didn't know Craford had missing teeth because his mouth was closed in the photos of him that she saw.)

 

New information noted, correction made.

 

So Ruth Paine suggested that Craford resembled Oswald. If Craford told Kitrell he was Oswald, would not Kitrell open the Oswald file? 

[Sandy Larsen]

52 minutes ago, Tony Krome said:

So Ruth Paine suggested that Craford resembled Oswald.

 

Did she do that?

 

52 minutes ago, Tony Krome said:

If Craford told Kitrell he was Oswald, would not Kitrell open the Oswald file? 

 

Yes, of course. I just forgot to update the description of my list. Here's the corrected update:

The second guy Kittrell spoke to could not have been Curtis Craford, for these reasons:  Kittrell couldn't have merely conflated her visit with Oswald and a later visit with Curtis Craford because:

1. Kittrell opened the Oswald file when she spoke to the second guy. Obviously the guy had to have said he was Oswald.
2. Later, when Kittrell wondered if the second guy had been Craford, she checked for and found his file at the TEC. She discovered that it was inactive. The Oswald file was still active. So she in fact did open Oswald's file when the second guy visited.
3. Kittrell said that the Oswald impersonator laughed boisterously. She saw that the impersonator had no missing teeth,* yet Curtis Craford had two missing front teeth. So he couldn't have been the impersonator. (Kittrell didn't know Craford had missing teeth because his mouth was closed in the photos of him that she saw.)

 

[Tony Krome]

22 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Did she do that?

Yes she did. Don't be fooled by Craford, the WC quizzed the hell out of that guy.

[Sandy Larsen]

28 minutes ago, Tony Krome said:

Yes she did. Don't be fooled by Craford, the WC quizzed the hell out of that guy.

 

Do you believe that the guy who met with Kittrell was Craford using Oswald's name?

If so, why would he have done that?

I have been puzzled by the story the Oswald impersonator (Craford?) gave Kittrell... just as Kittrell was.

 

[Greg Doudna]

Sobering finding: that one-third of individual jurors say they would have given a different verdict than the jury on which they served found in criminal cases, if it had been up to them. https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1113&context=lsrp_papers. 

The power of peer pressure in a village. I have often wondered if I were in a jury room and there was overwhelming belief and unanimous pressure on me in that room from the other eleven, including one or two a lot smarter than me whose judgment I respected, but I could see the evidence had been misinterpreted and there was no basis to conclude guilt stronger than inflamed but actually weakly supported suspicion, what would I do? You become an outcast to the village for obstructing the consensus. You want to be liked and approved, belong. You doubt and question yourself. The other jurors are alternatively pleading and impatient with you...

I know the right thing to do. Stand down that majority and don't buckle. But whether one does what is right is not always so easy to predict.

This is what comes to mind with accusations in village circles against Ruth Paine of all sorts of perfidy, forging and planting physical evidence, perjury, et al and et al, considered so primally true that it has been literally asserted no hard evidence is necessary or matters ... 

Three, maybe four, of the seven members of the Warren Commission did not agree with their own unanimous conclusion presented to America, the world, and history, that Oswald acting alone assassinated President John F. Kennedy. Senator Richard Russell, one of those seven, later told of this--said a majority of the Commission had wanted to find that others may have been involved, were not convinced it was Oswald alone. 

When a scapegoat is fixed upon by a leader pointing a finger, whether in a schoolyard or in a village or nation ... how risky and difficult it can be to defend that scapegoat. Fixing on scapegoats is a "cheap" solution when the harder task is to hold on to the reality of what may remain at present still unknown pending real solution.

[Joe Bauer]

I've heard about the letters Ruth sent to Marina. I have not read them. Are they even available to see?

For those who have read the letters, what parts of them give them the feeling that Ruth was physically attracted to Marina and to a point of expressing this to her even subtly? And if so, what is the point of this speculation?

 If Ruth's sexual orientation was possibly more inclusive than strict heterosexuality, what would be the importance of such in the larger scope of her relationship with Marina and possible motives in helping her?

I'm not asking these questions for titillation reasons. I'm really curious as to how a Ruth Paine physical attraction to Marina scenario might suggest something more such as Ruth's true feelings about Lee Harvey Oswald.

Ruth feeling competitive toward Oswald for Marina's affections?

Ruth maybe setting up Lee in providing a little too much incriminating information to the FBI regards him for instance?

Ruth hated Lee. That we know. Was she also in love with Marina?

If those two hypotheticals are true to any significant degree it does beg some contemplations about such things.

I think Ruth actually felt Lee's whacking by Jack Ruby was a life opportunity opening relief for Marina more than any feelings of sadness at his brutal demise.

 

Edited December 4, 2023 by Joe Bauer

[Greg Doudna]

Joe B, that is Miles' words you are quoting attributed to me, not my words; please edit, thanks. On the sexual issue, this 2014 article from Philadelphia Gay News makes the case that although William Manchester raised that prospect in Death of a President, there was no substance to it, not that I have any idea: https://lavendermagazine.com/our-affairs/education/uncovering-the-alleged-lgbt-connections-in-the-jfk-assassination/. Miles' suggestion is nuanced and might be possible but who knows.

Edited December 4, 2023 by Greg Doudna

[Miles Massicotte]

 

26 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:

I've heard about the letters Ruth sent to Marina. I have not read them. Are they even available to see?

For those who have read the letters, what parts of them give them the feeling that Ruth was physically attracted to Marina and to a point of expressing this to her even subtly? And if so, what is the point of this speculation?

 If Ruth's sexual orientation was possibly more inclusive than strict heterosexuality, what would be the importance of such in the larger scope of her relationship with Marina and possible motives in helping her?

I'm not asking these questions for titillation reasons. I'm really curious as to how a Ruth Paine physical attraction to Marina scenario might suggest something more such as Ruth's true feelings about Lee Harvey Oswald.

Ruth feeling competitive toward Oswald for Marina's affections?

Ruth maybe setting up Lee in providing a little too much incriminating information to the FBI regards him for instance?

Ruth hated Lee. That we know. Was she also in love with Marina?

If those two hypotheticals are true to any significant degree it does beg some contemplations about such things.

I think Ruth actually felt Lee's whacking by Jack Ruby was a life opportunity opening relief for Marina more than any feelings of sadness at his brutal demise.

 

Hi Joe, yes that is my personal supposition, not Greg's. Most people have not given this credence generally speaking, so I acknowledge that. It has been mentioned in passing here or there, but usually with the caveat that there is no "there" there. But for me, Ruth telling Marina that she loves her and wants to live with her across various letters is something more than kindness, but less than say a full blown attraction of a kind which would have been scandalous for a married Quaker woman. I simply think that the gut feeling that many people have that Ruth is hiding something is simply her protecting her personal feelings. 

Ultimately where I am going with this is that I don't think Ruth minded to see Lee in jail. I don't think she conspired to get him there at all, but I think she would have been happy to see him put behind bars, as he was an abusive husband, and Ruth had fond feelings towards Marina. That's all that I will say on the subject for now.

[Jonathan Cohen]

45 minutes ago, Miles Massicotte said:

Ultimately where I am going with this is that I don't think Ruth minded to see Lee in jail. I don't think she conspired to get him there at all, but I think she would have been happy to see him put behind bars, as he was an abusive husband, and Ruth had fond feelings towards Marina. That's all that I will say on the subject for now.

Out of curiosity, why does anybody ascribe some conspiratorial significance to the notion that Ruth disliked Lee? As you point out, he was an abusive husband at worst and an ungrateful houseguest at best. Is Ruth not entitled to her opinion on this matter, whether we or anybody else agree with it?

[Joe Bauer]

2 hours ago, Miles Massicotte said:

Ruth telling Marina that she loves her and wants to live with her across various letters is something more than kindness, but less than say a full blown attraction of a kind which would have been scandalous for a married Quaker woman. I simply think that the gut feeling that many people have that Ruth is hiding something is simply her protecting her personal feelings. 

Ultimately where I am going with this is that I don't think Ruth minded to see Lee in jail. I don't think she conspired to get him there at all, but I think she would have been happy to see him put behind bars, as he was an abusive husband, and Ruth had fond feelings towards Marina. That's a

In one letter, Marina wrote to Paine: “I kiss and hug you and the children.”

“I love you Marina and want to live with you,” Paine said in a particularly effusive reply.

"I love you Marina." ? And " I want to live with you?"

That's about as "deepest affection" direct as one can be imo.

"I care about you" would seem a more appropriate affection statement.

If I got a letter telling me " I love you" and the sender wasn't my mother or daughter I would be deeply stirred or even stimulated in a way different than direct family.

Not to go off on a Ruth Paine sexual orientation path but ...

If Ruth was truly that physically and even mentally drawn to Marina, it's not a totally illogical point to consider her looking at Lee Oswald as an impediment to her relationship with Marina. 

Which if true could suggest Ruth P. maybe trying to manipulate certain information to get him out of their lives and even to incriminate him?

Just speculating.

Did RP ever try to start and maintain any kind of intimate relationship with "any" man after her separation from Michael Paine? 

60 years is a long time to do without some one-on-one physical human contact intimacy imo.

Edited December 4, 2023 by Joe Bauer

[Miles Massicotte]

3 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Out of curiosity, why does anybody ascribe some conspiratorial significance to the notion that Ruth disliked Lee? As you point out, he was an abusive husband at worst and an ungrateful houseguest at best. Is Ruth not entitled to her opinion on this matter, whether we or anybody else agree with it?

Jonathan I agree, she is. As I said above I don't believe she conspired. I am not aware even of a substantial argument that does ascribe any conspiratorial significance to it. But I do believe it explains certain attitudes and actions that are sometimes overlooked or attributed elsewhere. 

2 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

In one letter, Marina wrote to Paine: “I kiss and hug you and the children.”

“I love you Marina and want to live with you,” Paine said in a particularly effusive reply.

"I love you Marina." ? And " I want to live with you?"

That's about as "deepest affection" direct as one can be imo.

"I care about you" would seem a more appropriate affection statement.

If I got a letter telling me " I love you" and the sender wasn't my mother or daughter I would be deeply stirred or even stimulated in a way different than direct family.

Not to go off on a Ruth Paine sexual orientation path but ...

If Ruth was truly that physically and even mentally drawn to Marina, it's not a totally illogical point to consider her looking at Lee Oswald as an impediment to her relationship with Marina. 

Which if true could suggest Ruth P. maybe trying to manipulate certain information to get him out of their lives and even to incriminate him?

Just speculating.

Did RP ever try to start and maintain any kind of intimate relationship with "any" man after her separation from Michael Paine? 

60 years is a long time to do without some one-on-one physical human contact intimacy imo.

Joe, yes I mostly agree that I believe Ruth looked upon Lee as an impediment, in multiple ways. I doubt highly that Ruth and Marina engaged in any kind of sexual activity, but I do think a certain physical attraction is undeniable from the letters, and played a major role in Ruth's generosity towards Marina and her animosity towards Lee, amongst other factors.

[Denny Zartman]

On 12/3/2023 at 5:58 PM, Bill Fite said:

Ruth wanted her to have the books—two of which were about raising children, in Russian, and Mrs. Paine worried that Marina would be lost without the Russian books. There then followed, quickly, a few “chain of possession” interviews regarding the books, until it is learned that there was a note in one of the books. It was exhibited to Ruth Paine and she was asked about it, but she claimed she had no knowledge of it whatsoever. “While the Secret Service agent held it up she read the first line or two but did not get to complete it. She recalls reading something to the effect that “here is the key to the post office.”

The Secret Service had Ruth translate the note? Am I reading that right?

[Bill Fite]

16 minutes ago, Denny Zartman said:

The Secret Service had Ruth translate the note? Am I reading that right?

Apparently, for the first couple sentences.

It seems that entry in the Chronology  implies that Ruth Paine may have fabricated the note and put it in the book for Marina as her house had already been searched.  

This would have made it hard to explain how the note was missed in the search(es?) unless it was hidden in a book. 

Maybe I'm reading too much into it.

[Keyvan Shahrdar]

1. Coincidental Discovery: Ruth Paine could have found the letter by coincidence in her house. This scenario suggests she was not knowingly involved in any conspiracy but became inadvertently entangled in the aftermath of the assassination.

2. Intentional Planting of the Letter: The letter could have been deliberately planted in her house for her to find, possibly by Oswald himself or by another party wishing to frame or involve him. In this case, Ruth Paine's discovery would still be coincidental, but the placement of the letter would be part of a larger conspiracy.

3. Active Involvement: A more complex theory could involve Ruth Paine being knowingly involved in the conspiracy, where she was instructed to give the fabricated letter to the FBI as part of the plot. This would imply her active participation in the conspiracy.

4. Unwitting Participant: Ruth Paine might have been manipulated by others involved in the conspiracy, not fully understanding the significance of the letter or her actions. This scenario places her as an unwitting participant, used by others without her full knowledge.

5. Misinterpretation or Misrepresentation: The letter's discovery and its contents might have been misinterpreted or misrepresented either by Ruth Paine, the FBI, or other parties involved in the investigation, leading to confusion or false leads.