The Backyard photos

[Marcel Dehaeseleer]

Hi,

A simple introduction to the "Imperial Reflex 620 Duo Lens" camera used by Marina Oswald to take the backyard photos.

Here is the link: Imperial Reflex 620 Duo Lens Camera (CE-750)

Best regards…

[Marcel Dehaeseleer]

DEPOSITIONS OF MARINA OSWALD PORTER

Staff Report of the

Select Committee on Assassinations

U.S. House of Representatives

Ninety-fifth Congress

Second Session

March 1979

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 20, 1977

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SELECT COMMITTEE ON ASSASSINATIONS,

Washington, D.C.

.../...

Q. This camera, do you recall whether to take pictures with this camera, you would look down into the viewfinder or whether you would hold the camera up to your eye and look straight ahead?

A. I just recall I think it is straight.

Q. You would put the camera up by your eye?

A. Yes.

Q. Do you remember what color the camera was?

A. I think it was black.

Q. Do you remember anything else about it?

A. Not the name; no. But again, since I am not expert with the camera, that is what I remember, I think?

.../...

[Marcel Dehaeseleer]

There is another mistake in the testimony of Marina. She testifies that the camera was black (like the one from my website), however the photo of CE-750 shows a Silver camera.

Edited June 29, 2005 by Marcel Dehaeseleer

[John Dolva]

.

Edited October 5, 2005 by John Dolva

[Marcel Dehaeseleer]

Hi!

Page updated: http://users.skynet.be/copweb/jfk/Imperial_Camera.htm

[John Dolva]

Hi!

Page updated: http://users.skynet.be/copweb/jfk/Imperial_Camera.htm

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Marcel, I wonder if you know when during the time that the shutter is open on Zapruders camera, how long from when the light hits the film it is registered as an image? I'm trying to find out if there is a lapse there to consider in working out how long the film during that 1/35 seconds is 'exposed'?

JohnD

[Christopher T. George]

Hi Marcel and John

Interesting information, Marcel, thanks for posting it. More correctly, from the look of the photograph of the actual Imperial Reflex 620 Duo Lens Camera (CE-750)camera used by Marina Oswald, it was silver and khaki not silver as such, although definitely was not "black" as Marina testified.

In regard to the backyard photographs, which it is alleged were hoaxed, and that Lee Harvey Oswald himself said were not him, and that his head had been pasted on another body, in retrospect, it would appear bizarre even in gun-crazy Texas to have yourself photographed in your own backyard with a rifle when you were planning to use it for criminal activities. The fact that the authorities quickly produced such a photograph, to convince members of the American public in 1963 of Oswald's guilt, seems very fishy.

All the best

Chris

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Chris, one of the other problems with the snaps, is the leftist papers oswald holds in one. "The Worker" & "The Militant"if memory serves,one is the house paper of the CPA, the other of the SWP, the former a Stalinist organisation, the later a Troskist one. No dedicated Marxist would have made this faux pas, however to the DPD they were all just Commie bastards.

[Christopher T. George]

Chris, one of the other problems with the snaps, is the leftist papers oswald holds in one. "The Worker" & "The Militant"if memory serves,one is the house paper of the CPA, the other of the SWP, the former a Stalinist organisation, the later a Troskist one. No dedicated Marxist would have made this faux pas, however to the DPD they were all just Commie bastards.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Steve, you make an interesting point about the newspapers supposedly held by Oswald. I would also agree that to the Dallas Police Department it is likely that a Commie was a Commie was a Commie, without taking allowance of the different factions within the Communist movement.

All my best

Chris

[John Dolva]

Chris, one of the other problems with the snaps, is the leftist papers oswald holds in one. "The Worker" & "The Militant"if memory serves,one is the house paper of the CPA, the other of the SWP, the former a Stalinist organisation, the later a Troskist one. No dedicated Marxist would have made this faux pas, however to the DPD they were all just Commie bastards.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Steve, you make an interesting point about the newspapers supposedly held by Oswald. I would also agree that to the Dallas Police Department it is likely that a Commie was a Commie was a Commie, without taking allowance of the different factions within the Communist movement.

All my best

Chris

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Chris,Stephen, I agree, good points, but given my questioning nature I can suggest other possibilities. While the murder of Leon Trotsky was not that far back in history (or distance either) at the time and the general history of Stalin-Trotsky intrigue, as well as that of the 3rd and 4th international, as reflected in these two party organs, there were issues on which they would have seen eye to eye, for example the need to support the Cuban revolution. Any idea of the dates of these particular issues? headlines?.

Alternatively, if Oswald was a participant in some spooky stuff it might be that these are 'publicity shots' intended for use in communicating with either of these organisations? Of course whether the photos are fakes or not is still an issue. I'm personally not convinced either way.

JohnD

[Guest Stephen Turner]

Chris, one of the other problems with the snaps, is the leftist papers oswald holds in one. "The Worker" & "The Militant"if memory serves,one is the house paper of the CPA, the other of the SWP, the former a Stalinist organisation, the later a Troskist one. No dedicated Marxist would have made this faux pas, however to the DPD they were all just Commie bastards.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Steve, you make an interesting point about the newspapers supposedly held by Oswald. I would also agree that to the Dallas Police Department it is likely that a Commie was a Commie was a Commie, without taking allowance of the different factions within the Communist movement.

All my best

Chris

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Chris,Stephen, I agree, good points, but given my questioning nature I can suggest other possibilities. While the murder of Leon Trotsky was not that far back in history (or distance either) at the time and the general history of Stalin-Trotsky intrigue, as well as that of the 3rd and 4th international, as reflected in these two party organs, there were issues on which they would have seen eye to eye, for example the need to support the Cuban revolution. Any idea of the dates of these particular issues? headlines?.

Alternatively, if Oswald was a participant in some spooky stuff it might be that these are 'publicity shots' intended for use in communicating with either of these organisations? Of course whether the photos are fakes or not is still an issue. I'm personally not convinced either way.

JohnD

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

John, I'll try to find out the dates of these papers. Actually the two organisations agreed on virtually nothing, and if they did both support the Cuban revolution, it would have been for very different reasons. the Spanish civil war, and the treatment of Trotskists by Stalinists had seen to this.

[John Dolva]

John, I'll try to find out the dates of these papers. Actually the two organisations agreed on virtually nothing, and if they did both support the Cuban revolution, it would have been for very different reasons. the Spanish civil war, and the treatment of Trotskists by Stalinists had seen to this.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, that's true Stephen, the reasons would have been different, I don't know how sophisticated a marxist Oswald was. This was a time when the SWP was starting to build in the SDS anti-war movement, plus a progressive turn from intellectualism to deep entry into the proletariat. Part of this strategy was at times to turn a blind eye to differences in order to further a 'larger' issue. I can't remember the time of it, but at one point in order to survive legally these organisations in America had to renounce foreign allegiances, perhaps making the local parties less tied to the official Moscow line. But, as you say , the arguments put forward by the two camps would have come from different perspectives.

JohnD

edit:hmm ..I think I mixed up a couple of dates there. surprised no-one picked it, maybe it's not wrong, but I think the SDS might have formed a bit later, perhaps someone can say? As well, the turn I'm alluding to may have been as long as a decade later. Maybe it doesn't matter a great deal as the point I was trying to make is about the 'opportunistic' behaviour these organisations sometimes adopt, perhaps these photos, if genuine, is a crude attempt at opportunism.

Nic, it surprises me sometimes the strange things intelligent people do, think , believe.

Edited July 14, 2005 by John Dolva

[Nic Martin]

Oswald was considered intelligent in school, so I find it hard to believe he'd just commit to something without any idea on what it meant. He cared enough about it to move to Russia, why would he easily confuse two completely different viewpoints just to seem more, I don't know, defiant of the American standards?

I'd expect that from today's thirteen year olds, not from someone of his age, that was considered intelligent.

[Pat Speer]

I once wrote something about the photographs kinda like you guys are doing now, only to find out some months later that Dave Perry had created a web page about how stupid and lazy most researchers are, and used ME and my post on the backyard photos as an example. Well, this kinda pissed me off, but I determined I'd go back in and check my facts, and admit I was stupid if that was the case. Instead, I found out I was basically correct in what I'd said, and that the backyard photos were even fishier than I thought. Some of you might want to use John's new index and see if you can find that thread. It might even be worth re-activating.

[Jack White]

I once wrote something about the photographs kinda like you guys are doing now, only to find out some months later that Dave Perry had created a web page about how stupid and lazy most researchers are, and used ME and my post on the backyard photos as an example.  Well, this kinda pissed me off, but I determined I'd go back in and check my facts, and admit I was stupid if that was the case.  Instead, I found out I was basically correct in what I'd said, and that the backyard photos were even fishier than I thought.  Some of you might want to use John's new index and see if you can find that thread.  It might even be worth re-activating.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Pat...Pay no attention to Dave Perry. Most researchers consider him

a "Posner"-like disinfo agent.

The backyard photos are indeed fishy, as I prove in my video FAKE.

Jack