Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Free Book Now Available -- Hasty Judgment: Why the JFK Case Is Not Closed  (Read 48197 times)

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10812
Advertisement
CE 773 is a photograph, not a photocopy. It was developed off of a negative from Klein's roll of microfilm. Cadigan, Cole, McNally, and Scott all had that photograph at their disposal and they all concluded that the handwriting on the envelope and the order coupon was that of Oswald's.

Charles Scott:

"The envelope addressed to Kleins (item 30) was available only in the form of a microfilm enlargement. This is even less satisfactory than a photocopy as a basis for an opinion on handwriting."

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline Joffrey van de Wiel

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 134
Gentlemen,

I have a question regarding the authenticity of the backyard photographs. Marina testified she took the photos on the instructions of, and aided by, her husband. But since she has credibility issues, many people believe she lied about this, as she did on many other occasions, because she was threatened with deportation back to the USSR. This was in 1963-1964.

Yesterday I watched an interview with Marina Oswald-Porter as she is now known - apparently she remarried. In it, she told reporter Jack Anderson that she took the backyard photos. The interview was done in 1988. In a conversation she had with Governor Jesse Ventura for his tv program Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura she reaffirmed this statement, although not directly on camera. Unfortunately I can't find the segment no more and am therefore unable to determine the year it was broadcast, but it was well after the 1988 Jack Anderson program.

So is she still lying? What possible reason could she have? She has reversed many of her past (1963-64) statements and has not been deported as far as I know.

Thanks in advance for your considered reply

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7322
Gentlemen,

I have a question regarding the authenticity of the backyard photographs. Marina testified she took the photos on the instructions of, and aided by, her husband. But since she has credibility issues, many people believe she lied about this, as she did on many other occasions, because she was threatened with deportation back to the USSR. This was in 1963-1964.

Yesterday I watched an interview with Marina Oswald-Porter as she is now known - apparently she remarried. In it, she told reporter Jack Anderson that she took the backyard photos. The interview was done in 1988. In a conversation she had with Governor Jesse Ventura for his tv program Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura she reaffirmed this statement, although not directly on camera. Unfortunately I can't find the segment no more and am therefore unable to determine the year it was broadcast, but it was well after the 1988 Jack Anderson program.

So is she still lying? What possible reason could she have? She has reversed many of her past (1963-64) statements and has not been deported as far as I know.

Thanks in advance for your considered reply

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline Michael T. Griffith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 929
For now, I am bracketing the issue of the meaning of the "12" that appears after the city and state on the postmark on the envelope to Klein's. I do not buy the theory that it is the number of the cancelling machine that processed it. That makes no sense to me at all, especially since some postmarks show a number-letter instead of just a number, and I don't think any such machines would have ID numbers of 3A, 3B, etc. For that matter, I've never heard of any kind of a machine being given a number/number-letter ID of just two characters.

I have confirmed from USPS sites that when zip codes were implemented in April 1963, they were placed after the city and state in the postmark, so it makes sense to me that postal zones would have been the logical predecessor that was placed after the city and state before then. However, I cannot account for the 2B entry on Johnson Exhibit 17. I finally found a 1963 postal zone chart for Dallas, and it shows no number-letter zones, only numbers. I can imagine a scenario where a large/busy zone was administratively divided into, say, 2A and 2B, but I can't find any evidence of this.

In any case, I think the attempts to explain away Oswald's Jaggars-Stovall timesheet are unconvincing and implausible, given the nature of Oswald's job there and given the WC testimony about Oswald's work environment. I think his timesheet proves he did not buy the money order.

I also think that the evidence that the money order was not cashed is compelling. The idea that any money order in 1963 could have gone through a major bank and the Federal Reserve System and ended up in Virginia without a single stamp/mark/notation that it was cashed is far fetched, just unbelievable.

I think David Josephs has answered all of David Von Pein's arguments regarding the money order. 

The deposit statement that Klein's submitted to the WC to try to establish that the money order had been deposited is not credible and is more evidence of fraud.

Beyond this, if you take a step back and look at this logically, the rifle-purchase evidence is far too pat and far too implausible to take seriously from the outset. Oswald was many things, but he most certainly was not stupid. Yet, we are asked to believe that Oswald was so utterly brain-dead that, instead of just buying a rifle at a local gun store in Dallas, he left a glaring paper trail straight back to himself by ordering a rifle by mail with a postal money order and using a false name, and then shot Kennedy while carrying a fake ID card in the same name he had used to order the rifle and never bothered to discard the fake ID before he was arrested. I mean, come on. . . .

« Last Edit: July 21, 2020, 06:34:27 PM by Michael T. Griffith »

Offline Tim Nickerson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1825
For now, I am bracketing the issue of the meaning of the "12" that appears after the city and state on the postmark on the envelope to Klein's. I do not buy the theory that it is the number of the cancelling machine that processed it. That makes no sense to me at all, especially since some postmarks show a number-letter instead of just a number, and I don't think any such machines would have ID numbers of 3A, 3B, etc. For that matter, I've never heard of any kind of a machine being given a number/number-letter ID of just two characters.

I have confirmed from USPS sites that when zip codes were implemented in April 1963, they were placed after the city and state in the postmark, so it makes sense to me that postal zones would have been the logical predecessor that was placed after the city and state before then. However, I cannot account for the 2B entry on Johnson Exhibit 17. I finally found a 1963 postal zone chart for Dallas, and it shows no number-letter zones, only numbers. I can imagine a scenario where a large/busy zone was administratively divided into, say, 2A and 2B, but I can't find any evidence of this.

In any case, I think the attempts to explain away Oswald's Jaggars-Stovall timesheet are unconvincing and implausible, given the nature of Oswald's job there and given the WC testimony about Oswald's work environment. I think his timesheet proves he did not buy the money order.

I also think that the evidence that the money order was not cashed is compelling. The idea that any money order in 1963 could have gone through a major bank and the Federal Reserve System and ended up in Virginia without a single stamp/mark/notation that it was cashed is far fetched, just unbelievable.

I think David Josephs has answered all of David Von Pein's arguments regarding the money order. 

The deposit statement that Klein's submitted to the WC to try to establish that the money order had been deposited is not credible and is more evidence of fraud.

Beyond this, if you take a step back and look at this logically, the rifle-purchase evidence is far too pat and far too implausible to take seriously from the outset. Oswald was many things, but he most certainly was not stupid. Yet, we are asked to believe that Oswald was so utterly brain-dead that, instead of just buying a rifle at a local gun store in Dallas, he left a glaring paper trail straight back to himself by ordering a rifle by mail with a postal money order and using a false name, and then shot Kennedy while carrying a fake ID card in the same name he had used to order the rifle and never bothered to discard the fake ID before he was arrested. I mean, come on. . . .

Oswald's handwriting on the money order proves that he bought it. The money order was cashed, as is evidenced by the File Locator Number on it. David Josephs has done nothing but flop about and present nonsensical arguments, as he always does. You guys don't know how to look at it logically. You never do. Klein's shipped the rifle to Oswald's PO Box. Do you really think that they would have never bothered to cash the money order?

JFK Assassination Forum


Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10812
Oswald's handwriting on the money order proves that he bought it.

No it doesn't.  First of all, you don't have to buy a money order in order to write on it.  Second of all, handwriting "analysis" is unscientific and biased.

Quote
Klein's shipped the rifle to Oswald's PO Box.

Too bad you don't have any evidence that such a package ever went through the mail and was delivered there.

Quote
Do you really think that they would have never bothered to cash the money order?

You can't even connect the money order found in Virginia to any specific Klein's order.

Offline Michael T. Griffith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 929
Gentlemen,

I have a question regarding the authenticity of the backyard photographs. Marina testified she took the photos on the instructions of, and aided by, her husband. But since she has credibility issues, many people believe she lied about this, as she did on many other occasions, because she was threatened with deportation back to the USSR. This was in 1963-1964.

Yesterday I watched an interview with Marina Oswald-Porter as she is now known - apparently she remarried. In it, she told reporter Jack Anderson that she took the backyard photos. The interview was done in 1988. In a conversation she had with Governor Jesse Ventura for his tv program Conspiracy Theory with Jesse Ventura she reaffirmed this statement, although not directly on camera. Unfortunately I can't find the segment no more and am therefore unable to determine the year it was broadcast, but it was well after the 1988 Jack Anderson program.

So is she still lying? What possible reason could she have? She has reversed many of her past (1963-64) statements and has not been deported as far as I know.

Thanks in advance for your considered reply.

Soon after the Secret Service and the FBI started interviewing Marina, they made it clear to her that she would end up back in Russia if she did not "cooperate." This was not an implied threat, but a clearly stated, expressly worded threat. They did not mince words. She clearly feared deportation for many years after the WC concluded.

During the 1980s, she began to insist that her husband was innocent of the assassination. During one of the interviews Marina gave in the 1990s, she was asked about the backyard photos, and she said they were not the pictures she took.

During the WC investigation, Marina was pressured into saying all kinds of incriminating things to corroborate evidence that was later exposed as fraudulent, such as Oswald's alleged attempt to shoot General Walker and his alleged 11/9/1963 letter to the Soviet embassy in DC. The Walker tale has been so thoroughly refuted that there's no need to reinvent the wheel here about it.

As for the phony Oswald letter to the Soviet embassy in DC, we now know that the Soviets concluded that Oswald did not write the letter, that it was faked in his name as part of an effort to plant a phony evidence trail that could be used to implicate Russia in JFK's death. The Soviets noted that the letter was "totally unlike" previous, undisputed letters that they had received from Oswald. Yet, Marina obligingly said, "Oh, yeah, I saw that letter before he mailed it."

Incidentally, the fake 11/9/63 Oswald letter to the DC Soviet embassy also reveals Ruth Paine's role as a CIA asset in helping to frame Oswald, as James Douglass discusses in JFK and the Unspeakable (pp. 319-324). Apparently, the CIA tasked her with coming up with an alternative version of the letter that would be far easier to innocently explain, and the WC uncritically gobbled up her obviously faked version. Paine's fraud was exposed when the actual letter that the Soviets received was made public--her version is markedly different from the letter the Soviets received. But the fact that the Soviets concluded the letter was fake was not revealed until 1999 when Anatoly Dobrynin's report on the letter was released with a bunch of other assassination-related documents.

All of which is to say that it is very hard to believe anything Marina said while there was any chance that she would be deported. I hesitate to judge her because she was a single mom with two kids who was scared to death of being deported back to Russia.

« Last Edit: July 25, 2020, 11:36:23 AM by Michael T. Griffith »


JFK Assassination Forum