Did Marina have a reason to claim the MC rifle belonged to Lee?

[Martin Weidmann]

Some four months ago, Mark Felton, who normally makes well researched videos about everything related to WWII, made this video;

at around the 5.53 mark he claims that, in 1964, Marina Oswald sold all rights to Lee Oswald's rifle and pistol, for $10.000 to John J. King.

This begs the question if Marina had a financial insentive to morph the wooden stock of a rifle she believed to see in the blanket in September 1963 into a full blown "Yes, that's Lee's rifle" during her WC testimony.

[Jon Banks]

Marina also feared being deported and separated from her children. So I believe she had several reasons to tell the Warren Commission whatever they wanted to hear.

She’s one of the least consistent witnesses in this case.

[John Mytton]

Marina also feared being deported and separated from her children. So I believe she had several reasons to tell the Warren Commission whatever they wanted to hear.

She’s one of the least consistent witnesses in this case.

When Marina was giving testimony to the Warren Commission she had no way of knowing what other people knew, saw or were going to say, so I think it was in her best interest to simply tell the truth. I know she may have made some innocent guesses like saying CE139 was Oswald's rifle but to the best of her abilities what she saw of the rifle at Neely Street was a close enough match.

Marina could have said she saw the rifle in the blanket the day/week before but she didn't know what the Commission knew, so she told the truth.
Marina could have said that she saw Oswald carry out the long brown package but again she didn't know, who would say what. Like for instance maybe Frazier would say the bag was already in the car from the night before.
Marina could have said she took X amount of Backyard Photos but she just said the best she remembered, because at the time imo it
wasn't particularly important to her.
There is a potential myriad of possibilities behind every fact and any slight divergence would deeply impact your credibility.

And I believe this same mindset would have been in the minds of the vast majority of eyewitnesses because by the time of the hearings, they were all under intense scrutiny and they would have no idea of the consequences of any contradictions.

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

And yet Marina made so many contradictory statements that the HSCA compiled a 29 page document listing them.

[John Mytton]

And yet Marina made so many contradictory statements that the HSCA compiled a 29 page document listing them.

Marina tried to protect Oswald at the start, so understandably may have told a white lie or two but after that she didn't have a perfect grasp of English, she was under a lot of pressure and her WC testimony was translated.

JohnM

[John Iacoletti]

“White lie or two”.

LOL.

[Richard Smith]

Some four months ago, Mark Felton, who normally makes well researched videos about everything related to WWII, made this video;

at around the 5.53 mark he claims that, in 1964, Marina Oswald sold all rights to Lee Oswald's rifle and pistol, for $10.000 to John J. King.

This begs the question if Marina had a financial insentive to morph the wooden stock of a rifle she believed to see in the blanket in September 1963 into a full blown "Yes, that's Lee's rifle" during her WC testimony.

That is one of the dumbest conspiracy claims in a long while.  Which is saying a great deal considering how low the bar has been set.  How many folks have made a buck for writing a book claiming there was a conspiracy?  Does that alone discredit the likes of Mark Lane and others?   Marina confirmed from the very beginning that Oswald owned a rifle and stored it in the Paine's garage.  When she was asked about a rifle by the police when they very first arrived at the Paine residence just a short while after the assassination, she directs them to the blanket.  Nothing morphed in her WC testimony as you dishonestly suggest.  She made numerous specific references to a rifle in her testimony.  The irony is that the false ambiguity in her identification of the rifle that you stupidly cite referencing the "wooden stock" comes from her WC testimony.  Her answers don't morph from the "wooden stock" answer to confirmation of a rifle because she had already confirmed to the WC, DPD, and others many times that Oswald owned a rifle before answering that specific question in her WC testimony.  There was no progression or morphing in that regard.