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

[Richard Smith]

Marina confirmed from the very beginning that Oswald owned a rifle and stored it in the Paine's garage.

A rifle. Yes, that's how the story goes.... But as Ruth Paine did the translation, who knows for sure what she actually said.

In any event, she did not confirm Lee owned the MC rifle that was found at the TSBD. In fact, when she was shown the MC rifle on Friday evening she did not recognize it.

Nothing morphed in her WC testimony as you dishonestly suggest.  She made numerous specific references to a rifle in her testimony.

Of course it morphed from a rifle to the rifle.

Do you really think a scared young Russian woman with two small children and a dead husband accused of killing the President would, all by herself, come up with the idea that she, through inheritance was now the rightful owner of the rifle that was allegedly used to kill Kennedy and the revolver that was allegedly used to kill Tippit, and that she could sell them or at least her rights to them?

If the answer is yes, then Marina was a lot more shrewder than most people give her credit for.
If the answer is no, then there must have been somebody in the background putting this idea in her head.

So, let me give you the answer; On December 4, 1963, Dallas businessman John J. King, wrote a letter to Marina, who at that time was in protective custody, in which he asked her to contact him to discuss a business proposition that could benefit her thousands of dollars. The result was that in the months that followed several representatives for Marina (where did they come from?) negotiated with King until Marina herself got involved in July 1964. Untimately a deal was struck in December 1964.

In other words, in the months leading up to Marina's WC testimony this potential deal was being discussed in secret. But we are to believe that it did not potentially influence her testimony?

You are all over the place.  When the police arrived just hours after the assassination and asked Marina whether her husband owned a rifle, she directed them to the Paine's garage.  That tells us without any ambiguity that Marina knew that Oswald owned a rifle and kept that rifle in a blanket in the garage.  She would not have directed the police to the location in response to a specific question about a rifle unless she had cause to believe that a rifle was kept there.  She would not direct them to a piece of wood as you stupidly imply.  That means that her story did not "morph" to make money.

Marina has from the first moments of this case confirmed that Oswald owned a rifle and kept it in the Paine's garage.  In nearly six decades, she has never claimed that Ruth Paine mistranslated her answer to the police or otherwise altered that statement.   As a result, it is dishonest to suggest that Marina conjured up the rifle for money.  That claim is demonstrably false based on the known timeline of events.  You are conflating this issue with whether Marina - as a person who was not familiar with guns - could identify the 6th floor rifle as the one owned by Oswald with certainty.  What Marina's testimony does do is confirm that: 1) Oswald owned a rifle in the months leading up to the assassination; 2) she took pictures of him holding that rifle; 3) Oswald stored the rifle in the Paine's garage; and 4) that rifle was discovered missing in the first hours after the assassination and has never been accounted for in any way EXCEPT as the rifle found in the TSBD.  Her testimony alone doesn't link Oswald to a specific rifle but provides compelling support, taken in conjunction with the other evidence in this case, that the rifle found in the TSBD belonged to Oswald.

[Steve M. Galbraith]

You are all over the place.  When the police arrived just hours after the assassination and asked Marina whether her husband owned a rifle, she directed them to the Paine's garage.  That tells us without any ambiguity that Marina knew that Oswald owned a rifle and kept that rifle in a blanket in the garage.  She would not have directed the police to the location in response to a specific question about a rifle unless she had cause to believe that a rifle was kept there.  She would not direct them to a piece of wood as you stupidly imply.  That means that her story did not "morph" to make money.

Marina has from the first moments of this case confirmed that Oswald owned a rifle and kept it in the Paine's garage.  In nearly six decades, she has never claimed that Ruth Paine mistranslated her answer to the police or otherwise altered that statement.   As a result, it is dishonest to suggest that Marina conjured up the rifle for money.  That claim is demonstrably false based on the known timeline of events.  You are conflating this issue with whether Marina - as a person who was not familiar with guns - could identify the 6th floor rifle as the one owned by Oswald with certainty.  What Marina's testimony does do is confirm that: 1) Oswald owned a rifle in the months leading up to the assassination; 2) she took pictures of him holding that rifle; 3) Oswald stored the rifle in the Paine's garage; and 4) that rifle was discovered missing in the first hours after the assassination and has never been accounted for in any way EXCEPT as the rifle found in the TSBD.  Her testimony alone doesn't link Oswald to a specific rifle but provides compelling support, taken in conjunction with the other evidence in this case, that the rifle found in the TSBD belonged to Oswald.

It's revealing - but at this point not really - that at the same time they characterize the evidence that Oswald owned the rifle, shot Tippit, et cetera as speculation and conjecture and then dismiss it based on that characterization then turn around and simply uncritically repeat all of these claims about Marina's motivations and dishonesty and behavior. One absurdly high standard for the evidence against Oswald - chain of custody, et cetera - and not much of one for evidence that everyone else was corrupt. Shorter: Everyone was corrupt except Oswald.

I really didn't need to make this point. It's been obvious from the start.

[John Iacoletti]

You are all over the place.  When the police arrived just hours after the assassination and asked Marina whether her husband owned a rifle, she directed them to the Paine's garage.  That tells us without any ambiguity that Marina knew that Oswald owned a rifle and kept that rifle in a blanket in the garage.

No, it tells us that she believed he owned a rifle and kept it in the garage. There’s a difference.

Marina has from the first moments of this case confirmed that Oswald owned a rifle and kept it in the Paine's garage.  In nearly six decades, she has never claimed that Ruth Paine mistranslated her answer to the police or otherwise altered that statement.

Ruth told the WC what she translated: that Marina peeked in the end of a tied up blanket in late September/early October and saw part of a wooden stock that she took to be a rifle.

The morphing is going from that to CE139 being “the fateful rifle of Lee Oswald” according to somebody who admittedly couldn’t even distinguish a rifle from a shotgun.

[John Iacoletti]

One absurdly high standard for the evidence against Oswald - chain of custody, et cetera - and not much of one for evidence that everyone else was corrupt. Shorter: Everyone was corrupt except Oswald.

Nobody ever claimed that everyone was corrupt except Oswald. That’s your fallback strawman when you are unable to prove your own claims.

[Richard Smith]

Marina was asked by the police if her husband owned a rifle.  They did not ask her if he owned something made of wood.  She directed them to the blanket in response to their specific question about a RIFLE.  Marina "believed" there was a rifle in the blanket because she had seen it.  She responded to dozens of WC questions about a RIFLE.  She used the word RIFLE in dozens of instances. There is no ambiguity after her testimony regarding Oswald owning a RIFLE.  Even in the single instance cited by our contrarians when she noted seeing the wooden stock that response comes after saying this:   "There was only once that 1 was interested in finding out what was in that blanket, and I saw that it was a rifle."  Of course, a RIFLE has a wooden stock.

This rabbit hole discussion just highlights how far out and dishonest these folks are in accessing the evidence.  Marina took pictures of Oswald holding the rifle for god's sake.  Those pictures exist. Anyone can see the RIFLE in Oswald's own hands with their own eyes.  Marina's testimony in conjunction with the other evidence proves beyond any iota of doubt that Oswald owned a rifle in the months leading up to the assassination.  There is no accounting for that RIFLE or even an attempt by our contrarians to account for that RIFLE as any other than the RIFLE left in the TSBD.  If Oswald had sold the rifle or had an explanation for it not being in the blanket other than using it in a crime, he had every incentive to direct the police to that RIFLE to exonerate himself.  Instead he lied.  The evidence of guilt leads back at every direction to Oswald.   

Nov. 22, 1963 - Marina Oswald affidavit:

"I knew there was a rifle in Mrs. Paine's garage. Two weeks ago I was in the garage and saw the same blanket that the Police got. I opened the blanket and saw the rifle in it."

[Martin Weidmann]

Marina was asked by the police if her husband owned a rifle.  They did not ask her if he owned something made of wood.  She directed them to the blanket in response to their specific question about a RIFLE.  Marina "believed" there was a rifle in the blanket because she had seen it.  She responded to dozens of WC questions about a RIFLE.  She used the word RIFLE in dozens of instances. There is no ambiguity after her testimony regarding Oswald owning a RIFLE.  Even in the single instance cited by our contrarians when she noted seeing the wooden stock that response comes after saying this:   "There was only once that 1 was interested in finding out what was in that blanket, and I saw that it was a rifle."  Of course, a RIFLE has a wooden stock.

This rabbit hole discussion just highlights how far out and dishonest these folks are in accessing the evidence.  Marina took pictures of Oswald holding the rifle for god's sake.  Those pictures exist. Anyone can see the RIFLE in Oswald's own hands with their own eyes.  Marina's testimony in conjunction with the other evidence proves beyond any iota of doubt that Oswald owned a rifle in the months leading up to the assassination.  There is no accounting for that RIFLE or even an attempt by our contrarians to account for that RIFLE as any other than the RIFLE left in the TSBD.  If Oswald had sold the rifle or had an explanation for it not being in the blanket other than using it in a crime, he had every incentive to direct the police to that RIFLE to exonerate himself.  Instead he lied.  The evidence of guilt leads back at every direction to Oswald.   

Nov. 22, 1963 - Marina Oswald affidavit:

"I knew there was a rifle in Mrs. Paine's garage. Two weeks ago I was in the garage and saw the same blanket that the Police got. I opened the blanket and saw the rifle in it."

Talk about being all over the place;

Mrs. OSWALD. I had never examined the rifle in the garage. It was wrapped in a blanket and was lying on the floor.
Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever check to see whether the rifle was in the blanket?
Mrs. OSWALD. I never checked to see that. There was only once that I was interested in finding out what was in that blanket, and I saw that it was a rifle.
Mr. RANKIN. When was that?
Mrs. OSWALD. About a week after I came from New Orleans.
Mr. RANKIN. And then you found that the rifle was in the blanket, did you?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, I saw the wooden part of it, the wooden stock.

In her affadavit she said she was in the garage "two weeks ago" and saw the rifle.
In her WC testimony she said she was in the garage and saw the rifle; "about a week after I came from New Orleans." which means it happened in late September.

I had never examined the rifle in the garage. It was wrapped in a blanket and was lying on the floor.

So, first she knew that was a rifle wrapped in a blanket....

There was only once that I was interested in finding out what was in that blanket, and I saw that it was a rifle.

But then, she didn't because she wanted to find out what was in the blanket...

Mr. RANKIN. And then you found that the rifle was in the blanket, did you?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, I saw the wooden part of it, the wooden stock.

And then she found that the rifle was in the blanket because she saw the wooden part of it...

By the time Marina Oswald testified before the WC she had been in protective custody for several months being subjected to a large number of interviews by the all sorts of law enforcement agencies to whom she lied on multiple occassions. She was alone with two young children and was told by a specially flown in immigration officer that she would not be deported if she "cooporated" with the investigators. Her husband was dead and she was being told over and over again that he was the lone gunman. That alone would make any widow, placed in her position, very angry. And with all this going on, she gets an offer for a substantial amount of money (back then) to buy the rights she had to Lee's rifle and revolver. So, why would she have to stay loyal to her dead husband when she can also get herself out of the mess by "cooperating" with the investigators and perhaps make some money on the side?

The bottom line is that nothing Marina said should be taken at face value as there is no way of knowing what is and isn't true.

[Dan O'meara]

Were any fibres found on the rifle that could be potentially connected to the blanket?

[Martin Weidmann]

Were any fibres found on the rifle that could be potentially connected to the blanket?

No, there were some fibres similar to the blanket's found in the paper bag recovered from the TSBD.
You know, the bag that was carried out of the TSBD upside down....