Oswald was in a position to personally develop them.
Hunter of fascists - ha, ha, ha.
Perhaps referring to his being employed at Jaggars-Chiles?
With access to photographic equipment?
Oswald had no darkroom apparatus of his own besides the cameras [that I've seen]
According to the established timeline [which is worthless for the most part]] Oswald was fired the very next day after the pictures were supposedly taken.
March 31, 1963: Marina takes the infamous "Backyard Photos" of LHO.
April 1, 1963: LHO is fired by Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall.
April 2, 1963: The Oswalds attend a dinner party at the home of Ruth and Michael Paine,
where General Walker is mentioned.
April 6, 1963: LHO's last day at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall.
April 10, 1963: LHO (according to evidence discovered later) fires a single shot at General
Walker, which misses him.
April 12, 1963: LHO files for unemployment benefits.
http://jfkassassination.net/parnell/chrono.htmTheoretically and that is...in theory, Oswald could have printed the B.Y. photos at JCS during that week [that is highlighted]
However, it seems odd that an employer would fire someone and then give them a week to have the run of their darkroom
People are let go and most usually it's 'You're fired...hit the road'.
Mr Stovall of JCS was a bit more lenient ....
Gleaning another look at Oswald's occupational opportunity at JCS-----
[If the reader is not familiar with this aspect of Oswald's life]
Mr. JENNER. And it records the date of termination of Oswald's employment?
Mr. STOVALL. Right.
Mr. JENNER. The sixth day of April 1963?
Mr. STOVALL. He was given notice the latter part of March, and our company's procedure is to give a fellow a week or 10 days notice prior to the termination.
Mr. JENNER. Was his termination prospectively or otherwise discussed with you prior to it?
Mr. STOVALL. Oh probably it was--I would not say for sure whether it was or wasn't.
********************************
Mr. JENNER. What was this man's skill to the extent that you recall, in these areas in which you sought to train him?
Mr. STOVALL. He had no skill. He had no training whatsoever. You see, we employed him only as a trainee and I think we probably started him at $1.25 or $1.35, or something like that, and automatically we give a youngster a 10-or 15-cent raise quarterly, but within 6 months, if they have shown no aptitude, we give up on them and have a parting of the ways.
Mr. JENNER. And that is what happened here?
Mr. STOVALL. Yes; because we give them a raise doesn't mean that the person is competent, it means that it is just a system of employment we have when we start someone on minimum, or generally a 90-day basis, and we give them a nickel or dime, and then within a maximum of 6 months, if they have shown no aptitude, we just have to terminate them.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/stova_ro.htmAs a sidepoint, Jenner told Robert Stovall
no less than three times that if he wanted a copy of his statement, it would cost $.35 a page
John Graef was Oswald's supervisor at JCS....
Mr. Jenner- Since your earlier answer that Oswald was employed at one time in October 1962, by this company, do you have knowledge or reasonably direct information as to the circumstances leading up to his employment, and What kind of an employee he was?
Mr. Graef- That's correct--I'll have to recall as best I can.
In about October 1962, as director of our photographic department we found ourselves in need of another man, so at this time I called the Texas Employment Commission and spoke to them about sending me someone having as close as possible the abilities that might work out in our photographic department. ****
Mr. JENNER. Do you recall how he looked--how he was attired, for example, on that occasion--that's a pretty big order?
Mr. GRAEF. Yes--my memory fails me a little here, but it seems to me he wore a suit, a dark gray suit, modestly dressed and he was very businesslike and likeable.***
Mr. JENNER. You say your recollection doesn't serve you well as to his attire on this particular occasion?
Mr. GRAEF. That's correct.
Mr. JENNER. It could be that he did not have a suit--gray? A collar, or otherwise?
Mr. GRAEF. It could have been, yes, but that's just an impression that hits my mind, but I could very easily be wrong.
Mr. JENNER. Could he have had a white T-shirt and one of these lightweight zipper jackets on?
Mr. GRAEF. No--no, definitely not.
Mr. JENNER. Definitely not?
Mr. GRAEF. No.
Mr. JENNER. You have a definite recollection that he had a suit coat on?
Mr. GRAEF. Yes, his appearance was as most young men would appear in applying for a job---tend to look nice and he made a nice appearance.
Mr. JENNER. All right.
Mr. GRAEF. So, he came in----
Mr. JENNER. Excuse me, did he have a tie?
Mr. GRAEF. Yes.
Mr. JENNER. He did have a tie?
Mr. GRAEF. Yes; I'm pretty certain he had a tie.****
Jenner seems to disbelieve the concept that LHO was capable of wearing a suit and that he always appeared [everywhere he went] as some kind of bum. Oswald wore a white collar shirt and tie as he passed out leaflets in New Orleans.
Mr. JENNER. What inquiries did you make of him with respect to your qualifications for this position--his prior experience, if any?
Mr. GRAEF. None--none. I assumed that--now, he was sent over, if I remember right--I was also told by this Mrs. Latham, something about that he had perhaps some photographic experience in the Marines or there was some--there was some quality there that helped. And I believe it was that he had had a little bit of photograph experience in the Marines that might be helpful. In other words, he was a little familiar with the processing of film and so forth and, of course, this would add a little weight to his becoming a successful employee.
Mr. JENNER. And it might even have been that if this man had no photographic experience whatsoever, but seemed--well, let's say clean cut and eager and intelligent, just out of the Marines and seeking to obtain employment and settle down, that that might have been sufficient qualifications for you?
Mr. GRAEF. Yes--if, of course, there was no one with any better promise that came along.
Mr. JENNER. Yes.
Mr. GRAEF. There have been several times when we have needed someone, when they would send two or three people over, and it was necessary for us to pick someone who had practically no experience in this work because you don't find anyone who is experienced in the type work we do. It is a very highly specialized trade.
The best you can hope to find is perhaps, and I'll tell you as I told this Mrs. Latham, the person that stands the best chance of success is perhaps someone who is industrious, willing to work, and not afraid of work, who perhaps has some artistic ability, because the area is opaquing of negatives with brushes and so forth, and possibly has some photographic experience, where they may know about paper and at least there will be some processes that they may have already learned or become familiar with and we won't have to begin from the very beginning.
Mr. JENNER. You are talking about photographic paper?
Mr. GRAEF. Yes.
Mr. JENNER. For example, some young man who has had an abiding interest in amateur photography, in developing his own film----
Mr. GRAEF. That's correct, and so you see he would become familiar with quite a few things in his hobby that he would know about when he came to work for us. We wouldn't have to start from the very beginning and say, "Now, this is film, and this is paper," and the difference between the two and start from the very beginning. So, to explain a little bit about why I didn't make any inquiries, I didn't frankly feel that any were necessary.*****
Mr. JENNER. Do you recall inquiring of him the extent, if any, of his skills with respect to photography and his experience in that connection, if any?
Mr. GRAEF. I don't recall; no. I believe I may have because this would be one of the normal things I would do in an interview. I think that he exhibited enough, as I recall--I think he exhibited enough knowledge that there again--about photography, that there was no curiosity raised on my part that he didn't know about it.***
Mr. JENNER. Does this include color work?
Mr. GRAEF. No; all black and white.***
Mr. JENNER. Now, I put words in your mouth that he was discharged?
Mr. GRAEF. Yes; he was discharged.
Mr. JENNER. Did you discuss this with him?
Mr. GRAEF. I did.
Mr. JENNER. Would you tell us about that, please?
Mr. GRAEF. His record, as all this has brought out was--adding up to where he was not a desirable employee. His relationships with other employees had reached the point where no one that I know of was really friendly or liked him. His work as we progressed into the more intricate details of our production, didn't improve and it began to be evident after all the training that we had given up to this point that now that he was in a position where he should be able to produce jobs, actually he was not able to do so, and after a reasonable----
Mr. JENNER. Was there ever any thought in your mind as to his ability ultimately to be able to do so?
Mr. GRAEF. Yes; I reached the opinion that he would not have--he would never be the kind of an employee that I was looking for.....***
... you can make a mistake on one job or two jobs, and you always feel like you must--"Let's try it one more time," and this was my thought, because after all, there had been several months passed where we had brought him up to this point and I feel we gave him every chance or tried to give him every chance to make a success, and still he was falling down and making these mistakes--sizing errors-- and camerawork.
When he had to make these things over, he would be mad at himself. He would go back and shoot it again, but it is obvious that he was taking twice as long when these things happened to produce one job because he was having to do the whole thing over again to get it right, that it couldn't be tolerated for much longer.
About this time, I think it was in April, we had a fluctuation in business--it dropped and I thought, "Well, this is the time to let Lee Harvey Oswald--to let him go, so I called him back into the darkroom one day and I said, "Lee, business is"----
Mr. JENNER. When you say this conversation took place in the darkroom, was the room dark?
Mr. GRAEF. There were dim red lights.
Mr. JENNER. Why did you call him back in the darkroom rather than some other place?
Mr. GRAEF. At the time it was the--I didn't want to embarrass the boy.
Mr. JENNER. This was a private talk?
Mr. GRAEF. Yes.****
.... I would have had to say something about his relations with other employees.
Mr. JENNER. And that would have been somewhat negative?
Mr. GRAEF. That's correct; but he did try to become a worker. It wasn't that he wasn't industrious---he was not lazy. He, to the best of his ability, tried but the ability was not there....
......By this time you see, this 6 months had elapsed and at this time work was suffering and he at this time--it was definite that he had no friends. Everyone couldn't be wrong, and so all of this evidence weighed against the decision to keep him on as an employee.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/graef.htmSo Oswald was terminated from JCS after a 6-7 month career...didn't cut the mustard...couldn't carry the ball.....nobody liked him.
Supposedly [four days later] Oswald takes a shot at a US Army general while sitting at his desk and misses. And here I thought he was a crack shot.
охотник фашистов ха ха ха----Hunter of fascists - ha, ha, ha.
I don't think they ever found out who wrote that.
