CT's, how did Oswald's rifle end up on the 6th floor?

[John Iacoletti]

Whew.  Brutal dishonesty.  As I have pointed out, Marina confirmed in response to dozens or more questions that Oswald owned a rifle during the relevant time period.  There is no ambiguity in her testimony regarding this point as dishonestly implied. Mrs. DeM also saw the rifle.  Oswald denied owning any rifle.  That means he lied.  There is no ambiguity about that.

Marina and Jeanne said that he had a rifle at the Neely Street apartment in April and/or in New Orleans in the summer.  Oswald (allegedly) denied owning a rifle in November.  Even Strawman "Smith" (if he is honest) should detect the flaw in this argument.

  Next issue.  Did Marina confirm that Oswald kept a rifle in the blanket.  Again, she answers multiple questions about a "rifle" being in the blanket.

There's no argument that Marina looked in the end of a rolled up, tied blanket and saw a part of a wooden stock that she took to be a rifle.  That's not "confirmation" that it WAS a rifle, only that she thought it was.

  Never once does she express any doubt about the object under discussion being anything other than a rifle.

Even Strawman "Smith" (if he is honest) should detect the flaw in this argument.  Never once did Roger Craig express any doubt about seeing "7.65 Mauser" on the depository rifle.  Certainty doesn't establish truth.

  If there were any doubt about this, when the police came on 11.22 and asked her about Oswald's ownership of a "rifle" she directs them to the blanket and is surprised when the rifle is not found there.

Ruth Paine, who was translating for her at the time this happened, was very clear about what it was that Marina said.

Mrs. PAINE - There were six altogether, and they were busy in various parts of the house. The officer asked me in the garage did Lee Oswald have any weapons or guns. I said no, and translated the question to Marina, and she said yes; that she had seen a portion of it--had looked into--she indicated the blanket roll on the floor.
Mr. JENNER - Was the blanket roll on the floor at that time?
Mrs. PAINE - She indicated the blanket roll on the floor very close to where I was standing. As she told me about it I stepped onto the blanket roll.
Mr. JENNER - This might be helpful. You had shaped that up yesterday and I will just put it on the floor.
Mrs. PAINE - And she indicated to me that she had peered into this roll and saw a portion of what she took to be a gun she knew her husband to have, a rifle. And I then translated this to the officers that she knew that her husband had a gun that he had stored in here.

Here we have Ruth Paine admitting that she mistranslated what Marina said, indicating more certainty then there actually was.

  It makes no sense whatsoever to argue that Marina didn't see the rifle in that blanket or was talking about some other object.

Only to somebody who is emotionally invested in there being not only a rifle in that blanket, but a particular rifle.

Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever check to see whether the rifle was in the blanket?  (Here Marina is asked about "the rifle" in the blanket!)

This is what's known as a leading question.

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.  (So Marina clarifies that although she was not "checking" for a rifle when she looked in the blanket the object she saw "was a rifle."  A "rifle" for F's sake!  Inexplicable how anyone can argue that there is ambiguity about her seeing "the rifle" when she confirms that she "saw that it was a rifle."  How much clearer could it be?

Speaking of taking things out of context.  Nobody denies that she saw something and thought it was a rifle.  That doesn't mean 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? (Again Marina is specifically being asked about "the rifle")

Note that Rankin keeps telling her what it was that she saw.

Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, I saw the wooden part of it, the wooden stock.  (Marina responds "yes" to the question about finding the rifle in the blanket.  In context Marina is not suggesting that she saw some unknown object made of "wood"  she is confirming that she saw the "wooden part of it."

Note that Marina clarifies here what she actually saw, which was the wooden part of an object she assumed to be a rifle.  This corroborates Ruth Paine's account.  She saw part of a wooden stock that she took to be a rifle.

  "It" can only mean a rifle since that is subject of the question.  If there was any doubt she goes on to say "the wooden stock."  Of course the rifle has a "wooden stock." 

The rifle that you want Oswald to have owned has a wooden stock, yes.  That's why you're so adamant that Marina's assumption be true.

To suggest there is any reasonable ambiguity about whether she is confirming the presence of a rifle in the blanket here or just some unknown object made of wood is mere kookery when you read the totality of her testimony.

No, the totality of her testimony and Ruth Paine's testimony indicates just what they said -- that Marina looked in the end of a rolled-up, tied blanket in early October, at which time she saw a portion of a wooden stock that she took to be the rifle that she knew her husband had earlier in the year.

[Richard Smith]

Hopeless.  A classic example of the contrarian mindset.  Marina mentions "wood" one time and suddenly the dozens of confirmations that she makes regarding the rifle become "assumptions."  And, of course, a rifle is partially made of wood and has a wooden stock.  So even by that dishonest characterization of her testimony, this description is still entirely consistent with seeing a rifle in the blanket.  What else would this object have been that was made of wood, had a wooden stock, and Marina mistook for a rifle?  Where did this wooden object go that it is no longer there on 11.22?  And we are told that confirmation of the rifle's presence was the result of a "mistranslation" by Ruth Paine.  This despite the fact that Marina confirms the events in her WC testimony and has never recanted her confirmation about Oswald owning and storing a rifle in the Paine's garage to this day.  Also the claim is made that X didn't happen (i.e. Oswald didn't store his rifle in the blanket).  By implication that means that Z must have happened (something made of wood that was not the rifle was kept in the blanket and that is what Marina saw).  But time and again there is no proof of Z.  Where is this wooden object, what happened to it?  Marina and the Paines never touched it.  Contrarians stick their heads in the sand and dismiss the implications of their own theories having any validity.  Maybe sugar plum fairies took the item without anyone noticing.  How are they to know?  Tiresome kookery.

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.

[John Iacoletti]

Hopeless.  A classic example of the contrarian mindset.  Marina mentions "wood" one time and suddenly the dozens of confirmations that she makes regarding the rifle become "assumptions."  And, of course, a rifle is partially made of wood and has a wooden stock.  So even by that dishonest characterization of her testimony, this description is still entirely consistent with seeing a rifle in the blanket.  What else would this object have been that was made of wood, had a wooden stock, and Marina mistook for a rifle?  Where did this wooden object go that it is no longer there on 11.22?

This is a classic argument from ignorance.  "I don't know what else it could possibly be other than a rifle, therefore it was a rifle".

  And we are told that confirmation of the rifle's presence was the result of a "mistranslation" by Ruth Paine.

No, you're mischaracterizing what I said.  Ruth Paine mistranslated what Marina said to the cops when they were searching the garage.  She said so in her testimony.  Marina told Ruth Paine in Russian that she saw a part of a wooden stock that she took to be a rifle.

  This despite the fact that Marina confirms the events in her WC testimony and has never recanted her confirmation about Oswald owning and storing a rifle in the Paine's garage to this day.

What she "confirmed" is that she saw part of a wooden stock that she took to be a rifle.

Also the claim is made that X didn't happen (i.e. Oswald didn't store his rifle in the blanket).

No, the claim is made that you don't know whether there was a rifle tied up in the blanket or not.  And neither did Marina.  She saw part of a wooden stock that she took to be a rifle.

  By implication that means that Z must have happened (something made of wood that was not the rifle was kept in the blanket and that is what Marina saw).  But time and again there is no proof of Z.

This is classic shifting the burden of proof.  I admit to not knowing what was in the blanket.  Your evidence for your claim that there was definitely a rifle in the blanket is that Marina thought so.  Great.  Michael Paine thought it was camping equipment.

  Where is this wooden object, what happened to it?  Marina and the Paines never touched it.  Contrarians stick their heads in the sand and dismiss the implications of their own theories having any validity.

Another argument from ignorance.  "I can't imagine what could have happened to this object in the intervening 6 weeks, therefore Oswald brought it to work on November 22nd".

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.

Proof by repetition?  I can do that too.

Mrs. PAINE - And she indicated to me that she had peered into this roll and saw a portion of what she took to be a gun she knew her husband to have, a rifle.

[Tom Scully]

Whew.  Brutal dishonesty.  As I have pointed out, Marina confirmed in response to dozens or more questions that Oswald owned a rifle during the relevant time period.  There is no ambiguity in her testimony regarding this point as dishonestly implied. Mrs. DeM also saw the rifle.  Oswald denied owning any rifle.  That means he lied.  There is no ambiguity about that.  Next issue.  Did Marina confirm that Oswald kept a rifle in the blanket.  Again, she answers multiple questions about a "rifle" being in the blanket.  Never once does she express any doubt about the object under discussion being anything other than a rifle.  If there were any doubt about this, when the police came on 11.22 and asked her about Oswald's ownership of a "rifle" she directs them to the blanket and is surprised when the rifle is not found there.  Why would she do that unless she knew a rifle was kept in the blanket?  It makes no sense whatsoever to argue that Marina didn't see the rifle in that blanket or was talking about some other object.   In the one instance that our dishonest contrarians grasp at straws to desperately suggest that she merely saw some object made of wood (like a rifle) they take her comment out of context and without reference to the question being asked or her previous confirmation that the object in the blanket was a rifle. 

Mr. RANKIN. Did you ever check to see whether the rifle was in the blanket?  (Here Marina is asked about "the rifle" 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.  (So Marina clarifies that although she was not "checking" for a rifle when she looked in the blanket the object she saw "was a rifle."  A "rifle" for F's sake!  Inexplicable how anyone can argue that there is ambiguity about her seeing "the rifle" when she confirms that she "saw that it was a rifle."  How much clearer could it be?


 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? (Again Marina is specifically being asked about "the rifle")
 Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, I saw the wooden part of it, the wooden stock.  (Marina responds "yes" to the question about finding the rifle in the blanket.  In context Marina is not suggesting that she saw some unknown object made of "wood"  she is confirming that she saw the "wooden part of it."  "It" can only mean a rifle since that is subject of the question.  If there was any doubt she goes on to say "the wooden stock."  Of course the rifle has a "wooden stock." 

To suggest there is any reasonable ambiguity about whether she is confirming the presence of a rifle in the blanket here or just some unknown object made of wood is mere kookery when you read the totality of her testimony.  She confirms multiple times that 1) Oswald owned a rifle; 2) he kept it in the blanket in the Paine's garage; 3) she expected the DPD to find it there on 11.22 because that is where she had seen it with her own eyes.

What planet are you posting from? You obviously have cleared Marina as a reliable source. The FBI, CIA, WC, HSCA. ARRB, (Oprah?) certainly were troubled about her veracity and motivation, but you know better? How?

https://www.maryferrell.org/search.html?q=webster&docid=209185
1. MISC_BELARUS.02, pg 16
Found in: ARRB Electronic Files of Team A
Robert Edward Webster #. Does a chronology exist of the activities of American defector Robert Edward Webster in the USSR? #.
What were Webster s activities in Sept. and Oct. 1959? #.
How many times did Webster visit the US Embassy in Moscow in 1959? #. What were the dates and times? DRAFT

2. MISC_BELARUS.02, pg 17
Found in: ARRB Electronic Files of Team A
Do photographs exist of Webster entering or leaving the American Embassy? #.
Do any official photographs exist that were taken of Webster by any government agencies following his defection? #.
Do any audio tape recordings ( or transcripts of tape recordings ) exist of Webster or of third party conversations about Webster in the American Embassy

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=209185&relPageId=11&search=leningrad_webster%20marina%20cia
3. MISC_BELARUS.02, pg 11
Found in: ARRB Electronic Files of Team A
Was Soviet Intelligence aware of any attempt by Marina Nikolaevna to establish a relationship or contact with American defector Robert Edward Webster in the autumn of 1960 when they resided in the same apartment building in Leningrad.
Marina Nikolaevna directed by any facet of Soviet Intelligence to attempt to establish a relationship or contact with American defector Robert Edward Webster

John Shaheen was Webster employer H James Rand's best man, eight years before Webster's defection.
Shaheen is only mentioned 40 times in this article on the 1980 October Surprise, more times than his pal, William Casey.:

https://consortiumnews.com/2006/102906.html
Original October Surprise (Part 3)
By Robert Parry  October 29, 2006
...The Shaheen connection led Cyrus Hashemi to William Casey even before Casey took over Ronald Reagan’s presidential campaign, according to Jamshid Hashemi and a 1984 CIA memo that surfaced later.....

https://archive.is/o/SA6W1/newspaperarchive.com/us/illinois/sterling/sterling-daily-gazette/1951/05-01/page-9

https://www.maryferrell.org/search.html?q=leningrad%20webster%20marina%20rand&types=D
26. No Title, pg 3
Found in: FBI - HSCA Subject File: Robert Edward Webster
WEBSTER said they never received the subject's letter of February 5, 1960.
WEBSTER, Kondratievsky Prospect, House 63 Apt. 18, Leningrad K-32, U.S.S.R. Informant stated that it is his understanding that Mr.
RAND is currently in Florida and will return to Cleveland on March 24, 1960.

27. MARINA OSWALD'S NOTEBOOK, pg 10
Found in: CIA documents released on November 9, 2017
. - 6 - Further identified by Marina OSWALD as Galina ( Gal. ya ) PRINTSEVA a , resident resident at Leningrad with whaa she shared a rocn at the rest
According to Marina OSWALD, she. met PRIZENTSEV who , is a resident at Leningrad ., at the rest home near Leningrad.
WEBSTER, who renounced his U. S. citizenship in 1959 when he defected to the USSR and who returned to the U.
28. Commission Document 911 - CIA Helms Memorandum of 8 May 1964 re: Marina Oswald's Notebook, pg 8
Found in: Warren Commission Documents
s 'fs 6- Printseva Oalya Further identified by Marina OSWALD Ulitsa Grazhdanskays as Oalina (Gaya) PRINTSEVA, a real..
Prizentsev Lev According to Marina OSWALD, she Kondrat'yevskiy met PRIZENtSEV, who is a resident House 7, Apt. 63 or of Leningrad, at the rest home House
WEBSTER, who renounced his U.S. citizenship in 1959 when he defected to the USSR and who returned to the U.S. as an alien under the Soviet quota in May

29. MARINA OSWALD'S NOTEBOOK, pg 11
Found in: Oswald 201 File, Vol 54B
. , ;ati;a Printseva Galya Further identified by Marina OSWALD Ulitsa Grazhdanskaya as Galina (Galya) PRINTSEVA, a-resi- House 7 ?
Prizentsev Lev According to Marina OSWALD, she Kondrat'yevskiy met PRIZENTSEV, who is a resident House 7, Apt. 63 or of Leningrad, at the rest home House
WEBSTER, who renounced his U.S. citizenship in 1959 when he defected to the USSR and who returned to the U.S. as an alien under the Soviet quota in May

.......
https://web.archive.org/web/20161103035644/http://tomscully.com/node/10


Shaheen and Reagan were born a couple of years apart in Tampico, IL, pop. 600 Shaheen’s best man was the employer
of defector Robert E. Webster. Both Casey and Shaheen died suddenly and left Gates holding “the bag” (Roy Furman)>

[Zeon Mason]

someone suggested that the  sling/strap appears to have been "not slack" when the MC rifle was found on the 6th floor.

if so, then there is some doubt that the shooter used the strap for purpose of stabilizing the rifle.

More likely, the tightened strap purpose was  to carry the rifle without leaving prints on it and/or for general carrying purpose while moving from assembly point to window of choice, 1st the SW window, and then the SE window, the shooter having apparently changed plan after 12:15pm.

Or a  conspirator shooter did NOT use the MC rifle actually found between the boxes, but was using some other rifle, which he managed to get  out of the building, or hide so well, that it was never found.

This would require that the MC rifle was planted after the fact, and hastily so, not even having time to check to see if the scope was out of alignment, or not thinking about the corrosion inside the barrel, that might indicate the rifle had not even been fired recently.

[Walt Cakebread]

This is a classic argument from ignorance.  "I don't know what else it could possibly be other than a rifle, therefore it was a rifle".

No, you're mischaracterizing what I said.  Ruth Paine mistranslated what Marina said to the cops when they were searching the garage.  She said so in her testimony.  Marina told Ruth Paine in Russian that she saw a part of a wooden stock that she took to be a rifle.

What she "confirmed" is that she saw part of a wooden stock that she took to be a rifle.

No, the claim is made that you don't know whether there was a rifle tied up in the blanket or not.  And neither did Marina.  She saw part of a wooden stock that she took to be a rifle.

This is classic shifting the burden of proof.  I admit to not knowing what was in the blanket.  Your evidence for your claim that there was definitely a rifle in the blanket is that Marina thought so.  Great.  Michael Paine thought it was camping equipment.

Another argument from ignorance.  "I can't imagine what could have happened to this object in the intervening 6 weeks, therefore Oswald brought it to work on November 22nd".

Proof by repetition?  I can do that too.

Mrs. PAINE - And she indicated to me that she had peered into this roll and saw a portion of what she took to be a gun she knew her husband to have, a rifle.

Ruth Paine mistranslated what Marina said to the cops when they were searching the garage.


Ruth Paine could speak and understand Russian.....  She certainly understood the difference between ------(yes ) and No, (Nyet)  So do you actually believe she misunderstood Marina?   What Ruth didn't know, was that Marina understood the cop who asked her if her husband owned a rifle.  And since she understood the question she didn't wait for Ruth to translate.....but answered that, "yes, he did" (in Russian)   But Ruth answered the cop before asking Marina  the question.   And Ruth said, "no" Lee didn't own a rifle...... 

A few minutes later Marina asked Ruth why she had told the cop "no"  .....Marina asked Ruth if she had suddenly forgot basic Russian.

[Denis Pointing]

someone suggested that the  sling/strap appears to have been "not slack" when the MC rifle was found on the 6th floor.

if so, then there is some doubt that the shooter used the strap for purpose of stabilizing the rifle.

More likely, the tightened strap purpose was  to carry the rifle without leaving prints on it and/or for general carrying purpose while moving from assembly point to window of choice, 1st the SW window, and then the SE window, the shooter having apparently changed plan after 12:15pm.

Or a  conspirator shooter did NOT use the MC rifle actually found between the boxes, but was using some other rifle, which he managed to get  out of the building, or hide so well, that it was never found.

This would require that the MC rifle was planted after the fact, and hastily so, not even having time to check to see if the scope was out of alignment, or not thinking about the corrosion inside the barrel, that might indicate the rifle had not even been fired recently.

Hi Zeon, the following is from a related post I made back in June;   "Not only was the sling "unique" it was pretty near useless, it was also far too short to use as an aid in steadying the rifle by looping it around the arm. About the only thing it was good for was holding the rifle akimbo to the body, under a long trench coat whilst walking around the streets at night...which is exactly what Marina claims he did. Very spooky guy."  https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1979.msg56104.html#msg56104

[Walt Cakebread]

Hi Zeon, the following is from a related post I made back in June;   "Not only was the sling "unique" it was pretty near useless, it was also far too short to use as an aid in steadying the rifle by looping it around the arm. About the only thing it was good for was holding the rifle akimbo to the body, under a long trench coat whilst walking around the streets at night...which is exactly what Marina claims he did. Very spooky guy."  https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1979.msg56104.html#msg56104

About the only thing it was good for was holding the rifle akimbo to the body, under a long trench coat whilst walking around the streets at night...

Would you believe that the strap was designed for Mussolini' s elite black garbed,  body guards ( The Guardie Del Duce) .....The wide patch was attached to the strap to relieve the pressure on the shoulder that a narrow strap inflicted,  while the guards stood long hours of guard duty.