JFK Assassination Forum 
Logo
HomeThe Robin Unger JFK Assassination GalleryYoutube JFK Assassination Video ChannelSearchNotepadLoginRegister

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 23, 2017, 12:16:09 PM
News: Posts and threads containing swear words, personal insults or crudities, content considered by Admin to be spamming, when reported or observed, may be edited or deleted.
The perpetrator of any offense may receive a posting suspension of a period to be determined by Admin in relation to the considered severity of the offense.
Questions relating to deletions or edits will not be answered by Admin via any communication method here or elsewhere.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11
DiEugenio: Stop O'reilly's book from being made into a film!  (Read 13037 times)

Super Member
*****

Posts: 2417



LEE HARVEY OSWALD, MARRION BAKER, ROY TRULY, AND THE COKE:

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


-------------------------
« Last Edit: January 11, 2013, 01:29:54 PM by David Von Pein »

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 6331


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
LEE HARVEY OSWALD, MARRION BAKER, ROY TRULY, AND THE COKE:

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


Well Dave the following stuck me before reading your blog. That Baker was not present when Burnett wrote the statement for him. It does not explain the reference to the third floor that is also crossed out. Surely if the coke was common knowledge by the FBI so was the fact that the lunchroom was on the second floor not the third.


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 601


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
LEE HARVEY OSWALD, MARRION BAKER, ROY TRULY, AND THE COKE:
As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

David,

It would have been easier to read had you made a proper reply and not direct us to a web page that was initially a response to something Anthony Marsh said and thereafter was about a conversation you had with Jean Davidson.

That said I concur that the writer was Burnett. That means that he wrote both the initial entries for the third floor as well as the coke bottle.

Now unless you are suggesting that information came directly from Burnett, then it follows it came from Baker.

What is left is why it was deleted. Did Baker suddenly realise he was wrong and change his mind. Or was he persuaded by Burnett to change his mind.

I know which answer you believe in. At best it is ambiguous, but if it was Baker that decided on the change, I am curious why he made the mistake in the first place.

James.


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 2417


Quote
Surely if the coke was common knowledge by the FBI so was the fact that the lunchroom was on the second floor not the third.

Obviously that's not the case in this instance. Because if it was the case, BOTH of the floors would not have been mentioned in Baker's statement at all. Burnett, who almost certainly wrote the words we find in CE3076, quite obviously must have still been uncertain as to exactly where the lunchroom was located within the Depository as of September 23, 1964.

Because if Baker had been right there when the statement was filled out (and, for whatever reason, Agent Burnett did the writing and not Baker), then we certainly wouldn't have had any confusion about the floor numbers as of 9/23/64, because no CTer can possibly believe something like the following scenario took place on 9/23/64, can they? .....

Officer Baker sits down with Agent Burnett of the FBI to write a statement on Sep. 23, with Baker telling Burnett that he encountered Oswald on the "second or third floor". (Baker, of course, months earlier, had already testified in front of the Warren Commission, and had verified that the encounter with Oswald took place on the SECOND floor, with no ambiguity at all arising as to what floor it occurred on.) And then, after saying "second or third floor" to Burnett, Baker then decides it was the second floor and corrects the error in the statement.

A much more logical scenario is the one I talk about in my 2010 post linked earlier -- i.e.,  Without Baker present, Agent Burnett wrote out a statement for Baker to sign. Baker looked it over, found two errors, corrected those mistakes, initialled the corrections and placed his signature (twice) on the completed document which became CE3076.

BTW, a clue that indicates Baker's statement was likely written outside the presence of Officer Baker entirely can be found on Page 2 of CE3076, where it says:

"I have read this statement consisting of this page and one other page and it is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I have initialled each page and each correction." -- /s/ Marrion L. Baker

In my opinion, the above words would not have been written in that document if Marrion L. Baker had been right there in the same room with Richard J. Burnett when the statement was being written. The key words being "I have READ this statement" and "I have initialled each correction".

I.E., Burnett wrote it outside the presence of Baker. Baker then read it, corrected it, and signed it.

Plus: If some conspiracy theorists think that the FBI was covering up something relating to CE3076 (and a lot of CTers do believe that very thing, of course), then why on Earth wouldn't they have simply torn up the original statement with the crossed-out words "drinking a Coke" and the other cross-out and simply re-write the statement without any reference to the Coke at all? They can fake all kinds of evidence, per the conspiracy theorists, but they're unwilling to toss a piece of paper in the trash and re-write a two-page witness statement?

Seems kinda silly, doesn't it?



As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


-------------------------
« Last Edit: January 11, 2013, 03:08:44 PM by David Von Pein »

   ReplyReply
Group: Guest

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

LEE HARVEY OSWALD, MARRION BAKER, ROY TRULY, AND THE COKE:

As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


David, I don't find it a persuasive argument to say that Burnett perpared the document in advance for Baker to sign. It simply does not work that way. The suggestion is self-serving and preposterous. A witness statement needs to contain what the witness said and not what somebody else may have heard elsewhere and/or believed should be included! The fact that the statements were written by hand instead of typed up may well be explained with your suggestion that both statements (from Baker and Truly) were obtained in a hurry, but even in a hurry a law enforcement can not take it upon himself to pre-write a witness statement.

In my experience, a witness will make a statement and the interviewer will write it down, in the presence of the witness, who will subsequently read the statement and sign it. I have never seen a case where a witness wrote his own statement.
  


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 6331


If we take on face value the requirement to have statements that need to satisfy the single issue of an isolated Oswald in the lunchroom why the embellishment by Burnett of unneccesary details at all? Baker was required to sign the thing, why not get him to write at the time of the encounter Oswald was alone. Takes just a minute. Compare this with the Baker affidavit about the reenactment that simply states 15 seconds to get to the doorway after the shots, no more.


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 2417


The Baker 9/23 statement IS weird, I'll grant you that. It's obviously not Baker's handwriting. It's someone else's. But Baker DID sign it and initial the cross-outs. There's no doubt about that either. If CTers want to think Baker was coerced into crossing out the "Coke" reference, I'll ask again -- Why didn't the FBI simply re-write the whole thing--sans any "Coke" reference--and then have Baker sign the revised statement? That would have taken--what?--an extra 5 minutes?

The fact that CROSS-OUTS exist in that document at all is pretty good proof that the FBI wasn't hiding anything concerning that document.

Heck, they could also have just as easily crossed out the word "Coke" entirely. But they didn't even do that. The word "Coke" can still easily be read underneath Baker's cross-out.

Some cover-up there.


-------------------------

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 6331


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The Baker 9/23 statement IS weird, I'll grant you that. It's obviously not Baker's handwriting. It's someone else's. But Baker DID sign it and initial the cross-outs. There's no doubt about that either. If CTers want to think Baker was coerced into crossing out the "Coke" reference, I'll ask again -- Why didn't the FBI simply re-write the whole thing--sans any "Coke" reference--and then have Baker sign the revised statement? That would have taken--what?--an extra 5 minutes?

The fact that CROSS-OUTS exist in that document at all is pretty good proof that the FBI wasn't hiding anything concerning that document.

Heck, they could also have just as easily crossed out the word "Coke" entirely. But they didn't even do that. The word "Coke" can still easily be read underneath Baker's cross-out.

Some cover-up there.


I don't disagree with your points David. Perhaps it give us better insight into the FBI MO of preparing material to,stitch up the LN case.


-------------------------

   ReplyReply
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11


Jump to:  

JFK Assassination Forum Assassination of JFK discussion and debate surrounding the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy In Dealey Plaza Texas on November 22nd 1963

JFK Assassination Photographs Gallery

JFK Assassination Forum Assassination of JFK discussion and debate surrounding the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy In Dealey Plaza Texas on November 22nd 1963
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines