O. H. LEE

[Jon Banks]

JFK Facts article about the Hiddell ID:

Was the Hidell ID planted in Oswald?s wallet on Nov. 23?

None of the five officers who drove Oswald from the Texas Theater to the police station mentioned Bentley?s discovery of the Hidell ID in their reports, including Bentley himself.

More than a week after November 22, Bentley?s report of Oswald?s arrest says only that ?on the way to the city hall?. I turned his identification over to Lt. Baker. I then went to Captain Westbrook?s office to make a report of the arrest.?

The date of the report was December 3, a rather disquieting 12-day delay, given Bentley?s claim that he went to Westbrook?s office to file a report immediately after the arrest. In any case, Bentley didn?t mention the Hidell ID.

Gerald Hill told the Warren Commission months later that Bentley had found the ID while en route to police headquarters, recalling that it was the same name that had been used to order the rifle. In contrast, hours after the Hidell ID was discovered, here?s what Hill told NBC:

HILL: The only way we found out what his name was was to remove his billfold and check it ourself; he wouldn?t even tell us what his name was?.

Q: What was the name on the billfold?

HILL: Lee H. Oswald. O-S-W-A-L-D.

In a radio interview earlier that afternoon, Hill talked at length about Oswald?s time in the USSR and that he was a ?communist.? Again he said nothing about the phony Hidell ID.

Bentley?s and Hill?s failure to remember the ?Hidell? ID was contagious.

A review of the reports filed by other three officers that transported Oswald from the Texas Theater ? Charles T Ford (Dec. 2, 1963), Bob Carroll (Dec. 3), and K.E. Lyons (Dec. 4) ? shows that none said anything about finding the ?Hidell? ID.

Yet several of them later told the Warren Commission that they remembered the card.

At 10 pm on Nov. 22, FBI agent Manning Clements questioned Oswald and reviewed the contents of his wallet on the desk. Clements said that the Hidell ID was inside the wallet at that time, but Oswald wouldn?t answer any questions about it. Clements? inventory of wallet cites the Hidell ID, but was not dictated until Nov. 23.

http://jfkfacts.org/when-did-hidells-id-enter-oswalds-wallet/

[Rob Caprio]

The FBI determined that he used the name H.O. Lee when he purchased a bus ticket back from Mexico City.

And his visa to Mexico, the one he used to go there and visit the Cuban and Soviet consulates, shows the name Lee, Harvey Oswald - or H.O. Lee on it. Although that appears to be a typographical mistake since he signed it Lee Harvey Oswald and not Harvey Oswald Lee.

The key point in this, for me, is why in the hell is this guying using fake names? What world does he think he's living in? Marina said, "Lee was sick...he didn't know who he was."

Can you cite the evidence that shows what bus he took back from Mexico?

[John Iacoletti]

That's right. FACT.

C2766 was Saint Patsy's rifle.

All the LOLs in the world can't change that.

Calling something a "fact" over and over again doesn't actually make it one.

[John Iacoletti]

Exactly who was he trying to fool with the aliases? The KGB? DGI? FBI? Who?

He signed the visa, Lee Harvey Oswald. And yet went around using "O.H. Lee".

Then he used the Hiddell alias and carries around a ID card, with his photo on it, and the Hiddell name.

Who is this fooling?

The Warren Commission.

[John Iacoletti]

Yes, he just left Marina some money. And he just left the building. And he just took a bus. And he just took a cab. And he just went to a movie.

This is how he characterizes Oswald's actions. He strips it of any context and describes the actions in the most innocent of ways.

You're assuming that every random action must be meaningful, because...you know...he murdered the president.

If I was defending Oswald before a court, I'd try that too. But we're not in a courtroom and we're not supposed to be trying to get him off. We're trying to find out - as best as we can - what he was doing and what happened that day.

I agree, so why attribute malice to every single action?  This is something that the LNs seem to understand for example when talking about the DPD's many incompetencies with evidence handling.

This latter approach is bad for Oswald and it's why he rejects it.

The guy argued with his wife the night before and she refused to move back to Dallas with him.  Why do you have to make any more of it than that?  Just to try to bolster a weak case?

[John Iacoletti]

JUDGE: Mr. Iacoletti, the prosecution has rested, your closing argument, please.

JI: Your honor, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I have nothing to say except LOL, I have no idea, and you must acquit because this whole trial is based on my client looking funny. The defense rests.

Two hours later....

FOREMAN OF THE JURY: Can we execute him twice ? Just to be sure.

Prosecutor HG:  Your honor, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, You must find the defendant guilty because that guy over there is bald and I'm too ashamed to show my face.  The prosecution rests.

FOREMAN OF THE JURY: LOL

[John Iacoletti]

Some Intelligence experts see evidence of Spycraft in many of the things Oswald did. Why is is so far-fetched for you to believe he had some training in espionage? The most logicial explanation is he was taught Russian by the Marines and was sent to Russia on some sort of mission.

Mr. FRITZ. You know I didn't have trouble with him. If we would just talk to him quietly like we are talking right now, we talked all right until I asked him a question that meant something, every time I asked him a question that meant something, that would produce evidence he immediately told me he wouldn't tell me about it and he seemed to anticipate what I was going to ask. In fact, he got so good at it one time, I asked him if he had had any training, if he hadn't been questioned before.