Did Oswald Go To Mexico City?

[Liam Kelly]

You might find this interesting:

A debate between Mark Lane and David Atlee Philips (CIA) ...
Oswald and Mexico City--- approx: 18:30-

[Steve M. Galbraith]

If Oswald was indeed the applicant in question...Why couldn't the Cuban council in Mexico City identify him?
No one has even tried to answer that one. TESTIMONY OF SENOR EUSEBIO AZCUE LOPEZ, FORMER CUBAN CONSUL IN MEXICO CITY   ------------------------------ http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/hscaascu.htm

Why do experts say eyewitness accounts are notoriously unreliable? For example, I suggest reading up on the research by Elizabeth Loftus.

I thought the one thing, probably the only thing, both sides - lone assassin believers and conspiracy advocates - agreed upon is that eyewitness accounts cannot be relied upon. There has to be corroborating evidence.

In this matter, there is: other accounts, physical evidence, photos, handwriting/signature, visa applications, circumstantial. We need to consider the totality of evidence and not simply one piece.

So you dismiss all of this other evidence because Azcue said the man he saw didn't appear to be Oswald?

In any case, I'll answer it: Azcue was wrong. Note that he also said in his testimony that the man in the visa photos was NOT the same man he saw and that the dress of the man in the photos was not the same. He testified that the man he saw was wearing a suit. Duran said, of course, that the man she met was the same man in the photos and that he was dressed the same. And she has corroborating evidence: the photo and his signature, among other things. Again, I think his memory failed him.

Now, your turn: How do you explain the other eyewitness accounts, the photos, the signatures, the application and the circumstantial evidence that indicates he went there?

[Walt Cakebread]

You might find this interesting:

A debate between Mark Lane and David Atlee Philips (CIA) ...
Oswald and Mexico City--- approx: 18:30-

Mr Kelly,  I'm hearing impaired and find it hard to understand what's being said on the tape....  Could you please transcribe the pertinent portion of the tape?

 

[Jerry Freeman]

Why do experts say eyewitness accounts are notoriously unreliable? Now, your turn: How do you explain the other eyewitness accounts, the photos, the signatures, the application and the circumstantial evidence that indicates he went there?

I have asked before...What makes someone an 'expert'? Also it just seems to me that the authorities accept eyewitness testimony when it supports their cause...but reject accounts that don't. Why follow that trend?
I have searched for other solid ID reports. Nothing has been linked that seems really convincing. We keep going back to the 'application'. Which application?  Passport?

 

 Here is the WC link [full page] again to the Oswald passport application
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pdf/WH17_CE_781.pdf
And recall I wrote earlier....

Why did Lee's [passport] application misspell his mother's name...his aunts name...[even  his own] wife's name..& misstate his height but, manage to spell photographer correctly when Lee consistently misspelled that word?

When you smell fish...something is fishy.
 

[Oscar Navarro]

Oscar don't you think you are getting a bit overly agitated there? I mean liar really? I just transcribed what it said on that page.... https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1142#relPageId=213&tab=page
Now if my eyes are out of whack that would be another thing. Let us allow other viewers decide OK?
---A brief add..Someone can be wrong or in error..mistaken perhaps but ..liar is quite a charge-take it easy.

No, Jerry. I'm just stating a simple fact. I gave you an opportunity to reconsider what you had posted about the Oswald photo and this is how you responded; Again adding things that aren't really there [as happens many times] Where you probably originally got the photo was from the WR, page 396 but when I showed you where the exhibit gives the complete description you gave that flippant remark. You were in error the first time but the second was a deliberate attempt at misleading the reader. And even now, the third time, you still refuse to acknowledge that I was not adding anything that isn't there by asking for support from fellow CTers, the only ones that you can count on to bail you out.

[Walt Cakebread]

I have asked before...What makes someone an 'expert'? Also it just seems to me that the authorities accept eyewitness testimony when it supports their cause...but reject accounts that don't. Why follow that trend?
I have searched for other solid ID reports. Nothing has been linked that seems really convincing. We keep going back to the 'application'. Which application?  Passport?

 

 Here is the WC link [full page] again to the Oswald passport application
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pdf/WH17_CE_781.pdf
And recall I wrote earlier....  When you smell fish...something is fishy.

but, manage to spell photographer correctly when Lee consistently misspelled that word?

This is interesting....I never realized that Lee had trouble spelling "photographer"....  But whoever said that it is spelled correctly on the application should take a closer look....    It looks to me like it is spelled Phtograhber  .....and the loop on the letter "h" has a bar across the top which makes no sense....

[Steve M. Galbraith]

I have asked before...What makes someone an 'expert'? Also it just seems to me that the authorities accept eyewitness testimony when it supports their cause...but reject accounts that don't. Why follow that trend?
I have searched for other solid ID reports. Nothing has been linked that seems really convincing. We keep going back to the 'application'. Which application?  Passport?

 

 Here is the WC link [full page] again to the Oswald passport application
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pdf/WH17_CE_781.pdf
And recall I wrote earlier....  When you smell fish...something is fishy.

Well, if you want to reject the peer-reviewed research of people then I guess we can't go anywhere on the expert question. Experts can be wrong of course; but one has to show where and how. 

In any case, do you think eyewitness accounts are always reliable? Here we have a specific case where  they can be wrong: two witnesses - Duran and Mirabal - say the man was Oswald and another witness - Azcue - saying it wasn't.

Obviously, someone is wrong here. So we consider other evidence that can corroborate what the parties say.

Re the application: I'm not sure what others are talking about but I am referring to the transit visa applications he signed. With the photos. That Duran said she typed for him. And had him sign.