"And he said 'I shot Walker'"

[Bill Brown]

"Later that night, about 11:30, Lee came in; white, covered with sweat, looking quite wild in the eyes.  And he said 'I shot Walker'." -- Priscilla Johnson McMillan (Frontline - "Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?", 1993)

Obviously McMillan is referring to Marina Oswald's description of that night, April 10, 1963.

The important part is that Lee Oswald told Marina that he had shot General Walker.

It doesn't matter that Marina would not have been allowed to testify against Lee, had there been a trial.  We are not in a court of law.  In the "court of wanting to know the historical truth", Lee admitted that he shot at Walker.

[Jarrett Smith]

"Later that night, about 11:30, Lee came in; white, covered with sweat, looking quite wild in the eyes.  And he said 'I shot Walker'." -- Priscilla Johnson McMillan (Frontline - "Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?", 1993)

Obviously McMillan is referring to Marina Oswald's description of that night, April 10, 1963.

The important part is that Lee Oswald told Marina that he had shot General Walker.

It doesn't matter that Marina would not have been allowed to testify against Lee, had there been a trial.  We are not in a court of law.  In the "court of wanting to know the historical truth", Lee admitted that he shot at Walker.

But after shooting Kennedy, and Tippit he was cool as a cucumber. 

[John Mytton]

But after shooting Kennedy, and Tippit he was cool as a cucumber. 

Familiarity breeds contempt!

Why would you expect a similar reaction months later to the same actions and especially to two completely different audiences, one of which was a direct route to the electric chair?
Nazi soldiers later recalled that killing their first Jew was extremely harrowing then thereafter, the act of murdering was just like taking another breath.

JohnM

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Marina said the same thing, about Oswald telling her, "I shot Walker", in both her WC and HSCA testimonies.

As to his post-assassination emotional state:

Johnny Brewer: "He [Oswald] just looked funny to me. Well, in the first place, I had seen him some place before. I think he had been in my store before. And when you wait on somebody, you recognize them, and he just seemed funny. His hair was sort of messed up and looked like he had been running, and he looked scared, and he looked funny."

Mary Bledsoe (on the bus Oswald got on): "And, after we got past Akard, at Murphy---I figured it out. Let's see. I don't know for sure. Oswald got on. He looks like a maniac.... That is---I was just---he looked so bad in his face, and his face was so distorted..."

As Norman Mailer pointed out in his book about Oswald: "We have seen him become hysterical on one occasion and, on another, be the coolest man in the room. If we have come through the turnings of this book without comprehending that the distance between his best and worst performance is enacted over a wide spectrum, then we have not gained much."

[Lance Payette]

I have a hard time even following the logic of the CTers on this issue (surprise, surprise).

When Ruth reports finding the Walker note, Oswald is dead and there is a plethora of evidence tying him to JFK and Tippit. The note does not specifically allude to Walker, which seems rather odd if it's supposed to be plant. Is Ruth supposed to have fabricated it on her own initiative (why?) or at the direction of her CIA handlers (why?)? The agents who interview Marina on 12-3-63 do so because they suspect the note might have something to do with the JFKA, not because they are connecting it to Walker. Marina surprises them with the Walker account (why?). CE 1785, https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/pdf/WH23_CE_1785.pdf. She repeats her account at the WC, at a press conference after the WC, at the HSCA, to Priscilla Johnson McMillan and God knows where else.  Despite coming under the influence of CTers like Walt Brown and expressing doubt about Oswald's guilt in the JFKA, she never disavows the Walker incident.

What's it all about from the CT perspective? The "bad guys" go through all these hoops with Ruth, the note and Marina for ... what? To show Oswald's propensity for violence? But he was already dead, his propensity for violence was already pretty well established by JFK and Tippit, and there was never going to be a trial. What does a conspiracy to frame Oswald for the Walker attempt add to the equation that makes it worth all the risks associated with Ruth, Marina and the note? Who needs the questions raised by an attempt on Walker, who was not exactly JFK's ideological twin? As always, WHAT SENSE DOES THIS MAKE?

I see that Bill started the same thread at the Ed Forum. There are absolutely no rational responses. "You gonna believe that lying Marina?" yada yada yada. One LBJ-did-it guy offers, "That never happened. A terrified Marina Oswald was lying about her murdered husband to protect herself and her children [what? how did that protect her and the children?] Marina fabricated that story [why?]. Or was given that story and told to tell it [why?]." This is all easy to say, but HOW WOULD THAT HAVE WORKED and WHAT SENSE WOULD THAT HAVE MADE?

[Michael T. Griffith]

"Later that night, about 11:30, Lee came in; white, covered with sweat, looking quite wild in the eyes.  And he said 'I shot Walker'." -- Priscilla Johnson McMillan (Frontline - "Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?", 1993)

Obviously McMillan is referring to Marina Oswald's description of that night, April 10, 1963.

The important part is that Lee Oswald told Marina that he had shot General Walker.

It doesn't matter that Marina would not have been allowed to testify against Lee, had there been a trial.  We are not in a court of law.  In the "court of wanting to know the historical truth", Lee admitted that he shot at Walker.

This is dubious hearsay given by Marina when she was being held in a hotel room and threatened by the Secret Service and the FBI and was scared to death of being deported. Marina also said she saw Oswald cleaning the Carcano rifle early in January 1963, but the rifle was not sent to the "Hidell" post office box until the end of March.

There are numerous problems with the case against Oswald in the Walker shooting, starting with the fact that Walker himself said the bullet looked nothing like an WCC FMJ bullet and that not one of the fingerprints on Oswald's alleged goodbye note to Marina matched his or Marina's fingerprints. Two of the three HSCA handwriting experts said the note was not written in Oswald's handwriting. I should add that the note did not surface until two months after the assassination and came from--guess who?--Ruth Paine.

And why in the world would someone who tried to kill the fanatically right-wing General Walker turn around and shoot JFK? That makes no sense whatsoever.

https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/oswald-and-the-shot-at-walker-redressing-the-balance

http://22november1963.org.uk/did-lee-oswald-shoot-general-edwin-walker



 

[Lance Payette]

I should add that the note did not surface until two months after the assassination and came from--guess who?--Ruth Paine.

Do you care ANYTHING about the facts? The note was found by Ruth about a week after the assassination. The agents questioned Marina about it on December 3, 1963 (CE 1785). They questioned her at the Martins' residence.

Rather odd that "Ruth" in fabricating the note didn't date it or make the slightest reference that would tie it to the Walker shooting. Maybe Ruth and her handlers were in Three Stooges mode that day?

You seem to a veritable fount of "facts" that aren't facts.