JFK Assassination Forum

JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Howard Gee on August 30, 2018, 02:57:10 PM

Title: O. H. LEE
Post by: Howard Gee on August 30, 2018, 02:57:10 PM
Saint Patsy tells Fritz he's renting a room at 1026 Beckley.

Fritz orders some men to go search Saint Patsy's room.

The cops arrive and tell Earlene Roberts and Mrs. Johnson they're looking for Lee Harvey Oswald's room.

Johnson and Roberts tell the officers there is no such boarder.

It's not until Saint Patsy's mug is shown on TV that they realize the boarder that registered as O. H. LEE is actually Lee Harvey Oswald, the man the whose room the cops want to search.

Upon seeing Saint Patsy on TV they exclaim 'There's O.H. LEE, no wonder we didn't know who Lee Oswald was', and direct the cops to his room.

Or so the story goes.

Questions: At some point in time Oswald must have had some conversation, no matter how perfunctory, with Johnson, Roberts and the other boarders.

Did they not know his first name ?

Was he just known to them as Mr. Lee ?

Is there testimony regarding this question ?

The story about Roberts and Johnson not knowing O H LEE was actually Lee Oswald until they saw him on on TV rings true but being unaware of his real first name doesn't.

Supposedly Fritz asked Saint Patsy why Johnson knew him as O. H. LEE, and Oswald responded that Johnson made a mistake.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Dillon Rankine on August 30, 2018, 03:13:48 PM
Does it matter? He could?ve said his name was Oliver, or O. Harvey or something like that.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jon Banks on August 30, 2018, 03:19:30 PM
Why did Lee decide to move into a rooming house under an alias, not his real name?

If he liked using aliases, why didn?t he use Alec Hiddell?
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Howard Gee on August 30, 2018, 03:21:39 PM
Does it matter? He could?ve said his name was Oliver, or O. Harvey or something like that.

In the grand context of things it really doesn't matter.

Saint Patsy is guity as hell.

Just curious whether Saint Patsy was using a different alias besides Hidell.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 30, 2018, 03:37:32 PM
Why did Lee decide to move into a rooming house under an alias, not his real name?

If he liked using aliases, why didn?t he use Alec Hiddell?

I believe Oswald claimed he gave the housekeeper his real name, but she got wrong.

I can picture her getting the "Lee" part, then asking him to repeat it.

    "My name is Oswald ... Lee."
    "How's that, Mr. Lee?"
    "Oswald [expecting her to take this to be his surname] .... Harvey."

Landlady unsure how to spell Oswald [thinks it's his first name] and writes down O.H. No problem, since she figures she got his last name right. Oswald likes Secret Agent shows, so he's happy he got an innocent "alias"; will throw off the "notorious FBI".
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Richard Smith on August 30, 2018, 04:16:12 PM
Why did Lee decide to move into a rooming house under an alias, not his real name?

If he liked using aliases, why didn?t he use Alec Hiddell?

Oswald wasn't big on small talk.  He likely thought himself more intelligent than the masses who he had a certain amount of contempt.  It's a leitmotif of his personality when you read the accounts of people who dealt with him.  Didn't say much or engage much with others.  Sometimes wouldn't even acknowledge a greeting.  He also knew the FBI was keeping tabs on him.   So whether by intent or honest mistake, he likely didn't care much that no one there knew his real name.  If anything, it was to his benefit.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jon Banks on August 30, 2018, 04:21:44 PM
In the grand context of things it really doesn't matter.

Saint Patsy is guity as hell.


Just curious whether Saint Patsy was using a different alias besides Hidell.

No unsolved mysteries in the Kennedy assassination matter because Oswald is Guilty.

If you really believe that, you wouldn?t be curious

Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Richard Smith on August 30, 2018, 04:37:44 PM
No unsolved mysteries in the Kennedy assassination matter because Oswald is Guilty.

If you really believe that, you wouldn?t be curious

There are things that only Oswald can know with certainty.  Like why he used an alias or a certain name.  We can make logical inferences from the facts about that, but no one can make a case that is 100% conclusive of the issue.  That isn't to be confused, however, with creating any doubt of his guilt.  Oswald could have used any name including his own and it creates no doubt whatsoever of his guilt in the JFK assassination.  If he had used his own name, CTers could argue that was suspicious since he knew the FBI was keeping tabs on him and a false name would make it difficult to track him.   Even if you find it strange or improbable that he used an alias, it does not create doubt of his guilt.  Oswald was an odd duck who did some odd things from the perspective of a normal person.  Agonizing over those details doesn't move the needle as to his guilt.   Until someone provides a reasonable explanation for his rifle being found on the 6th floor, the basic fact of his guilt is established.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jon Banks on August 30, 2018, 04:56:29 PM
There are things that only Oswald can know with certainty.  Like why he used an alias or a certain name.  We can make logical inferences from the facts about that, but no one can make a case that is 100% conclusive of the issue.  That isn't to be confused, however, with creating any doubt of his guilt.  Oswald could have used any name including his own and it creates no doubt whatsoever of his guilt in the JFK assassination.  If he had used his own name, CTers could argue that was suspicious since he knew the FBI was keeping tabs on him and a false name would make it difficult to track him.   Even if you find it strange or improbable that he used an alias, it does not create doubt of his guilt.  Oswald was an odd duck who did some odd things from the perspective of a normal person.  Agonizing over those details doesn't move the needle as to his guilt.   Until someone provides a reasonable explanation for his rifle being found on the 6th floor, the basic fact of his guilt is established.

You have to admit that it?s kind of ironic that Howard starts a thread with questions about Oswald?s alias but you guys follow with the usual crap about how Ozzie was crazy and none of these things matter because you know he was Guilty.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Howard Gee on August 30, 2018, 05:54:47 PM
No unsolved mysteries in the Kennedy assassination matter because Oswald is Guilty.

If you really believe that, you wouldn?t be curious

Trust me, I believe it.

It's my curiousity that has lead me to examine the case as thoroughly as possible.

Over the years I've read and watched everything I could regarding the assassination.

I started out believing there was a conspiracy.

Eventually, I came to my senses.

It's been a long journey.

I was 7 yrs old when the assassination happened.

I can remember getting dismissed from school and crying to my mother that I didn't want the president to be dead. I remember sitting with my friend and discussing what should be done to the assassin. My 7 year old answer was he should be put under a rocket ship and incinerated.

I remember watching my dad's reaction to Saint Patsy getting shot on national TV.

The newspapers of 11/22/63 were saved.

The saying 'everyone remembers where they were when JFK was killed' is definitely true in my case, and I've always been fascinated by the case.

At first, authors like Mark Lane and Rush to Judegement seemed pretty convincing to me.

Hidden assassins on the grassy knoll, dead witnesses, and a massive cover-up seemed reasonable; The SBT and a lone shooter didn't.

I couldn't wait to see the Groden's Zap film on Geraldo's show.

Over the years I've come to realize Mark Lane was a snakeoil salesman and Groden is a nut. Try reading High Treason if you doubt that.

Lifton is the biggest crackpot there is. Try reading Best Evidence and not laughing your ass off. 

About the only conspiracy author I've read and have any respect for is Anthony Summers. At least he doesn't ridiculously advocate that Saint Patsy was innocent and he does lay out a compelling case Saint Patsy might have been a 'spook' asset.

The HSCA acoustical findings seemed pretty solid, but that's been proven to be garbage too. Thank you forum member Steve Barber.

Frontal entry throat shot ? Easily dispelled by the use of common sense.

The more you think about it, based on the Z film and forensics, the SBT is the only way it could have happened and should be called the Single Bullet Fact.

Give me the work of Dale Myers and especially Vince Bugliosi over all the conspiracy theorists, any day of the week and twice on Sundays. Forum member David Von Pein is darned good too.

Are there unknowns about the assassination despite it being the most exhaustively studied and investigated murder in history ? Yes.

But I'm quite comfortable telling you that Saint Patsy was JFK's and Tippit's murderer beyond any reasonable doubt and that there's no credible evidence of a conspiracy, either foreign or domestic.

I SAID IT  I MEANT IT  I'M HERE TO REPRESENT IT
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Steve M. Galbraith on August 30, 2018, 06:04:09 PM
In the grand context of things it really doesn't matter.

Saint Patsy is guity as hell.

Just curious whether Saint Patsy was using a different alias besides Hidell.

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."

(https://img.culturacolectiva.com/content/2017/10/26/1509066731874/visa-mexico-lee-medium.jpg)
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jon Banks on August 30, 2018, 06:13:55 PM
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."

(https://img.culturacolectiva.com/content/2017/10/26/1509066731874/visa-mexico-lee-medium.jpg)

Some of the things Oswald did were well known espionage techniques.

When and where did he learn Spycraft?

It?s entirely possible that he pretended to be a spy in his spare time. I?m not dismissing it. It?s equally possible that Oswald was actually a spy.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 30, 2018, 06:53:50 PM
Oswald wasn't big on small talk.  He likely thought himself more intelligent than the masses who he had a certain amount of contempt.  It's a leitmotif of his personality when you read the accounts of people who dealt with him.  Didn't say much or engage much with others.  Sometimes wouldn't even acknowledge a greeting.

And yet his not being a social butterfly after the motorcade somehow constitutes evidence of his guilt.  Go figure.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 30, 2018, 06:54:51 PM
Until someone provides a reasonable explanation for his rifle being found on the 6th floor, the basic fact of his guilt is established.

"His rifle".  LOL.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 30, 2018, 07:02:21 PM
Since the Rhetoric Not Evidence Squad has taken to referring to Oswald as "Saint", it's only fair that the moniker also be bequeathed on people such as

Saint McDonald
Saint Day
Saint Bugliosi
Saint Brennan
Saint Hill
Saint Myers

Because, after all, why talk about facts and evidence when you can just give somebody a cute nickname instead?
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Organ on August 30, 2018, 07:10:07 PM
Since the Rhetoric Not Evidence Squad has taken to referring to Oswald as "Saint", it's only fair that the moniker also be bequeathed on people such as

Saint McDonald
Saint Day
Saint Bugliosi
Saint Brennan
Saint Hill
Saint Myers

Because, after all, why talk about facts and evidence when you can just give somebody a cute nickname instead?
Oy yoy yoy. The only way you ever "discuss" the facts and evidence is through rhetoric.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Howard Gee on August 30, 2018, 07:18:19 PM
And yet his not being a social butterfly after the motorcade somehow constitutes evidence of his guilt.  Go figure.

You're right.

The butterfly flapped his unsocial widdle wings just as fast as he could and flew out of the depoitory, no interest whatsoever in what just happened -- and because his widdle wings got tired hopped on a bus and a taxi bcz he was in a huge rush to get to the movies where he could watch Steve McQueen in complete seclusion.

Unfortunately, bcz the butterfly looked funny he was beaten and arrested.

Got it.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 30, 2018, 07:19:12 PM
Saint Patsy tells Fritz he's renting a room at 1026 Beckley.

Fritz orders some men to go search Saint Patsy's room.

The cops arrive and tell Earlene Roberts and Mrs. Johnson they're looking for Lee Harvey Oswald's room.

Johnson and Roberts tell the officers there is no such boarder.

It's not until Saint Patsy's mug is shown on TV that they realize the boarder that registered as O. H. LEE is actually Lee Harvey Oswald, the man the whose room the cops want to search.

Upon seeing Saint Patsy on TV they exclaim 'There's O.H. LEE, no wonder we didn't know who Lee Oswald was', and direct the cops to his room.

Or so the story goes.

Questions: At some point in time Oswald must have had some conversation, no matter how perfunctory, with Johnson, Roberts and the other boarders.

Did they not know his first name ?

Was he just known to them as Mr. Lee ?

Is there testimony regarding this question ?

The story about Roberts and Johnson not knowing O H LEE was actually Lee Oswald until they saw him on on TV rings true but being unaware of his real first name doesn't.

Supposedly Fritz asked Saint Patsy why Johnson knew him as O. H. LEE, and Oswald responded that Johnson made a mistake.

Your first two sentences are a false representation of the events. It's easy to claim someone is guilty when the evidence is ignored or misrepresented.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Howard Gee on August 30, 2018, 07:22:34 PM
"His rifle".  LOL.

Yep, his rifle.

Your laughter will never change that fact.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 30, 2018, 07:30:20 PM
Some of the things Oswald did were well known espionage techniques.

When and where did he learn Spycraft?

It?s entirely possible that he pretended to be a spy in his spare time. I?m not dismissing it. It?s equally possible that Oswald was actually a spy.

Plenty of spy movies in those Cold War days. Not hard to glean a few techniques. Books on the subject as well.

Where did you come up with 'equally' possible? 55 years and still no supported evidence of Oswald being involved with anyone but his alter ego and Marina's laughter at his self-importance, including parading around the back yard in his black ops-wannabe getup.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jon Banks on August 30, 2018, 07:36:48 PM
Plenty of spy movies in those Cold War days. Not hard to glean a few techniques. Books on the subject as well.

Where did you come up with 'equally' possible? 55 years and still no supported evidence of Oswald being involved with anyone but his alter ego and Marina's laughter at his self-importance, including parading around the back yard in his black ops-wannabe getup.

People who know far more about National Security than you and I have opinionated that Oswald didn?t act alone. Those include:

- Father of the Warren Commission, Lyndon Johnson
- Robert Kennedy
- Sen. John Kerry

Plus a few former CIA agents like Brian Latell and Bob Baer

Those are just a few names that come to mind without researching

As far as spycraft, maybe he learned it in the Marines where he learned Russian. That?s the most likely place.

Or maybe he learned a few things living in the USSR.

Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 30, 2018, 08:16:11 PM
Oy yoy yoy. The only way you ever "discuss" the facts and evidence is through rhetoric.

Then you don't understand what rhetoric is.  It's not rhetoric to point out that the claims you make about the evidence aren't supported by the actual evidence.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 30, 2018, 08:17:31 PM
You're right.

The butterfly flapped his unsocial widdle wings just as fast as he could and flew out of the depoitory, no interest whatsoever in what just happened -- and because his widdle wings got tired hopped on a bus and a taxi bcz he was in a huge rush to get to the movies where he could watch Steve McQueen in complete seclusion.

Unfortunately, bcz the butterfly looked funny he was beaten and arrested.

Got it.

Howard makes another one of his stunning contributions to the pursuit of knowledge.

Steve McQueen?  You can't even get that right.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 30, 2018, 08:20:05 PM
Your first two sentences are a false representation of the events. It's easy to claim someone is guilty when the evidence is ignored or misrepresented.

Everything Howard says is a false representation of the events.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 30, 2018, 08:20:21 PM
Yep, his rifle.

Your laughter will never change that fact.

"Fact".  LOL.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Howard Gee on August 30, 2018, 08:34:50 PM
"Fact".  LOL.

That's right. FACT.

C2766 was Saint Patsy's rifle.

All the LOLs in the world can't change that.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Steve M. Galbraith on August 30, 2018, 08:42:24 PM
Some of the things Oswald did were well known espionage techniques.

When and where did he learn Spycraft?

It?s entirely possible that he pretended to be a spy in his spare time. I?m not dismissing it. It?s equally possible that Oswald was actually a spy.

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?

Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Steve M. Galbraith on August 30, 2018, 08:45:40 PM
You're right.

The butterfly flapped his unsocial widdle wings just as fast as he could and flew out of the depoitory, no interest whatsoever in what just happened -- and because his widdle wings got tired hopped on a bus and a taxi bcz he was in a huge rush to get to the movies where he could watch Steve McQueen in complete seclusion.

Unfortunately, bcz the butterfly looked funny he was beaten and arrested.

Got it.

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.

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.

This latter approach is bad for Oswald and it's why he rejects it.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Howard Gee on August 30, 2018, 09:12:21 PM
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.

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.

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

 Thumb1:

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.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jon Banks on August 30, 2018, 09:21:02 PM
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?

There?s no proof that the Hiddell ID was in Oswald?s wallet at the time of his arrest.

Who knows?

What we do know is that in 1963 Oswald for some reason chose to keep a low profile while living in Dallas but chose to be visible while living in New Orleans and visiting Mexico City.

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.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jon Banks on August 30, 2018, 09:54:47 PM
JFK Facts article about the Hiddell ID:
Quote

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/
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Rob Caprio on August 30, 2018, 10:42:21 PM
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."

(https://img.culturacolectiva.com/content/2017/10/26/1509066731874/visa-mexico-lee-medium.jpg)

Can you cite the evidence that shows what bus he took back from Mexico?
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 30, 2018, 10:43:08 PM
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.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 30, 2018, 10:43:43 PM
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.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 30, 2018, 10:48:06 PM
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.

Quote
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.

Quote
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?
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 30, 2018, 10:50:30 PM
Thumb1:

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
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on August 30, 2018, 10:52:15 PM
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.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Steve Howsley on August 30, 2018, 11:00:02 PM
Trust me, I believe it.

It's my curiousity that has lead me to examine the case as thoroughly as possible.

Over the years I've read and watched everything I could regarding the assassination.

I started out believing there was a conspiracy.

Eventually, I came to my senses.

It's been a long journey.

I was 7 yrs old when the assassination happened.

I can remember getting dismissed from school and crying to my mother that I didn't want the president to be dead. I remember sitting with my friend and discussing what should be done to the assassin. My 7 year old answer was he should be put under a rocket ship and incinerated.

I remember watching my dad's reaction to Saint Patsy getting shot on national TV.

The newspapers of 11/22/63 were saved.

The saying 'everyone remembers where they were when JFK was killed' is definitely true in my case, and I've always been fascinated by the case.

At first, authors like Mark Lane and Rush to Judegement seemed pretty convincing to me.

Hidden assassins on the grassy knoll, dead witnesses, and a massive cover-up seemed reasonable; The SBT and a lone shooter didn't.

I couldn't wait to see the Groden's Zap film on Geraldo's show.

Over the years I've come to realize Mark Lane was a snakeoil salesman and Groden is a nut. Try reading High Treason if you doubt that.

Lifton is the biggest crackpot there is. Try reading Best Evidence and not laughing your ass off. 

About the only conspiracy author I've read and have any respect for is Anthony Summers. At least he doesn't ridiculously advocate that Saint Patsy was innocent and he does lay out a compelling case Saint Patsy might have been a 'spook' asset.

The HSCA acoustical findings seemed pretty solid, but that's been proven to be garbage too. Thank you forum member Steve Barber.

Frontal entry throat shot ? Easily dispelled by the use of common sense.

The more you think about it, based on the Z film and forensics, the SBT is the only way it could have happened and should be called the Single Bullet Fact.

Give me the work of Dale Myers and especially Vince Bugliosi over all the conspiracy theorists, any day of the week and twice on Sundays. Forum member David Von Pein is darned good too.

Are there unknowns about the assassination despite it being the most exhaustively studied and investigated murder in history ? Yes.

But I'm quite comfortable telling you that Saint Patsy was JFK's and Tippit's murderer beyond any reasonable doubt and that there's no credible evidence of a conspiracy, either foreign or domestic.

I SAID IT  I MEANT IT  I'M HERE TO REPRESENT IT

 Thumb1:

Yours is a similar background to my own. I too waded through the conspiracy muck thinking it smelt sweet not realising the dishonesty of many of the most prominent of the CT authors including those you have mentioned. I agree with you regarding Summers. I see him as a honest researcher although I wouldn't use "compelling" to describe his 'spook' asset theory but I do find it interesting and worthy of consideration. Josiah Thompson's 'Six Seconds In Dallas' is another excellent effort in unbiased research.  I think Armstrong's 'Harvey and Lee' might rival Lifton's 'Best Evidence' in the crackpot awards.

Good post Howard.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Bill Chapman on August 30, 2018, 11:13:57 PM
People who know far more about National Security than you and I have opinionated that Oswald didn?t act alone. Those include:

- Father of the Warren Commission, Lyndon Johnson
- Robert Kennedy
- Sen. John Kerry

Plus a few former CIA agents like Brian Latell and Bob Baer

Those are just a few names that come to mind without researching

As far as spycraft, maybe he learned it in the Marines where he learned Russian. That?s the most likely place.

Or maybe he learned a few things living in the USSR.

Who knows a man better than his wife? Marina certainly was entertained by the killer of fascists' demonstrated delusions of grandeur.

And none of these guys were ballistics experts.. possibly not knowing that FMJ ammo is designed to pass-through-and-through flesh and remain intact.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jon Banks on August 30, 2018, 11:53:03 PM
Who knows a man better than his wife? Marina certainly was entertained by the killer of fascists' demonstrated delusions of grandeur.

I?m sure there?s plenty she didn?t want to know about Lee and she couldn?t possibly know every person he interacted with when he wasn?t home. And Lee doesn?t strike me as the type of husband who shared everything on his mind with his wife.

She also wasn?t a useful witness on Oswald?s ownership of a rifle.


Quote
And none of these guys were ballistics experts.. possibly not knowing that FMJ ammo is designed to pass-through-and-through flesh and remain intact.

None of the people I mentioned believed there were any Shooters other than Oswald.

Johnson, RFK and others implied that Oswald was working with either the Soviets or the Cubans.

It seems notable that none of those folks with Insider knowledge of National Security looked at Oswald?s background and thought, ?there?s no way that guy could be part of a conspiracy?
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jon Banks on August 30, 2018, 11:56:06 PM
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.

Oswald was just a Natural. He couldn?t possibly have had training
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Martin Weidmann on August 31, 2018, 04:19:33 AM
So someone else fired C2766 on 11/22/63 ?

In other words, sometime after Saint Patsy is photographed with the murder weapon, it somehow winds up in the hands of the real assassin who happens to assassinate JFK from Oswald's workplace.

Makes perfect sense that someone else used Saint Patsy's rifle, and there's plenty of evidence to support that idea, right ?

I'm sure the FBI and WC thought someone else fired C2766....wait a minute....I thought the FBI and WC framed Saint Patsy....now I find out they didn't think Oswald was doing the shooting....this gets soooooo confusing. 

Once you concede that C2766 was Oswald's rifle, you might as well surrender your Saint Patsy fan club card.


sometime after Saint Patsy is photographed with the murder weapon


And you know this for a fact, how?

Once you concede that C2766 was Oswald's rifle,

I'll concede that once you have shown conclusively that this is true.

Well. can you?
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on August 31, 2018, 04:37:19 AM
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.
(https://img.culturacolectiva.com/content/2017/10/26/1509066731874/visa-mexico-lee-medium.jpg)

  Don't tell me you still think Oswald actually went to Mexico?
And probably some buracho ticket seller typed the name wrong anyway.

 

 
 
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Walt Cakebread on August 31, 2018, 03:37:00 PM
Oswald was just a Natural. He couldn?t possibly have had training

You're right .....   Lee was a natural...but his talents were honed by the CIA....
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 01, 2018, 01:51:04 AM
The Warren Commission.

Himself
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Steve M. Galbraith on September 01, 2018, 02:04:33 AM
Don't tell me you still think Oswald actually went to Mexico?
And probably some buracho ticket seller typed the name wrong anyway.


Whose signature is on the visa?

And who is this in the application for a visa to Cuba? This was the photo he gave the Cubans for his visa application.

(https://capa-us.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/lee-harvey-oswald_cuba-passport_application.jpg)

And this:
(http://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/scalefit_630_noupscale/59eca079140000371b8c90b3.jpeg)

And why did the KGB agents who met him over two days say it was indeed Lee Oswald? Was the KGB in on framing him too?
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 01, 2018, 05:28:39 PM
That visa doesn't really prove he ever went to Mexico.
Did the 'KGB agents' testify in the 'investigation' ::)
Where is a copy of the passport that someone would need to get that visa?
There may be one I haven't seen.
The passport from 1959 is a matter of record.
There was another one applied for in New Orleans June 1963
Supposedly granted but where is that passport?

https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/front-page-of-a-passport-application-for-lee-harvey-oswald-news-photo/576878042#front-page-of-a-passport-application-for-lee-harvey-oswald-dated-june-picture-id576878042
 Could it all have been faked ?
 

(http://media.liveauctiongroup.net/i/34974/30074501_2.jpg?v=8D5CCC258DD8EF0)

What about Sylvia Odio who did testify and saw Oswald the very time he was allegedly in Mexico.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 01, 2018, 05:44:04 PM
That visa doesn't really prove he ever went to Mexico.
Did the 'KGB agents' testify in the 'investigation' ::)
Where is a copy of the passport that someone would need to get that visa?
There may be one I haven't seen.
The passport from 1959 is a matter of record.
There was another one applied for in New Orleans June 1963
Supposedly granted but where is that passport?

https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/front-page-of-a-passport-application-for-lee-harvey-oswald-news-photo/576878042#front-page-of-a-passport-application-for-lee-harvey-oswald-dated-june-picture-id576878042
 Could it all have been faked ?
 

(http://media.liveauctiongroup.net/i/34974/30074501_2.jpg?v=8D5CCC258DD8EF0)

What about Sylvia Odio who did testify and saw Oswald the very time he was allegedly in Mexico.

Get a clue, Sherlock

That's actor Gary Oldman. He played Oswald in Oliver Stone's JFK
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102138/characters/nm0000198

'Could it all have been faked'
You mean like what you just did, liar?
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 01, 2018, 10:01:53 PM
That's actor Gary Oldman.  He played Oswald  ...liar?
That's actor Gary Oldman.... That's actor Gary Oldman......That's actor Gary Oldman.
Really Chumpman? Sharp as a rock pal? Wow, I guess you got me there.. you think? How frigging clever ...Aren't you a piece of something?
Where did I lie? I was just demonstrating a forgery could have been made.
Here's a clue Chumpman...Stand up for something because it looks like you'll fall for just about anything
 
 

 
 
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 02, 2018, 12:32:56 AM
That's actor Gary Oldman.... That's actor Gary Oldman......That's actor Gary Oldman.
Really Chumpman? Sharp as a rock pal? Wow, I guess you got me there.. you think? How frigging clever ...Aren't you a piece of something?
Where did I lie? I was just demonstrating a forgery could have been made.
Here's a clue Chumpman...Stand up for something because it looks like you'll fall for just about anything

I find most CTer presentations oddly incomplete. I would have identified Oldman with at least a caption.
 
And you're the one falling for everything, glomming onto practically every nutball conspiracy that comes down the pike. And even entertaining the notion that everything could be fake places you firmly on the far shores of the lunatic fringe.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 02, 2018, 02:26:29 AM
... the notion that everything could be fake places you firmly on the far shores of the lunatic fringe.
Wow! Am I in danger?
In the meantime [for anyone else who might be skeptical about Oswald in Mexico] the passport...

https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/front-page-of-a-passport-application-for-lee-harvey-oswald-news-photo/576878042#front-page-of-a-passport-application-for-lee-harvey-oswald-dated-june-picture-id576878042
...states that Oswald's height is 5' 11"
Again, states it was issued [according to the Report] in one day!...what happened to it?
Anyone else ever had a passport issued in 24 hours?
Why wasn't the backside of the application shown?
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 02, 2018, 02:41:44 AM
Whose signature is on the visa?

And who is this in the application for a visa to Cuba? This was the photo he gave the Cubans for his visa application.

(https://capa-us.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/lee-harvey-oswald_cuba-passport_application.jpg)

And this:
(http://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/scalefit_630_noupscale/59eca079140000371b8c90b3.jpeg)

And why did the KGB agents who met him over two days say it was indeed Lee Oswald? Was the KGB in on framing him too?

Can you show me where LHO had the Visa application photograph taken and processed?
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 02, 2018, 02:44:22 AM
Can you show me where LHO had the Visa application photograph taken and processed?

He means through time-travel. ;)
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 02, 2018, 02:47:39 AM
He means through time-travel. ;)

So this means you can't. No surprise there.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 02, 2018, 02:48:48 AM
So this means you can't. No surprise there.

Right. And no surprise you expected there to be time-travel.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Rob Caprio on September 02, 2018, 03:07:16 AM
Right. And no surprise you expected there to be time-travel.

Since you are totally ignorant of the evidence it no surprise that you think time-travel would be needed. This issue was looked into and the WC couldn't find where this photo was taken and processed. We aren't talking just one copy either as you had to submit 6 or 8 copies to the Consulate.

You invented the nonsensical time-travel point to try and cover this fact.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Mytton on September 02, 2018, 04:47:23 AM
That's actor Gary Oldman.... That's actor Gary Oldman......That's actor Gary Oldman.


Hahaha, caught again. You really are not very good at this are you!

JohnM
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Mytton on September 02, 2018, 04:49:49 AM
This issue was looked into and the WC couldn't find where this photo was taken and processed.

So what?

JohnM
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 02, 2018, 05:50:28 AM
Hahaha, caught again. You really are not very good at this are you!
Probably not. But you really suck.
"Hahaha"? Seriously? What are you an eighth grader?
 
 
 
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 02, 2018, 05:54:44 AM
Probably not. But you really suck.
"Hahaha"? Seriously? What are you an eighth grader?

'"Chumpman"? Seriously? What are you, an eighth grader?
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 02, 2018, 06:05:26 AM
So what?

JohnM

If Caprio means the photograph of Oswald, it could pass for a photobooth photo in my opinion. That heavy black border, the low position of Dirty Harvey in the image, which suggests a generic setup, revealing the small stature of the little twerp.

Lee Harvey Oswald: The little assassin that could.
"I think I can, I think I can" he may been repeating as he butt-twisted ahead of Buell who was lollygagging along, distracted by the little engines that could.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 02, 2018, 06:23:56 AM
'"Chumpman"? Seriously? What are you, an eighth grader?
12th
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 03, 2018, 03:23:53 AM
Was this visit to the Atomic Energy Museum noted in the Warren Report?

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_d9kZfc4kK-Y/TMghzJS7JTI/AAAAAAAAOSA/evjB_2k_K-Q/s1600/MASO_nary-wcdocs-49_0001_0005[1].jpg)

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2010/10/lee-h-oswald-at-atomic-energy-museum.html
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 03, 2018, 04:06:43 AM
Was this visit to the Atomic Energy Museum noted in the Warren Report?
As I look at that more...According to the Oswald timeline -He did not live in Dallas then!


 
 
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 03, 2018, 04:21:23 AM
Whose signature is on the visa?

And who is this in the application for a visa to Cuba? This was the photo he gave the Cubans for his visa application.

(https://capa-us.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/lee-harvey-oswald_cuba-passport_application.jpg)

And this:
(http://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/scalefit_630_noupscale/59eca079140000371b8c90b3.jpeg)

And why did the KGB agents who met him over two days say it was indeed Lee Oswald? Was the KGB in on framing him too?
That's OK. I don't like being wrong either. Who says it? Graham Ledger...Even when I'm wrong..I'm right.
The various signatures of Lee Oswald..

(http://content.invisioncic.com/r16296/monthly_2018_08/431728212_Oswaldsignatures.thumb.jpg.5d8c1e3e00a2e84f98b082a0c05ccf5a.jpg)
invisioncic.com/r16296/monthly_2018_08
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 03, 2018, 04:23:09 AM
(https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/library-card-of-lee-harvey-oswald-picture-id50398669)

The words in the Museum register on the "Oswald" line appear to be written by a feminine hand.

Near to it are others from Texas. Maybe a group of teens went there and one of them had written a school paper on detectors. "Dallas Rd" means the person had no idea where the real Oswald was currently living.

The "l" in "Oswald" is usually developed in other samples by Oswald, but the Museum "Oswald" looks more like "Osward". The other "l"s (as in "Dallas") show the writer knew how to write a "l" properly. It may be that the writer couldn't quite remember how to spell "Oswald".

(http://wwwcdn.antiquetrader.com/wp-content/uploads/Oswald-letter.jpg)

Oswald wrote his capital "D"s quite different compared to the Museum writing. The "e"s in "Lee" are closed in the Museum writing, while Oswald typically had open "e"s.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Bill Brown on September 03, 2018, 04:48:44 AM
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.

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.

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

Great post, Steve.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Bill Brown on September 03, 2018, 04:50:43 AM
Thumb1:

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.

(https://i.imgur.com/N9sX3Tl.gif)

(https://i.imgur.com/7Fp3t2Q.jpg)
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 03, 2018, 02:26:25 PM
Near to it are others from Texas. Maybe a group of teens went there and one of them had written a school paper on detectors. "Dallas Rd" means the person had no idea where the real Oswald was currently living. The "l" in "Oswald" is usually developed in other samples by Oswald, but the Museum "Oswald" looks more like "Osward". The other "l"s (as in "Dallas") show the writer knew how to write a "l" properly. It may be that the writer couldn't quite remember how to spell "Oswald".
(http://forum.jfkmurdersolved.com/download/file.php?id=474&sid=779335213220b4bd2c45e0f02e95de20)
You mean defectors? ...Yeah, most unlikely there.
According to the timeline....
Quote
July 27, 1963 - Lee H. Oswald makes a speech against communism to Jesuits in Mobile, Alabama.
 
July 28, 1963 - Jada opens at Jack Ruby's club in Dallas.

July 29, 1963 - The Dallas FBI office asks the New Orleans FBI office to "verify" both LHO and Marina's presence in New Orleans.
Why was a verification necessary?
 
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Organ on September 03, 2018, 03:48:34 PM
(http://forum.jfkmurdersolved.com/download/file.php?id=474&sid=779335213220b4bd2c45e0f02e95de20)
You mean defectors? ...Yeah, most unlikely there.
According to the timeline....Why was a verification necessary?
 

Hosty lost track of Oswald in Dallas when he visited in late-May Oswald's last-known location in Dallas, the Neely Street house. In June, the New Orleans FBI told Dallas that a Lee Oswald was in New Orleans, requesting information on him that the Dallas FBI had. The Dallas FBI eventually requested verification, where upon jurisdiction of the files were transferred to New Orleans.

I just noticed the "s" in all the words on the "Osward" line at the Museum are consistently the same; all are unlike the "s" in the word "Oswald" as written by LHO.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 04, 2018, 10:54:24 PM
If Caprio means the photograph of Oswald, it could pass for a photobooth photo in my opinion. That heavy black border, the low position of Dirty Harvey in the image, which suggests a generic setup, revealing the small stature of the little twerp.

Chapman seems to think that insults rather than evidence somehow prove murder.

Quote
Lee Harvey Oswald: The little assassin that could.
"I think I can, I think I can" he may been repeating as he butt-twisted ahead of Buell who was lollygagging along, distracted by the little engines that could.

"butt-twisted?  What the hell are you babbling about now?
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 05, 2018, 01:22:49 AM
Chapman seems to think that insults rather than evidence somehow prove murder.
 
"butt-twisted?  What the hell are you babbling about now?
Too many beers.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Bill Chapman on September 05, 2018, 01:36:38 AM
Chapman seems to think that insults rather than evidence somehow prove murder.

"butt-twisted?  What the hell are you babbling about now?

So rather than suggest where might Oswald gotten the pictures for that particular passport (as Rob seems to need) you simply attack.. thus showing once again you lot are only here to troll.

So my suggestion of your innocent little angel possibly using a photo booth, remains unchallenged. Got it.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 05, 2018, 02:12:49 AM
Can you cite the evidence that shows what bus he took back from Mexico?
Doesn't know how. 
Glancing through the the FBI's Commission documents ...I can [so far] only find people that they had  located who didn't see Oswald during the respective Mexico travel times and itinerary...
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11293#relPageId=500&tab=page
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11293#relPageId=501&tab=page
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11293#relPageId=502&tab=page
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11293#relPageId=504&tab=page
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11293#relPageId=505&tab=page
On and on.
So far, one poster claims that two [nameless] Russians 'saw' Oswald in Mexico City and provides no link to this claim.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on September 05, 2018, 03:57:27 PM
So rather than suggest where might Oswald gotten the pictures for that particular passport (as Rob seems to need) you simply attack.. thus showing once again you lot are only here to troll.

Says the guy who thinks that talking about "Dirty Harvey" "butt-twisting" is a valuable contribution to the pursuit of knowledge.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 05, 2018, 11:03:26 PM
No serious response concerning this Lee Oswald signature that transpired when/while he was in New Orleans [July 26, 1963] but that guest book was signed in Oak Ridge Tenn. ---600 miles away.
At the bottom of this page....
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=40391#relPageId=18&tab=page
Do the nutters just think 'So What'? [when things seem to defy logic]

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_d9kZfc4kK-Y/TMghzJS7JTI/AAAAAAAAOSA/evjB_2k_K-Q/s1600/MASO_nary-wcdocs-49_0001_0005[1].jpg)
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on September 06, 2018, 02:17:35 AM
 I found this posted on the EdFourm....
Quote
As JFK traveled and spoke around the country, it appears that "someone" was making sure the "Oswald presence" was established in the weeks leading up to that fateful date
                                                                                     David Josephs
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/25184-some-tidbits-about-mexico-city/?tab=comments#comment-385103

(http://content.invisioncic.com/r16296/monthly_2018_08/1936588565_LIFEANDTIMESOFLEEHARVEYOSWALD2.thumb.jpg.3870cd37a5d807b09e401d2267d77c16.jpg)

SuperLee either traveled around like a speeding bullet or someone was impersonating him and/or  forging his signature...WHY?
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on April 06, 2020, 09:41:42 PM
Saint Patsy tells Fritz he's renting a room at 1026 Beckley.
Fritz orders some men to go search Saint Patsy's room.
  That didn't happen. The nutters could make a statement like it was part of the record whether it was or not.
Oswald did not tell Fritz where he lived but cops started showing up at Beckley [where they already knew he lived] some 30 minutes after his arrest.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on April 06, 2020, 10:41:51 PM
Quote
Mr. BALL. Who did you send to Irving?
Mr. FRITZ. To Irving, Officer Stovall, Rose, and Adamcik.
Mr. BALL. After you had done that what did you do?
Mr. FRITZ. I sent some officers---you mean right at that time? I also sent officers over to the Beckley address, you know, as soon as we got there, I don't believe we had the Beckley address at this part of this question.
Mr. BALL. You didn't have it at that time, did you?
Mr. FRITZ. Not right at this time, but as soon as I got to that address.
Mr. BALL. Let's come to that a little later and we find out when you got there.
Mr. FRITZ. When I got there?
Mr. BALL. Yes. What did you do after you had sent the officers to Irving?
Mr. FRITZ. When I started to talk to this prisoner or maybe just before I started to talk to him, some officer told me outside of my office that he had a room on Beckley, I don't know who that officer was, I think we can find out, I have since I have talked to you this morning I have talked to Lieutenant Baker and he says I know maybe who that officer was, but I am not sure yet.
Mr. BALL. Some officer told you that he thought this man had a room on Beckley?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Had he been brought into the station by that time?
Mr. FRITZ. He was at the station when we got there, you know.
Mr. BALL. He was?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; so then I talked to him and I asked him where his room was on Beckley.
Which room? There were how many guys staying there?
We see there.. the feeble attempt to cover Fritz's ass about the Beckley address.
Another anonymous guy had come forward with the information.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Walt Cakebread on April 07, 2020, 01:22:26 AM
  That didn't happen. The nutters could make a statement like it was part of the record whether it was or not.
Oswald did not tell Fritz where he lived but cops started showing up at Beckley [where they already knew he lived] some 30 minutes after his arrest.

Actually Lee DID in fact tell Fritz that he had a room at a rooming house at 1026 N. Beckley....  That address is the first entry in Hosty's scribbled notes ....
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on April 07, 2020, 01:55:57 AM
Actually Lee DID in fact tell Fritz that he had a room at a rooming house at 1026 N. Beckley....  That address is the first entry in Hosty's scribbled notes ....
That would be 1 [page one]? Where it says 3:15? and where it says 'doesn't own a gun..saw one at bldg M Truly and two others'?
Looked again and I don't see "Beckley" but the scribble is crap...where do you see what I can't?
Besides the time being 3:15 and there was no room number ever given......
https://jfkwitnesses.omeka.net/items/show/235
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 07, 2020, 03:43:16 PM
I believe Oswald claimed he gave the housekeeper his real name, but she got wrong.

I can picture her getting the "Lee" part, then asking him to repeat it.

    "My name is Oswald ... Lee."
    "How's that, Mr. Lee?"
    "Oswald [expecting her to take this to be his surname] .... Harvey."

Landlady unsure how to spell Oswald [thinks it's his first name] and writes down O.H. No problem, since she figures she got his last name right. Oswald likes Secret Agent shows, so he's happy he got an innocent "alias"; will throw off the "notorious FBI".

Naah. The Warren Commission covered this item in detail back in 1964. Page 314-315 says this:
https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/chapter-6.html#investigations

== quote ==
Oswald also used incorrect names other than Hidell, but these too appear unconnected with any form of conspiracy. Oswald's last name appears as "Lee" in three places in connection with his trip to Mexico City, discussed above. His tourist card was typed by the Mexican consulate in New Orleans, "Lee, Harvey Oswald."  However, the comma seems to have been a clerical error, since Oswald signed both the application and the card itself, "Lee H. Oswald." Moreover, Oswald seems originally to have also printed his name, evenly spaced, as "Lee H Oswald," but, noting that the form instructed him to "Print full name. No initials," printed the remainder of his middle name after the "H." The clerk who typed the card thus saw a space after "Lee," followed by "Harvey Oswald" crowded together, and probably assumed that "Lee" was the applicant's last name. (See Commission Exhibit 2481, p. 800.) The clerk who prepared Oswald's bus reservation for his return trip wrote "H. O. Lee." He stated that he did not remember the occasion, although he was sure from the handwriting and from other facts that he had dealt with Oswald. He surmised that he probably made out the reservation directly from the tourist card, since Oswald spoke no Spanish, and, seeing the comma, wrote the name "H. O. Lee."  Oswald himself signed the register at the hotel in Mexico City as "Lee, Harvey Oswald,"  but since the error is identical to that on the tourist card and since he revealed the remainder of his name, "Harvey Oswald," it is possible that Oswald inserted the comma to conform to the tourist card, or that the earlier mistake suggested a new pseudonym to Oswald which he decided to continue.

In any event, Oswald used his correct name in making reservations for the trip to Mexico City, in introducing himself to passengers on the bus, and in his dealings with the Cuban and Soviet Embassies. When registering at the Beckley Avenue house in mid-October, Oswald perpetuated the pseudonym by giving his name as "O. H. Lee," though he had given his correct name to the owner of the previous roominghouse where he had rented a room after his return from Mexico City.  Investigations of the Commission have been conducted with regard to persons using the name "Lee," and no evidence

Page 315

has been found that Oswald used this alias for the purpose of making any type of secret contacts.
== UNQUOTE ==

[Here's the tourist card prepared by Oswald: https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0354a.htm - Hank]

[Here's where Oswald signed the hotel register as "Lee, Harvey Oswald" (right side of page): https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm - Hank]

And it's important to remember that Oswald himself also signed the roominghouse register O.H.Lee. The landlady did not misunderstand him. Page 182:

== QUOTE ==
When asked why he lived at his roominghouse under the name O. H. Lee, Oswald responded that the landlady simply made a mistake, because he told her that his name was Lee, meaning his first name, An examination of the roominghouse register revealed that Oswald actually signed the name O. H. Lee.
== UNQUOTE ==

https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/chapter-4.html#aliases

Here's the link to the rooming house register where Oswald wrote "O.H.Lee".
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh20/html/WH_Vol20_0148b.htm

Also, one needs to further remember than Marina asked Mrs. Paine to call Oswald at the rooming house, and Mrs Paine asked for "Mr. Oswald", and was told there was no one registered there by that name. Marina said this led to a fight between her and her husband.
Mrs. Paine's testimony:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/paine_r2.htm

== QUOTE ==
Mr. JENNER - You are. absolutely clear about that. All right. Now, state, you began to state the circumstances of the telephone call. Would you in your own words and your own chronology proceed with that, please?
Mrs. PAINE - Marina had said, "Let's call papa," in Russian and asked me to dial the number for her, knowing that I had a number that he had given us. I then dialed the number--
Mr. JENNER - Excuse me, did you dial the first or the second number?
Mrs. PAINE - The second number.
Mr. JENNER - And that number is?
Mrs. PAINE - WH 3-8993.
Mr. JENNER - When you dialed the number did someone answer?
Mrs. PAINE - Someone answered and I said, "Is Lee Oswald there?" And the person replied, "There is no Lee Oswald here," or something to that effect.
Mr. JENNER - Would it refresh your recollection if he said, "There is nobody by that name here"?
Mrs. PAINE - Or it may have been "nobody by that name" or "I don't know Lee Oswald." It could have been any of these.
Mr. JENNER - We want your best recollection.
Mrs. PAINE - My best recollection is that he repeated the name.
Mr. JENNER - He repeated the name?
Mrs. PAINE - But that is not a certain recollection.
Mr. JENNER - I take it then from the use of the pronoun that the person who answered was a man?
Mrs. PAINE - Was a man.
Mr. JENNER - And if you will just sit back and relax a little. I would like to have you restate, if you now will, in your own words, what occurred? You dialed the telephone, someone answered, a male voice?
Mrs. PAINE - Yes.
Mr. JENNER - What did he say and what did you say?
Mrs. PAINE - I said, "Is Lee Oswald there." He said, "There is no Lee Oswald living here." As best as I can recall. This is the substance of what he said. I said, "Is this a rooming house." He said "Yes." I said, "Is this WH 3-8993?" And he said "Yes." I thanked him and hung up.
Mr. JENNER - When you hung up then what did you next do or say?
Mrs. PAINE - I said to Marina, "They don't know of a Lee Oswald at that number."
Mr. JENNER - What did she say?
Mrs. PAINE - She didn't say anything.
Mr. JENNER - Just said nothing?
Mrs. PAINE - She looked surprised.
Mr. JENNER - Did she evidence any surprise?
Mrs. PAINE - Yes; she did, she looked surprised.
Mr. DULLES - You are quite sure you used the first name "Lee," did you, you did not say just "Mr. Oswald," or something of that kind?
Mrs. PAINE - I would not say "Mr. Oswald." It is contrary to Quaker practice, and I don't normally do it that way.
Mr. JENNER - Contrary to Quaker practice?
Mrs. PAINE - They seldom use "Mister."
Mr. JENNER - I see.
Mr. DULLES - And you wouldn't have said "Harvey Oswald," would you?
Mrs. PAINE - I knew he had a middle name but only because I filled out forms in Parkland Hospital. It was never used with him.
Mr. JENNER - You do recall definitely that you asked for Lee Oswald?
Mrs. PAINE - I cannot be that definite. But I believe I asked for him. Oh, yes; I recall definitely what I asked. I cannot be definite about the man's reply, whether he included the full name in his reply.
Mr. JENNER - But you did?
Mrs. PAINE - I asked for the full name, "Is Lee Oswald there."
== UNQUOTE ==

Marina testified to the same thing, that Oswald wasn't living at the rooming house under his real name:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/oswald_m1.htm
== QUOTE ==
Mrs. OSWALD. No. After Lee returned from Mexico, I lived in Dallas, and Lee gave me his phone number and then when he changed his apartment--Lee lived in Dallas, and he gave me his phone number. And then when he moved, he left me another phone number.
And once when he did not come to visit during the weekend, I telephoned him and asked for him by name rather, Ruth telephoned him and it turned out there was no one there by that name. When he telephoned me again on Monday, I told him that we had telephoned him but he was unknown at that number.
Then he said that he had lived there under an assumed name. He asked me to remove the notation of the telephone number in Ruth's phone book, but I didn't want to do that. I asked him then, "Why did you give us a phone number, when we do call we cannot get you by name?"
He was very angry, and he repeated that I should remove the notation of the phone number from the phone book. And, of course, we had a quarrel. I told him that this was another of his foolishness, some more of his foolishness. I told Ruth Paine about this. It was incomprehensible to me why he was so secretive all the time.
Mr. RANKIN. Did he give you any explanation of why he was using an assumed name at that time?
Mrs. OSWALD. He said that he did not want his landlady to know his real name because she might read in the paper of the fact that he had been in Russia and that he had been questioned.
== UNQUOTE ==

It appears too many have been scared away from ever reading the Warren Report or the volumes by claims of how inaccurate it is by conspiracy theorist authors. It's not.

There is no mystery here.

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Walt Cakebread on April 07, 2020, 03:54:33 PM
That would be 1 [page one]? Where it says 3:15? and where it says 'doesn't own a gun..saw one at bldg M Truly and two others'?
Looked again and I don't see "Beckley" but the scribble is crap...where do you see what I can't?
Besides the time being 3:15 and there was no room number ever given......
https://jfkwitnesses.omeka.net/items/show/235

Hi Jerry,  You've posted a link to Captain Fritz hand scribbled note.....I was referring to FBI agent James Hosty's notes.  And the first entry on Hosty's notes says

Quote:...1026 N. Beckley     room.... Unquote

PS   Hosty's scribbled notes can be found in the photo section of Hosty's book "Assignment :   OSWALD "

Now I want to go back to the link that you've posted and read Fritz scribbling....Thanks for posting the link.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Steve M. Galbraith on April 07, 2020, 04:41:29 PM
Naah. The Warren Commission covered this item in detail back in 1964. Page 314-315 says this:
https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/chapter-6.html#investigations

== quote ==
Oswald also used incorrect names other than Hidell, but these too appear unconnected with any form of conspiracy. Oswald's last name appears as "Lee" in three places in connection with his trip to Mexico City, discussed above. His tourist card was typed by the Mexican consulate in New Orleans, "Lee, Harvey Oswald."  However, the comma seems to have been a clerical error, since Oswald signed both the application and the card itself, "Lee H. Oswald." Moreover, Oswald seems originally to have also printed his name, evenly spaced, as "Lee H Oswald," but, noting that the form instructed him to "Print full name. No initials," printed the remainder of his middle name after the "H." The clerk who typed the card thus saw a space after "Lee," followed by "Harvey Oswald" crowded together, and probably assumed that "Lee" was the applicant's last name. (See Commission Exhibit 2481, p. 800.) The clerk who prepared Oswald's bus reservation for his return trip wrote "H. O. Lee." He stated that he did not remember the occasion, although he was sure from the handwriting and from other facts that he had dealt with Oswald. He surmised that he probably made out the reservation directly from the tourist card, since Oswald spoke no Spanish, and, seeing the comma, wrote the name "H. O. Lee."  Oswald himself signed the register at the hotel in Mexico City as "Lee, Harvey Oswald,"  but since the error is identical to that on the tourist card and since he revealed the remainder of his name, "Harvey Oswald," it is possible that Oswald inserted the comma to conform to the tourist card, or that the earlier mistake suggested a new pseudonym to Oswald which he decided to continue.

In any event, Oswald used his correct name in making reservations for the trip to Mexico City, in introducing himself to passengers on the bus, and in his dealings with the Cuban and Soviet Embassies. When registering at the Beckley Avenue house in mid-October, Oswald perpetuated the pseudonym by giving his name as "O. H. Lee," though he had given his correct name to the owner of the previous roominghouse where he had rented a room after his return from Mexico City.  Investigations of the Commission have been conducted with regard to persons using the name "Lee," and no evidence

Page 315

has been found that Oswald used this alias for the purpose of making any type of secret contacts.
== UNQUOTE ==

[Here's the tourist card prepared by Oswald: https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0354a.htm - Hank]

[Here's where Oswald signed the hotel register as "Lee, Harvey Oswald" (right side of page): https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0353b.htm - Hank]

And it's important to remember that Oswald himself also signed the roominghouse register O.H.Lee. The landlady did not misunderstand him. Page 182:

== QUOTE ==
When asked why he lived at his roominghouse under the name O. H. Lee, Oswald responded that the landlady simply made a mistake, because he told her that his name was Lee, meaning his first name, An examination of the roominghouse register revealed that Oswald actually signed the name O. H. Lee.
== UNQUOTE ==

https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/chapter-4.html#aliases

Here's the link to the rooming house register where Oswald wrote "O.H.Lee".
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh20/html/WH_Vol20_0148b.htm

Also, one needs to further remember than Marina asked Mrs. Paine to call Oswald at the rooming house, and Mrs Paine asked for "Mr. Oswald", and was told there was no one registered there by that name. Marina said this led to a fight between her and her husband.
Mrs. Paine's testimony:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/paine_r2.htm

== QUOTE ==
Mr. JENNER - You are. absolutely clear about that. All right. Now, state, you began to state the circumstances of the telephone call. Would you in your own words and your own chronology proceed with that, please?
Mrs. PAINE - Marina had said, "Let's call papa," in Russian and asked me to dial the number for her, knowing that I had a number that he had given us. I then dialed the number--
Mr. JENNER - Excuse me, did you dial the first or the second number?
Mrs. PAINE - The second number.
Mr. JENNER - And that number is?
Mrs. PAINE - WH 3-8993.
Mr. JENNER - When you dialed the number did someone answer?
Mrs. PAINE - Someone answered and I said, "Is Lee Oswald there?" And the person replied, "There is no Lee Oswald here," or something to that effect.
Mr. JENNER - Would it refresh your recollection if he said, "There is nobody by that name here"?
Mrs. PAINE - Or it may have been "nobody by that name" or "I don't know Lee Oswald." It could have been any of these.
Mr. JENNER - We want your best recollection.
Mrs. PAINE - My best recollection is that he repeated the name.
Mr. JENNER - He repeated the name?
Mrs. PAINE - But that is not a certain recollection.
Mr. JENNER - I take it then from the use of the pronoun that the person who answered was a man?
Mrs. PAINE - Was a man.
Mr. JENNER - And if you will just sit back and relax a little. I would like to have you restate, if you now will, in your own words, what occurred? You dialed the telephone, someone answered, a male voice?
Mrs. PAINE - Yes.
Mr. JENNER - What did he say and what did you say?
Mrs. PAINE - I said, "Is Lee Oswald there." He said, "There is no Lee Oswald living here." As best as I can recall. This is the substance of what he said. I said, "Is this a rooming house." He said "Yes." I said, "Is this WH 3-8993?" And he said "Yes." I thanked him and hung up.
Mr. JENNER - When you hung up then what did you next do or say?
Mrs. PAINE - I said to Marina, "They don't know of a Lee Oswald at that number."
Mr. JENNER - What did she say?
Mrs. PAINE - She didn't say anything.
Mr. JENNER - Just said nothing?
Mrs. PAINE - She looked surprised.
Mr. JENNER - Did she evidence any surprise?
Mrs. PAINE - Yes; she did, she looked surprised.
Mr. DULLES - You are quite sure you used the first name "Lee," did you, you did not say just "Mr. Oswald," or something of that kind?
Mrs. PAINE - I would not say "Mr. Oswald." It is contrary to Quaker practice, and I don't normally do it that way.
Mr. JENNER - Contrary to Quaker practice?
Mrs. PAINE - They seldom use "Mister."
Mr. JENNER - I see.
Mr. DULLES - And you wouldn't have said "Harvey Oswald," would you?
Mrs. PAINE - I knew he had a middle name but only because I filled out forms in Parkland Hospital. It was never used with him.
Mr. JENNER - You do recall definitely that you asked for Lee Oswald?
Mrs. PAINE - I cannot be that definite. But I believe I asked for him. Oh, yes; I recall definitely what I asked. I cannot be definite about the man's reply, whether he included the full name in his reply.
Mr. JENNER - But you did?
Mrs. PAINE - I asked for the full name, "Is Lee Oswald there."
== UNQUOTE ==

Marina testified to the same thing, that Oswald wasn't living at the rooming house under his real name:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/oswald_m1.htm
== QUOTE ==
Mrs. OSWALD. No. After Lee returned from Mexico, I lived in Dallas, and Lee gave me his phone number and then when he changed his apartment--Lee lived in Dallas, and he gave me his phone number. And then when he moved, he left me another phone number.
And once when he did not come to visit during the weekend, I telephoned him and asked for him by name rather, Ruth telephoned him and it turned out there was no one there by that name. When he telephoned me again on Monday, I told him that we had telephoned him but he was unknown at that number.
Then he said that he had lived there under an assumed name. He asked me to remove the notation of the telephone number in Ruth's phone book, but I didn't want to do that. I asked him then, "Why did you give us a phone number, when we do call we cannot get you by name?"
He was very angry, and he repeated that I should remove the notation of the phone number from the phone book. And, of course, we had a quarrel. I told him that this was another of his foolishness, some more of his foolishness. I told Ruth Paine about this. It was incomprehensible to me why he was so secretive all the time.
Mr. RANKIN. Did he give you any explanation of why he was using an assumed name at that time?
Mrs. OSWALD. He said that he did not want his landlady to know his real name because she might read in the paper of the fact that he had been in Russia and that he had been questioned.
== UNQUOTE ==

It appears too many have been scared away from ever reading the Warren Report or the volumes by claims of how inaccurate it is by conspiracy theorist authors. It's not.

There is no mystery here.

Hank
This shows, to me, again how unstable and removed from reality Oswald was. He truly did believe that he was doing important work, "infiltrating" anti-Castro groups, working for his Marxist cause, and that he was being closely monitored by the "notorious FBI" (as he told the Soviet embassy/KGB officials he met in Mexico City). Hell, the FBI agent assigned to monitor him never met him. Some surveillance.

Marina said, "Lee was sick. He didn't know who he was." I'll leave the amateur psychoanalysis to others but these are not the acts of a stable person.

But to the conspiracy believers this is evidence not of an unstable person but a person being directed by the CIA or the FBI. We see a erratic person; they see dark forces. There's no way of reasoning with them on this. Whatever evidence we produce showing Oswald acted on his own is viewed by them as evidence he was being used or controlled. And so it goes.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 07, 2020, 06:01:34 PM
I found this posted on the EdFourm....                                                                                     David Josephs
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/25184-some-tidbits-about-mexico-city/?tab=comments#comment-385103

(http://content.invisioncic.com/r16296/monthly_2018_08/1936588565_LIFEANDTIMESOFLEEHARVEYOSWALD2.thumb.jpg.3870cd37a5d807b09e401d2267d77c16.jpg)

SuperLee either traveled around like a speeding bullet or someone was impersonating him and/or  forging his signature...WHY?

Another alternative suggests itself. When I sign a register of some sort, I often notice there are skipped lines that have been left blank.

It's not beyond the realm of possibility that these two cited occurrences were both filled in *after the assassination* by someone who fancies themselves a wit flipping back a few pages and finding a blank line and filling it in with Oswald's name. I'm NOT suggesting it was the same person who put the names down in both places. It's more likely it was two different people with time on their hands having a little fun.   

We can assume that simple explanation - that requires nothing beyond some people doing what people do - is what happened.

Or we can assume some conspiracy decided to have people, in advance of the assassination, go around and randomly sign various registers where we know Oswald could not have been, all to advance some unknown purpose of the conspiracy. Remember that Oswald's name appearing in either location does not help frame him for the assassination nor offer an alibi for one. So what's the point the conspiracy was hoping to establish?

None known, right?

Remember the Cardiff Giant?

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 07, 2020, 06:30:35 PM
I?m sure there?s plenty she didn?t want to know about Lee and she couldn?t possibly know every person he interacted with when he wasn?t home. And Lee doesn?t strike me as the type of husband who shared everything on his mind with his wife.

She also wasn?t a useful witness on Oswald?s ownership of a rifle.

None of the people I mentioned believed there were any Shooters other than Oswald.

Johnson, RFK and others implied that Oswald was working with either the Soviets or the Cubans.

It seems notable that none of those folks with Insider knowledge of National Security looked at Oswald?s background and thought, ?there?s no way that guy could be part of a conspiracy?

Actually, the bolded is untrue.

When the police arrived at Mrs. Paine's home on the afternoon of the assassination, Ruth Paine originally said Oswald did NOT own a rifle. Marina corrected her, and said he did. She then led the police to the blanket in the garage, and pointed it out as where the rifle was stored. When a policeman lifted the blanket, it hung limp. It was empty. Because Oswald had brought it to the Depository that morning, where it was recovered.

Ruth Paine's testimony:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/paine_r2.htm
== Quote ==
Mrs. PAINE - I said nothing. I think I just dropped my jaw. And the man in front said by way of explanation "We have Lee Oswald in custody. He is charged with shooting an officer." This is the first I had any idea that Lee might be in trouble with the police or in any way involved in the day's events. I asked them to come in. They said they wanted to search the house. I asked if they had a warrant. They said they didn't. They said they could get the sheriff out here right away with one if I insisted. And I said no, that was all right, they could be my guests.
They then did search the house. I directed them to the fact that most of the Oswald's things were in storage in my garage and showed where the garage was, and to the room where Marina and the baby had stayed where they would find the other things which belonged to the Oswalds. Marina and I went with two or three of these police officers to the garage.
Mr. JENNER - How many police officers were there?
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.
Mr. JENNER - Were you standing on the blanket when you advised--
Mrs. PAINE - When I translated. I then stepped off of it and the officer picked it up in the middle and it bent so.
Mr. JENNER - It hung limp just as it now hangs limp in your hand?
Mrs. PAINE - And at this moment I felt this man was in very deep trouble and may have done--
Mr. McCLOY - Were the strings still on it?
Mrs. PAINE - The strings were still on it. It looked exactly as it had at previous times I had seen it. It was at this point I say I made the connection with the assassination, thinking that possibly, knowing already that the shot had been made from the School Book Depository, and that this was a rifle that was missing, I wondered if he would not also be charged before the day was out with the assassination.
Mr. JENNER - Did you say anything?
Mrs. PAINE - No; I didn't say that.
== Unquote ==

Marina's testimony:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/oswald_m1.htm
== Quote ==
Mr. RANKIN. Did Mrs. Paine say anything about the possibility of your husband being involved?
Mrs. OSWALD. No, but she only said that "By the way, they fired from the building in which Lee is working."
My heart dropped. I then went to the garage to see whether the rifle was there, and I saw that the blanket was still there, and I said, "Thank God." I thought, "Can there really be such a stupid man in the world that could do something like that?" But I was already rather upset at that time--I don't know why. Perhaps my intuition. I didn't know what I was doing.
Mr. RANKIN. Did you look in the blanket to see if the rifle was there?
Mrs. OSWALD. I didn't unroll the blanket. It was in its usual position, and it appeared to have something inside.
Mr. RANKIN. Did you at any time open the blanket to see if the rifle was there?
Mrs. OSWALD. No, only once.
Mr. RANKIN. You have told us about that.
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. And what about Mrs. Paine? Did she look in the blanket to see if the rifle was there?
Mrs. OSWALD. She didn't know about the rifle. Perhaps she did know. But she never told me about it. I don't know.
Mr. RANKIN. When did you learn that the rifle was not in the blanket?
Mrs. OSWALD. When the police arrived and asked whether my husband had a rifle, and I said "Yes."
Mr. RANKIN. Then what happened?
Mrs. OSWALD. They began to search the apartment. When they came to the garage and took the blanket, I thought, "Well, now, they will find it." They opened the blanket but there was no rifle there.
Then, of course, I already knew that it was Lee. Because, before that, while I thought that the rifle was at home, I did not think that Lee had done that. I thought the police had simply come because he was always under suspicion.
== Unquote ==

Guy Rose's testimony (one of the officers who took part in the initial search:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/rose_g.htm

== Quote ==
Mr. BALL. You took part in the search, didn't you?
Mr. ROSE. Yes; I did.
Mr. BALL. What part did you take?
Mr. ROSE. Well, I was the senior detective that was there, and so I was sort of the spokesman for the group, I suppose, and Stovall wen into the bedroom of Marina Oswald--Marina Oswald's bedroom, and I don't remember where Adamcik went first, but I talked with Ruth Paine a few minutes and she told me that Marina was there and that she was Lee Oswald's wife and that she was a citizen of Russia, and so I called Captain Fritz on the phone and told him what I had found out there and asked him if there was any special instructions, and he said, "Well, ask her about her husband, ask her if her husband has a rifle." I turned and asked Marina, but she didn't seem to understand. She said she couldn't understand, so Ruth Paine spoke in Russian to her and Ruth Paine also interpreted for me, and she said that Marina said--first she said Marina said "No," and then a minute Marina said, "Yes, he does have." So, then I talked to Captain Fritz for a moment and hung up the phone and I asked Marina if she would show me where his rifle was and Ruth Paine interpreted and Marina pointed to the garage and she took me to the garage and she pointed to a blanket that was rolled up and laying on the floor near the wall of the garage and Ruth Paine said, "Says that that's where his rifle is." Well, at the time I couldn't tell whether there was one in there or not. It appeared to be--it was in sort of an outline of a rifle.
Mr. BALL. You mean the blanket had the outline of a rifle?
Mr. ROSE. Yes; it did.
== Unquote ==

The testimony of these three people about Marina Oswald's initial reaction when asked if Oswald owned a rifle is consistent in the general facts. The police showed up, inquired if Oswald owned any weapons, and Marina led the police to the Paine garage and pointed out the blanket, where, she testified she had previously seen Oswald's rifle stored.  She didn't have time to think about it much. She wasn't in "protect her husband" mode and certainly hadn't been brow-beaten or threatened with being shipped back to the USSR if she didn't testify a certain way. The police asked a question, Ruth Paine said 'No', and Marina corrected her, pointing out the blanket in the garage and saying she had seen Oswald's rifle therein.

The blanket, however, was empty. And conveniently for the conspirators, Oswald decided to take a long package to work that day, leave that long package near the sniper's nest where his print was found on it, and leave his rifle on the sixth floor from where the shots were fired by an unknown assassin. Oswald also conveniently (perhaps at the behest of the conspirators who were framing him) dropped three shells at the sniper's nest window, travelled to Parkland Hospital and dropped off a nearly whole bullet traceable to his rifle to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world, and then somehow got close enough to the limo at Parkland to toss (unseen) two large fragments from his rifle to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world into the limo where they would later been found and used as evidence against him.

Or somebody else did this all to frame Oswald.

Or Oswald fired the shots that killed the President.

Your call.  I know which way is the simplest, and makes the most sense, and has the most evidence in support. And it doesn't involve a conspiracy.

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 07, 2020, 06:58:24 PM
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."

(https://img.culturacolectiva.com/content/2017/10/26/1509066731874/visa-mexico-lee-medium.jpg)
Yes! This is the document prepared by the Mexican authorities after Oswald squeezed in the "Harvey" between Lee and Oswald, making it look like Lee was his last name. That handwritten document prepared by Oswald was cited above. Here it is again:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0354a.htm

His name above appears as "Lee, Harvey Oswald" and the Warren Commission concluded this possibly suggested a new alias to Oswald ("O. H. Lee") that he used when renting a room at the Johnson's rooming house on North Beckley.

PS: This also strengthens the case that Lee Harvey Oswald was also in Mexico City.

(CT: Yeah, right! Maybe his handler told him to register at the rooming house under that alias!)

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on April 07, 2020, 07:55:58 PM
Hi Jerry,  You've posted a link to Captain Fritz hand scribbled note.....I was referring to FBI agent James Hosty's notes.  And the first entry on Hosty's notes says 1026 N. Beckley     room
PS   Hosty's scribbled notes can be found in the photo section of Hosty's book "Assignment :   OSWALD "
My blind bad there ::)

(https://i1.wp.com/www.prayer-man.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/hostynotes_LHO.jpg?w=594)

  Hosty's note...The same time written down as Fritz---- 3:15. The cops were there at Beckley around 2:30 according to the Johnsons. So how did they know where to go some 45 minutes earlier? Again..what room did they come to search? The name "Oswald"--- did not register with the staff. Oswald's room number was never mentioned in the Report [AFAIK]
 After the interview...it was moot. Note that page 2 says '4:05'?
Walt...did I ever mention the Hostys went to our church..I went to school with his children.
Did James Hosty know that Oswald lived over on Beckley? I really don't think so.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Walt Cakebread on April 07, 2020, 08:15:10 PM
My blind bad there ::)

(https://i1.wp.com/www.prayer-man.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/hostynotes_LHO.jpg?w=594)

  Hosty's note...The same time written down as Fritz---- 3:15. The cops were there at Beckley around 2:30 according to the Johnsons. So how did they know where to go some 45 minutes earlier? Again..what room did they come to search? The name "Oswald"--- did not register with the staff. Oswald's room number was never mentioned in the Report [AFAIK]
 After the interview...it was moot. Note that page 2 says '4:05'?
Walt...did I ever mention the Hostys went to our church..I went to school with his children.
Did James Hosty know that Oswald lived over on Beckley? I really don't think so.

Did James Hosty know that Oswald lived over on Beckley? .

Well now this is an interesting question.....  Maybe Fritz didn't know that Lee had the room at 1026 N.Beckley...One would think that if he knew that he would have entered that info as the very first entry just as Hosty did....  Could it be that Hosty knew that Lee lived at 1026 N.Beckley and therefore simply jotted that down even though the question hadn't been asked?   You'll notice that Hosty jotted  ...."OH Lee is how he lives" ...commonsense would dictate that the address and this entry should be together.....   ????
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on April 07, 2020, 08:19:31 PM
Another alternative suggests itself. When I sign a register of some sort, I often notice there are skipped lines that have been left blank.

It's not beyond the realm of possibility that these two cited occurrences were both filled in *after the assassination* by someone who fancies themselves a wit flipping back a few pages and finding a blank line and filling it in with Oswald's name.
That theory has been advanced before. But it doesn't seem likely that someone could/would sign Oswald's name so perfectly [just as a lark]   

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_d9kZfc4kK-Y/TMghzJS7JTI/AAAAAAAAOSA/evjB_2k_K-Q/s1600/MASO_nary-wcdocs-49_0001_0005[1].jpg)

Have another glance at the register--- all but a couple of entries are from Texas...compile the chances on that.
Odd is how the 'Oswald' date is entered...the writing doesn't really match does it?!
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on April 07, 2020, 08:51:02 PM
 
Yes. This is the document prepared by the Mexican authorities after Oswald squeezed in the "Harvey" between Lee and Oswald, making it look like Lee was his last name.
His name above appears as "Lee, Harvey Oswald" and the Warren Commission concluded this possibly suggested a new alias to Oswald ("O. H. Lee") that he used when renting a room at the Johnson's rooming house on North Beckley.
Quote
She also wasn?t a useful witness on Oswald?s ownership of a rifle.
When she did state that there was a rifle..she told the feds that Lee brought it from Russia....
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/pdf/WH23_CE_1778.pdf

I don't see anything 'squeezed in' on the travel document.
It was signed Lee H Oswald...where is the implied deception? So the clerk must have screwed up the name [not uncommon in Mexico]
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 07, 2020, 09:51:36 PM
That theory has been advanced before.

Which doesn't mean it's wrong.
 
But it doesn't seem likely that someone could/would sign Oswald's name so perfectly [just as a lark]   [/b]

Is that your opinion (about the 'perfect' signing) or the actual opinion of a qualified handwriting expert you'd care to cite?
 
(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_d9kZfc4kK-Y/TMghzJS7JTI/AAAAAAAAOSA/evjB_2k_K-Q/s1600/MASO_nary-wcdocs-49_0001_0005[1].jpg)

Have another glance at the register--- all but a couple of entries are from Texas...compile the chances on that.

So the argument is the conspirators put the fake Oswald in with a real group of visitors from Texas to better frame him or what? Sorry, I don't see how this advances the conspiracy to frame Oswald any. Can you walk me through the logic on that? What difference does it make where the other people came from?
 
Odd is how the 'Oswald' date is entered...the writing doesn't really match does it?!

So whether it matches in your opinion (supposed "perfect" Oswald signature) or doesn't match in your opinion (the date) that is worth remarking upon and somehow points to a conspiracy? Sorry, need some help with that logic as well. Slow down and walk me through that.

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 07, 2020, 10:08:51 PM
 
When she did state that there was a rifle..she told the feds that Lee brought it from Russia....
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/pdf/WH23_CE_1778.pdf

No, she said nothing about the origin of the rifle the first time she admitted Oswald owned one on the afternoon of the assassination. See the testimony of Ruth Paine, Marina Oswald, and Guy Rose cited above. She did point out the blanket in the garage and said the rifle was in there. Turned out it wasn't, but that's where she said she saw it last.

I posted the quotes to rebut the claim originally made, that Marina "... wasn't a useful witness on Oswald's ownership of a rifle." [Typos corrected]

Not only did she admit Oswald owned a rifle the first time she was asked (before she was ever threatened with deportation, mind you), but why  does where and how he obtained it enter into this point?

Oswald denied in custody ever owning a rifle, right?
Marina admitted to the police the first time she was asked (on the afternoon of the assassination) Oswald owned a rifle, right?

Was one of them lying or mistaken? 

If so, which one? And why?

Where he obtained the rifle is a different argument altogether and a change of subject. You wouldn't be trying to misdirect the conversation?

I don't see anything 'squeezed in' on the travel document.
It was signed Lee H Oswald...where is the implied deception? So the clerk must have screwed up the name [not uncommon in Mexico]

Neither I nor the Warren Report suggested  there was any deception by Oswald in the travel document. It appears it was an inadvertent error on Oswald's part (misreading the form that specified no initials, and squeezing in "Harvey"), which led to the clerk typing the name wrong ("Lee, Harvey Oswald"), which suggested the O.H.Lee alias to Oswald that he used at the rooming house.

Once more, with feeling:

Here's the document I cited. Click the link:
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0354a.htm

You don't see the document that Oswald filled out with the squeezed-in "Harvey"?

Here's what the Warren Report said about that document:
== QUOTE ==
...His tourist card was typed by the Mexican consulate in New Orleans, "Lee, Harvey Oswald."  However, the comma seems to have been a clerical error, since Oswald signed both the application and the card itself, "Lee H. Oswald." Moreover, Oswald seems originally to have also printed his name, evenly spaced, as "Lee H Oswald," but, noting that the form instructed him to "Print full name. No initials," printed the remainder of his middle name after the "H." The clerk who typed the card thus saw a space after "Lee," followed by "Harvey Oswald" crowded together, and probably assumed that "Lee" was the applicant's last name. (See Commission Exhibit 2481, p. 800.)
== UNQUOTE ==

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on April 07, 2020, 10:44:36 PM
Which doesn't mean it's wrong. Is that your opinion (about the 'perfect' signing) or the actual opinion of a qualified handwriting expert you'd care to cite? So the argument is the conspirators put the fake Oswald in with a real group of visitors from Texas to better frame him or what? Sorry, I don't see how this advances the conspiracy to frame Oswald any. Can you walk me through the logic on that? What difference does it make where the other people came from? So whether it matches in your opinion (supposed Oswald signature) or doesn't match in your opinion (the date) that is worth remarking upon and somehow points to a conspiracy? Sorry, need some help with that logic as well. Slow down and walk me through that.
Not worth the trouble. I 'advanced' nothing.
Marina did tell SA Brookhout that Oswald had the rifle in Russia [for anyone that can read the link]
Incidently...per forum rules---
Quote
There must be no more than one single line of empty space between any written text, including quotes or posted images.
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2006.0.html
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 07, 2020, 11:03:02 PM
Not worth the trouble. I 'advanced' nothing.

Sorry, it must have been another Jerry Freeman that made all those other posts above advancing the arguments I responded to, including this one: "... she wasn't a useful witness on Oswald's ownership of a rifle.". My apologies.
 
Marina did tell SA Brookhout that Oswald had the rifle in Russia [for anyone that can read the link]

I saw the link. I clicked the link. I read the link. Her language is not quoted as strongly as you put it. In that link she does say Oswald owned "a rifle" in Russia (not "the rifle"). But in Russia, as Oswald himself told the police in custody, he owned a shotgun, not a rifle. He said you cannot own a rifle in Russia. Was Oswald lying about that or was Marina mistaking a shotgun for a rifle?

Marina went on to say that having been shown "a rifle" (reportedly the one recovered from the Depository), she couldn't identify it as her husband's, but went on to also say it looked like her husband's in terms of the color, but didn't recall the telescopic sight. She also went on to say all rifles (and apparently shotguns) look alike to her. So her obvious mistake about Oswald owning "a rifle" (actually a shotgun) in Russia is transmuted by you into her claiming Oswald owned "the rifle" in Russia (and "the rifle" under discussion is the one Marina admitted Oswald kept within a blanket in the Paine garage. The same rifle that was determined to be missing on the afternoon of the assassination). But that's clearly not what Marina said.

Glad I could clear that up for you.

...per forum rules---  https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2006.0.html (https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2006.0.html)
Quote
There must be no more than one single line of empty space between any written text, including quotes or posted images.

I guess that means everything I said above is wrong. I do it for readability. Or I did. I'll try to avoid it in the future.

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on April 07, 2020, 11:25:05 PM
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/pdf/WH23_CE_1778.pdf
Quoting from the statement that apparently someone fails to see...
Quote
Marina Oswald advised that Lee Harvey Oswald owned a rifle which he used in Russia about two years ago. She observed what she presumed to be the same rifle in a blanket.....
Why argue this point except for just the sake of arguing?
Also, why does someone need to be a handwriting expert to see if certain signatures look alike?
Signatures----
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1599.msg75787.html#msg75787
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Bill Chapman on April 07, 2020, 11:55:49 PM
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/pdf/WH23_CE_1778.pdf
Quoting from the statement that apparently someone fails to see...Why argue this point except for just the sake of arguing?

You seem to be asserting that the rifle in the blanket was bought in Russia.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 08, 2020, 12:28:58 AM
You seem to be asserting that the rifle in the blanket was bought in Russia.

Yeah, that's the way I read it too. Unless he's trying to suggest Marina is untrustworthy and unreliable, and because she couldn't tell a rifle from a shotgun that means she never saw a weapon in the blanket.

Frankly, when I argue with a conspiracy theorist, it appears to me they are much like a drowning man, willing to grab onto anything to keep their head above water. So we often see some hardly relevant documents cited that sink of their own weight and can't support the argument being advanced or defended. Like the claim that Marina thought it was the same weapon Oswald had in Russia. How's that help get Oswald's rifle out of the blanket in the Paine garage, where Marina - on the afternoon of the assassination when she was first asked about the rifle - said the rifle was kept?

It helps not a whit. But any port in a storm, and anything that floats for a drowning man.

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 08, 2020, 12:33:48 AM
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/pdf/WH23_CE_1778.pdf
Quoting from the statement that apparently someone fails to see...
Quote
Marina Oswald advised that Lee Harvey Oswald owned a rifle which he used in Russia about two years ago. She observed what she presumed to be the same rifle in a blanket.

I saw it. I read it carefully. I also saw the word "presumed" in there. Did you miss that?
Quote
Marina Oswald advised that Lee Harvey Oswald owned a rifle which he used in Russia about two years ago. She observed what she presumed to be the same rifle in a blanket.

Do you understand why that word weakens your argument to the point of meaninglessness? It's merely an presumption by her that it was the same rifle. You claimed "she told the feds that Lee brought it from Russia"... turns out what she actually said when we read the statement with care (without her or you apparently realizing it) was she couldn't tell the difference between a rifle and a shotgun, and she was merely assuming it was the same weapon. It wasn't. It couldn't be. We know that for a fact.

And the fact she couldn't tell a rifle from a shotgun doesn't remove or weaken her admission on the afternoon of the assassination that Oswald kept his rifle in the blanket (there are no photographs of Oswald with a shotgun, for example. Only with a rifle). There's no order form from Kleins or PO Money Order signed by Oswald where Oswald ordered a shotgun, only a rifle. What Marina saw and what she admitted to seeing on the afternoon of the assassination was Oswald's rifle.  There's no doubt about that.

....Why argue this point except for just the sake of arguing?

So although it was originally claimed that "She [Marina] also wasn't a useful witness on Oswald's ownership of a rifle", when it's established her first statement on that subject was effectively "Yes, My husband owned a rifle, and he stored it here, in the Paine garage, wrapped within a blanket", now it's just arguing for the sake of arguing? I would think it's pointing out errors of fact - which I happen to think is worthwhile.

Also, why does someone need to be a handwriting expert to see if certain signatures look alike?
Signatures----
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1599.msg75787.html#msg75787

You said originally "But it doesn't seem likely that someone could/would sign Oswald's name so perfectly [just as a lark]".

"Perfectly" was the word you used. But you're backing away from that allegation of a perfect signature, and merely saying you think they now "look alike". And it appears you answered my question -- you don't have any handwriting expert to quote, and are merely telling us what your uneducated eye (in terms of handwriting analysis) sees.

Again, I still fail to understand what conspiracy objective is advanced by having someone masquerading as Oswald in various parts of the country and going around signing his name in various registers, especially at times when we know Oswald was elsewhere.

Again, if there's no point to it (and there doesn't appear to be, as you can't even suggest one), then it's more than likely exactly what I suggested rather than part of some master plot or anything nefarious.

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on April 08, 2020, 12:47:44 AM
Again, I still fail to understand what conspiracy objective is advanced by having someone masquerading as Oswald in various parts of the country and going around signing his name in various registers, especially at times when we know Oswald was elsewhere.
No one advanced any "conspiracy objective". It remains what can be considered a very weird anomaly. If you feel like you are right about something...than feel free. 
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 08, 2020, 01:02:17 AM
No one advanced any "conspiracy objective".

YES! Exactly! That's the problem I'm pointing out. You can't suggest how these register signings help frame Oswald or ensure the assassination of JFK happened. So what's the reason the conspirators would do this? There apparently isn't one. So unless you're speculating insane conspirators doing things disconnected from reality, conspirators didn't have anything to do with these signings.

It remains what can be considered a very weird anomaly.

A "very weird anomaly" only if one ignores or rejects the most reasonable explanation. You acknowledged that explanation with the comment "That theory has been advanced before" but offered no reason to dismiss it.

If you feel like you are right about something...than feel free.

That no one could even argue for how these register signings advanced any conspiratorial objective that makes any sense - CTs are not exactly reticent when asked to speculate most times - strengthens the argument that this was done on a whim after the assassination by people considering themselves witty.

PS: Are we not supposed to notice that you ignored approximately 90% of my response and only responded to one of several points I made? On the subject of the rifle, did Marina actually "tell SA Brookhout that Oswald had the rifle in Russia"? I see a lot of reasons to reject that claim, contained within the very document you cited.

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Bill Chapman on April 08, 2020, 04:13:27 AM
Yeah, that's the way I read it too
Hank

No flies on us, huh
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on April 08, 2020, 05:56:52 AM
An examination of the roominghouse register revealed that Oswald actually signed the name O. H. Lee.

When was this examination done, and by whom?
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on April 08, 2020, 06:09:56 AM
YES! Exactly! That's the problem I'm pointing out. You can't suggest how these register signings help frame Oswald or ensure the assassination of JFK happened.

That’s a strawman. Jerry didn't claim that these register signings helped frame Oswald or ensured that the assassination happened. He’s just saying that they are evidence that Oswald was somewhere else than where the narrative claimed he was at those times.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Bill Chapman on April 08, 2020, 04:55:08 PM
 
When she did state that there was a rifle..she told the feds that Lee brought it from Russia....
https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh23/pdf/WH23_CE_1778.pdf

I don't see anything 'squeezed in' on the travel document.
It was signed Lee H Oswald...where is the implied deception? So the clerk must have screwed up the name [not uncommon in Mexico]

You might need glasses: Marina said she 'presumed' it was the same rifle.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 08, 2020, 07:44:37 PM
When was this examination done, and by whom?

By Mrs. A.C.Johnson, the landlady, according to the Warren Commission footnotes.

== QUOTE ==
Mr. BALL. Do you remember the date Oswald rented the room?
Mrs. JOHNSON. October 14.
Mr. BALL. What time of day did he come by?
Mrs. JOHNSON. It was between 4 and 5 o'clock, I do know that because I was home that day when he came back by and I said, when he came by, I said, "You did come back by."
Mr. BALL. Was your sign out at that time?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; it was; he seen the sign.
Mr. BALL. How much did you charge him?
Mrs. JOHNSON. $8 a week, refrigerator and living room privileges.
Mr. BALL. The refrigerator was located where?
Mrs. JOHNSON. In my kitchen--he wanted to know if he could put milk and lunch meat in my refrigerator and I told him he could.
Mr. BALL. Did he tell you what his name was?
Mrs. JOHNSON. O.H. L-e-e [spelling].
Mr. BALL. Did he sign anything with that name?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; I have it in my purse.
Mr. BALL. May I see it?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I will be glad to--I don't want you to keep it. I want you to--I brought it for your information. I knew you was going to ask that.
Mr. BALL. Now, is this in his handwriting?
Mrs. JOHNSON. This "O. H. Lee" is in his handwriting and this other is in the housekeeper's handwriting--Mrs. Roberts.
Mr. BALL. And these are the rates you gave him?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes.
Mr. BALL. I would like this marked as an exhibit to this deposition, mark this Exhibit A.
. . .
Mr. BALL. We will make a copy of this and give the original back to you and we will mark this "A." Did he sign that "O. H. Lee" in your presence?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes sir.
Mr. BALL. On that day?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; the day he rented the room, they sign the register--they sign the register before I accept any money.
Mr. BALL. I'm talking about this "O. H. Lee" signature on this document; he signed that on that date?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.
== UNQUOTE ==

Here's the link to the rooming house register where Oswald wrote "O.H.Lee".
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh20/html/WH_Vol20_0148b.htm

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on April 08, 2020, 07:52:43 PM
That sounds like a claim, not an "examination".
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 08, 2020, 07:59:18 PM
That sounds like a claim, not an "examination".

So you want to quibble over the wording in the Warren Report, rather than concede the fact that Oswald signed the register in her presence, which refutes the original claimant's argument that maybe the landlady misunderstood Oswald, and he didn't use the alias.

He did. He signed the register "O.H.Lee".

Here's the original [false] claim, by Jerry Organ:
I believe Oswald claimed he gave the housekeeper his real name, but she got wrong.

I can picture her getting the "Lee" part, then asking him to repeat it.

    "My name is Oswald ... Lee."
    "How's that, Mr. Lee?"
    "Oswald [expecting her to take this to be his surname] .... Harvey."

Landlady unsure how to spell Oswald [thinks it's his first name] and writes down O.H. No problem, since she figures she got his last name right. Oswald likes Secret Agent shows, so he's happy he got an innocent "alias"; will throw off the "notorious FBI".

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 08, 2020, 07:59:35 PM
That’s a strawman. Jerry didn't claim that these register signings helped frame Oswald or ensured that the assassination happened. He’s just saying that they are evidence that Oswald was somewhere else than where the narrative claimed he was at those times.

NOPE. He suggested far more than that. And arbitrarily limited the choices to two:

SuperLee either traveled around like a speeding bullet or someone was impersonating him and/or  forging his signature...WHY?

He also added the below, acknowledging a third possibility I suggested, but failing to give any reason to dismiss it:
That theory has been advanced before. But it doesn't seem likely that someone could/would sign Oswald's name so perfectly [just as a lark]   
...
Have another glance at the register--- all but a couple of entries are from Texas...compile the chances on that.
Odd is how the 'Oswald' date is entered...the writing doesn't really match does it?!

All the best,
Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on April 08, 2020, 08:03:26 PM
So you want to quibble over the wording in the Warren Report, rather than concede the fact that Oswald signed the register in her presence, which refutes the original claimant's argument that maybe the landlady misunderstood Oswald, and he didn't use the alias.

Not that handwriting analysis is reliable or scientific, but they didn't even bother to do that.  I'm not sure how this qualifies as "analysis".

To me it doesn't look like a "register" at all, but a list of payments thrown together after the fact in one sitting.  And why in the world would it ever be classified "Top Secret"?
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 08, 2020, 09:06:46 PM
Not that handwriting analysis is reliable or scientific, but they didn't even bother to do that.  I'm not sure how this qualifies as "analysis".

To me it doesn't look like a "register" at all, but a list of payments thrown together after the fact in one sitting.  And why in the world would it ever be classified "Top Secret"?

So more quibbles over the wording. He signed it in the presence of Mrs. Johnson. You doubt he did that and she was part of the frame-up?

Nobody cares what it looks like to you. It might be one page from a notebook - it looks like each boarder had a page. Oswald certainly had his own. Business records are acceptable as evidence. And this was the rooming house's business record. It wasn't a big business, it was one home with multiple rooms being rented by the week. That home was in the Johnson for over 50 years since the assassination. You don't get to tell the Johnsons how they should maintain their business records.

Bottom line: Oswald used the alias of O.H.Lee at the rooming house, as affirmed by the business record, as affirmed by Mrs. Johnson, and as affirmed by Ruth Paine and Marina Oswald, both of whom testified they called the rooming house and asked for Oswald, but were told there was no Oswald there.

And studies have shown the government stamps far too much top secret, It wasn't top secret for long as it was published in the Warren Commission volumes of evidence in 1964.

You too give the impression of a drowning man thrashing about trying to grab onto whatever is handy in an attempt to keep your head above water. It's a great impression, just not very effective in the face of the evidence.

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on April 08, 2020, 09:37:25 PM
So more quibbles over the wording. He signed it in the presence of Mrs. Johnson. You doubt he did that and she was part of the frame-up?

It's not a quibble.  "Mrs. Johnson said so" isn't an "examination", so why does the Warren report say that there was an examination?

Quote
Nobody cares what it looks like to you. It might be one page from a notebook - it looks like each boarder had a page.

Really?  Let's see the other ones.

Quote
Oswald certainly had his own. Business records are acceptable as evidence.

This isn't evidence that Oswald misrepresented his name as opposed to Johnson misunderstanding him.  It's just a piece of paper with "O.H. Lee" on it.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 09, 2020, 01:53:37 AM
It's not a quibble.  "Mrs. Johnson said so" isn't an "examination", so why does the Warren report say that there was an examination?

It most certainly is quibbling over the language. Mrs. Johnson said he signed the register in her presence. You're ignoring that entirely and complaining about the language. The bottom line is the evidence indicates that's Oswald's own handwriting. You may not like that evidence. Too bad. You don't get to discard it or ignore it or handwave it away simply because it points to a conclusion you're trying to avoid reaching - and trying to paint as unreasonable.

Really?  Let's see the other ones.

I am surmising there is one page per lodger from the evidence on that "O.H.Lee" page - it has Oswald's payments listed by week and "Room 0" at the top. Since there are no other entries for other lodgers on that sheet, it stands to reason that the Johnsons tracked the lodgers by room and by lodger and most likely one room/lodger per page. Oswald was in room 0 and had a page to himself. I trust I didn't lose you along the way with that reasoning (but while I can explain it to you, I can't understand it for you. You have to do that on your own (and while not doing an imitation of a drowning man, either).

This isn't evidence that Oswald misrepresented his name as opposed to Johnson misunderstanding him.  It's just a piece of paper with "O.H. Lee" on it.

Nope. You're ignoring her testimony once more. She said he signed it in her presence. I already quoted it for you. Here you go again:
== QUOTE ==
Mr. BALL. Do you remember the date Oswald rented the room?
Mrs. JOHNSON. October 14.
Mr. BALL. What time of day did he come by?
Mrs. JOHNSON. It was between 4 and 5 o'clock, I do know that because I was home that day when he came back by and I said, when he came by, I said, "You did come back by."
Mr. BALL. Was your sign out at that time?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; it was; he seen the sign.
Mr. BALL. How much did you charge him?
Mrs. JOHNSON. $8 a week, refrigerator and living room privileges.
Mr. BALL. The refrigerator was located where?
Mrs. JOHNSON. In my kitchen--he wanted to know if he could put milk and lunch meat in my refrigerator and I told him he could.
Mr. BALL. Did he tell you what his name was?
Mrs. JOHNSON. O.H. L-e-e [spelling].
Mr. BALL. Did he sign anything with that name?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; I have it in my purse.
Mr. BALL. May I see it?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I will be glad to--I don't want you to keep it. I want you to--I brought it for your information. I knew you was going to ask that.
Mr. BALL. Now, is this in his handwriting?
Mrs. JOHNSON. This "O. H. Lee" is in his handwriting and this other is in the housekeeper's handwriting--Mrs. Roberts.
Mr. BALL. And these are the rates you gave him?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes.
Mr. BALL. I would like this marked as an exhibit to this deposition, mark this Exhibit A.
. . .
Mr. BALL. We will make a copy of this and give the original back to you and we will mark this "A." Did he sign that "O. H. Lee" in your presence?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes sir.
Mr. BALL. On that day?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; the day he rented the room, they sign the register--they sign the register before I accept any money.
Mr. BALL. I'm talking about this "O. H. Lee" signature on this document; he signed that on that date?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.
== UNQUOTE ==

Here's the link to the rooming house register where Oswald wrote "O.H.Lee".
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh20/html/WH_Vol20_0148b.htm

You can pretend the document stands alone, and Mrs. A.C.Johnson's testimony stands alone as well. And then look at each independently and find reasons to discard each. But that's just pretense. They don't stand alone. They are both evidence. Mutually reinforcing evidence.

Here's something you'll need. https://clipartmag.com/images/lifesaver-candy-clipart-16.jpg

Grab onto that.

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on April 09, 2020, 02:19:10 AM
It most certainly is quibbling over the language. Mrs. Johnson said he signed the register in her presence.

Yes, she certainly said that.

Now where is the examination?

Quote
I am surmising there is one page per lodger from the evidence on that "O.H.Lee" page

Cool.  I'm surmising that this is not a "register" and Oswald didn't write O.H. Lee on it.  Or is it only you who gets to surmise?

I'm also surmising that the the Warren Commission falsely claimed that "further examination" was done.

Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on April 09, 2020, 11:51:43 AM
  Mrs. Johnson said he signed the register in her presence. You're ignoring that entirely .........

What register? The one she didn't produce in evidence?
Quote
Mr. BALL. How many tenants did you have in October last year?
Mrs. JOHNSON. You know, I'm sorry I didn't bring my register. I couldn't tell you exactly; I imagine I had about 10 or 12.
You're ignoring that entirely. That slip of paper was not a register. That signature on the slip does not look like Oswald's writing to me but then [as you like to point out] I'm no expert.
You are new here and all this has been done redundantly. It looks like it was all prepared the day before...........
BTW what does _____ OUT mean?
 (https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh20/pages/WH_Vol20_0148b.gif)
 
 
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Walt Cakebread on April 09, 2020, 03:49:15 PM
What register? The one she didn't produce in evidence?You're ignoring that entirely. That slip of paper was not a register. That signature on the slip does not look like Oswald's writing to me but then [as you like to point out] I'm no expert.
You are new here and all this has been done redundantly. It looks like it was all prepared the day before...........
BTW what does _____ OUT mean?
 (https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh20/pages/WH_Vol20_0148b.gif)

If there was someway to prove it, I'd wager a large sum that the so called "signature" was NOT written by Lee Oswald.....   I'm not even sure that it's a "signature"....It appears to be a way to identify the person who was renting the room....and a record of the rent paid.....  I'd bet that the entry was made by Mrs Roberts.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 09, 2020, 04:17:15 PM
What register? The one she didn't produce in evidence? You're ignoring that entirely.

Nope. Business records are sufficient. There's no need for a business to provide all the records for all the customers to satisfy you and your fellow conspiracy theorists. Mrs. Johnson provided the business record for her customer that was pertinent to the Warren Commission's investigation. Your demand for things not seen does not remove the evidence that is seen.

That slip of paper was not a register.

Yes, Mrs. Johnson admitted that. That doesn't change the business record that was produced into non-evidence. Nor does it make her testimony invalid. You're just trying to find any reason at all to ignore or disregard the evidence that has been produced that shows Oswald used the alias of O.H.Lee that was suggested by his Mexico City trip.

That signature on the slip does not look like Oswald's writing to me but then [as you like to point out] I'm no expert.

Yes. My opinion (and yours) means squat. Mrs. Johnson affirmed in her testimony Oswald filled it out himself. This evidence (and the comitant conspiracy complaints about it) are however, totally meaningless to Oswald's guilt or innocence in the assassination. It neither establishes his guilt or provides proof of his innocence. It's part and parcel of the CT mileau where anything pointing to Oswald doing anything must be declared to be fraudulent and found inadmissible at all costs to the conspiracy theorist, no matter how weak is the CT argument advanced.

You are new here...
 
No, I'm not. Not sure what happened to my old posts but I did post here and debate the Oswald arrest in the theatre with John Iacolletti more than a few years ago. He kept insisting (among other things) that McDonald wasn't assaulted by Oswald, as I recall, despite the evidence of the scratch across McDonald's face in CE 744. Maybe that was a different forum? If I had to guess, it was about five or so years ago. More than that, I am not new to the JFK assassination nor to the online debate. You could find my name (and that of the alias I used to satisfy my first wife ("Joe Zircon") on numerous forums. I started with Prodigy back in the early 1990s.

...and all this has been done redundantly.
 
Obviously not. See the original post I responded to (by Jerry Organ), that you are still trying to somehow defend. Clearly, the fact that the evidence indicates Oswald noted the O.H.Lee alias on the form as testified to by Mrs. Johnson didn't reach Jerry Organ. Hence my post.

It looks like it was all prepared the day before...........

As opposed to two days before, three days before, ten days before, or on the dates indicated on the ledger? Please, tell me how you divined that information.

BTW what does _____ OUT mean?

Thanks for proving my point above, that CTs will argue over anything and ignore the obvious reasonable solution to continue to attempt to find some reason to exclude evidence pointing to Oswald. Earlier, John Iacoletti questioned the "Top Secret" designation. You here question the authenticity of the document, saying it looks like it was prepared the day before, and it doesn't look like Oswald's handwriting, despite having no known or admitted expertise, education, or background as a document examiner. And now you question what "Out" at the bottom of the document means?

You really can't figure it out? Let me give you a hint: His next rent payment was due on 11/25/63. Right? See the document and Mrs. Johnson's testimony.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/johnso_g.htm
== QUOTE ==
Mr. BALL. Was there one weekend when he was gone in which he didn't return on Monday but he came back the next day, on Tuesday?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Was there?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes; there was one and it must have been on Labor--no----
Mr. BALL. Armistice Day?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Armistice Day; it was on Monday, was it not?
Mr. BALL. Yes.
Mrs. JOHNSON. That was Monday he wasn't home. He didn't come home until Tuesday; that's the first time and only time he failed to pay his rent when it was due. It was due on Monday.
Mr. BALL. When did he pay it?
Mrs. JOHNSON, I would say the next 5 minutes after he walked into the house from work [on that Tuesday].
== UNQUOTE ==

Did Mrs. Johnson have a reasonable expectation of getting paid by Oswald (the man she knew as O.H.Lee before the assassination) on Monday 11/25/63 for the upcoming week? Why or why not? If you still need help figuring this out, just ask.

(https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh20/pages/WH_Vol20_0148b.gif)

All the best,
Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 09, 2020, 04:23:55 PM
If there was someway to prove it, I'd wager a large sum that the so called "signature" was NOT written by Lee Oswald.....   I'm not even sure that it's a "signature"....It appears to be a way to identify the person who was renting the room....and a record of the rent paid.....  I'd bet that the entry was made by Mrs Roberts.

Hilarious. You weren't there. You're not a witness, nor a recognized expert in handwriting analysis. Your opinion about this document wouldn't be allowed in a courtroom. It's meaningless.

You know whose testimony would be allowed to be heard?
Mrs. Johnson's. Here's what she said about that name:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/johnso_g.htm
== QUOTE ==
Mr. BALL. Did he tell you what his name was?
Mrs. JOHNSON. O.H. L-e-e [spelling].
Mr. BALL. Did he sign anything with that name?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; I have it in my purse.
Mr. BALL. May I see it?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I will be glad to--I don't want you to keep it. I want you to--I brought it for your information. I knew you was going to ask that.
Mr. BALL. Now, is this in his handwriting?
Mrs. JOHNSON. This "O. H. Lee" is in his handwriting and this other is in the housekeeper's handwriting--Mrs. Roberts.
Mr. BALL. And these are the rates you gave him?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes.
Mr. BALL. I would like this marked as an exhibit to this deposition, mark this Exhibit A.
...
Mr. BALL. We will make a copy of this and give the original back to you and we will mark this "A." Did he sign that "O. H. Lee" in your presence?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes sir.
Mr. BALL. On that day?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; the day he rented the room, they sign the register--they sign the register before I accept any money.
Mr. BALL. I'm talking about this "O. H. Lee" signature on this document; he signed that on that date?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Did he give you the money?
Mr. BALL. $8?
Mr. BALL. Did you ever know his true name was Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mrs. JOHNSON. No; not until we saw his picture flash on the television as the officers were out.
== UNQUOTE ==

Her testimony matters. It's evidence. Your opinion doesn't matter. And it's not evidence.

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on April 09, 2020, 04:40:09 PM
(https://merdist.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Oswalds-collage6.png)
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on April 09, 2020, 04:42:36 PM
Hilarious. You weren't there. You're not a witness, nor a recognized expert in handwriting analysis.

When did a "recognized expert in handwriting analysis" examine this "register"?  After all, the Warren Commission claimed that an "examination" was done.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 09, 2020, 04:49:43 PM
Yes, she certainly said that.

Now where is the examination?

Asked and answered. You're quibbling about the wording in the Warren Report. The Commission had testimony Oswald signed that ledger. The usual complaint about the Commission coming from conspiracy theorist quarters is that the Commission ignored the evidence and reached the conclusion they wanted to reach. Here, you're claiming the Commission should have ignored the evidence and reached a conclusion contrary to the evidence they had before them, as you ignore the evidence and reach a contrary conclusion below.

Cool.  I'm surmising that this is not a "register" and Oswald didn't write O.H. Lee on it.  Or is it only you who gets to surmise?

I'm also surmising that the the Warren Commission falsely claimed that "further examination" was done.

No, you're the only one surmising.

Let me apologize. Sorry, I used the wrong word earlier. I used the word surmise, when I should have used conjecture.

surmise
suppose that something is true without having evidence to confirm it.
"he surmised that something must be wrong"

conjecture; plural noun: conjectures
an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information.

I *conjectured* on the basis of the incomplete information on the O.H.Lee / Room 0 page that the Johnson's tracked the rent payments in a register with one lodger listed per page. You demanded I produce the register, which isn't necessary. No business need produce all their records to establish the veracity of one record. You are surmising on the basis of nothing at all, other than your fervent desire that Oswald didn't use an alias when registering at the rooming house that Oswald didn't sign the document, despite the evidence to the contrary. In doing so, you're ignoring or excluding the evidence we do have, that of Mrs. Johnson's testimony and the business record she submitted.

Hank

Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 09, 2020, 04:54:08 PM
When did a "recognized expert in handwriting analysis" examine this "register"?  After all, the Warren Commission claimed that an "examination" was done.

Asked and answered, three or four times now.

If you have a reason to dispute the testimony of Mrs. Johnson, who testified the ledger page was signed in her presence, let it be known now. Otherwise, this is a moot argument and a mere quibble over the language in the Warren Report. The import of the evidence we do have before us (Mrs. Johnson's testimony and document) is clear: Oswald used the O.H.Lee alias when registering at the rooming house.

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on April 09, 2020, 05:37:57 PM
Asked and answered.

Yeah, your "answer" was that the examination was "Johnson said so".

Quote
Here, you're claiming the Commission should have ignored the evidence and reached a conclusion contrary to the evidence they had before them, as you ignore the evidence and reach a contrary conclusion below.

I'm claiming no such thing.  You are basing a conclusion (namely that Oswald intentionally used a fake name at the Beckley house) based solely on Johnson's claim that he filled out this "register" in that name.  Oswald's interrogators claim that Oswald said she misunderstood him when he gave he his name.  That's evidence too.

Quote
I *conjectured* on the basis of the incomplete information on the O.H.Lee / Room 0 page that the Johnson's tracked the rent payments in a register with one lodger listed per page. You demanded I produce the register, which isn't necessary. No business need produce all their records to establish the veracity of one record.

No, that won't fly.  There is no evidence -- even "Johnson said so" evidence -- that each renter had a separate page like this.

Besides, is this supposed "alias" supposed to have any bearing on who killed Kennedy?
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on April 09, 2020, 05:41:10 PM
If you have a reason to dispute the testimony of Mrs. Johnson, who testified the ledger page was signed in her presence, let it be known now.

Yes.  My reason is that the letters on Johnson's "ledger" look nothing like the way Oswald wrote his Ls and Os in the known samples of his signature and despite what the WC claimed, no examination was done on it.
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Walt Cakebread on April 09, 2020, 06:09:17 PM
Yes.  My reason is that the letters on Johnson's "ledger" look nothing like the way Oswald wrote his Ls and Os in the known samples of his signature and despite what the WC claimed, no examination was done on it.

 the letters on Johnson's "ledger" look nothing like the way Oswald wrote his Ls and Os

Bravo!....    And THAT'S the reason that piece of paper is stamped TOP SECRET..... That stamp limited the people who could see the document.... And therefore it also limited the people like you, and I, who can see that It was NOT written by Lee Oswald.   

In a way it is a very elementary microcosm of this entire case.    Anything the conspirators didn't want us pissants to see was blacked out or stamped TOP SECRET
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 09, 2020, 06:23:07 PM

Bravo!....    And THAT'S the reason that piece of paper is stamped TOP SECRET..... That stamp limited the people who could see the document.... And therefore it also limited the people like you, and I, who can see that It was NOT written by Lee Oswald.   

In a way it is a very elementary microcosm of this entire case.    Anything the conspirators didn't want us pissants to see was blacked out or stamped TOP SECRET

...And then published it where anyone could see it. In the Warren Commission volumes of evidence. Hilarious. What a great way to keep it a secret. Publish it in a Government document that anyone could view at their local library or university, or even purchase from the Government Printing Office.

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 09, 2020, 06:41:03 PM
Yeah, your "answer" was that the examination was "Johnson said so".

Nope. I'm saying you're quibbling over the language in the report. The evidence cited is Johnson's testimony, which wasn't an examination. I freely admitted that. I did point out the evidence before us is Johnson's testimony and the document itself, which is the business record of the Johnson's boarding house. Both those items would be admissible in a court case. Your opinions would not.

I'm claiming no such thing.

You wrote the above in response to my post that "Here, you're claiming the Commission should have ignored the evidence and reached a conclusion contrary to the evidence they had before them, as you ignore the evidence and reach a contrary conclusion below."

And you absolutely did claim that, because you claimed: " I'm surmising that this is not a "register" and Oswald didn't write O.H. Lee on it.... I'm also surmising that the the Warren Commission falsely claimed that "further examination" was done."

So if you're NOT claiming the Warren Commission should have ignored the evidence before it and concluded otherwise, are you saying the Commission reached the correct conclusion?
Or is there some middle ground? Or are you arguing that the Commission should have investigated this further?

Isn't it a given that the current state of the evidence is never enough to satisfy a conspiracy theorist? So the Warren Commission didn't investigate sufficiently, the HSCA didn't investigate sufficiently, the Justice Department didn't investigate sufficiently, NARA didn't investigate sufficiently... no matter what, CTs always need more evidence to reach a reasonable conclusion.
 
You are basing a conclusion (namely that Oswald intentionally used a fake name at the Beckley house) based solely on Johnson's claim that he filled out this "register" in that name.
 
Because that's the evidence before us. And the document. And the fact that she had no known reason to lie about this. And the fact we know Oswald was living there, but he was NOT living there under his own name. We know all this from the available evidence. Like the testimony of the housekeeper, who recognized Oswald as a boarder she knew as O.H.Lee when he showed up on 11/22/63 at the rooming house, from the testimony of Mrs. Johnson, who testified Oswald signed the ledger O.H.Lee, and from the testimony of Mrs. Paine and Mrs. Oswald who testified when they tried to reach Oswald at the rooming house by the number he left in Ruth's phone book, he couldn't be reach and was told there was no Mr. Oswald at that location.

Oswald's interrogators claim that Oswald said she misunderstood him when he gave he his name.  That's evidence too.

No, that's hearsay. And don't some CTs - perhaps yourself included - allege the interrogators who wrote those reports were part of the cover-up or conspiracy? For example, Harry Holmes is alleged to have forged the money order by some, so we can disregard anything Holmes wrote. So either the interrogators had no reason to lie and we accept the documents they wrote after the fact as accurate as possible, or we disregard everything they wrote because they are part of of the conspiracy. But you can't have it both ways, and too often CTs want to have it both ways -- draw conclusions from the evidence as it exists but then discard the evidence as a falsification. So we have some CTs arguing the Z-film shows the Governor and the President were hit too close together to be separate shots (hence two shooters) but some CTs also arguing the Z-film has been altered.

No, that won't fly.  There is no evidence -- even "Johnson said so" evidence -- that each renter had a separate page like this.

Again, it's my conjecture -- a conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information -- based on the available evidence. Nothing more, nothing less. The one page submitted into evidence does NOT show any other boarder's room number or name. It shows only the O.H.Lee name and room 0. Therefore, the other boarders must have had other pages, and perhaps a separate page for each. That's the easiest way to organize it, I would think. If you can think of a better way, I'd love to hear it. By keeping each lodger's payments separated as I suggest, you also maintain the privacy of each lodger, and prevent one lodger from seeing that one renter is in arrears or is paying less for his room. But again, there is no need for a business to document its entire set of business records when they provide the testimony and the document(s) in question concerning the one person under investigation. 

Why don't you tell us why my reasonable conjecture based on the available evidence is an issue for you? Or even worth discussing? Why is how the Johnson's maintained their business records something you need to determine or even discuss? Better yet, why don't you tell us how you reached the conclusion it was "..a list of payments thrown together after the fact in one sitting." That's your stated conclusion - based on what evidence?

Remember we got here because of this exchange:
You: "To me it doesn't look like a "register" at all, but a list of payments thrown together after the fact in one sitting."
Me: "Nobody cares what it looks like to you. It might be one page from a notebook - it looks like each boarder had a page. Oswald certainly had his own. Business records are acceptable as evidence. And this was the rooming house's business record. It wasn't a big business, it was one home with multiple rooms being rented by the week. That home was in the Johnson for over 50 years since the assassination. You don't get to tell the Johnsons how they should maintain their business records."
You: "Really?  Let's see the other ones."
Me: "I am surmising [should be 'conjecturing'] there is one page per lodger from the evidence on that "O.H.Lee" page - it has Oswald's payments listed by week and "Room 0" at the top. Since there are no other entries for other lodgers on that sheet, it stands to reason that the Johnsons tracked the lodgers by room and by lodger and most likely one room/lodger per page. Oswald was in room 0 and had a page to himself. I trust I didn't lose you along the way with that reasoning (but while I can explain it to you, I can't understand it for you. You have to do that on your own (and while not doing an imitation of a drowning man, either)."

Besides, is this supposed "alias" supposed to have any bearing on who killed Kennedy?

It does not establish Oswald's guilt nor his innocence. I already said that.

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Walt Cakebread on April 09, 2020, 06:43:04 PM
...And then published it where anyone could see it. In the Warren Commission volumes of evidence. Hilarious. What a great way to keep it a secret. Publish it in a Government document that anyone could view at their local library or university, or even purchase from the Government Printing Office.

Hank

Ha,ha,ha,....Hee,hee,hee....  It was NOT stamped "TOP SECRET"  by the WC..... It was Stamped by some "investigator"( conspirator)   The WC lawyer may have realized how silly that stamp was and printed it in a obscure place in the volumes....
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 09, 2020, 06:58:18 PM
Yes.  My reason is that the letters on Johnson's "ledger" look nothing like the way Oswald wrote his Ls and Os in the known samples of his signature and despite what the WC claimed, no examination was done on it.

So your argument is that Johnson lied when she claimed Oswald signed that ledger page. And that, if Oswald was going under an alias, he wouldn't try to disguise his handwriting in any fashion by perhaps signing "O.H.Lee" differently. Tell us how you reached that conclusion.

So let's start here: Why don't you tell us what possible reason Mrs. Johnson had to lie about the name and who put it on the ledger?

And how it was that Oswald, who Johnson testified told her his name was Mr.Lee, wasn't going by an alias despite the evidence to the contrary.

And why Lee got upset for nothing on that Tuesday or Wednesday night before the assassination when he spoke to Marina and demanded Marina remove his phone number from Ruth Paine's address book:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/oswald_m1.htm
== QUOTE ==
Mr. RANKIN. Did you understand that he had used any assumed name about going to Mexico?
Mrs. OSWALD. No.
Mr. RANKIN. He never told you anything of that kind?
Mrs. OSWALD. No. After Lee returned from Mexico, I lived in Dallas, and Lee gave me his phone number and then when he changed his apartment--Lee lived in Dallas, and he gave me his phone number. And then when he moved, he left me another phone number.
And once when he did not come to visit during the weekend, I telephoned him and asked for him by name rather, Ruth telephoned him and it turned out there was no one there by that name. When he telephoned me again on Monday, I told him that we had telephoned him but he was unknown at that number.
Then he said that he had lived there under an assumed name. He asked me to remove the notation of the telephone number in Ruth's phone book, but I didn't want to do that. I asked him then, "Why did you give us a phone number, when we do call we cannot get you by name?"
He was very angry, and he repeated that I should remove the notation of the phone number from the phone book. And, of course, we had a quarrel.
I told him that this was another of his foolishness, some more of his foolishness. I told Ruth Paine about this. It was incomprehensible to me why he was so secretive all the time.
Mr. RANKIN. Did he give you any explanation of why he was using an assumed name at that time?
Mrs. OSWALD. He said that he did not want his landlady to know his real name because she might read in the paper of the fact that he had been in Russia and that he had been questioned.
Mr. RANKIN. What did you say about that?
Mrs. OSWALD. Nothing. And also he did not want the FBI to know where he lived.
Mr. RANKIN. Did he tell you why he did not want the FBI to know where he lived?
Mrs. OSWALD. Because their visits were not very pleasant for him and he thought that he loses jobs because the FBI visits the place of his employment.
== UNQUOTE ==

You will note the evidence all points to Oswald using an alias and then telling three different stories about this "O.H.Lee" name:
Good luck explaining all that away. I know, everybody lied except Archangel Oswald. Even when the evidence indicates Oswald gave three mutually contradictory stories.

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Hank Sienzant on April 09, 2020, 07:04:38 PM
Ha,ha,ha,....Hee,hee,hee....  It was NOT stamped "TOP SECRET"  by the WC..... It was Stamped by some "investigator"( conspirator)

Evidence that it was stamped that way by a conspirator? Suggestion: Try not to use circular reasoning to justify your claim.

The WC lawyer may have realized how silly that stamp was and printed it in a obscure place in the volumes....

Obscure place? They listed it as "Johnson Exhibit A" and the footnote leads directly to her testimony and to the Commission Exhibit.

But your argument reduces to: The Warren Commission did nothing wrong. They published the document. It was other unidentified really bad people who did the bad stuff here. Right?

Hank
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Walt Cakebread on April 09, 2020, 07:27:22 PM
Evidence that it was stamped that way by a conspirator? Suggestion: Try not to use circular reasoning to justify your claim.

Obscure place? They listed it as "Johnson Exhibit A" and the footnote leads directly to her testimony and to the Commission Exhibit.

But your argument reduces to: The Warren Commission did nothing wrong. They published the document. It was other unidentified really bad people who did the bad stuff here. Right?

Hank

Are you unaware that not all of the members of LBJ's cover up committee endorsed the findings.  And some of the lawyers had strong doubts about the "finding'
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on April 09, 2020, 07:42:06 PM
 
Yes, Mrs. Johnson admitted that. That doesn't change the business record that was produced into non-evidence. Nor does it make her testimony invalid.
Quote
That doesn't change the business record that was produced into non-evidence.
Produced into non-evidence? What is non evidence? If the Johnson 'Exbt A' is non evidence then why is it there? Answer--as fodder...meaningless crap.
Quote
Mr. BALL. Did he sign anything with that name?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir; I have it in my purse.
Mr. BALL. May I see it?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I will be glad to--I don't want you to keep it. I want you to--I brought it for your information. I knew you was going to ask that.
Mr. BALL. Now, is this in his handwriting?
Mrs. JOHNSON. This "O. H. Lee" is in his handwriting and this other is in the housekeeper's handwriting--Mrs. Roberts.
Johnson witnessed the signer sign a blank slip?
She did not wish to submit it. So what happened? Did Mr Ball keep it anyway? It was not submitted in evidence for the record.
When you sign something...something is written out for you to sign.
You don't sign something and then it written out for you.
Johnson told Ball that she didn't want him to keep the slip? How come?... and then wouldn't that invalidate the paper as evidence?
But then Hank...you will argue about this too. Because that is why you are here. To argue and to continue to argue.... huh Hank?
You will even argue that you are not arguing.. won't you Mr Condescending Hank?
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: John Iacoletti on April 09, 2020, 07:54:27 PM
So your argument is that Johnson lied when she claimed Oswald signed that ledger page.

Not at all.  I'm questioning whether she is correct or not.  She could just be confused.

Quote
And that, if Oswald was going under an alias, he wouldn't try to disguise his handwriting in any fashion by perhaps signing "O.H.Lee" differently. Tell us how you reached that conclusion.

And yet you would have us believe he didn't "disguise his handwriting" when ordering a rifle to shoot a general.

Quote
Then he said that he had lived there under an assumed name. He asked me to remove the notation of the telephone number in Ruth's phone book, but I didn't want to do that. I asked him then, "Why did you give us a phone number, when we do call we cannot get you by name?"
He was very angry, and he repeated that I should remove the notation of the phone number from the phone book. And, of course, we had a quarrel.[/b] I told him that this was another of his foolishness, some more of his foolishness. I told Ruth Paine about this. It was incomprehensible to me why he was so secretive all the time.

All of that is also consistent with Johnson misunderstanding his name and him running with it.  Just like the "H. O. Lee" on the Greyhound bus slip.  Or are you going to claim that he signed that and disguised his handwriting too?

But to what end?  What does the O.H. Lee "alias" mean to you in terms of anything relevant to the assassination?
Title: Re: O. H. LEE
Post by: Jerry Freeman on April 09, 2020, 11:17:09 PM
Actually guys..I revived this thread [reply 77] not to debate O H Lee as that was done here...
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1490.0.html
I was responding to the very first post by Gee stating that Oswald told Fritz that he lived at the Beckley address and then Fritz dispatched a search party. That claim was predisposed and blatantly false as I have demonstrated in both these threads.