Fact check: Oswald’s ‘girlfriend.’ Is she for real?

Her name is Judyth Vary Baker. She says she had a romance with Lee Harvey Oswald and they worked on a secret bio-weapons program in New Orleans in 1963. As the 50th anniversary of the assassination approached, her flair for self-dramatization was getting some attention.

Jesse Ventura has endorsed her story. She’s gotten respectful treatment in Pittsburgh. A San Francisco newspaper columnist reported her story uncritically.

There is little evidence that her story is true. 

One Baker believer argues this evidence supports her story.

— A pay stub from a company where Oswald worked that verifies they worked together;

— “A friend who said on tape that she and her husband double-dated with Baker and Oswald;”

— “Videotapes of Baker recounting her experience in the laboratory and her recollection of her superior there, Dr. Ochsner, who had ties with anti-communist organizations and the FBI.”

This is hardly compelling. A pay stub does not prove a romance. I cannot find a link to any video of the friend saying she and her husband double-dated with Judyth and Lee. And videotapes of her experience with the doctor are irrelevant to the question of whether she had a relationship with Oswald.

Good faith attempts by JFK conspiracy researchers to corroborate her story have resulted in dense and impenetrable discussions that revolve around hearsay — what she said when — but rarely touch on actual evidence.

With the help of credible researchers, John McAdams has compiled the many problems with Baker’s story.

If there’s something I’m missing here, please let me know.





  1. Bill Kelly says:

    While her book published by TrinDay is pretty neat, with a lot of photos and footnotes – and appears to be accurate on most counts, unlike other witnesses, I could find few leads that panned out to other supportive witnesses or records, which is usually the case. JVB must have known Oswald from Reilly Coffee but the cancer-killing-Castro angle is bizarre, as is the fact that there are two Judyth Bakers, and we can’t find the other one.

  2. greg parker says:

    She’s every bit as “real” as Mimi Alford – and has the same amount of proof for her claims.


  3. My take on Judy Baker? She is mostly telling the truth. I do believe she was Oswald’s summer 1963 mistress and I do believe she was engaging in “off the books” weaponizing cancer research, indirectly for the CIA. CIA has been involved with a lot of bizarre things – witness all the MKULTA experiments that were going on during this exact same era.

    I think Judy basically telling the truth and probably mixing in some embellishemts or “lies” if you will. Martin Shackleford, a sober JFK researcher, believes her story. Ed Tatro, one of the greatest JFK researchers of all time, is a strong advocate for her story. Ed Haslam is another completely sober man who believes her.

    I wish folks (Judy Baker) either were 100% truthful or 100% liars. But humans are not built that way; often it is a mix of truth vs. lies or simple misremembering. Don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater with Judy. It is like saying OJ is innocent in the murder of Nicole Brown Simpson because Mark Fuhrmann lied under oath about referring to black people as niggers.

    Unlike, Judy, I think Oswald was involved in the JFK assassination (not a shooter, but an unwilling fall guy) because of the very fact he was U.S. intelligence. Oswald was hanging out with all these fantatically right wing Kennedy haters (Phillips, Bannister, Shaw, Ferrie); it is hard to see him as an innocent.

    Btw, I think the government murdered Jack Ruby with weaponized cancer. He was just won a critical court case (had his conviction overturned) and was soon going to be able to leave jail before his new trial and thus be “accessible” to the public. I think the govt. injected Ruby with cancer with the intent to murder him. I did not arrive at this opinion over night.

    As for Mimi Alford, JFK’s teenage mistress (one of many…), I think she is nearly a pristine witness – probably 100% of her story is true. All one has to do is read the oral history of Barbara Gamarekian who embargoed her 1964 oral history simply because she did not want to embarrass Jackie or the newly married Mimi.

    Mimi says JFK told her at the height of the Cuban Missile Crisis that he’d rather his children be red than dead. Sounds like JFK and I do believe that to be extremely historically significant.

    With the advice of McGeorge Bundy, LBJ, the JCS, congressional leaders & the governments – all screaming for bombing or an invasion of Cuba – we’d be dead. Or, rather, a lot of folks would be.

    Gamarekian oral history: http://mysteryromance.blogspot.com/2012/02/1964-barbara-gamarekian-oral-history.html

    • NellTick says:

      Oswald was described by all who knew him as a loner, someone who kept everything inside, and one who rejected any close relationships. Even his relationship with Marina was very shadowy from his standpoint. Why then would someone like that totally confide in someone like Judyth, who was young and totally a stranger to him, on such an important matter as he was supposedly engaged in? His personality makes me doubt this relationship ever was possible.

      • Ryno says:

        Obviously you have never been “in love” before. I worked with a guy like you…sad.
        I do believe Judy. Im sure there are inconsistencies in her story, it was a long time ago and those were pretty crazy times. Do you remember your early 20s with perfect accuracy? I doubt it. But thats what people want from Judith, perfection.

      • Igor says:

        I agree with you 100%! I agree Oswald was too much of a loner and I wonder if he knew exactly what he would be doingfrom one day to the next. He was very u stable and not a person anyone would count on.

        As far as his sex life, I think Marina was more than his low libido (my interpretation, rightly or wrongly) could cope with, therefore, I do not believe he would have an affair with Judyth Vary Baker. She strikes me as a very bizarre individual who certainly does not have the background and education that wound render her of any value in plotting against Castro or anyone. I think she lives in a fantasy world, at best. Who would trust somebody as obviously unstable as she is. Choosing a person as unpopular as Lee Harvey Oswald as an imaginary romantic partner is like calling Hermann Goering “hot.” Well, some people will do or say anything for attention, even the negative kind!

    • Diane Roberts Powell says:

      But the slogan “better red than dead,” was used during the Vietnam era to protest the war. I simply don’t believe that the president murmured he would rather his children be “red than dead” while he was fooling around with her. If he would have intimated that he would rather his children continue to live, even if under a Communist regime, than to be reduced to ash, that would make more sense, and make him more human and real to us. Frankly, I doubt they had that level of intimacy between them. He probably wouldn’t have uttered those words to anyone, even Jackie.

  4. greg parker says:


    please quote Barbara Gamarekian saying she had direct (or even indirect) knowledge of an affair between Ms Alford and JFK.

    Robert Dalek out and out misused and abused Ms Gamerekian’s oral history to help sell his book, and perhaps for other even less noble reasons.

    As for JVB, I’m afraid the historical facts bely the central tenets of the anti-Castro plot into which she casts LHO. That being the case, any affair she claims to have had with him is entirely irrelevant to the assassination.

    I don’t wonder that you believe both, given you seem predisposed to believe any allegations made by anyone when it comes to sex – but I do very much wonder about those who believe one and not the other in the two cases referred to here. I mean, there is nothing to split them. They both waited a long time to come forward, both wrote books, and neither has anything of weight to support their claims beyond their own say so, and proof of working in the same building. The main difference is that Alford’s allegations are far more harmful to history. On that basis alone, the bar should be maintained (if not raised) in regard to proof. Instead, the likes of Dalek have sought to lower it to ground level. But ONLY if there is a Kennedy involved.

    • jeffmorley says:

      But Greg, I am NOT disposed to believe both Mimi Alford and Judyth Baker.

      I am disposed to believe neither woman’s story has any relevance to the JFK assassination story. I’ve never written about Mimi Alford for this site for that reason. Until I see corroborating evidence for Baker’s claims, I believe the same about her story.

      Thankfully, Judyth Baker has written us to state her case herself and we will have a chance to review her claims and her evidence in more detail.

      • greg parker says:


        I know you are not disposed to believe both. I said my concern was with people who believe one but not the other, given I can’t discern any substantive difference in their credibility. Given that lack of difference in credibility, the only reason to believe one and not the other, comes down to personal agenda.

        One example might be that you want to push a particular theory, so you latch onto JVB whose story can be used to support said theory, while discounting Mimi’s story as a pack of lies.

        Or another might be latching onto Alford’s story as true (with or without it having any relevance to anything) while discounting JVB with both positions held solely for the purpose of being taken seriously by the MSM.

        I don’t need to be Nostradamus to predict your review on JVB will be negative.

  5. Jim Phelps says:

    I am one of the rare persons that has met Judyth Baker, and basically known her for a decade, and I don’t find the objections to her story that the detractors in the JFK investigation invent. I have paged through her notebook and seen many Coffee Company check stubs, and various other supporting documents that show the written proof in ways most undeniable. She was there in New Orleans and knew Lee Oswald, zero doubt. There are other witnesses that support her story!

    There is even a play now that brings her story to life in the theater and it is an excellent production! This will no doubt steam her detractors also.

    There are many that have never met Judyth Baker and follow the political ways of the JFK information detractors, which are generally allied with the John McAdams folks and the Education Forums and John Simpkin methods that act more to suppress the JFK information than to expose the areas that do fact check. This is part and parcel for why these remain unsolved for nearly 50 years, as these detractor types don’t want the truth exposed. Education Forum and John Simkin are a British affair and they appear more interested in creating misinformation than doing real fact checking. Bill Kelly and Education Forum are the roots for much of the attack the Judyth Baker story, as it mostly stem from this area.

    Persons, like Education Forum’s Bill Kelley, are wanna be JFK experts, and they have never met persons like Judyth Baker or even asked to page through her notebooks pages from this time in her life. Such blind opinion is hardly akin to fact checking, and only kin to I didn’t fact check anything hand-waving nonsense.

    Jesse Ventura supports Judyth Baker’s story very likely because she showed him some of her supporting document notebooks, which are several. The reason that some of these areas of JFK interest don’t know that which is obvious to others is they maintain and contribute to web blog areas that are essentially hostile toward exposing various information on the JFK assassination, and they censor and restrict anyone from telling the JVB story and supporting her as being the real deal. I’ve been there and observed this happens. Such isn’t real JFK investigation methods, only scamming the innocent seeking the higher truths on JFK. Their insights are not reliable, nor even honest in my opinion and experiences.

    Judyth Baker has been on a book tour the last month, Nov.-Dec. 2012, and had all the information in black and white to show anyone polite. It is offered freely and there is abundant proof she is as she claims. She has many supporters that did fact checks. Ed Haslam was curious about the Mary Sherman’s murder down in New Orleans and in his serious investigations of her Murder he finds the Judyth Baker and Lee Oswald story, which he did not set out to find and didn’t want to get involved in the JFK and Castro hit story, but that is where the trail led. Haslam discovered Judyth Baker knew Mary Sherman so well that she could tell the difference between her photo and one of her sister, which really impressed him. So, there are lots of independent people that have taken the time to look carefully at the Judyth Baker story and do real fact checks in place of hand waving from many of those hostile to her telling her story. Such isn’t fact checking, but just more a detractor’s propaganda.

    Most likely when she came to these areas of the recent news coverage on her recent book tour the various reporters saw these same notes and she received good support because the supporting information is there. Such apparently just steams all those that have tried to attack her for years and her story since she came out and told it perhaps a decade ago. Some of her detractors can’t even find that radiation can cause cancer and all cancers have a viral pathogen trigger that sets off the rapid cell growth via cytokine factors generated unique to each virus. Such scientific vapidness isn’t about fact checking, and is nothing more than biased political propaganda that doesn’t come close to truths in science. I mean really, the radiation methods to kill people are several, and even the Russian’s political assassinations have used radiation methods. There is a huge and obvious association with cancer and radiation, and it can be used to kill easily and has been used. It was the biggest of fears on the Manhattan Project.

    There is balogna that rejects the grinder and calling this page a fact check, or the Bill Kelly Education Forum’s styled attack game, is total balogna, in my humble opinion. I have seen how these persons act and they are not reliable for anything except being wrong!


    Jim Phelps

  6. FROM JUDYTH VARY BAKER: People try to find my lengthy reply to your article, but it fails to appear. Why? they look for your “Oswald’s Girlfriend” article, but there, nobody can find my reply. NOR IS THE REPLY VISIBLE THAT I LEFT WITH YOU CONCERNING MARY FERRELL FOUNDATION’S PUBLISHING AN ALTERED PAIR OF DOCUMENTS, in response to Jeff Morley’s statement that no documents there have been altered, ‘correcting’ me. We cannot find my reply, so i am posting it here again, for Mr. Morley, a man I do hope will one day seek to interview me himself regarding the relevance of the information I supply regarding Lee Oswald, and Lee’s activities to save, rather than destroy, Kennedy.

    Please DO publish this reply, where people can find it, and also, to inform Mr. Morley and others concerning the altered evidence.


    Many researchers have copies of the unaltered time cards. Seems we will have to make a YouTube presentation, to show what was done–and why it matters. Erasing my presence from the record has been going on for some time, many of us believe, but this is the most recent example, having been detected in June, 2012. If the author of this article had actually met and interviewed me –I have been available freely for the past month (that window is now closed–having now personally met additional researchers, including Robert Groden and Jesse Ventura, for many hours–these two questioned me together one evening, just for starters–these who have seen the evidence and questioned me have been satisfied.

    Those who rely on secondhand information or on altered documents and altered emails and statements made about me or purportedly by me, should consider the value of firsthand knowledge. I am a living witness –judged without being interviewed–by your fact-finding system. Was that fair? Judgments as to my veracity and utility in the case have been made by persons who never met me, have never seen the raw, unaltered evidence, and who believe falsified material and statements being circulated about me.

    Thank you for publishing this information. I repeat: I was available for six weeks in the USA, with a published schedule. Jesse Ventura made a long trip to find out about the real Judyth Vary Baker, to view the evidence, to ask the important questions, and to see what I said, actually wrote, and did, in contrast with what detractors have published online and said about me behind my back. So–where was John McAdams? Where was Bill Kelly, who even posts on one of my Facebook pages (Occupy Dealey Plaza)? Thank you for posting this response. JVB

    • jeffmorley says:

      The documents that appear on Mary Ferrell Foundation Web site were copied directly from the National Archives. They were not altered.

      Readers will have to decide for themselves if these time cards corroborate the main claims found Judyth Baker’s story.

      Myself, I need more evidence.

      In the future, comments that try to make their points will not be published. I am making an exception here because I think ALL CAPS ARE UGLY, UNCONVINCING and UNPLEASANT.

    • Rich Pope says:

      My name is Rich Pope. My late father was the Vice Chairman and CEO of Southwestern Bell Telephone Company. I can verify that Judyth Vary Baker is telling the truth when she said that she and Lee Oswald had conversations over the phone with a telephone number that did not charge either one of them for the calls.

      • F.Vegas says:

        My name is Reverend Frankie Vegas. My late father was head of the CIA and I can verify what Judyth Vary Baker is saying because we were trying to kill Castro at the time in question.
        Obviously, that’s not true, but there is nothing to stop me from posting it here. Just like you did Mr. Pope with your claims about uncharged phone calls. I think we are going to need a little more than a random post in a comment section to go along with you. But good try…
        I would also like to add here that you are actually in most probability hindering your friend Judyth here instead of helping with your evidence-less claims. If anything she needs more concrete evidence, not more half claims of proof lacking in substance.

        • Igor says:

          If anything, Judyth Vary Baker needs to find a very good psychiatrist and a new supplier of aluminium foil to fashion a more effective chapeau to block her instrusive, fantastical thoughts. I understand she used to teach creative writing at one time but judging from her samples of writing, she has the fiction aspect of creative writing mastered, but not the grammatical or effective plotting aspects.

    • B Kamp says:

      Jesse Ventura, as much as I like the guy, also buys the James Files story which most noted researchers have considered to be a complete hoax as well.
      The links I posted in my previous post as an answer to Photon’s reply delve out a lot more inconsistencies in JVB story, it just doesn’t wash with the amount of evidence presented and the discrepancies pointed out.

  7. Rockwell Livingston says:

    E Haslam is making his pitch at Loyola University July 20, 9 – 1.

  8. Geoff Mellard says:

    I met Miss Baker,Lee Harvey Oswalds girlfgiend on the 50th anniversary of JFKs deaht in Dallas ,She is a humble lady who in my oppinion only seeks to exonerate Oswalds who is wholely innocent of the crime that the US government perpatrated . Anyone with half an ounce of brain matter knows it was the US government who murdered JFK .The problem is The highest power in the US is not superceeded by a higher power to bring them to justice.So it’s impossible to get justice,but we can get the truth and expose the government for what they was and still are.

    • I also met Judyth Vary Baker in Dallas in Nov. 2013. On a personal level, I found her to be entirely credible. I do believe she used known history to fill in gaps in her memory, but on the whole her story holds up.

      With one glaring exception. She interrupted her affair with Oswald to marry someone else (she later had five kids with him). And, she says Oswald was planning to leave Marina and run off with her, even though Marina was pregnant with their second daughter. I think Judyth embellished the romance. But if she’s a categorical liar, then I’m a bad judge of character.

    • beryhlilton says:

      Amen sister! The office of inspector general at the USDA
      is corrupt. Covering up the crimes of USDA officials.
      I have it in black and white. Its in the government.
      We the people own the government. When are we going
      to get what we are paying for. This is not working for
      American people. Time for change.

  9. Scott Liberati says:

    I do believe Ms Baker, and have ever since I saw her on, “The Men Who Killed Kennedy-The Final Chapter”. Her testimony and that of an FBI researcher seen on, “The Men Who Killed Kennedy-The Truth Shall Set You Free” have resolved the case in my mind. JFK & RFK, riled by what they perceived to be CIA foul-ups regarding their unseating of Castro (“Operation Mongoose”) chose to perform their own, tightly-classified attempts on the Cuban leader’s life. This was implemented despite JFK’s public hands-off Cuba promise to Krushev. The brothers used the US mob as the hatchet-men. Attorney General RFK, meanwhile, was playing hardball with key mob figures(prison and deportation). The mob simply used the secrecy surrounding this project to insulate them after they hit JFK. RFK executed the ex-post-facto “cover-up”: doctoring JFK’s autopsy photos, confiscating JFK’s brain, having the Zapruder film put on-ice for years away from public scrutiny, etc. This was all done to conceal US duplicity with the Soviets when the cold war was at its apex. And of course, less than 5 years later, RFK was killed after winning the CA primary. The mob knew that if RFK became president he would attack them like Cujo with a tape-worm.

    • Photon says:

      She is a complete fraud who avoids anybody willing to confront her about the obvious inconsistencies and outright errors in her story ( or stories, depending on the shelf life).
      Use a little common sense- when is the last time that Federal science grant funds were used for a laboratory in an apartment? Try NEVER. The real joke is that CTs will accept what she says without the slightest knowledge of how ridiculous her claims of being an expert in laboratory science really are.

    • Stephen Roy says:

      I know a great deal about the Baker claims. I strongly advise that you study them further before unconditionally accepting them.

  10. Charlie Books says:

    Is there any information on James Files? Do legitimate researchers believe his story.

  11. Mark Barsotti says:


    Your last comment to the original post was dated 12/31/12, almost two years ago. As a “mainstream” ex-WASHINGTON POST reporter, with a high level of interest in Dallas, if you thought that there was even a 5% chance that Ms. Baker was creditable, which might lead to an amazing breakthrough on THE American Murder Mystery of the 20th Century, I have to believe you would have been on a plane to interview her two years ago.

    That you haven’t should tell “skeptical” WC skeptics all they need to know about Ms. Baker.

  12. Nominay says:

    If Mrs. Baker can point researchers to people who knew her in 1963 that are still living, this could be helpful in ascertaining the credibility of her story.

  13. Nominay says:

    Files is ignored, deservedly so. Consensus largely is he’s a fraud.
    I’m confident that the real TSBD shooters were Mac Wallace and Loy Factor. Others I believe to be shooters are Jean Souetre, Herminio Diaz Garcia, and Nestor Izquierdo. I suspect Frank Sturgis and David Morales of being spotters.
    There is an Altgens photo where two men in hats appear to be CIA agents Rip Robertson and Tracey Barnes. Facial recognition experts could confirm whether they are or aren’t.

    • Diane Roberts Powell says:

      The problem I have with Nestor Izquierdo is that he was a black man, and as such, wouldn’t have been selected to for that job. In the south, there was already much harrasment and suspicion of black men anyway. Those red necked cops would have loved to finger a black man, even more than they did a so-called Communist. See, all of those false secret service agents were able to flash their phoney badges, or fade into the crowd, without anyone batting an eye.

  14. David Regan says:

    Whether you believe her or not, there are interesting details to her story: http://bit.ly/1IfPv1J via @theliptv

  15. Glenn Viklund says:

    In accordance with my experiences and exchanges with Judyth Baker, I would suggest that anyone interested in her story should have a look at the essay I’ve written about Baker.

    After a short indroduction in Swedish it’s all in English.


  16. Scarlet says:

    Here’s why I don’t believe Judyth. I’m reading Me & Lee right now, and it feels, looks, and smells like well-researched fan fiction. What she presents in the book as “evidence” are a couple of bus passes and check stubs from 1963. It’s extraordinarily thin support for her claims.

    I’ve also watched several of her recorded lectures. She has a big album/scrapbook supposedly full of other supporting evidence. Apparently she shows this scrapbook to select people like Jesse Ventura (not the most critical guy alot of times). My question is if this other evidence is so good, why doesn’t she make it available to all of us online? Or, better yet, why not publish it in a book so we can examine it?

    Also, she claims that she has all of these witnesses, but where are they??? I’ve seen alot of her just claiming to have witnesses. But, I’ve never actually seen her presenting hard evidence like video interviews with solid, credible eyewitnesses.

    Judyth seems to hang her hat alot on the late Ana Lewis. And sorry, but Ana Lewis doesn’t do it for me. I don’t find her credible. Lewis insisted that she and her husband met Oswald in Feb. of 1962……but he was still in Russia then. I just don’t believe her.

    Where is the video evidence showing Judyth’s bevy of witnesses actually saying that they remember her with Oswald???

    If her story is true, she’s doing a terrible job of backing it up. But, even beyond the lack of evidence is my gut feeling that she’s a fraud. Her story seems like a classic con: Bait people with solid info and build their confidence in you, then switch on the bunk.

    She was seemingly in New Orleans and worked at the same place with Oswald for a little while. She might have seen him around perhaps. My gut feeling is that she’s built a franchise on that flimsy foundation.

    Why on earth do so many researchers believe her? Am I missing something?

    • Martin Holmes says:

      Have you read the more recent, 2nd Edition, of “Dr. Mary’s Monkey” by Edward T. Haslam ?

      Haslam was a youngster in New Orleans during the time that Oswald and Baker were there together. Haslam’s father was an MD and knew the people that Baker discusses.

      Haslam does a credible job establishing the existence of the research lab to which Baker refers, as well as relating accounts of witnesses who had seen Oswald and Baker together.

      Your opinion of Judyth Baker could well change after reading “Dr. Mary’s Monkey”.

      • Scarlet says:

        I just finished Haslam’s book. It was a great read and I trust Haslam on most points. He seems humble and sincere, the type of person that people like JVB eat for breakfast. I was glad that JVB was cordoned off to a single chapter, because it was incredibly weak. It’s obvious that he trusted Judyth’s tendency to cite and reference herself without credible evidence or witnesses. I’m just not willing to go down the JVB road with Haslam.

  17. Sammy says:

    Read through, “Me and Lee”, twice and noted an error right away. Judyth stated that Lee wouldn’t wear a watch yet Marina clearly said that Lee wore a watch to cover some scars on his wrist. Marina added that he even continued to wear the watch when it stopped working. You can clearly see him wearing a watch in photos. Many don’t seem to pay attention to Marina at all. Her testimony disagrees with what Judyth says in so many areas. Judyth casts a dark shadow on Marina. I think more logic and thought should go into this. Marina was educated and used people who spoke in her Russian language to get her story across. Oswald was also a man who would never be someone’s “puppet’. He was very capable of gathering his own info, etc.

    • KT Cherf says:

      Did you really read “Me and Lee”?? Twice? You missed the part where Judyth says, paraphrase: “I believe Marina Oswald Porter is a courageous woman.” Also, asking Lee not to hit Marina anymore, regardless of her stake in the matter. JVB casts a dark shadow over Marina?? What?! That passage stuck with me because women of that generation were catty with one another, not complimentary-i.e. AnNa Lewis! So, for Judyth to magnanimously say these words speaks to her character and spiritual being. A person’s character says a lot in this day and age of high def and IMing. 1963 was a different world where people trusted you and your word was law. Judyth has opened our eyes to a whole other, covert reality. The world did change, and not for the better, after JKF was murdered, just look around. After viewing the comments here and just completing my copy of “Me and Lee”-also a truth seeker/amateur researcher in the matter of the JFK assassination since I was almost four when I saw it unfold on a grainy, black and white TV, I found Judyth’s book highly credible just from the standpoint of being told from the eyes of a nineteen year old!! A nineteen year old in Love no less, what is more real than someone in Love. Others may poo poo that, however, we have to remember, back then a nineteen year old was a full fledged adult as is proven in the book. Lee Oswald was 24 years old! U fathomablle

      • KT Cherf says:

        Unfathomable, by today standards!! It may seem pollyannish, but If we are looking for proof, maybe we should “go within” and feel what feels like the truth. All this other, “who said this? Who is credible? etc, etc.” still has us chasing our tails after 50+ years. The powers that be would want that. If you’re looking for the truth and looking to be a sovereign being, as JFK wanted, read “Me and Lee” again, see through the eyes of a young girl, connect the dots with your other research and feels what resonates within you therein lies your Truth.

        • max says:

          Sorry. No matter how often I go through the book I still find it offensive to Marina. I have to agree with others who feel the same. Judyth, a fine and talented woman, should not have written this book for Lee’s daughters. What daughter would want to hear of her father’s sexual exploits and see their mother insulted. Judyth may have called Marina courageous but the insulting comments were also there.

    • James Morgan says:

      Marin states Oswald did not satisfy her sexually according to reports. Who fathered the children?

  18. The absence of verifiable evidence damages her claims beyond repair. Her attempts to impugn various members of the research community for any reasonable criticism, and use the name’s of those who knew her in passing is deplorable and reeks of a selfish vanity. She attempts to force herself into history on numerous occasion without a shred of primary evidence.


  19. Ms. Baker has alleged that Kerry Thornley was seen by her multiple times at a time when The Warren Commission, Jim Garrison, the HSCA and Mary Ferrell concluded that he was in California. I have done two blog articles on this, one just asking a question. After interacting with Ms. Baker and a less than pleasant response for asking for the proof of her specific citations I decided to dig more deeply into her responses. I responded with a second blog. Kerry Thornley’s biographer has weighed in as well. There is no evidence that supports her claims.




  20. Scarlet says:

    Here’s what bothers me the most about JVB’s witness claims:
    –Judyth *claimed* on her blogspot back in 2010 that Mac McCullogh’s audio taped testimony would be released “eventually.” But 5 years later where is it???

    –She *claims* she has statements from Carlos Marcello’s family saying they knew her, but where is evidence of these claims?? A videotaped interview would be great and highly credible.

    –JVB *claims* she convinced G. Patrick Hemming when he was alive. But where is the evidence that he vouched for her? Hemming had his own credibility problems, but he was VERY willing to go on camera. There are videos of him all over the net. Why didn’t she get a video interview of him vouching for her??

  21. max says:

    The more I read on this subject the more it sounds like an incredible spy novel. It’s exciting but doesn’t clear anything up as it goes along. She definitely recreated Oswald. I doubt his family or friends would recognize him as being their Lee. Wow did he change but I guess love can do that.
    I don’t want to insult Judyth as she seems intelligent and sincere. But this is hard to take. I feel like I entered an alternate reality.

  22. Sammy says:

    After reading through Judyth’s book again, I realize that she has gone through a lot of trouble writing such a detailed book with so many photos, etc. She is definitely a wonderful writer and a very patient person. What I wrestled with was how much she and Marina disagreed. For instance when Judyth said she was with Lee, Marina claimed he was home. She claimed he came home every night after work. And as far as I could see, Lee did tend to come home even though he and Marina had problems. Judyth and Marina disagreed on even more important issues. However I thought Judyth very sincere about her love for Lee and how devoted he was to her. Perhaps they were very intimate and close. Perhaps the two ladies were simply a little jealous and wanting to get the upper hand? I’m no expert and it’s just an idea. As I said, some parts of the story are here to believe but I don’t want to discredit someone before I know more.

  23. dan shanahan says:

    The Junkkarian critique is quite flawed – so much so one is led to suspect malicious intent. It says Baker cites being told to write JFK six months before he elected. But the citation from the book it gives is, astonishingly, cobbled together (and cited as being on another page than it actually is). Baker clearly says – p. 25 – she postponed writing for seven months because Eisenhower was a lame-duck president. No one who reads the relevant paragraph can miss the meaning of what Baker writes. For whatever reasons, from carelessness to desire to misrepresent, Junkkarian’s gross error throws her entire commentary into serious doubt.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

In seeking to expand the range of informed debate about the events of 1963 and its aftermath, JFKFacts.org welcomes comments that are factual, engaging, and civil. more