Bill Kelly highlights the 1997 account of ONI Investigator Fred Reeves who wrote that the Marines Corps compiled reports on Lee Harvey Oswald that have never been made public.
Days
Hours
Minutes
Technical assistance courtesy of the Mary Ferrell Foundation | Designed by iWebResults
Ask the question: Why would the figure in front be cutout of Altgens6? It had to be Lovelady. If it was someone else, there would be no need to cut out the face. It is really very simple logic.
John McAdams, this one is for you, Bud.
Oswald was Doorman was standing on the top LEVEL (the 1st floor) of the TSBD and Billy Lovelady was on the STEPS in front of and to the left of Oswald. There is no longer any doubt.
Oswald is confirmed as Doorman by Judyth Baler’s pixelation analysis which proves that Doorman’s shirt is that of Oswald and not Lovelady.
OSWALD WAS IN THE DOORWAY OF THE TSBD, JUST AS HE SAID TO WILL FRITZ.
IT IS PROVEN BY A CLOSE LOOK AT ALTGENS6. THE CUTOUT OF THE FIGURE STANDING IN FRONT ON THE STEPS IS BILLY LOVELADY. WE CAN SEE THE TOP RIGHT OF HIS FACE. IT IS VERY CLEAR.
Billy Lovelady testified that he had his lunch and stayed on the STEPS.
Mr. LOVELADY – That’s on the second floor; so, I started going to the domino room where I generally went in to set down and eat and nobody was there and I happened to look on the outside and Mr. Shelley was standing outside with Miss Sarah Stanton, I believe her name is, and I said, “Well, I’ll go out there and talk with them, SIT DOWN and eat my lunch out there, set on the STEPS,” so I went out there.
Mr. BALL – You ate your lunch on the STEPS
Mr. LOVELADY – Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL – Who was with you?
Mr. LOVELADY – Bill Shelley and Sarah Stanton, and RIGHT BEHIND ME…
Mr. BALL – What was that last name?
Mr. LOVELADY – Stanton.
Mr. BALL – What is the first name?
Mr. LOVELADY – Bill Shelley.
Mr. BALL – And Stanton’s first name?
Mr. LOVELADY – Miss Sarah Stanton.
Mr. BALL – DID YOU STAY ON THE STEPS?
Mr. LOVELADY – YES.
Mr. BALL – Were you there when the President’s motorcade went by?
Mr. LOVELADY – Right
Lovelady was asked to point the black arrow to himself by placing it in a dark area.
Mr. BALL – I have got a picture here, Commission Exhibit 369. Are you on that picture?
Mr. LOVELADY – Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL – Take a pen or pencil and mark an arrow where you are.
Mr. LOVELADY – Where I thought the shots are?
Mr. BALL – No; you in the picture.
Mr. LOVELADY – Oh, here (indicating).
Mr. BALL – Draw an arrow down to that; do it in the DARK. You got an arrow in the DARK and one in the WHITE pointing toward you. Where were you when the picture was taken?
Mr. LOVELADY – Right there at the entrance of the building standing on the top STEP, would be here (indicating).
And Baker’s credentials in photo analysis?
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/judyth.htm
Hello Richard
Surprisingly I find myself agreeing with the Professor on this one.
But I do find compelling the Sean Murphy discussion of ‘prayer man’ as Oswald. This figure is seen on the Weigman film standing behind Lovelady. There are links on CTKA.
Why not start a separate thread on Dr. Cinque and the photos of the man in the doorway?
Why can’t we continue the discussion on the ONI files without being interrupted by those who want to divert the topic to something that has been endlessly discussed elsewhere?
A classic disinformation ploy is to sidetrack serious topics with less threatening ones, – hijacking threads and trains of thought and taking them onto another track, and to set up easily debunked Strawmen like fuzzy photos of The Man in the Doorway?
If you Google “Barney Fife at Dealey Plaza” at my JFKCountercoup2 blog you see a photo of a Dallas motorcycle policeman at the TSBD who bears a remarkable resemblance to Barney Fife, which just goes to prove that such photo evidence isn’t evidence at all and arguing about it is just a waste of time.
BK
Bill, thanks for expounding on Terry Pike and other so-called “mental cases” in the newest post on your jfkcountercoup2 blog. http://jfkcountercoup2.blogspot.com/
Hi. Sandy
In glad someone else appreciates the fact that declaring witnesses and suspects a mental case is one way to get them out of the way and each of the case studies deserve close examination.
And if anyone has more info on Amy of these cases I’d like to know more, especially Underhill and Dinkin.
I am also curious as to where Debbie got her information about the disposition of LTCM pike’s JAG case and why she would make the false charge that Pike was a conspiracy theorist as she only identified and located records and never commented on the contents of any records other than the ONI Defector File, which she read, redacted any classified and indexed. Her description of this file was purely objective and subsequently classified and withheld until 2017. She was then relieved of duty and charged with unauthorized travel and made army all case.
Remember A Few Good Men”? – “You can’t handle the truth!”
And the TV series JAG?
Navy military tribunal – Judge Advocate General – I think is what it stands for and LTCM – Lt Commander Pike didn’t become a LTCM by padding her expense accounts, and her case would make a great script or theatrical play – and can be imagined in the same protocols as the JAG shows.
And I wonder why Debbie and those who want to discuss photos of Oswald in the doorway in this thread don’t seem interested in my suggestion it be discussed as a dedicated topic?
BK
Yes, one should read every single post from Dr. Cinque’s excellent blogspot. You won’t have a hard time finding it. Reading it is another matter.
Well then there should be a separate thread on that subject so Dr. Cinque’s theories can be looked at closely and evaluated but this is not the place to do it, unless you want to intentionally hijack the subject of Oswald’s ONI files, which is what is happening, isn’t it?
Is that the intention?
BK
I have a great deal of respect for you Bill, but limiting discussion on topics is a classic Lone Nutter tactic.It is only with the free flow of ideas that we can get the truth out.Sometime that truth pops up in different ways, sometimes interrupting a previous topic. I know nothing about this Cinque person, but if there is proof that Oswald was watching the motorcade ( like everybody else in Dallas) it is immensely helpful to get that out in public. The ONI stuff kind of pales in comparison to an air-tight alibi for an innocent man.
Why not discuss Oswald in the doorway? Perhaps the ONI records document that he WAS in the doorway and how the government dealt with that problem. As Oswald was probably the most interested in politics of anybody in the Depository it is difficult to believe that he wouldn’t be interested in seeing JFK. After all, he was an admirer of the President.
I honestly believe that the man in the doorway as seen in Altgens photograph is Bill Lovelady. A subsequent photo confirms the RIGHT shirt he was wearing.
However, and it may have been posted elsewhere in this site, an unclear film shows someone that could be Oswald hanging around on the front steps.
I agree with Gerry that Billy Lovelady was standing on the front steps as ‘doorman’. However, as demonstrated by Sean Murphy and the Dave Weigman film discussion, behind him was someone named ‘prayer man’ who could be Oswald. The links are on CTKA.
Sean Murphy has eliminated every other TSBD employee as ‘prayer man’ and the testimony by Bill Shelley, Buell Frazier, Billy Lovelady et al who identified everyone else out there with them fails to mention a guy standing in the corner. Oswald himself said he was ‘out in front with Bill Shelley’. The guy standing in the corner is seen on Dave Weigman’s film. It’s well worth considering this figure as Oswald.
I didn’t say Oswald in the doorway shouldn’t be discussed, I just said it should have its own dedicated thread as the title and subject of this thread is Oswald’s ONI files.
BK
You’re probably correct but sometimes it is unavoidable as one issue leads to another or are related.
One issue might lead to another but we can keep them in separate threads, and keep them separate in our minds and analysis. Especially such diverse issues as the ONI assassination records and photos of the TSBD doorway.
BK
Oswald began learning the Russian language in the USMC and the Warren Commission lawyers apparently had access to a military file that we don’t have because at one meeting a WC lawyer said they were going to find out what Oswald studied at the Monterey Language Institute – now the Defense Language Institute, where those in the military and foreign service are trained before being deployed overseas.
As for the man in the doorway photos, one is Lovelady, and the other has yet to be identified, and Dr. Cinque is not the one who exonerates Oswald – DPD officer Baker does.
And Oswald in the doorway should be discussed in another thread.
BK
No one can place LHO on the sixth floor TSBD with the MC in his hands at 12:30 pm on 11/22/63. Not a single witness. DPD Chief Curry said as much in 1969.
The case against Oswald has always been circumstantial, and while juries can and do convict on such evidence, they would have been extremely unlikely to have be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt of his guilt once a competent defense attorney began picking away at the prosecution’s case through an independent investigation and rigorous cross-examination of the state’s witnesses.
Come to think of it Dave, you’re right. All the evidence against Oswald was circumstantial or tainted if otherwise (including his spouse’s who was fearful of being deported).
BTW, I don’t even recall that they found any of his fingerprints on the shells.
Oswald was eating his lunch alone at the time of the assassination , the real conspirators knew he wouldn’t have an alibi and The bogeyman was the shooter.
And Debbie – please site the reference that she claimed for a year to have access to records that prove Oswald’s ties to CIA/ONI and never produced anything.
I never saw any records or statements that say that.
Pike was not a conspiracy theorist like Horne, but always conducted herself as a professional records officer who was responsible for identifying, locating and obtaining ONI records related to the assassination of President Kennedy, a job she did too well in the opinion of the Navy brass who relieved her of that responsibility.
Bk
I think Debbie and Bill K. make good points-the former on Marcello, and Bill’s excellent article on ONI on his website, which is one of the 2 or 3 major things along with the ARRB medical evidence, and Doug Horne’s chronology of the Z Film that has changed my overview significantly.
Well well, now I’m incredibly sexist for thinking those who would accuse her of padding an expense account would also attempt to frame her sexually?
She was at first only charged with unauthorized travel, even though she traveled with Doolittle, and he wasn’t charged, but reassigned in regular Navy instead. How come? How come he wasn’t sent to Walter Reed for psychic testing too?
Also please cite your source for the padding the expense account charge, as I don’t think I posted that and I would like to know more if you have documentary sources, though I believe it to be a trumped up charge, just as the unauthorized travel charge clearly was.
Pike is a hero in my book – not for padding her expense account, but for doing her job and losing it because the top brass came down on her for being so good at it.
She wasn’t the only person to lose her job over these records, the Chief Analyst for Military Records before Hprne also left early and Jeremy Gunm quit in a huff after being reprimanded for beginning am investigation of ONI actions without authorization from ONI.
And thank you for stating your belief in Dr. Cinque’s debunked thesis of Oswald in the doorway pix, as it explains a lot. I think Jeff and JFKFacts should address that issue in another thread, as Oswald is innocent of killing JFK, but not for that Strawman reason.
BK
In response to Debbie above, in my book LT commander Terri Pike didn’t get sent to psych test until after she discovered the ONI Defecter File and was tasked to locate the 119 Reports that are still missing. Pike labeled the ONI Defecter File a JFK Record, and wrote on them clearly – the Criminal Code number of the JFK Act , a document now withheld for reasons of national security, and indexed by Pike herself, an index that is also classified. After being relieved of her duty and tested, they reclassified the ONI Defecter file as NBR – Not Belevfed Relevant, even though it clearly is.
Pike may have padded her expense account, traveled without permission and may have even carried on with Lt Commander Doolittle, who was not reprimanded for the same travels and was activated to regular Navy from Reserve status.
Like the guy who delivered the messages about the Preakness bets.in Seven Days.in May, I’ll bet he was sent to Pearl Harbor or Antartica.
Pike was no more crazy than Gen Walker or Oswald or the ASA guy in France or Demohrenschildt or Gary Underhill or Debbie.
Terry Pike is a hero in my book, and a very credible witness to ONI shenanigans who should be called to testify about government assassination records, when they get around to it.
Pike was merely the messenger who called attention to the ONI Defecter File and the 119 Reports, that I believe exist and were not destroyed and as with the Defecter File, will someday shed new light on what really happened at Dealey Plaza.
Bill Kelly
I have a problem labeling someone who pads expense accounts a hero- particularly after she spent a year claiming to have access to valuable records that could have proven Oswald’s ties to CIA /ONI and yet never produced anything. Your comment about her relationship with Mr. Doolittle is incredibly sexist-why bring up such speculation? The real story here is Reeves information about Oswald pre-and post the assassination. I would certainly never blow off his belief that Marcello was behind the ambush, particularly as he had the original info on Oswald. As Oswald has been proven to be in the doorway of the Texas Depository building during the shooting and was photographed ( proven by Dr. Ralph Cinque) The Mob hit seems the likely scenario to me. I don’t think the CIA/ONI would be careless enough to let Oswald be photographed watching JFK at street level.
Oh, my!
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/oswald_doorway.htm
Debbie:
“Oswald has been proven to be in the doorway of the Texas Depository building during the shooting and was photographed ( proven by Dr. Ralph Cinque)”
That would be a remarkable discovery. Who is Dr Cinque? From which university did he earn his doctorate? In which journal may I find his proof?
I’d never heard of him either. He’s a chiropractor who collaborated with Fetzer.
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/01/25/jfk-special-oswald-was-in-the-doorway-after-all/
“He’s a chiropractor who collaborated with Fetzer.” That doesn’t inspire a lot of confidence. Chiropractic isn’t much more credible than homeopathy: http://www.skepdic.com/chiro.html .
As far as I can tell from the Veterans Today article, the ‘proof’ that Oswald was in the doorway is just the old idea, debunked years ago, that Oswald was depicted in the Altgens photo. The man in the photo was Billy Lovelady, not Oswald. The article seems to admit that the man in the photo was Lovelady, but claims that the photo was altered and that it originally depicted Oswald. Apparently, if you look at it in the right light, the man’s shirt sort of resembles Oswald’s shirt, which proves that the photo was altered and that Oswald was in the doorway. Or something.
The Altgens photo was on the front pages of newspapers within a few hours of the assassination. The article asserts that the photo was altered, but doesn’t bother to explain how it was altered, or exactly when it was altered, or who altered it, or why James Altgens and everybody else at Associated Press didn’t notice that it was altered, or even whether such an alteration was even possible in 1963.
Here are some other unsupported assertions from that article: “The Zapruder film: altered; the medical evidence: altered; the President’s wounds: altered; the autopsy photos: altered; the alleged murder weapon: altered; the limousine: altered … Poor Lovelady … No wonder they had to ‘heart attack’ him out at age 42 before he could testify before the House Subcommittee on Assassinations.”
So – pretty much all the evidence has been faked, and Lovelady was murdered. (And it was the House Select Committee, not Subcommittee.) Now, why is it that conspiracy theorists have such a bad reputation?
Good synopsis Leslie.
Vincent Salandria, Physician Ralph Cinque, Dr. Jim Fetzer, sniper Craig Roberts,Mark Lane, David Wrone, Gerald McKnight, Richard Charnin and Rev Lance Moore have all confirmed that Oswald was photographed in the Book Depository entrance at the time of the assassination. As I believe that they represent the cream of the research community I accept their findings. I do not believe that the CIA/ONI would have permitted a patsy to be photographed so easily. On the other hand, I suspect that the Mob didn’t care where Oswald was; they took care of loose ends like they always do- in this case in 48 hrs. with Chicago Outfit member Ruby.
As I recall Marcello clearly stated that he wanted to ” get rid of the stone in his shoe” . I suspect that the Mob took care of JFK’s Marilyn problem, but instead of getting rewarded the President’s brother tried to take them down. November 22 may have been payback..
Which, I’m afraid, badly harms the credibility of each of those guys.
I’m not very familiar with Fetzer’s work.
I’ve seen it discussed in an article on this site and read a little elsewhere. If I recall right some of his theories were perceived by others as not that sound.
As far as the Dr. part. I respect expertise in the right field, if used objectively. I didn’t know a chiropractor was considered a physician, from what Medical School did he graduate?
Otherwise, one’s education in History, Political Science, Sociology etc. ends as an undergraduate as Masters and PHD’s focus on their area of expertise, and many here like me are equally uneducated on the subject other than reading and common sense.
IMHO I think O could logically have been at the front door, but this is not convincing or proof.
Debbie June 26, 2014 at 6:49 pm
I think the Mob took care of the Kennedy getting elected problem. Especially in Chicago and West Virgina.
Wasn’t real smart of Bobby to cross them after that.
Debbie,
I would agree with you that the mob (elements of mob as it wasn’t monolithic) were involved in the JFK assassination. However, I also think that the mob didn’t just do contract work for the Kennedys, but sold their “expertise” to agencies and to other powerful people in the US government, like the Dulles brothers. With regard to the JFK assassination, I think these mob elements did “contract work” for the CIA and the military. One of the reasons why J. Edgar Hoover did not like to admit that there even was an organized mob in this country was because he knew that many mob figures worked with intelligence, were hired on, going back at least to WW2. Today, this mob-government link is still hidden from the public, and one of the reasons why (in my opinion) we haven’t gotten all of the JFK files released yet. Some of these files may have mob contract information that would be upsetting/embarrassing/damning to CIA and other government agencies, who don’t want their institutional “dirty laundry” to be unveiled. If you look at the recent revelations made by Snowden of NSA tactics which caused an uproar, you get the idea.
How could “The Mob” have orchestrated the cover-up, a critical component of the assassinatio, unless of course they were positioned as scapegoats.
Can anyone envision Marcello Trafficanti Giancana et al picking up their phones let alone meeting in back alleyways to advise Henry Luce, Claire Boothe Luce, Norman Chandler, Bill Paley, the Grahams and Dealeys and Hobbys et al to assert: we’re in charge, now you clean up the mess?
@Leslie: I agree. The mob was, in my opinion, a player, a piece in the game, but in no way were they in complete control. That was by more powerful people. My argument was that the mob has been working with parts of our government for over 70 years. They are linked through shared projects. So of course when you dig into the JFK assassination you will find mob assets. THAT was my argument.
JSA, I appreciate what you are saying, and we should define mob. I contend there is what may be thought of as a “white mafia” meaning ‘operating in the open’ in the US that is as much, in fact I would argue more a threat to democracy than those named as ‘mobsters’ (who may well have been on the periphery of the assassination). Name a greater gambling operation than the stock exchange.
An element of intimidation is essential to all mob enterprises and any event that enforces their legend serves them. I think the mob, in this case Giancana Trafficante and Marcello – with the Campisis somewhat in the shadows – exploited their connections in Dallas and New Orleans to create a legend they had the power to decide, to execute and to cover up the assassination of a US president. I think they were little more than pawns in the Great Game and died as such. The greater legend is what we are looking to expose.
An FBI report dated 12/2/63 describes a photograph taken of the assassination by an AP photographer that captured the president “immediately after he was shot” and showed the doorway of the TSBD in the background. The photo is identified as “DN 5, 11/22/63, Dallas, Texas”, and is obviously Altgens #6 (id’ed #6 after the pre-existing number on the negative). Several people noticed the similarity of an individual in the Altgens photo to LHO. The FBI showed the photo to the following people to find out who that person was:
Roy Truly identified the individual in the photo as Lovelady:
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=111185&relPageId=52
Billy Lovelady identified himself as the individual in the photo:
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=111185&relPageId=53
William Shelley identified the individual in the photo as Lovelady:
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=111185&relPageId=54
Three people who were actually there said that person was Lovelady.
http://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2014/08/07/10851/
Ten Reasons why Lovelady is the CUTOUT figure standing on the STEPS in FRONT of the TSBD and Oswald is Doorman on the TOP Level (the FIRST FLOOR).
Along with Judyth Baker’s pixelation analysis which proves that Doorman’s shirt matches Oswald’s and not Lovelady’s….
1. If the cutout in front was not Lovelady, there would be no need to cut him out.
2. Lovelady testified he was on the steps in front.
3. Frazier testified he was on the top level and Lovelady was in front on the steps.
4. Molina testified that he was on the steps in front.
5. Shelley testified Lovelady was on the steps in front of him.
6. Williams testified he was on the steps in front between two witnesses
7. The face of the cutout in the GIF perfectly matches Lovelady.
8. Oswald told Fritz he was with Bill Shelley out front.
9. The top right of the cutout’s face in Altgens6 perfectly matches Lovelady.
10. If the cutout figure is not Lovelady, then who is it?
Carolyn Arnold, a secretary working for the Texas School Book Depository, provided support for Lee Harvey Oswald’s alibi. She said that he was on the first (i.e. ground) floor of the TSBD at the time of President Kennedy’s assassination. http://22november1963.org.uk/carolyn-arnold-witness-oswald
Charles Givens was not asked where he was at 12:30. Danny Arce said was in front but “on the grass”. The others said they were inside the building on the upper floors. Jack Dougherty’s testimony is suspicious and confusing.
Doorman’s shirt was open in a V to reveal a tee shirt identical to the shirt Oswald was wearing in custody. Lovelady did not wear his shirt open in a V.
Judith Baker’s pixel analysis proves Doorman’s shirt matched Oswald’s shirt, not Lovelady’s. http://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2014/07/27/jfk-judyth-baker-pixel-analysis-of-altgens6-photo-proves-oswald-is-doorman/
http://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2014/08/07/10851/
Frazier confirmed Lovelady was on the steps in 5 interviews from 1963-86
11/22/63 to the DPD
3/1/64 at the WC
2/13/69 at the Garrison/Shaw trial
1978 at HSCA
1986 at the Oswald Mock trial
11/22 Dallas PD (handwritten statement and affidavit)
Standing on the front steps.
3/1/64 Warren Commission
Frazier testified that Lovelady was standing two or three steps below him. http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/frazierb1.htm
Mr. BALL – We have got a picture taken the day of the parade and it shows the President’s car going by.
Now, take a look at that picture. Can you see your picture any place there?
Mr. FRAZIER – No, sir; I don’t, because I was back up in this more or less black area here.
Mr. BALL – I see.
Mr. FRAZIER – Because Billy, like I say, is two or three steps down in front of me.
Mr. BALL – Do you recognize this fellow?
Mr. FRAZIER – That is Billy, that is Billy Lovelady.
Mr. BALL – Billy?
Mr. FRAZIER – Right
Mr. BALL – Let’s take a marker and make an arrow down that way. That mark is Billy Lovelady?
Mr. FRAZIER – Right.
Mr. BALL – That is where you told us you were standing a moment ago.
Mr. FRAZIER – Right.
Mr. BALL – In front of you to the right over to the wall?
Mr. FRAZIER – Yes.
Mr. BALL – Is this a Commission exhibit?
We will make this a Commission Exhibit No. 369.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 369 for identification.)
2/13/69 Clay shaw/Garrison trial http://www.jfk-online.com/fraziershaw.html
MR. ALCOCK:
Q: Can you see the spot where you were situated when the presidential motorcade came by?
A:Yes,sir,I can.
Q: Will you take this symbol and place it at that location where you were standing?
Q: Mr.Frazier, do you recall who you were with during the presidential motorcade?
A: Yes, sir, I can. When I was standing there at the top of the stairs, I was standing there by a heavyset lady who worked up in our office, her name is Sara, I forget her last name, but she was standing right there beside me when we watched the motorcade.
Q: Do you recall anyone else who may have been with you?
A: Right down in front of me at the bottom of the steps my foreman Bill Shelley and Billy Lovelady were standing there.
1978 HSCA interview by Moriarity and Day
Standing right on the steps
1986 Oswald Mock trial
Gerry Spence: “You recall that 23 years later that BNL was standing in front of you…About 4 steps in front of you. Is that correct?”
Frazier: Yes it is..
Of course they would say it was Lovelady. He was there. But so was Oswald.
http://richardcharnin.wordpress.com/2014/07/14/to-believe-oswald-was-not-standing-in-front-of-the-tsbd-you-must-believe-that/
To believe Oswald was not standing in front of the TSBD at 12:30pm, you must believe all of the following…
1- Oswald was either shooting JFK on the 6th floor or somewhere else in the TSBD.
2- Unlike his fellow employees, Oswald had no interest in viewing the motorcade.
3- Oswald lied to Det. Will Fritz when he said he was “out with Bill Shelley in front” at 12:30.
4- Oswald lied even though he had an alibi of being seen on the 2nd floor by TSBD manager Roy Truly and policeman Marrion Baker at 12:31.
5- Fritz’s notes of his Oswald interview were hidden until 1993 due to poor record-keeping.
6- Fritz’s notes were not revealed by the Warren Commission because of administrative oversight.
7- The fact that no one claimed to have seen Oswald in front proves he was not there.
8- The Warren Commission would have allowed testimony that Oswald was in front
9- The goal of the Commission was to determine the facts, not to confirm Oswald as the lone nut.
10- The faces in the Altgens6 photo were accidentally blotted out during photo processing.
11- Judyth Bakers pixelation analysis of Doorman’s shirt compared to that of Lovelady and Oswald is bogus. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1X2eD2Wl3xSmRHTuE02ntfYkb3ES2Kuo8wl3HHzzAlD8/pub
12- Lovelady lied to WC when he said he sat down to eat lunch on the STEPS in FRONT of Shelley.
13- Buelle Frazier lied to the WC when he said Lovelady was standing a few steps BELOW him.
14- The WC asking Lovelady to point a BLACK arrow to himself in the BLACK area of Altgens6 is not suspicious.
15- Doorman “looks like Lovelady” therefore it must be him.
16- Doorman’s shirt matching Oswald’s is just a coincidence.
17- Doorman wearing Oswald’s shirt does not prove he is Oswald.
18- Doorman’s open long-sleeve shirt not matching Lovelady’s short-sleeved striped or closed long-sleeve plaid shirt proves nothing.
19- Oswald cannot be Doorman since it was decided long ago that Lovelady was Doorman.
20- Carolyn Arnold was mistaken in stating that Oswald was on the first floor of the TSBD at 12:25. http://22november1963.org.uk/carolyn-arnold-witness-oswald
21- This GIF is not evidence and should be ignored…
– It is just a coincidence that many who do not believe Oswald was Doorman also believe that the Altgens6 photo was not altered, the Zapruder film was not altered and the photos of Oswald standing in the backyard were not fakes.
“It is just a coincidence that many who do not believe Oswald was Doorman also believe that the Altgens6 photo was not altered, the Zapruder film was not altered and the photos of Oswald standing in the backyard were not fakes.” ~Richard Charnin
No coincidence at all! Except for the last proposition, to do with the backyard photos being fakes. I disagree with all of your points.
There are no proofs whatsoever that Altgens 6 was tampered with. And there is not the slightest chance that the person in the doorway you identify as Oswald is not actually Lovelady.
There is every reason to assert that those like you and the others making this ridiculous argument suffer from Prosopagnosia in one degree or another.
Prosopagnosia is a cognitive disorder of face perception where the ability to recognize faces is impaired, while other aspects of visual processing (e.g., object discrimination) and intellectual functioning (e.g., decision making) remain intact.
See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosopagnosia
Also, your list of 21 points is a rhetorical mélange falling into the category of “not necessarily so” – there could be multiple reasons for the great majority of your assertions. And it is such disingenuous argumentation that gives away your agenda to drag red herrings across the path of genuine investigation, leading to unnecessary time wasting distractions.
\\][//
VB is right- no one would have selected LHO as an assassin and I agree with the esteemed Bill Kelly that LHO did not shoot the president. Why even I who am not an experienced litigator could have poked enough holes in the government’s case to preclude LHO from being indicted much less convicyed. and there was never any admissible evidence linking LHO to the Walker shooting. Bullet was too deformed to conclusively link to rifle. the only way he could have gotten to Walkers was by bus. no witnesses were ever produced who identified LHO on a bus with a rifle (something you would have expected would have caught someone’s attention).
Larry, I didn’t know about the bus witness angle. Good point.
Marina mentioned that Oswald had said the best way to escape a crimescene was by foot, and one can make a case that his bus return from the Walker shooting matched his bus return from the depository after the Kennedy shooting. Marina claimed he buried the rifle near Walker’s house, which would explain why no one recalled him on a bus with a rifle the night Walker was shot. As nearly all evidence linking Oswald with the Walker shooting is from her testimony worth your while to have a refresh read of her interviews.
I suspect ONI is reticent concerning Oswald because Oswald had been borrowed by the CIA. In such a case, ONI may have had responsibility for keeping some sort of tabs on one of the Navy’s own but wouldn’t know the details of Oswald’s work. What ONI would be covering up today would be its clandestine relationship with the CIA, not so much anything ONI knew about Oswald.
Reticent they would be if they assisted in the training of O in Russian to the point of proficiency Marina believed he was from another part of Russia. If you believe her at the time. Excellent analysis Jonathan.
I mean really, where does a High School dropout who joined the Marines at 17 learn fluent Russian on his own time?
Ronnie,
You’re absolutely right. One does not pick up a knowledge of how to speak and read a language as difficult to an outsider as Russian without (a) learning the language from young childhood by being immersed in it, or (b) receiving specialized, intensive, carefully designed training.
I got the latter at the Defense Language Institute during a 47-week course in 1970-71. My daughter got better grounding, in Russian, over 7 years at an elite university in NYC and various language school sessions in Russia. My daughter now teaches Russian language at the elite university.
Needless to say, she agrees with me that the idea LHO simply picked up the knowledge of how of how to speak and write Russian from reading Russian language newspapers is beyond preposterous. No native-born English speaker could learn to speak and write Russian that way. It would be impossible.
This is one major reason I think John Armstrong is on to something. I have to believe he is.
I agree with you, Jonathan — the idea that Oswald picked up “how to speak and write Russian from reading Russian language newspapers is beyond preposterous.” Of course it is.
But that preposterous idea is the invention of conspiracy theorists like Mr. Cinque.
The Warren Report says the opposite:
“When he reached the Soviet Union… he could barely speak the language.” Marina’s remarks in the same paragraph were similar to the comments on the Russian-language site I linked to today: “She stated that “his grammar was sometimes incorrect and that his writing was never good.”
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=946&relPageId=281
Keep reading Mr. Cinque and similar theorists, and you’ll “learn” tons of stuff that’s not true.
Can you speak Vietnamese? While there I really wished that I could but they gave us absolutely no language training. I understand it is a very difficult language.
Reply to:
Bill Clarke
June 27, 2014 at 2:13 am
A little these days. In 1972, I was pretty fluent and could read business and public signs, menus, etc. I was self-taught with the primary help of a tutor. Vietnamese wasn’t the language I studied formally in language school. That was another S.E. Asian language.
Vietnamese is somewhat difficult to speak because it’s a tonal language. Get the tone wrong, you get the meaning wrong. Grammatically it’s pretty straightforward.
By all accounts Oswald spoke very little Russian when he arrived in the Soviet Union in October 1959. He was sent to live and work in Minsk where few people spoke English, and in the beginning he was assigned a Russian tutor. How could there be any better way to learn a foreign language than that?
By the time he met Marina in March 1961 he spoke the language well, though reportedly he sometimes made grammatical errors. Marina thought he might be from a Baltic country (like Latvia, e.g.), where Russian was spoken but not “the native language.”
What were the qualifications of Oswald’s tutor(s)
to teach Russian? Did they speak English?
What was the extent of Oswald’s tutelage in terms of time spent?
How did Oswald’s tutor(s) assess his progress?
One of Oswald’s Russian tutors was Stanislav Shushkevich, who later became an official in Belarus:
https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=34058&relPageId=2
Norman Mailer apparently interviewed Shushkevich for Oswald’s Tale, which is searchable at Amazon, pp. 81-82. (Not sure this link will work):
http://www.amazon.com/Oswalds-Tale-American-Norman-Mailer/dp/0345404378/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1403895703&sr=1-1&keywords=norman+mailer+oswald%27s#reader_0345404378
Last but not least, Shushkevich’s name is in Oswald’s address book along with several other names and the Russian word for “teachers.” (scroll down):
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0046b.htm
The name “Rosa” below the others probably refers to a Minsk Intourist guide who also tutored him in the language:
https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=1202410
With due respect, you didn’t address any of the questions.
Michael,
The links answer some of what you asked. Shushkevich and Rosa spoke English; neither were professional language instructors. Shushkevich wasn’t impressed with Oswald’s progress (p. 82, Mailer)– if you want to read that, search for “Shushkevich” here:
http://www.amazon.com/Oswalds-Tale-American-Norman-Mailer/dp/0345404378/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1403895703&sr=1-1&keywords=norman+mailer+oswald%27s#reader_0345404378
A college Russian major who knew Oswald in Dallas put it this way: “It was this poorly spoken Russian, but he was completely fluent. He understood more than I did and he could express any idea, I believe, that he wanted to in Russian. But it was heavily pronounced and he made all kinds of grammatical errors, and Marina would correct him, and he would get peeved at her for doing this. She would say you are supposed to say like this, and he would wave his hand and say, “Don’t bother me.”
(testimony of Paul Gregory)
I had intended to let this go, but on another thread I see Jean posting about Shushkevich.
On this thread Jean Davison wrote:
Stanislau Shushkevich was an accomplished engineer who went on to become the first post-Soviet leader of Belarus. Shushkevish had no training or experience as a tutor or instructor of the Russian language. His prior experience had consisted of translating technical documents.
In 2013, he told an interviewer for Radio Free Europe:
“My colloquial English was basically
nonexistent. I had been trained to do passive translations. I translated texts from English, and I still do. But I still don’t speak English very well.”
In an interview with the Christian Science Monitor, Shushkevich described Oswald’s Russian when they met as passable:
“He was a simple martinet, and I found nothing in common with him. His Russian at that point was passable. We had about a dozen lessons in all, after that we had no contacts.”
In the RFE interview, Shushkevich said:
“Therefore, it is my absolute conviction that they found a passive, calm, compliant boy, and used him as the guilty one. As for the conclusions of the Warren Commission,
I don’t believe them one bit. I have studied them and I don’t think [the assassination] was the work of my student.”
Incidentally, Norman Mailer’s book on Oswald is often incomplete and/or misleading. It should not be used as if it were a primary source.
At this link Russian speakers commented on the handwritten note Oswald left for Marina. Interesting assessment of his ability to write Russian from unbiased observers, imo.
http://learn-russian.livejournal.com/813634.html
The core issue is whether or not Oswald received Russian language instruction prior to his arrival in the Soviet Union however basic. Jean, are you positing that he was tutored one on one when he arrived in Minsk but that he did not have the fundamentals of the language prior to his stint in the Soviet Union?
With respect, you frequently discount laymens’ assessments so I’m surprised and curious how you think the site you have linked (learn-russian) represents a credible source in the debate over Oswald’s facility with the Russian language. I perused the site and came across very little objective information to develop an informed opinion.
It would be interesting to know what other sources allege that Oswald’s Russian was mediocre at best and that he was not trained by the US military in the language prior to traveling to the USSR.
His military record exists, and it shows that he was not trained by the military.
He asked to be tested, and he was. He made a score that would have been poor had he been trained by the military (although not bad for somebody who was self-trained).
John McAdams, you state “His military record exists, and it shows that he was not trained by the military.” Do you mean not trained by the military in the Russian language? Would you site those records, and can you authenticate them beyond a reasonable doubt? Are they ONI records, CIA records, Marine Corp Records, NSA records, DIA records? Are they complete? Have they been altered?
You and Bill Kelley seem to disagree on this issue. BK states:
“Oswald began learning the Russian language in the USMC and the Warren Commission lawyers apparently had access to a military file that we don’t have because at one meeting a WC lawyer said they were going to find out what Oswald studied at the Monterey Language Institute – now the Defense Language Institute, where those in the military and foreign service are trained before being deployed overseas.”
You then state: “He asked to be tested and he was.”
Could you clarify the circumstances of this incident?
And you state: “He made a score that would have been poor had he been trained by the military (although not bad for somebody who was self-trained).
This caveat attempts to have it both ways. For the record, one on one tutoring is not ‘self-trained,’ so your comment is misleading.’ You also bend the assessment of Oswald’s proficiency in Russian by appealing to US patriotism, i.e. “how could good Americans believe that our language schools graduated such a mediocre student?” It’s a clever and very subtle device.
NSA linguists and those versed in the early days of the DIA I have spoken with tell me that during the Cold War, the US military was throwing the net over any military personnel that had the slightest capacity to learn Russian. If Oswald could learn it in Russia, why couldn’t he have learned it in the U.S. of A under the tutelage of our skilled trainers at our highly respected language institutes? Something does not make sense.
They are in the Warren Commission volumes. Check the Mary Ferrell website.
I’m sure you will claim they have been, given that they are inconvenient for you.
That was at a January, 1964 meeting, which was before the WC got the records. WC counsel mentioned a “report.”
Apparently, somebody confused “tested by Monterey” and studied at Monterey.
Any Marine could ask to be tested. If he passed the test, he might be qualified for an assignment that used the skill.
You yourself admitted:
Then you say:
He could have, but he didn’t.
leslie sharp June 27, 2014 at 6:20 pm
With the low rank of Oswald I seriously doubt the military sent him to language school. Every one I knew that went through language school was an officer. Not saying they don’t accept enlisted men but hardly as low as Oswald I think.
I don’t think you will find the military guilty of teaching Oswald the Russian language.
Bill Clarke, I personally know three individuals, non-officers that went through the training.
“I don’t think you will find the military guilty of teaching Oswald the Russian language.”
That is strange phraseology, Bill. Why would I think the military “guilty” had they trained Oswald in Russian? Would it not have been part of the established program?
leslie sharp June 28, 2014 at 12:16 pm
Yes Leslie, that is why I said I wasn’t saying they didn’t send enlisted men to the language school. But these three troops you know, where they as low ranking as Oswald?
And I used the word “guilty” because it seems to me the cant of the subject here has been to find the rotten person or group that taught Oswald the Russian language. My apology if I was mistaken about this.
Bill, one individual was recruited straight out of high school on the West Coast and sent directly to Monterrey, the other was a Navy enlistee who never sought or achieved any rank other than that, and the other .. let’s just say she ‘enrolled.’
No apologies necessary but it is counterproductive to reduce questions and challenges to the Warren Report as “cants.” We’re here to tease out the facts. I suspect that Oswald was trained in Russian prior to defecting. That does not necessarily prove that the military branch that trained him (Navy, DIA, CIA) was directly involved in the assassination, but it begs the question whether or not they participated in the cover-up in the aftermath by concealing, altering or destroying the records.
John McAdams, rather than detract from the salient issue, would you be willing to remain focused on whether or not Oswald was trained in Russian prior to his defection?
You state: “That was at a January, 1964 meeting, which was before the WC got the records. WC counsel mentioned a “report.. . . ” Apparently, somebody confused “tested by Monterey” and studied at Monterey.”
“Apparently ….?”
Can you expand on that assessment … is there any proof that WC counsel misread ‘tested’ for ‘studied?’ ‘Apparently’ is a perfect choice of qualifier when promoting one’s private analysis; what it suggests to me is you don’t know what actually happened in the meetings relating to Oswald’s Russian proficiency or lack thereof let alone whether or not the US military trained him. I posit that there are no complete minutes from those WC meetings.
Did some within the WC staff prematurely identify Oswald’s records … this was in January and in spite of Dulles’ prompting in December, 1963 that Oswald fit the stereotype of a lone assassin, some well intentioned investigators may have gone digging into Oswald’s past in earnest; a file surfaced to suggest he might have been trained in Russian at Monterrey. That would have been highly inconvenient information for Dulles and those on the commission and behind the scenes. Records get lost, records get destroyed, records get tampered with.
You argue that Oswald asked to be trained but was turned down. Please cite specifically or better yet, please copy and paste the record indicating he was refused language training instead of referring me to MFF.
Reply to:
Bill Clarke
June 28, 2014 at 1:46 am
The student body at Defense Language Institute when I was there was a mixed bag. I was an O-2 in a class with an O-1, W-3, an E-4 and two E-3s. (The W-3, E-4 and one of the E-3s flunked out after six weeks.)
There were a bunch of Navy enlisted guys getting trained in Arabic. An O-6 doing one-on-one six hours a day in Russian. And so on.
Oswald for sure DID NOT ATTEND DLI at Monterey. His service record doesn’t show the necessary “gap” — which would have been, bare bones, 32 weeks and more likely 47 weeks to become conversational in Russian.
The way DLI works (or at least worked) is this: For six hours a day, you go through structured exercises: (1) dialogue recitation; (2) extensive interaction with your native-speaker teacher on the next day’s dialogue, including new words, phrases, and grammar; (3) country and cultural inculcation; (4) listening and repetition exercises with recorded media; (5) free-form interaction with teacher. All in the language you’re learning. Plus two hours at night working on next day’s dialogue.
Oswald could have gone through DLI, I’m guessing; i.e., it appears he had an aptitude for learning various things. But learning to speak a language correctly TAKES TIME.
Jonathan, thanks for expounding on the specifics in this debate. If I read correctly, Oswald’s military records do not indicate a “gap” in his service record sufficient for him to have been in language training. (for the record Monterrey was not DLI until later.)
My question now is, what was Oswald doing during the period defined as the “gap.” Was he in So. California, Alabama? Why hasn’t anyone clarified that he could not possibly have been in Monterrey because he was elsewhere?
Leslie…..John McAdams makes the claim that LHO’s military records don’t show that Oswald went to language school but obviously dodges the burden of proof and then attempts reverse psychology by making it appear you are the culprit and not himself.
@John McAdams….you made the claim that Oswalds military records don’t reflect any language training, but dodged providing any citations, John, the burden of proof is on you not Leslie. I’ll assume you haven’t been in the military, as any Vet would know where training is documented.
In this case McAdams is correct (even if he doesn’t know why). If LHO had language training, it would or should be listed on his military discharge form DD214, along with any other training. Of course there would be other records as well. (Oswald’s DD214 can be found in the JFK DPD Collection @ The Portal to Texas Histoty)
@Bill Clarke…the suggestion that only Officers attended language traing is completely false. After completing aptitude and Psych profiling tests. I was told I was eligible for any career field and given the list to choose from. I chose “Linguist Interrogator Specialist” which required two years at Language school. My grade then was E-1, lowest military grade.
Jonathan June 28, 2014 at 7:15 pm
Thank you. I stand corrected.
Why should I provide citations, when you folks are simply going to say any document you find inconvenient is forged, and any witness you find inconvenient is lying?
But here is Oswald’s Marine Corps record.
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=141424
Now go ahead and insist that it’s faked.
This page from Oswald’s Marine records shows the scores from his Russian test and lists the military schools he attended:
https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?mode=searchResult&absPageId=141514
His Marine Corps records are Folger Exhibit 1, over 100 pages starting here:
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh19/html/WH_Vol19_0337b.htm
Lt. Col. Folger explained parts of this record (including his Russian test scores) here:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/folsom.htm
Thanks for the comments regarding my research, and I think I am just getting a handle on the ONI assassination files after many years of studying them, and I don’t know if that’s Oswald in the doorway in the photos under discussion at the Education Forum, but I don’t believe that LHO was in the Sixth Floor window at the time of the assassination.
As for Gerry Simone’s reference of Bugliosi’s statement that no one would hire Oswald as an assassin, I don’t think that Oswald assassinated anybody, and that he was not the assassin of JFK and that he was set up as a patsy, just as he claimed, so no, nobody hired him to be an assassin.
Nor do I believe Reeves’ conclusion that the conspiracy was concocted by Carlos Marcello, or know why he came to that conclusion, but I do believe that Oswald fits the Covert Operational Profile, and that if was associated with the assassination in any way, then the murder was a covert intelligence operation, as his background suggests.
To narrow the focus as much as possible, Reeves and other San Diego ONI officers know that there were “119 Reports” filed on Oswald’s case at the time of his defection and after the assassination, and they are no longer part of the public record, which means that these files are significant enough to deep six.
When Doug Horne learned of the “119 Reports” from Reeves, he called ONI records officer Terri Pike and requested she search for them, but instead, she was relieved of her duties and brought up on charges of unauthorized travel in search of JFK assassination records, and drummed out of the service.
What’s so important about these “119 Reports” on Oswald that a Navy officer would be brought up on phony charges in order to keep them from the public?
We are just scratching the surface of the ONI records on the assassination.
Bill Kelly
If there is any record of these 119 reports, like the CIA files on JFK they should be part of the public record. Thank you for your post Mr. Kelly. Please keep Scratching.
USMC>ONI>CIA is something I’ve wondered about for years just from reading.
FREETEFILES, all of them.
Bill, great work until you brought up Pike. She got caught padding expense accounts which her lawyer claimed was do to mental illness .She was a psychiatric patient at Walter Reed and that medical testimony kept her from a court martial.
You play into McAdams and Davison’s comments when you bring up these questionable individuals as sources.
I don’t mind playing into McAdams and Davison, as they usually cut to the chase and their objections should be responded to. As I mentioned earlier, Pike’s padding expense accounts and unauthorized travel charges were total BS – and when they wouldn’t hold up in the JAG hearing, they sent her off to be psychically evaluated. She was pulled from the task of locating ONI Assassination records shortly after she located the ONI Defector File and was asked to locate the 119 Reports. She is a hero in my book, and how she was railroaded out of the service should be part of a Congressional investigation into JFK assassination of records.
It’s funny that Lone Nut buffs are always declaring that no one would hire Oswald to be an assassin, or trust him as part of a conspiracy, since if they’re correct and he did it all by himself, he is exactly the sort of person you’d want doing it — he smuggles in a rifle with no one noticing, assembles it under conditions of considerable tension, and manages to do the job with the very little bit of ammo that he had at his disposal. I might point out they say the same thing about Jack Ruby, and the same “judging by the job he did he’s exactly the man for the task” principle applies to him.
If I could select one person to do an initial review of the unreleased JFK files now in the National Archives it would be Bill Kelly. He has a talent for successfully sifting through haystacks to find needles (the AF1 tapes of 11/22/63 for example). Bill’s blogs jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com and jfkcountercoup2.blogspot.com are sources for fresh information.
Sandy K.
Great insight on Having Bill Kelly Sift through the Haystack. He is Brilliant. This particular Thread is an excellent example of Bill and other Curious Researchers breaking down recently Discovered information.that first surfaced in 2009.
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=20354&page=1
The thread goes on for 97 pages and was started in 2013, it deals with some new images of the area of where Oswald Claimed that he was Standing during the time of the assassination, in the Doorway of the Bookstore depositary. The 16mm Film clip shows Officer Bakers running entrance to the book depository steps, and what appears to be Lee H. Oswald standing top step. On page 16 of the thread http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=20354&page=16
is an excellent example of a GiF done by a German woman that stabilizes another film together with the one being analyzed in the thread. It’s an excellent example of just a fraction, of what can be done today with the footage from 1963. If the source images from this 16mm could be located I’m that the person on top of the steps could be identified.
Granted just because Lee H. Oswald was standing in the Doorway watching the Parade, does not mean he he was not involved in the Assassination plot, it means he did not fire a shot from the 6th Floor, and if you still believe Lee H. Oswald fired a shot from the 6th floor, this is America, and minority opinions are welcome, but at some point those who continue to beat the dead horse of DOJ investigator Lee H. Oswald firing a rifle at the President, are going to look like fools. Perhaps the 50th anniversary of the Warren report release would be a good time to lay the rest of the cards on the table, because “Sometimes the cards ain’t worth a dime unless you lay them down”.
Willy
i am about a third through the thread I mentioned, it takes a longtime to read this thread so, I would suggest reading the whole thread. FYI there are likely, I should say very likely, more pictures of Oswald outside the building, taken at the time of the film which was approximately 35-45 seconds after the shots were fired.
“As an issue beyond the Oswald investigation this agent has concluded that Oswald shot the President in accordance with the desire of the Mob boss Carlos Marcello, now deceased.”
It would be very interesting to know what specific information Fred Reeves had access to that make him conclude this.
He also writes:
“As the world knows Oswald tried to kill General Ed. Walker and in addition to killing President Kennedy he killed officer JD Tippit.”
One thing that I’ll agree with Bugliosi’s critique of LHO is that nobody would hire him as a professional assassin.
Even in Waldron’s latest tome, he recites that Marcello said they hired foreigners to do the job.
Until I see some meaty source files, I’d discount what Reeves wrote.
That’s certainly the right approach.
Note the following from the ARRB:
http://jfkcountercoup2.blogspot.com/2014/06/arrb-meeting-report-woni-investigator.html
That’s Doug Horne’s comments concerning the initial meeting with Reeves, who turned over an ONI File on Oswald he obtained via FOIA, apparently the same file provided Paul Hoch in the 1970s, and no 119 Reports are there. And all ONI Investigators in San Diego said they wrote or read 119 Reports on Oswald’s defection as well as post assassination, so we know they exist. John McAdams can discount Reeves, but he can’t discount the existence of the ONI Defector File and the 119 Reports.