Judith Baker's Evidence

[Edward Haslam]

Lack of Evidence in ME AND LEE?I must admit that I am uncomfortable reading a discussion about the lack of evidence in Judyth Vary Baker’s ME AND LEE. I find the term “lack of evidence” suspect in the first place and trace it to another forum which was aggressively against Judyth (and anyone else who challenged their lone-nut dogma). I don’t think we should aid their efforts by adopting their language to frame the issue from their perspective.Having spent approximately one year of my life helping the Trine Day’s editors locate, catalogue, analyze, annotate and present the evidence connected to Judyth’s story, I don’t see a “lack of evidence.” There is plenty. In fact, I recall complaints from Trine Day of their being “overwhelmed” with the amount of documents. Our biggest frustrations was that much of her documentation was accidently lost. She had given it to her son for safe keeping, but a custodian at her son’s university cleaned out his locker over the summer when he was out of the country on a research project. The other problem was that people in the Netherlands who had digitally scanned many of Judyth’s documents deliberately covered up portions to conceal their full contents, thereby making possession of the originals more valuable. Then these same people made off with those documents, so you’ll probably see them being auctioned to the highest bidder one day. In the meantime, we have obscured documents which are still valuable.What is remarkable to me is the copious amount of material that Judyth kept for so many decades. She kept bus tickets, student ID cards, pay stubs (from both Reily and the Royal Castle next door to Carlos Marcello’s office), stationery from her office at Reily, a letter from Guy Banister that she stole from a U.S. Congressman’s office, a personal letter she wrote to Lee, many newspaper articles, laboratory notes, correspondences from that time, even drawings from a 9th grade report showing her interest in Russia, business cards from the VP of Research of the American Cancer Society, newspaper articles with a photo of her with a radiologist who taught at the summer program run by the nation’s leading experts in cancer-causing monkey viruses, and on-and-on. You will see all of these things displayed on the pages, and in the appendix, of ME AND LEE. When you do, ask yourself why someone would have kept all those things all these years? Simply said, she does not lack evidence; she has plenty to support her story.Now about the photo of her and Lee. First of all, I never expected to see one, and if I had, I am think I would have found that suspect in itself, since people having out-of-marriage affairs usually don’t keep photos, since little photos can cause big problems. When you consider that no one has ever produced a single photo of Lee Oswald in or near the TSBD building, then I think the expectation that Judyth should have one of her and Lee is misplaced. She even reported that one day one of Lee’s friends took a Polaroid snapshot of her and Lee together in New Orleans, and Lee tore it up on the spot, which is exactly what I would have done if I was in his shoes. And can you imagine the accusations of forgery that would have greeted Judyth if she had such a photo? But there may have been photos. Army Intel was all over the place in New Orleans at the time, as was the CIA. Both may have had photos of Lee and Judyth, but we will never see them. Perhaps, that is why both destroyed their files, because that would have led an investigation to the cancer project, which would certainly have complicated the “lone nut” agenda.Personally, I am much more interested in 1) the video tape of Anna Lewis recorded by Debra Conway in which Anna reported repeatedly seeing Judyth and Lee together in New Orleans in the summer of 1963, 2) the comments from the closing statements of the Garrison trial in which they mention witnesses who reported seeing Lee with a woman in Jackson, Louisiana, and that they (Garrison’s investigators) had determined that the woman seen with Lee was not Marina, and 3) that Judyth’s last pay stub from Reily was dated August 9, 1963 (the day Lee was arrested in New Orleans), especially since they both started working at Reily on the same day. But the biggest piece of evidence presented in ME AND LEE is Lee’s time cards which were found in the FBI files after ARRB, but which had been withheld from the WC for some reason. They clearly show Judyth’s initial on Lee’s time cards. Lee’s supervisor complained that he could never find him, so why were his time cards approved? Who was approving Lee’s time cards? Is that simple “J” on Lee’s time cards the reason that the FBI did not give them to the WC?In summary, Judyth has a plethora of evidence waiting to be analyzed, and we crammed as much of it as we could into ME AND LEE. There are more details at JudythVaryBaker.com. Personally, the “where’s the photo of them together” argument strikes me as moot. There are more important things to discuss. The question is: What does the evidence that we do have tell us?My Best,Ed HaslamAuthor of DR. MARY'S MONKEYOne of the Editors of ME AND LEE

[tom jeffers]

mike martinez wrote:Why is it that since the Kennedy assassination was such a tragic event, changing America forever, and the killers are so despised (Bush, LBJ, CIA, FBI, DPD, SS, Howard Hunt, 3 tramps, etc.................................)Why is it that so many of the regular posters don't show any ill will, and it seems to me, actually glorify and like the guy who you say actually killed JFK??I find rather funny.mike,jimmy was trained by the us government to do their dirty deeds. if it wasn't for them, jimmy might have had a different light. if i might make an analogy....if you keep a dog penned up and poke it with sticks and make the dog viscious and then turn him loose and he bites somebody, who is more at fault the dog or the owner. that's why we presecute the owners. Then if you take into consideration that jimmy found christ and repented, why shouldn't we forgive his deeds, god has? Then pile on the fact that chuck nicolletti's bullet actually hit jfk a split second before jimmy's shot, then jfk would have died from the previous bullet and jimmy's shot was for nothing. every good debater needs the proper tools to utilize as well as the facts. if you don't read the book, how can you pass judgement on it. you say that you don't want to buy her book and put money in her pocket for her lies, then maybe you should find another subject to debate on. I just finished her book. I enjoyed it except for the fact that it was written like a novel and had a lot of personal thoughts and feelings listed. it made it more credible but more appealing to the woman reader. I have to say that I had a lot of girlfriends in the 70's and I lived with a woman for 2 years and there are no pictures of us together. All I have are my memories.

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

mike martinez wrote:I have not read the book, that would require monitarily contributing to her scam. I have seen several of her interviews on the subject on different documentaries and on the web. I stand by my opinion..BTW, per your own rules for this forum:"The rules are: 1) Register preferably under your real name, first and last. You may also choose a nickname if you provide your true name to me or another administrator. 2) No name calling, obscenity, profanity or insults.Wim Dankbaar"So you gonna ban yourself?Mike Martinez,I don't follow your logic. If you used the word "nutcase" first, why are you using the same word to accuse Wim of breaking one of the forum rules? You insinuate that Wim using the word "nutcase"is breaking the rule about "name calling, obscenity, profanity, or insults," but you used the word first. When you say that Judyth Baker is a nutcase, you're implying that anyone who believes her story is basically a nutcase too, aren't you? So, are you looking for a double-standard here? Anyway, what's the big deal? You called names first when you used the word "nutcase" first. It's kind of silly to cry the blues when someone says it back to you.

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

mike martinez wrote:IMO, I think she is a nutcase to the nth degree just like Beverly Oliver and Gordon Arnold. Trying to insert themselves into history to give their lives some meaning.Mike Martinez,Have you read the book Me & Lee? It seems like you haven't, or you wouldn't just dismiss Judyth Baker like you do.There is plenty of documentation regarding what Judyth Baker is saying. I'll quote from Ed Haslams post on this topic below. Maybe if you give an example of WHY or HOW you came to that conclusion, we might take you seriously. In the absence of any actual reasoning as to how you came to your conclusion, you're just going to look like you're spreading false propaganda or false information. I would hate to think that you're doing that on purpose. Ed Haslam wrote:"Our biggest frustrations was that much of her documentation was accidently lost. She had given it to her son for safe keeping, but a custodian at her son’s university cleaned out his locker over the summer when he was out of the country on a research project. The other problem was that people in the Netherlands who had digitally scanned many of Judyth’s documents deliberately covered up portions to conceal their full contents, thereby making possession of the originals more valuable. Then these same people made off with those documents, so you’ll probably see them being auctioned to the highest bidder one day. In the meantime, we have obscured documents which are still valuable.What is remarkable to me is the copious amount of material that Judyth kept for somany decades. She kept bus tickets, student ID cards, pay stubs (from both Reily and the Royal Castle next door to Carlos Marcello’s office), stationery from her office at Reily, a letter from Guy Banister that she stole from a U.S. Congressman’s office, a personal letter she wrote to Lee, many newspaper articles, laboratory notes, correspondences from that time, even drawings from a 9th grade report showing her interest in Russia, business cards from the VP of Research of the American Cancer Society, newspaper articles with a photo of her with a radiologist who taught at the summer program run by the nation’s leading experts in cancer-causing monkey viruses, and on-and-on. You will see all of these things displayed on the pages, and in the appendix, of ME AND LEE. When you do, ask yourself why someone would have kept all those things all these years? Simply said, she does not lack evidence; she has plenty to support her story.Now about the photo of her and Lee. First of all, I never expected to see one, and if I had, I am think I would have found that suspect in itself, since people having out-of-marriage affairs usually don’t keep photos, since little photos can cause big problems. When you consider that no one has ever produced a single photo of Lee Oswald in or near the TSBD building, then I think the expectation that Judyth should have one of her and Lee is misplaced. She even reported that one day one of Lee’s friends took a Polaroid snapshot of her and Lee together in New Orleans, and Lee tore it up on the spot, which is exactly what I would have done if I was in his shoes. And can you imagine the accusations of forgery that would have greeted Judyth if she had such a photo? But there may have been photos. Army Intel was all over the place in New Orleans at the time, as was the CIA. Both may have had photos of Lee and Judyth, but we will never see them. Perhaps, that is why both destroyed their files, because that would have led an investigation to the cancer project, which would certainly have complicated the “lone nut” agenda.Personally, I am much more interested in 1) the video tape of Anna Lewis recorded by Debra Conway in which Anna reported repeatedly seeing Judyth and Lee together in New Orleans in the summer of 1963, 2) the comments from the closing statements of the Garrison trial in which they mention witnesses who reported seeing Lee with a woman in Jackson, Louisiana, and that they (Garrison’s investigators) had determined that the woman seen with Lee was not Marina, and 3) that Judyth’s last pay stub from Reily was dated August 9, 1963 (the day Lee was arrested in New Orleans), especially since they both started working at Reily on the same day. But the biggest piece of evidence presented in ME AND LEE is Lee’s time cards which were found in the FBI files after ARRB, but which had been withheld from the WC for some reason. They clearly show Judyth’s initial on Lee’s time cards. Lee’s supervisor complained that he could never find him, so why were his time cards approved? Who was approving Lee’s time cards? Is that simple “J” on Lee’s time cards the reason that the FBI did not give them to the WC?In summary, Judyth has a plethora of evidence waiting to be analyzed, and we crammed as much of it as we could into ME AND LEE. There are more details at JudythVaryBaker.com. Personally, the “where’s the photo of them together” argument strikes me as moot. There are more important things to discuss. The question is: What does the evidence that we do have tell us?"

[Bob]

Edward Haslam wrote:Lack of Evidence in ME AND LEE?I must admit that I am uncomfortable reading a discussion about the lack of evidence in Judyth Vary Baker’s ME AND LEE. I find the term “lack of evidence” suspect in the first place and trace it to another forum which was aggressively against Judyth (and anyone else who challenged their lone-nut dogma). I don’t think we should aid their efforts by adopting their language to frame the issue from their perspective.Having spent approximately one year of my life helping the Trine Day’s editors locate, catalogue, analyze, annotate and present the evidence connected to Judyth’s story, I don’t see a “lack of evidence.” There is plenty. In fact, I recall complaints from Trine Day of their being “overwhelmed” with the amount of documents. Our biggest frustrations was that much of her documentation was accidently lost. She had given it to her son for safe keeping, but a custodian at her son’s university cleaned out his locker over the summer when he was out of the country on a research project. The other problem was that people in the Netherlands who had digitally scanned many of Judyth’s documents deliberately covered up portions to conceal their full contents, thereby making possession of the originals more valuable. Then these same people made off with those documents, so you’ll probably see them being auctioned to the highest bidder one day. In the meantime, we have obscured documents which are still valuable.What is remarkable to me is the copious amount of material that Judyth kept for so many decades. She kept bus tickets, student ID cards, pay stubs (from both Reily and the Royal Castle next door to Carlos Marcello’s office), stationery from her office at Reily, a letter from Guy Banister that she stole from a U.S. Congressman’s office, a personal letter she wrote to Lee, many newspaper articles, laboratory notes, correspondences from that time, even drawings from a 9th grade report showing her interest in Russia, business cards from the VP of Research of the American Cancer Society, newspaper articles with a photo of her with a radiologist who taught at the summer program run by the nation’s leading experts in cancer-causing monkey viruses, and on-and-on. You will see all of these things displayed on the pages, and in the appendix, of ME AND LEE. When you do, ask yourself why someone would have kept all those things all these years? Simply said, she does not lack evidence; she has plenty to support her story.Now about the photo of her and Lee. First of all, I never expected to see one, and if I had, I am think I would have found that suspect in itself, since people having out-of-marriage affairs usually don’t keep photos, since little photos can cause big problems. When you consider that no one has ever produced a single photo of Lee Oswald in or near the TSBD building, then I think the expectation that Judyth should have one of her and Lee is misplaced. She even reported that one day one of Lee’s friends took a Polaroid snapshot of her and Lee together in New Orleans, and Lee tore it up on the spot, which is exactly what I would have done if I was in his shoes. And can you imagine the accusations of forgery that would have greeted Judyth if she had such a photo? But there may have been photos. Army Intel was all over the place in New Orleans at the time, as was the CIA. Both may have had photos of Lee and Judyth, but we will never see them. Perhaps, that is why both destroyed their files, because that would have led an investigation to the cancer project, which would certainly have complicated the “lone nut” agenda.Personally, I am much more interested in 1) the video tape of Anna Lewis recorded by Debra Conway in which Anna reported repeatedly seeing Judyth and Lee together in New Orleans in the summer of 1963, 2) the comments from the closing statements of the Garrison trial in which they mention witnesses who reported seeing Lee with a woman in Jackson, Louisiana, and that they (Garrison’s investigators) had determined that the woman seen with Lee was not Marina, and 3) that Judyth’s last pay stub from Reily was dated August 9, 1963 (the day Lee was arrested in New Orleans), especially since they both started working at Reily on the same day. But the biggest piece of evidence presented in ME AND LEE is Lee’s time cards which were found in the FBI files after ARRB, but which had been withheld from the WC for some reason. They clearly show Judyth’s initial on Lee’s time cards. Lee’s supervisor complained that he could never find him, so why were his time cards approved? Who was approving Lee’s time cards? Is that simple “J” on Lee’s time cards the reason that the FBI did not give them to the WC?In summary, Judyth has a plethora of evidence waiting to be analyzed, and we crammed as much of it as we could into ME AND LEE. There are more details at JudythVaryBaker.com. Personally, the “where’s the photo of them together” argument strikes me as moot. There are more important things to discuss. The question is: What does the evidence that we do have tell us?My Best,Ed HaslamAuthor of DR. MARY'S MONKEYOne of the Editors of ME AND LEEThanks Ed. I certainly believe that Judyth has made a strong case, as do the points you mention in your post. But some...like Mike Martinez...who never read the book...will use flawed logic to come to a different conclusion. A lot of people that use disiformation seem to do that. Right Mike?

[ChristophMessner]

Bob wrote:mike martinez wrote:So I've been meaning to ask this since I stumbled onto this sight a couple years ago..Why is it that since the Kennedy assassination was such a tragic event, changing America forever, and the killers are so despised (Bush, LBJ, CIA, FBI, DPD, SS, Howard Hunt, 3 tramps, etc.................................)Why is it that so many of the regular posters don't show any ill will, and it seems to me, actually glorify and like the guy who you say actually killed JFK??I find rather funny.Why? Because James Files confessed and told the truth. Unlike the family that you continue to glorify...the Bu$h family. A family of cowards and traitors. You tell it! That's the difference! Thumbs up!tom jeffers wrote:... Then if you take into consideration that jimmy found christ and repented, why shouldn't we forgive his deeds, god has? ... Yes, that's the question, and even if he wouldn't have found christ, the forgiving is the question. Not prejudice like Mike towards Judyth, but openness for more aspects and a higher fairness. Edward Haslam wrote:... The question is: What does the evidence that we do have tell us? Yes, that's the question, too! And that leads directly to the question, whether the majority in the public, who doesn't want to know the hard truth about how it really was with Oswald, can learn to handle this truth better, if they would be shown real convincing alternatives to present politics and to what's going on behind the facades.

[mike martinez]

Tom,Thanks for the well written response. Although I respectfully disagree, I appreciate it nonetheless.tom jeffers wrote:mike martinez wrote:Why is it that since the Kennedy assassination was such a tragic event, changing America forever, and the killers are so despised (Bush, LBJ, CIA, FBI, DPD, SS, Howard Hunt, 3 tramps, etc.................................)Why is it that so many of the regular posters don't show any ill will, and it seems to me, actually glorify and like the guy who you say actually killed JFK??I find rather funny.mike,jimmy was trained by the us government to do their dirty deeds. if it wasn't for them, jimmy might have had a different light. if i might make an analogy....if you keep a dog penned up and poke it with sticks and make the dog viscious and then turn him loose and he bites somebody, who is more at fault the dog or the owner. that's why we presecute the owners. Then if you take into consideration that jimmy found christ and repented, why shouldn't we forgive his deeds, god has? Then pile on the fact that chuck nicolletti's bullet actually hit jfk a split second before jimmy's shot, then jfk would have died from the previous bullet and jimmy's shot was for nothing. every good debater needs the proper tools to utilize as well as the facts. if you don't read the book, how can you pass judgement on it. you say that you don't want to buy her book and put money in her pocket for her lies, then maybe you should find another subject to debate on. I just finished her book. I enjoyed it except for the fact that it was written like a novel and had a lot of personal thoughts and feelings listed. it made it more credible but more appealing to the woman reader. I have to say that I had a lot of girlfriends in the 70's and I lived with a woman for 2 years and there are no pictures of us together. All I have are my memories.

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

Bob wrote:Thanks Ed. I certainly believe that Judyth has made a strong case, as do the points you mention in your post. But some...like Mike Martinez...who never read the book...will use flawed logic to come to a different conclusion. A lot of people that use disiformation seem to do that. Right Mike?For the record, I have looked at the Judyth Baker information for quite a while now, and I find her to be very credible. I also have exchanged e-mails with her, and she even sent me a very sweet two-paged signed and hand-written note months ago when I pre-ordered her book. I'll have her back anytime, and I told her so too.I find her to be not only credible but also a very, very sweet woman. That being said, I also have to agree with Bob in that I feel that one of the trademarks of people who intentionally want to misinform other people is to MISREPRESENT the information and then attack it. It's a typical straw man argument where the information is misrepresented and then attacked. We've seen this before regarding the James Files information on those other forums where they misrepresented the information about him as well and then used those misrepresentations to attack the story. The name calling is a sort of vague way of misrepresenting the information without actually having to address any of the evidence presented.It was done to me here on this forum, in fact. When I presented information on the topic regarding Israeli involvement in 9/11, Martin Hinrichs basically called me names and did NOT address the information. The implication or insinuation with the name calling was that I MUST be wrong. The fact of the matter is that Martin never addressed the information. He still has not addressed any of my information, but he initially took the time to comment and then call me names. He just called me insane and also said I was talking like a Neo-Nazi. He also said that he suspected that Fetzer made me think the way I think, even though I started that thread well before I had any idea that Fetzer was talking about Israeli involvement in 9/11 as well. LOLSo, for the rest of you, it is our duty to not let them get away with it, especially here. The straw man technique and the name calling (as in calling Judyth Baker names) are very typical disinformation tactics. The facts are on our side, so we just need to keep setting the record straight.

[mike martinez]

As I believe I have stated here before, in my teens to well into my 30's I was absolutely sure there was a conspiracy. I've been to Dealy Plaza several times, read several books on the assassination, probably every documentary made, saw JFK (the movie when it opened) and several times since, yada, yada, yada...Now almost 47 yrs later, I need rock hard evidence. Not one solid, concrete piece of photographic evidence. There were dozens of cameras at Dealy Plaza that day and nothing. How about a receipt dated Nov 22, 1963 from the pancake house? Have anything to prove you were in Dallas that day? A picture in Dealy Plaza, just pretending to be another person in the crowd waiting on the president. A picture with you and XP100.Are there tons of unexplained and unanswered questions? Hell yes!!What bothers me most is the cracked windshield. You have the magic bullet, fatal head shot, one shot that hit the curb and injured Mr Tauge. How the hell did the the windshield get damaged?? I take Deputy Craig at his word.In the recent documentary JFK: The Lost Tapes, there were live media reports that said the following:1. witnesses say a man and woman fired the shots from the underpass on Houston street.2. Shell were found on both the 4th and 5th floors.3. Shots were fired from the 5th floor.4. 6.5 Mauser was found in TSBD5. Oswald was in possession of a shotgun at the Texas Theatre.6. I believe it was Jean Hill that said on live television that there was a black dog in the limosine. She was no more than 20-30 ft from the vehicle!!I personally don’t believe Judyth. I think it has been proven that Beverly Oliver and Gordon Arnold are frauds. How about Ed Hoffman? Either you believe his account of what he saw or you believe James Files. One of them is absolutely lying. The illustration I am trying to make is I just gave three names off the top of my head that inserted themselves into the story, for whatever reason, that have been proven to be liars. Why? Only they can answer that question..Anyone dispute my opinion of Oliver, Arnold, Hoffman v Files account?

[Phil Dragoo]

PasqualeI, too, find both Judyth and Jimmy credible. I shall be getting both their books, in due course, in my queue of books. Right now I'm into Jim Fetzer Murder in Dealey Plaza, a buffet of excellent stuff.Your point is well-taken that in this matter the usual angle of attack is on the Strawman Tangent, that and Argument to the Absurd, Argument to the Authority of Government Investigation, basically Judge Judy's peeing on our leg, telling us it's raining.The tenth part of Jim DiEugenio's review of Bugliosi is a good exercise in countering this arguing to facts not in evidence.http://www.ctka.net/2008/bugliosi_10_review.htmlThere are many excellent works on the subject, e.g., Douglass' Unspeakable, Horne Volumes I-V, Fetzer Murder in Dealey Plaza--Robert Morrow has a great list approaching 200--none of which are at the Confusatory.Len the other night selling some more of those shirts.