Oswald's alibi - yet another look

A few weeks back I got a video call from a facebook friend who had concluded that there must have been an "inside man" in the TSBD. He wanted to know what I thought about that idea. I tried to explain about Roy Truly and this led to a discussion on Oswald's alibi and Truly's role in burying it. Unlike some, I'm not that great at trying to explain this stuff verbally. I need to be able to point to docs and graphs and photos and other fun stuff for clarity and reinforcement of a point - and also to stay on topic and not go off on tangents - or forget where I am at in the narrative!

Anyhow, I gave up, but promised I would do something in writing and send it to him.

That got me thinking about the best way to present it and how to keep it simple and easy to follow.

Around this time, I dscovered Opera Pinboards, so decided to test them with this work.

In the meantine of course, Bart had put his piece out on similar themes. Have been too busy to read it but will remedy that today. 

Hopefully the works compliment each other. I have more to come. A side benefit for me doing this is that it makes it so much easier to put it together for the volumes I have resumed work on. 
https://gregrparker.com/pinboards/

Was going to post this in Bart's thread because of the similarity of themes, but thought better of it. Don't want to distract from Bart's work. The timing I know is terrible, but it was not planned that way.  I could have had this out much sooner, but Pinboards is still in Beta mode and I encountered a lot of issues getting it done.

Those are not bullet points those are missle points!
Fantastic PB's Greg

Well done, Greg.

I will read this later today as I am busy indexing the interrogations papers and one more to tidy up and voila!

And separate threads is no bother to me. The more proper view points the better!


Pay attention Brian!

There used to be a very clear and stablized GIF showing the cop get off the bike and run into the building. Someone took some other footage and combined it with this one to extend it. I think it's the Couch and Darnell films. As the cop was running someone added an arrow to a man standing on the sidewalk and the cop runs right by him. The arrow ID-ed him as being Truly.

So according to this thread, the running cop is not Baker but another cop? And the arrowed man with hat on is not Truly?

I can't for the life of me find this GIF and have looked everywhere for it.

Are you asking about Gerda's combined Couch/Darnell or mine?

There is no GIF or film showing Baker run into the bldg.
Nor even close to going in.

Which thread says that isnt Baker or Truly?

JFK_Case wrote:There used to be a very clear and stablized GIF showing the cop get off the bike and run into the building. Someone took some other footage and combined it with this one to extend it. I think it's the Couch and Darnell films. As the cop was running someone added an arrow to a man standing on the sidewalk and the cop runs right by him. The arrow ID-ed him as being Truly.

So according to this thread, the running cop is not Baker but another cop? And the arrowed man with hat on is not Truly?

I can't for the life of me find this GIF and have looked everywhere for it.

Ed is right. There is no footage of Baker going in. And whilst I am not saying the IDs are not correct here, I am as a rule of thumb, leery of many of the so-called identifications in Dealey Plaza. A lot of it is just imagination and wishing thinking.

greg_parker wrote:

JFK_Case wrote:There used to be a very clear and stablized GIF showing the cop get off the bike and run into the building. Someone took some other footage and combined it with this one to extend it. I think it's the Couch and Darnell films. As the cop was running someone added an arrow to a man standing on the sidewalk and the cop runs right by him. The arrow ID-ed him as being Truly.

So according to this thread, the running cop is not Baker but another cop? And the arrowed man with hat on is not Truly?

I can't for the life of me find this GIF and have looked everywhere for it.

Ed is right. There is no footage of Baker going in. And whilst I am not saying the IDs are not correct here, I am as a rule of thumb, leery of many of the so-called identifications in Dealey Plaza. A lot of it is just imagination and wishing thinking.

Let me add... no footage of him going in for a very good reason. He never went in.

AARC has posted it on their site.

https://aarclibrary.org/the-destruction-of-lee-oswalds-alibi-the-invention-of-the-second-floor-lunchroom-encounter/

Vinny wrote:AARC has posted it on their site.

https://aarclibrary.org/the-destruction-of-lee-oswalds-alibi-the-invention-of-the-second-floor-lunchroom-encounter/

This raises the exposure and credibility level in the minds of many. Congratulations Bart and thank you Vinny.

greg_parker wrote:

greg_parker wrote:

JFK_Case wrote:There used to be a very clear and stablized GIF showing the cop get off the bike and run into the building. Someone took some other footage and combined it with this one to extend it. I think it's the Couch and Darnell films. As the cop was running someone added an arrow to a man standing on the sidewalk and the cop runs right by him. The arrow ID-ed him as being Truly.

So according to this thread, the running cop is not Baker but another cop? And the arrowed man with hat on is not Truly?

I can't for the life of me find this GIF and have looked everywhere for it.

Ed is right. There is no footage of Baker going in. And whilst I am not saying the IDs are not correct here, I am as a rule of thumb, leery of many of the so-called identifications in Dealey Plaza. A lot of it is just imagination and wishing thinking.

Let me add... no footage of him going in for a very good reason. He never went in.

OK, to be clear, I think that footage is of Baker running past Truly and going into the building where he encounters Oswald. Here's a report from Dallas:

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth340577/m1/3/

Everything in this document seems to ring true. Even LHO himself said the cop encountered him on the "back stairs." How could Oswald possibly know that this would somehow make him look innocent or guilty? The reason is because he didn't know how all of this was going to play out and was being honest about his encounter.

Baker said the same thing later in interviews. Also in this report, LHO denied the fake BYP and how they were made. There's even some info there of the early goings of coercing Marina to say the rifle was his, which he denied. He said he didn't own a rifle but a pistol, buying it in FW. He talks about the bus ride and then switching to the cab; his rooming house; the map that they tried to make it sound like something sinister; And so on.

This is not to say that Oswald did the shootings - far from it. There's too much other evidence showing that he was not on the 6th floor shooting Kennedy or murdering Tippit. And he had his one moment to blurt out that he was a patsy, which he was. The footage shows the man in the doorway (most probably Lee). You have the P. Parade notation. In the above, he himself says he was on the first floor, which makes sense, matching up with doorway man footage.

But has been said on this forum numerous times, the best or correct answers are usually the simplest. No fingerprints were found on the throw down gun - Oswald would have needed more time to do all they said he did - perform his fantastic feat of shooting [as Castro himself called it], work his way through the boxes, wipe down the gun meticulously so only a palm print was supposedly found much later, go down the steps, fish cash out of his pocket to buy his soft drink, open it up, take a drink and be encountered.

"Everything in this document seems to ring true."

Ah no....
I am only getting a hint of truth and sprinkle of bullshit from that narration.

Oswald DOES NOT agree with back stairs.
They are trying to put him on the back stairs to comport with Bakers affidavit.
They first had Lee going for a coke with lunch now he's upstairs drinking a coke when Baker sees him.

So what he goes down eats( to be able to have a coke with lunch) then goes outside to watch a parade thats long gone.

Nah.

Ed.Ledoux wrote:"Everything in this document seems to ring true."

Ah no....
I am only getting a hint of truth and sprinkle of bullshit from that narration.

Oswald DOES NOT agree with back stairs.
They are trying to put him on the back stairs to comport with Bakers affidavit.
They first had Lee going for a coke with lunch now he's upstairs drinking a coke when Baker sees him.

So what he goes down eats( to be able to have a coke with lunch) then goes outside to watch a parade thats long gone.

Nah.

"Police forces around the world have  always sought to control the narrative surrounding suspects.  One method of doing this is to keep the suspect away from legal help,  interrogate them for hours on end and if they make no admissions,  put words in their mouth in your report.  This is known in some countries as "verballing". In this case, Captain Fritz and others cooporated after Oswald was killed, to alter his alibi, making it easy to refute."
https://gregrparker.com/pinboards/

Baker never went in. There is no hint of him going in. There are no witnesses to him going in.

We know Oswald's movements from Hosty's notes. He got the coke to have with lunch in the domino room then stepped out to watch the parade. Encountering Baker while buying the coke means Baker was psychic and rushed in BEFORE the assassination.

To believe anything else means, as Ed says, that Oswald bought a coke, ate lunch and then went outside to watch a parade that was long over while standing near Shelley, despite Shelley no longer being there.

There is the water, Mr Case. It is not Kool Aid. The Kool Aid is the story invented for the official narrative. Up to you which you choose to drink.

greg_parker wrote:

Ed.Ledoux wrote:"Everything in this document seems to ring true."

Ah no....
I am only getting a hint of truth and sprinkle of bullshit from that narration.

Oswald DOES NOT agree with back stairs.
They are trying to put him on the back stairs to comport with Bakers affidavit.
They first had Lee going for a coke with lunch now he's upstairs drinking a coke when Baker sees him.

So what he goes down eats( to be able to have a coke with lunch) then goes outside to watch a parade thats long gone.

Nah.

"Police forces around the world have  always sought to control the narrative surrounding suspects.  One method of doing this is to keep the suspect away from legal help,  interrogate them for hours on end and if they make no admissions,  put words in their mouth in your report.  This is known in some countries as "verballing". In this case, Captain Fritz and others cooporated after Oswald was killed, to alter his alibi, making it easy to refute."
https://gregrparker.com/pinboards/

Baker never went in. There is no hint of him going in. There are no witnesses to him going in.

We know Oswald's movements from Hosty's notes. He got the coke to have with lunch in the domino room then stepped out to watch the parade. Encountering Baker while buying the coke means Baker was psychic and rushed in BEFORE the assassination.

To believe anything else means, as Ed says, that Oswald bought a coke, ate lunch and then went outside to watch a parade that was long over while standing near Shelley, despite Shelley no longer being there.

There is the water, Mr Case. It is not Kool Aid. The Kool Aid is the story invented for the official narrative. Up to you which you choose to drink.

There seems to be some cherry-picking going on here. So this statement says everything that we know of the case EXCEPT the Baker thing? I don't think so.

I'd advise you to watch this:

https://www.marktyler.org/mc63.html

This shows just about everyone involved in real time, factoring in of course that it's based on info from 60 years ago. But it does a good job of showing things happening as if you're looking down on 11/22 in real time. The last shot shows up on the running clock around 12:30. You can then watch Baker (17) ride up and dismount. At the very same time, imagine at the very last shot visualize an imaginary Owald in the building pulling the trigger, scooting through the boxes, going to the opposite end of the building, wiping the gun down so nothing is found, scampering down the steps, going into the room, fishing out change from his pocket, buying a Coke, taking a sip, and then Baker runs into him.

If you can believe that to have happened that way, then you're crazy. There's no way all of that could have happened. So the idea of Baker running into Oswald actually proves that he couldn't have been up there doing all they said he was doing.

For some reason though folks on this forum think that Baker needs to be shown he was lying, that the encounter didn't happen, and so on and so forth. I'm not buying it.

And quite frankly, Ed Ledoux thinks everything is faked in this case, which certainly clouds his discussion on this case.

Vivid imagination you'll need to show I think "EVERYTHING IS FAKE", said JFK_CASE (Real person?)
All the running and wiping wont affect Lee not being up there on six.... and your spinning a fake fairy tale in the pretext of calling US crazy is a cloud over you mate.

Cya.
Ed "Everything Is Fake" LeDoux

JFK_Case wrote:For some reason though folks on this forum think that Baker needs to be shown he was lying, that the encounter didn't happen, and so on and so forth. I'm not buying it.

Let's take a glimpse at what Marrion Baker told authorites:
 
Marrion Baker's first affidavit, 11.22.1963:

The elevator was hung several floors up so we used the stairs instead. As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to that man and he turned around and came back toward me.

 
Warren Commission Testimony of Marrion L. Baker, 3.25.1964:
 

As I came out to the second floor there, Mr. Truly was ahead of me, and as I come out I was kind of scanning, you know, the rooms, and I caught a glimpse of this man walking away from this—I happened to see him through this window in this door. I don't know how come I saw him, but I had a glimpse of him coming down there.
...
Now, through this window you can't see too much but I just caught a glimpse of him through this window going away from me and as I ran to this door and opened it, and looked on down in the lunchroom he was on down there about 20 feet so he was moving about as fast as I was.

 
Marrion Baker Voluntary Handwritten Statement to FBI, 9.23.1964:
 

I, Marrion L. Baker, do hereby furnish this voluntary signed statement to Richard J. Burnett who has identified himself to me as a Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
I am employed as an officer with the Dallas police department and was so employed as of November 22, 1963.
On the early afternoon of that day after hearing what sounded like to me to be bullet shots, I entered the Texas School Book Depository Building on the northwest corner of Elm and Houston Streets in downtown Dallas.
I had entered the building in an effort to determine if the shots might have come from this building.
On the second or third floor floor, [line out with initials MLB] where the lunch room is located, I saw a man standing in the lunch room, drinking a coke [line out with initials MLB]. He was alone in the lunch room at this time.
I saw no one else in the vicinity of the lunch room at this time. 

In his WC testimony Baker talked about seeing Oswald on the evening of the assassination while he was giving his affidavit. Why, in that affidavit, does he not mention the second floor lunchroom? Why does he not even mention Oswald by name?
 
Baker is a living breathing walking discrepancy.
 
The second floor encounter didn't happen. And after reading his affidavits/testimony, I believe Marrion Baker, to put it kindly, was not truthful.

StanDane wrote:

JFK_Case wrote:For some reason though folks on this forum think that Baker needs to be shown he was lying, that the encounter didn't happen, and so on and so forth. I'm not buying it.

Let's take a glimpse at what Marrion Baker told authorites:
 
Marrion Baker's first affidavit, 11.22.1963:

The elevator was hung several floors up so we used the stairs instead. As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to that man and he turned around and came back toward me.

 
Warren Commission Testimony of Marrion L. Baker, 3.25.1964:
 

As I came out to the second floor there, Mr. Truly was ahead of me, and as I come out I was kind of scanning, you know, the rooms, and I caught a glimpse of this man walking away from this—I happened to see him through this window in this door. I don't know how come I saw him, but I had a glimpse of him coming down there.
...
Now, through this window you can't see too much but I just caught a glimpse of him through this window going away from me and as I ran to this door and opened it, and looked on down in the lunchroom he was on down there about 20 feet so he was moving about as fast as I was.

 
Marrion Baker Voluntary Handwritten Statement to FBI, 9.23.1964:
 

I, Marrion L. Baker, do hereby furnish this voluntary signed statement to Richard J. Burnett who has identified himself to me as a Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
I am employed as an officer with the Dallas police department and was so employed as of November 22, 1963.
On the early afternoon of that day after hearing what sounded like to me to be bullet shots, I entered the Texas School Book Depository Building on the northwest corner of Elm and Houston Streets in downtown Dallas.
I had entered the building in an effort to determine if the shots might have come from this building.
On the second or third floor floor, [line out with initials MLB] where the lunch room is located, I saw a man standing in the lunch room, drinking a coke [line out with initials MLB]. He was alone in the lunch room at this time.
I saw no one else in the vicinity of the lunch room at this time. 

In his WC testimony Baker talked about seeing Oswald on the evening of the assassination while he was giving his affidavit. Why, in that affidavit, does he not mention the second floor lunchroom? Why does he not even mention Oswald by name?
 
Baker is a living breathing walking discrepancy.
 
The second floor encounter didn't happen. And after reading his affidavits/testimony, I believe Marrion Baker, to put it kindly, was not truthful.

Not making excuses for Baker, Stan, or any witness for that matter. I believe he tried to explain what happened that day and if you look at the correction that was made [third vs second floor] it's interesting that if he had never been in there, they wouldn't have had a reason to correct his statement. In other words, if he'd been told to get the story straight but had never been in there, he'd have gotten it all correct. But he didn't get his "fake" story right because it wasn't fake. As we all know, the break room was on the 2nd floor so I believe they were merely trying to make it accurate.

The Coke strikeout is interesting. However, I think that right there is a good indication that Baker was telling the truth, that Lee was drinking a pop. But they also knew that there was no way in hell he'd have been able to pull everything off then waltz on down to the 2nd floor, fish out his change and buy his Coca Cola.

Still, at least for me, this doesn't change the fact that if Baker was in there and saw him, it works against the official story that Lee was able to do all of this within a very short amount of time.

Ed.Ledoux wrote:Vivid imagination you'll need to show I think "EVERYTHING IS FAKE", said JFK_CASE (Real person?)
All the running and wiping wont affect Lee not being up there on six.... and your spinning a fake fairy tale in the pretext of calling US crazy is a cloud over you mate.

Cya.
Ed "Everything Is Fake" LeDoux

Yes, Ed, you think everything is fake. If you can't remember go back and look at all the xxxx you've said about the Z film not being real and this and that.

Who gives a xxxx who I am? Stop acting like the xxxxxxxx that are so easy to find on the Education Forum and Duncan's site.

But if it'll make you happy, my name is Michael Walton. But see. Did you think by asking above if I'm a real person(???) you thought what...I'm some kind of bot? I mean, what the xxxx? That actually proves my point LOL

Your point? Michael Walton?( Now I remember you)
This and that ... oh okay.
Big list.

It's just that, that and this, turns out to be fake by a preponderance of "all" the evidence.
Not just your evidence but all of it.

No, that is your holy bible that film, right, and I am a blasphemer to question a frame or two. MK
Life just made a mistake or several Mr Ledoux when they cut it and made slides and copies and prints... lots...of errors.
Such an lame excuse,  Havard teach that, because thats a good college try but no logic to it. Besides
Its not like I've been wrong. On any of what I claimed. This or That ya know.
Your posts on EF etc echo my threads like No Shots Fired From TSBD.... yep Im way way off on This n That.

I laugh at your bracketed copies and sneeze on your beyond full flush left frames.
I giggle at your changing depth of field and lack of blurr in 301 to 303 then laugh some more on your density, er I mean the black patch being dense.
Are you going to go cry to Rollie or Tink?
Can they explain the divit in JFKs head or a flap and blob the size of a hand!
FFS are ya blind or just insolent? They wont save you here! Give em a ring.

But hey if you're that boisterous and sure of yourself step up, into my thread, with silly comments about me this and that.

Lets dance.

So you know .. film cant be altered is closed minded and whomever told you this didnt know jack shit or has blown so much smoke up your ass I can legally call you a chimney. No offense to chimneys or the law.

Oh BTW
Seems someone needs to cherry pick.
You can not defend the Zfilm and especially its known aberrations with anything out there,,, so please give me, no us all, a break.
So keep repeating about one piece of evidence that you cant show any chain of custody for. Ouch mate.
So whats with the sanctimony and piety on this anyway?
Shady deals, and bs stories, stories that do not match up, in your world might make no difference. But best look around. Here we think through the evidence not ignore and make bloody excuses with shat for arguements.  
I didnt keep any film hidden away and tell false narratives about it for years and years Mike.
Are you not lapping up the party line bs now like a dog.
RIGHT NOW! YES YOU ARE! MMM PROPAGANDA!

To be crystal
To you PM is not fake.
TSBD shots are fake.
The BYPs are fake
But never ABE'S CASH COW,  IT WAS ONLY LOVINGLY MASSAGED BY THE CIA NEVER ABUSED OR BEATEN UP.... HA!
Thats the Non Sequitur of NS's
Sorry
Better check the story line
Out of sequence frames printed not once oops but twice oh my!
Garbage accounts told about the contents of the film.
All just mistakes and oopsey does it says JFK UNDERSCORE CASE. (aka MW)

Better check the the rules for posting here btw.
Youre close to a TAXI ride and it'd be quite real and ironically so.
Cheers Michael
Ed

JFK_Case wrote:

StanDane wrote:

JFK_Case wrote:For some reason though folks on this forum think that Baker needs to be shown he was lying, that the encounter didn't happen, and so on and so forth. I'm not buying it.

Let's take a glimpse at what Marrion Baker told authorites:
 
Marrion Baker's first affidavit, 11.22.1963:

The elevator was hung several floors up so we used the stairs instead. As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to that man and he turned around and came back toward me.

 
Warren Commission Testimony of Marrion L. Baker, 3.25.1964:
 

As I came out to the second floor there, Mr. Truly was ahead of me, and as I come out I was kind of scanning, you know, the rooms, and I caught a glimpse of this man walking away from this—I happened to see him through this window in this door. I don't know how come I saw him, but I had a glimpse of him coming down there.
...
Now, through this window you can't see too much but I just caught a glimpse of him through this window going away from me and as I ran to this door and opened it, and looked on down in the lunchroom he was on down there about 20 feet so he was moving about as fast as I was.

 
Marrion Baker Voluntary Handwritten Statement to FBI, 9.23.1964:
 

I, Marrion L. Baker, do hereby furnish this voluntary signed statement to Richard J. Burnett who has identified himself to me as a Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.
I am employed as an officer with the Dallas police department and was so employed as of November 22, 1963.
On the early afternoon of that day after hearing what sounded like to me to be bullet shots, I entered the Texas School Book Depository Building on the northwest corner of Elm and Houston Streets in downtown Dallas.
I had entered the building in an effort to determine if the shots might have come from this building.
On the second or third floor floor, [line out with initials MLB] where the lunch room is located, I saw a man standing in the lunch room, drinking a coke [line out with initials MLB]. He was alone in the lunch room at this time.
I saw no one else in the vicinity of the lunch room at this time. 

In his WC testimony Baker talked about seeing Oswald on the evening of the assassination while he was giving his affidavit. Why, in that affidavit, does he not mention the second floor lunchroom? Why does he not even mention Oswald by name?
 
Baker is a living breathing walking discrepancy.
 
The second floor encounter didn't happen. And after reading his affidavits/testimony, I believe Marrion Baker, to put it kindly, was not truthful.

Not making excuses for Baker, Stan, or any witness for that matter. I believe he tried to explain what happened that day and if you look at the correction that was made [third vs second floor] it's interesting that if he had never been in there, they wouldn't have had a reason to correct his statement. In other words, if he'd been told to get the story straight but had never been in there, he'd have gotten it all correct. But he didn't get his "fake" story right because it wasn't fake. As we all know, the break room was on the 2nd floor so I believe they were merely trying to make it accurate.

The Coke strikeout is interesting. However, I think that right there is a good indication that Baker was telling the truth, that Lee was drinking a pop. But they also knew that there was no way in hell he'd have been able to pull everything off then waltz on down to the 2nd floor, fish out his change and buy his Coca Cola.

Still, at least for me, this doesn't change the fact that if Baker was in there and saw him, it works against the official story that Lee was able to do all of this within a very short amount of time.

You don't know the difference between a stairwell and a lunchroom..Congratulations Officer Walton.

JFK_Case wrote:

greg_parker wrote:

Ed.Ledoux wrote:"Everything in this document seems to ring true."

Ah no....
I am only getting a hint of truth and sprinkle of bullshit from that narration.

Oswald DOES NOT agree with back stairs.
They are trying to put him on the back stairs to comport with Bakers affidavit.
They first had Lee going for a coke with lunch now he's upstairs drinking a coke when Baker sees him.

So what he goes down eats( to be able to have a coke with lunch) then goes outside to watch a parade thats long gone.

Nah.

"Police forces around the world have  always sought to control the narrative surrounding suspects.  One method of doing this is to keep the suspect away from legal help,  interrogate them for hours on end and if they make no admissions,  put words in their mouth in your report.  This is known in some countries as "verballing". In this case, Captain Fritz and others cooporated after Oswald was killed, to alter his alibi, making it easy to refute."
https://gregrparker.com/pinboards/

Baker never went in. There is no hint of him going in. There are no witnesses to him going in.

We know Oswald's movements from Hosty's notes. He got the coke to have with lunch in the domino room then stepped out to watch the parade. Encountering Baker while buying the coke means Baker was psychic and rushed in BEFORE the assassination.

To believe anything else means, as Ed says, that Oswald bought a coke, ate lunch and then went outside to watch a parade that was long over while standing near Shelley, despite Shelley no longer being there.

There is the water, Mr Case. It is not Kool Aid. The Kool Aid is the story invented for the official narrative. Up to you which you choose to drink.

There seems to be some cherry-picking going on here. So this statement says everything that we know of the case EXCEPT the Baker thing? I don't think so.

I'd advise you to watch this:

https://www.marktyler.org/mc63.html

This shows just about everyone involved in real time, factoring in of course that it's based on info from 60 years ago. But it does a good job of showing things happening as if you're looking down on 11/22 in real time. The last shot shows up on the running clock around 12:30. You can then watch Baker (17) ride up and dismount. At the very same time, imagine at the very last shot visualize an imaginary Owald in the building pulling the trigger, scooting through the boxes, going to the opposite end of the building, wiping the gun down so nothing is found, scampering down the steps, going into the room, fishing out change from his pocket, buying a Coke, taking a sip, and then Baker runs into him.

If you can believe that to have happened that way, then you're crazy. There's no way all of that could have happened. So the idea of Baker running into Oswald actually proves that he couldn't have been up there doing all they said he was doing.

For some reason though folks on this forum think that Baker needs to be shown he was lying, that the encounter didn't happen, and so on and so forth. I'm not buying it.

And quite frankly, Ed Ledoux thinks everything is faked in this case, which certainly clouds his discussion on this case.

The only cherry-picking going on was by the authorities ignoring ALL of the evidence that went against their fake-ass narrative.

You claim Baker running into Oswald on the 2nd floor, exonerates Oswald because of the "impossibility" of the timing issue? Do I have that right?

If so, they did 10 time trials to prove you wrong. They "proved" it was possible, no matter how unlikely. And that was all they needed. Possible = it does NOT exonerate Oswald. What does exonerate Oswald is that he provably was not on the 6th floor at the time of the shots. This fake-ass Baker encounter was designed to hide Baker's real encounter with someone on the 3rd floor of the Dal-Tex and the real encounter between Oswald, Truly and Lt. Kaminski at the first floor entrance. Or maybe you can think of an innocent reason for Truly never mentioning being at the front doorway helping Kaminski clear people to leave?

Somewhere in this thread, you mention the coke being crossed out in Baker's statement, so let me again set the record straight on that.

"When the suspect finally admits to the crime, you praise him for owning up and press for corroborating details. Then you work together to convert the admission into a full, written confession. If he seems to have trouble remembering the details, you can present multiple-choice questions. Where did you enter the house: the front, the back, through a window? As a finishing touch, you introduce some trivial mistakes into the document, which the suspect will correct and initial. That will show the court that the suspect understood what he was signing."
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/12/09/the-interview-7

The same process could be used for witnesses to test them.

The "mistake" was deliberately inserted by the FBI. It seems the taker of the statement had some doubts about  Baker's story. Wonder why?
 
According to you then, either Oswald went up for a coke after the assassination - which  was absolute bullshit), or he ate his lunch in the second floor lunch-room - which he was not allowed to do. The second floor was sublet to the book companies for THEIR exclusive use - and that included the lunchroom. All confirmed by Roy Lewis. The blue collar workers were allowed in to buy snacks and drinks from the machines and that was it, and most of them did use those machines almost daily including Lee. But they were not welcome to hang around. He took his coke back to the domino room. We know this for a fact from Hosty's note and also because he saw Junior Jarman and Shorty Norman re-enter through the back dock area at approximately 12:25 - something he could see  through the domino room window but not from the second floor - not unless he was wearing his x-ray specs (CIA issue). 

On top of all of this, there are no witnesses to Baker going in. Something I intend to include in part 2 of the series.

But just for you, Michael, here are those witnesses.

STEP WITNESSES

Frazier
Mr. BALL - Did you see anybody after that come into the Building while you were there?
Mr. FRAZIER - You mean somebody other that didn't work there?
Mr. BALL - A police officer.
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I stood there a few minutes, you know, and some people who worked there; you know normally started to go back into the Building because a lot of us didn't eat our lunch, and so we stared back into the Building and it wasn't but just a few minutes that there were a lot of police officers and so forth all over the Building there.
Mr. BALL - Then you went back into the Building, did you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Right.
Mr. BALL - And before you went back into the Building no police officer came up the steps and into the building?
Mr. FRAZIER - Not that I know. They could walk by the way and I was standing there talking to somebody else and didn't see it.

So unless Baker was a ninja able to sneak past without beinng seen (he was shy like that), he never went in according to Frazier. Biut a whole bunch of them did go in togetrher.

Molina
Mr. BALL. Did you see Mr. Truly go into the building?
Mr. MOLINA. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Where were you when you saw him go into the building?
Mr. MOLINA. I was right in the entrance.
Mr. BALL. Did you see a police officer with him?
Mr. MOLINA. I didn't see a police officer. I don't recall seeing a police officer but I did see him go inside.
Mr. BALL. Did you see a white-helmeted police officer any time there in the entrance?
Mr. MOLINA. Well, of course, there might have been one after they secured the building, you know.
Mr. BALL. No, I mean when Truly went in; did you see Truly actually go into the building?
Mr. MOLINA. I saw him go in.
Mr. BALL. Where were you standing?
Mr. MOLINA. Right at the front door; right at the front door.
Mr. BALL. Outside the front door?
Mr. MOLINA. Yes, outside the front door I was standing; the door was right behind me.
Mr. BALL. Were you standing on the steps?
Mr. MOLINA. Yes, on the uppermost step.
Mr. BALL. You actually saw Truly go
Mr. MOLINA. Yeah.
Mr. BALL. You were still standing there?
Mr. MOLINA. Yes.

Molina was standing right outside the front entrance and saw Truuly go in. In no time did he see a helmeted cop go in. The repeated questions from Ball show it was slowly dawning on him that the Truly/Baker was bulklshit.

THE FIRST FLOOR WITNESSES

Piper
Piper wwatched the parade from a first floor window then raced down to join Troy West at the sound of the shots. In his first appearance before the WC, he said he saw Truly with either a cop of FBI man - he wasn't sure which. Unsatisfied with that, the recalled him and this time got him to say it was a cop, although he refused to say he saw any helmet on the cop.

From his second appearance

Mr. BALL. And the first people that you saw on the floor after the shooting was who?
Mr. PIPER. Mr. Truly and some fellow---I really don't know who it was; like I say, it was some fellow that was with Mr. Truly.
Mr. BALL. Some fellow; how was he dressed?
Mr. PIPER. Oh, I don't know.
Mr. BALL. Was he an officer?
Mr. PIPER. Yes; I believe he was an officer.
Mr. BALL. A police officer?
Mr. PIPER. Yes; a police officer.
Mr. BALL. Did he have a white helmet on?
Mr. PIPER. No; I don't think so. I didn't pay any attention to it. I was already excited over the shooting or something when he came running into the building.
Mr. BALL. And what did Truly and this--some fellow do?
Mr. PIPER. Well, Mr. Truly and this fellow run up the steps. He just hollered for the elevator and I said, "I don't know where it is at," and I'm still standing over there by that table and he ran up on up the steps with this police officer--him and another fellow and I was standing there and the people began swarming out and around--different ones coming in, but it was where nobody could come out.
Mr. BALL. They were the first ones to go up the steps?
Mr. PIPER. That's right.
Mr. BALL. Had anybody come down the steps before they went up the steps?
Mr. PIPER. No, sir.

Okay so initially (first appearance before WC) he said cop or FBI - that means the person had to be in civliian clothes. After his first appearance, he was obviously advised that this was definitely a cop.

So what cop was dressed in civilian clothes who is definitely known to have gone upstairs with Truly? Chief Lumpin went up with Truly to report Oswald missing. Not in all the questionin that no timing of seeing Truly and this officer going up is mentioned. That was deliberately omitted because if the timing of it had come up, it would rule Baker out. Even though the lack of a uniform for Truly's companion already does that.

West

Mr. BELIN - At any time while you were making coffee or eating your lunch, did you see anyone else on the first floor?
Mr. WEST - No, sir; I didn't see.
Mr. BELIN - Who was the first person you saw on the first floor after you - while you were eating your lunch? Someone came in the building?
Mr. WEST - Yes; before I got through. The officers and things were coming in the front door.
Mr. BELIN - Who was the first person or persons that you saw coming through there while you were eating your lunch?
Mr. WEST - Well, that was the police.
Mr. BELIN - A police officer?
Mr. WEST - Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN - Anyone else?
Mr. WEST - I guess it was a bunch of them, I guess, FBI men, and just a crowed of them coming in there.
Mr. BELIN - Did you see Roy Truly coming in at all that time? Do you know Mr. Truly?
Mr. WEST - Yes, sir; that is the boss, the superintendent.
Mr. BELIN - Did you see him, do you remember, while you were eating your lunch, come in the building?
Mr. WEST - Yes, sir; I think he came in with the police.
Mr. BELIN - Was he one of the first people in, or did other people come in ahead of him, if you remember?
Mr. WEST - Really, I just don't know.

West said he only saw Truly with a whole nunch of police.

If you want to invoke Garmer claiming she saw Truly and Baker going up, go ahead. My response is that she never said it was Baker specifically - never said he was wearing ahelmet or any particular type of uniform - and also never said how long after Adams and Styles had gone down that this sighting occured. I put it to you that she saw the same as Eddie Piper. She saw Truly going up with Lumpkin.

The film that he falsely recall showing Baking going inside the building, actually shows him going in a trajectory toward the Dal-Tex. What is interesting about that is that some thought the TSBD was still in that building - and there had been disturbances there on the 3rd floor with two arrests of people as a result. This is the same floor as mentions in his inital affidavit.  I believe he went over there to specifically check that floor to see if there were any more strangers hanging around in there. 

Note that Baker says he was met by someone introducing themselves as the "building manager". Note that Truly only ever seemed to describe himself as the "superindant". Indeed, that was how Oswald also described him, as did all trhe other workers. 

Baker never ran into 411 Elm. He ran into 501 Elm. 

You can maintain a different view if you want, just as Ed is entitled to a dissenting view on the z-film. but be careful that you have your facts straight before accusing anyone of cherry-picking. I have taken EVERY bit of evidence there is in to account - unlike the official version which CHERRY-PICKED BIG TIME. The Baker-Truly story is bullshit.

Aloha a quick reminder.
This Forum is dedicated to reopening the case. Thinking out of the box is necessary.
Stale arguments and circular reasoning are a fast track to another forum.


Yes Baker tried and tried and tried some more to explain away his morphing statements and ebbing affidavits.
Poor excuse to say he tries to tell them, but they just didnt listen. Woe is Mama's boy.

Marrions Fbi statement of Sept 23 1964 has
no stairs.
No Truly.
No door or doorway.
No window in a door.
No walking back
Baker has Lee on the second or third floor "standing" there drinking a coke.
Of course Marrion corrects this;
To: Lee standing on the second floor.
No coke no more
No one else around.
Just Lee and Baker standing there..... its a damn good thing Truly came along and broke up the party.
Who knows how long they'd be frozen in time, silently staring at each other.
Yep totally real!!!

No frisking either, nah ...Baker just wanted to study the color of Lee's shirt or jacket but then be imprecise later.

Was it solid color lt. tan, or brown,, dark tan, woven or print whatev what difference I guess.. So he called him over, with or without walking, and there they are in the lunchroom door .....and time stopped? Baker stares at Lee (and still cant get the shirts color straight.)
No searching Lee for ID or asking who he is. Nope according to at least one version Baker and Lee were waiting for Truly to come okay Lee.
Hmmm same job Truly perfoms downstairs at the front entrance but never mentioned it.

Anyway,

Truly was surprised to hear Marrions testimony about the window/door and Baker getting a glimpse through it. Very surprised.

Truly dissavows it and says what Baker claimed is not his own statement!
Seems Truly called BS on Baker right on the stand.

You mean in all the talking and descriptions of what Baker Truly were telling Ochus Campbell, and the reporters downstairs in the Alyea film clip, Baker never says how he noticed Lee to Truly or Ochus?

Thats amazing! or consistent with not knowing himself yet. Nat Pinkston to the rescue!

It appears Truly saw Baker run past him to the corner and Ochus runs to Elm Ext. and goes back inside where he see's Lee in the little storage room near the entrance.

Itd be difficult for Cambell to be saying this to the reporters as he is listening to Baker and Truly if it hadnt happened yet.

Perhaps Baker on his way back to his bike spots Truly and Brennan.
Hears Brennan tell his fantasy .
Baker decides to make a sweep of the building but gets talking to Ochus and Roy on the first floor by then Baker isnt needed and leaves.

Mr. BAKER -
As I entered this lobby there were people going in as I entered. And I asked, I just spoke out and asked where the stairs or elevator was, and this man, Mr. Truly, spoke up and says, it seems to me like he says, "I am a building manager. Follow me, officer, and I will show you."


I never got an answer to how Baker can enter a lobby with an elevator to his right and a staircase to his left and needs to ask how to get upstairs?
Its ridiculous.
I dont want to hear But Ed The Stairs only go to Second floor and elevator only to Fourth floor. We know that.
Baker should have had no hesitation and took the stairs not knowing they terminate so quickly.
What did Baker expect to find in the lobby of a tall building ... a rope ladder?

I've not heard any of the TSBD ladies or salesmen ever mention such an question by a cop in the lobby that day... Truly handled this by saying 'They Saw No One There.' ....so Baker Lied about asking or Truly lies about lobby occupants.
Or both are up to their ears!

Truly's psychic intuition told him what Marrion Baker wanted, ...no not Malibu Chicken (pigeon) for lunch. Roof was Trulys shining moment.

Trulys hunches and intuition didnt extend to the cop 7 or 8 feet from him as seen in Frame from Wiegman (See far right side)
Truly even hears this nearby officer proclaim "OH GOD DAMN"
But Truly went on about his business.
If its officer Joe Marshall Smith. He went by Truly hunting around bushes with his pistol drawn, alone... no psychic friends there!!

Baker stops Lee in a lunchroom... does not see or notice anyone in the office through an open door right next to the lunchroom entrance.
Truly doesnt either. And Hine doesnt notice Baker Truly. Hine says she did not see Lee at all 11/22.
She is alone feet from a Jack Booted Cop telling Lee to come over here and Roy rushing in to give the okay... Hine sees and hears nothing during the lunchroom encounter.. AMAZING! No. It means Roy and Baker were not accosting Lee with or without sodas.
Baker and Truly were charlatans.






Appreciate all the strong verbiage.... but.
Can we get this Alibi thread back on track .
Mahalo
Ed

Quick Question:

So Marrion enters the bldg to determine if shots had been fired from there.... Truly is saying no.

So whom else did Marrion ask?

Did he lobby the lobby?

Did Baker ask Lee if he knew??? NAH!

Did Baker ask the negros/white folk near the elevators??? NO!

I have to question HOW was Baker going about his investigation without any witnesses to aide him.
Baker was shoving pistols in peoples stomachs so I can't blame the employees for not being more helpful. 
But what exactly was Mamas Kin up to.


Marrion Baker can ask for the stairs but damn it if he asks for accepts any other help (other than pigeon based) and NEVER never ask where shots came from.

Lee's alibi = the cops are morons.