Judyth and Jack Ruby
dli...@my-deja.com
credible, but, fwiw, here's additional information that Judyth set forth
when I spoke with her on March 4, 2000.
Judyth told me that she met Jack Ruby (who she repeatedly referred to as
"Sparky", as if she had been in his "inner circle") more than one
occassion.
She also told me she met one or more of his strippers.
She also said something like: "You know, I love to paint (or draw) horses.
And I drew a picture of a horse for Sparky. I wonder if its still
around." (FWIW: My latest check of the National Archives data base does
not indicate that any picture of a horse was found amongst Ruby's
possessions.)
Finally, she told me that one of the psychological turning points in her
dialogue with Martin Shackelford (and presumably, this is also with
Platzman, but she didn't mention him, on this point) occurred when she
told Martin that Ruby (again, who she repeatedly referred to as "Sparky")
had a piece of the tip of one of his finger's missing. (This is called
"Missig Finger Syndrome"; or "Missing Finger Fantasy", if its bogus. But
there is no mention of it in the DSM-IV).
Anyway: Apparently, this is a matter of public record. (Perhaps some
poster can supply where that is stated.) But here's the point: Martin
didn't believe Judyth, saying he'd never of that before, and so they went
round and round on the subject.
Then, voila, Martin "found" (or "discovered") the reference; apparently,
there is evidence that Jack Ruby did have the tip of one of his finger's
missing; and this proved Judyth was right; and, at that point, Martin's
estimation of her then zoomed. (Again, this is what Judyth told me.)
Of course, from what I know, Judyth has read a number of books, and has
visited a number of websites on the JFK assassination. Exactly where she
got the factoid that one of Jack Ruby's finger's has the tip missing (or
bitten off) I do not know. THe point is: she knew it; Martin Shackelford
didn't, and this afforded her a certain psychological leverage with him.
And she fairly glowed with pride when she related this story to me. She
said that Martin told her either it wasn't so, or he had never heard of
that before. Then, it turned out she was right. And when, in the course
of his running debate with Judyth, he found her to be right, why her
credibility increased dramatically.
So what do we learn from this incident? Judyth turned a small piece of
non-essential information---one that most people wouldn't bother trying to
remember--into something to enhance her credibility with Shackelford.
Jack Ruby's finger afforded her that leverage.
In effect, she sent Martin on a scavenger hunt, and he--like a dutiful
golden retriever--"fetched" the incriminating evidence. (Shades of the TV
ad, where the voice says, "Lycos - - - FETCH!!")
What is amazing to me is that Judyth's m.o. is so blatantly transparent.
(It became obvious to me, during our conversation, that Judyth was
possessed of all sorts of factoids, and it became a contest of sorts, when
I spoke with her, to figure out which web site or book each came from.)
One other thing: I don't know where this fits in the puzzle, but on the
subject of Dave Phillips, Judyth told me that Lee specifically told her,
"Phillips. . . don't EVER forget that name." (As in: "American Express. .
. don't leave home without it!")
I have additional insights about Judyth Baker, but I've just expended my
daily ration on that useless subject for today.
To all my fellow Judyth addicts. . . be well.
DSL
FOR THOSE WHO LIKE KEY WORD SEARCHES: Lycos, Fetch, Shackelford, Sparky
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
AnthonyMarsh
She probably got this tidbit from Lattimer's book. I think he was the
first to make a big deal out of it. Supposedly he first thought that Ruby
using his middle finger must be some indication of his firearms expertise.
Then he reviewed the autopsy report and noticed that Ruby was missing the
tip of his index finger so that he could only fire the revolver using his
middle finger. Check out Lattimer's book for the details. I don't know if
I copied those pages.
> didn't, and this afforded her a certain psychological leverage with him.
> And she fairly glowed with pride when she related this story to me. She
> said that Martin told her either it wasn't so, or he had never heard of
> that before. Then, it turned out she was right. And when, in the course
> of his running debate with Judyth, he found her to be right, why her
> credibility increased dramatically.
>
All of these anecdotes indicate to me that the witness has been prepped.
Like those "insiders" who claim to have "inside" knowledge about the
motorcade route being switched or the fact that some SS agent was in on
the conspiracy by removing the "bulletproof" bubble top or cranking the
back seat up all the way. Just their mentioning any "fact" like this
automatically disqualifies them to me.
> So what do we learn from this incident? Judyth turned a small piece of
> non-essential information---one that most people wouldn't bother trying to
> remember--into something to enhance her credibility with Shackelford.
>
> Jack Ruby's finger afforded her that leverage.
>
> In effect, she sent Martin on a scavenger hunt, and he--like a dutiful
> golden retriever--"fetched" the incriminating evidence. (Shades of the TV
> ad, where the voice says, "Lycos - - - FETCH!!")
>
When interviewing any witness in this case, the researcher MUST have a
firm understanding about all the possible aspects of evidence which might
come up so that he'll know right away what is genuine and what is bogus.
When a discrepancy arises that must be pointed out right away.
> What is amazing to me is that Judyth's m.o. is so blatantly transparent.
> (It became obvious to me, during our conversation, that Judyth was
> possessed of all sorts of factoids, and it became a contest of sorts, when
> I spoke with her, to figure out which web site or book each came from.)
>
No offense, but you as the interviewer must be better prepared by knowing
those things before you go into the interview. For example, if some
witness were to tell you that an M-16 was used, you'd have to know whether
the M-16 was in service at the time. Or to make up an example, if a
witness to the supposed windshield switch would tell you that he saw the
limo arriving in a DC-10, you'd have to know that a DC-10 was not even
made yet in 1963. Things like that.
> One other thing: I don't know where this fits in the puzzle, but on the
> subject of Dave Phillips, Judyth told me that Lee specifically told her,
> "Phillips. . . don't EVER forget that name." (As in: "American Express. .
> . don't leave home without it!")
>
> I have additional insights about Judyth Baker, but I've just expended my
> daily ration on that useless subject for today.
>
> To all my fellow Judyth addicts. . . be well.
>
> DSL
>
> FOR THOSE WHO LIKE KEY WORD SEARCHES: Lycos, Fetch, Shackelford, Sparky
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
--
Anthony Marsh
The Puzzle Palace http://www.boston.quik.com/amarsh
mshack
revelation" about Judyth, and once again he screws it up royally.
He has mixed up (intentiionally or unintentionally) some
information about an ex-Ruby stripper. In his version it becomes "one or
more of Ruby's strippers," implying current, and he suggests it is
connected to her enountering Jack Ruby. All wrong.
He mentions a horse drawing, and considers it significant that it
isn't in the Archives--but that means very little. Not even everything
that was still around after Ruby shot Oswald made it into the
Archives. He makes a big deal of Ruby' missing fingertip, which
was nly one of many points on which I challenged Judyth. The nonsense
about it being a "psychological turning point" is totally bogus. All it
proved was that she as right on that single point. Having blown the
matter totally out of proporation, he then tries to use it to draw
conclusions--wrong ones.
Lifton continues to confuse reading Judyth did long after she
wrote down her recollections with what she was familiar with before that
time, in furtherance of his bogus claim that she pieced together her
account from the literature (to cater to our biases, don't you know).
Further evidence that "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing."
Martin
--
Martin Shackelford
"The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those
who have not got it." ---George Bernard Shaw
John McAdams
>As you might imagine, I find the whole Judyth business not particularly
>credible, but, fwiw, here's additional information that Judyth set forth
>when I spoke with her on March 4, 2000.
>
>Judyth told me that she met Jack Ruby (who she repeatedly referred to as
>"Sparky", as if she had been in his "inner circle") more than one
>occassion.
>
>She also told me she met one or more of his strippers.
>
>She also said something like: "You know, I love to paint (or draw) horses.
>And I drew a picture of a horse for Sparky. I wonder if its still
>around." (FWIW: My latest check of the National Archives data base does
>not indicate that any picture of a horse was found amongst Ruby's
>possessions.)
>
>Finally, she told me that one of the psychological turning points in her
>dialogue with Martin Shackelford (and presumably, this is also with
>Platzman, but she didn't mention him, on this point) occurred when she
>told Martin that Ruby (again, who she repeatedly referred to as "Sparky")
>had a piece of the tip of one of his finger's missing. (This is called
>"Missig Finger Syndrome"; or "Missing Finger Fantasy", if its bogus. But
>there is no mention of it in the DSM-IV).
>
>Anyway: Apparently, this is a matter of public record. (Perhaps some
>poster can supply where that is stated.) But here's the point: Martin
>didn't believe Judyth, saying he'd never of that before, and so they went
>round and round on the subject.
>
An e-mail correspondent of mine recognized one possible source of this
information.
<quote on> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
At The Silver Spur, there were many plays Jack had to take away. He
was not a big man -- five-foot-nine, 175 pounds -- but he was brawny
in the arms and shoulders, and fast, and deft at his tactic of the
seized initiative. We found no memory, in the jumbled fight stories
from his "bucket-of-blood" days, of his ever losing the play. He
struck fast. Once, though, having struck, he left his hand too long in
an opponent's face: "Dub" Dickerson chomped down on his finger and
would not let go. By the time Jack shook him off, the flesh was
mangled and one joint of his left finger had to be amputated.
Typically, Jack and Dickerson were friends when they met after this.
<quote off> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
This is from the paperback edition of Gary Wills and Ovid Demaris,
*Jack Ruby* (New York: Da Capo Press, 1994), page 3. *Jack Ruby* was
originally published in 1968.
.John
--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
JLeyden900
>From: dli...@my-deja.com
>Date: Thu, Nov 2, 2000 00:31 EST
>Message-id: <8tqu89$bl1$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>
Did she say when it was she got so chummy with Ol' Sparky because, of course,
she was in New Orleans (doing cancer research with Ferrie) and Ruby was in
Dallas. I can see a window of only 6-7 weeks between Oswald's arrival back in
Dallas and the assassination. And somewhere in these tangled threads Martin
assured us that she wasn't in Dallas at the time of the assassination.
JGL
W. Tracy Parnell
> An e-mail correspondent of mine recognized one possible source of this
> information.>>
Another is page 356 of Case Closed (LSC Edition). Posner's source is FBI
reports on interviews with several Ruby associates.
W. Tracy Parnell
pamela mcelwain-brown
David,
It seems as though you have no alternative but to invest a considerable
amount of time and energy attempting to objectively verify the statements
of this person. Coming from my research on the Weldon "Man from the
Rouge", I can sympathize, in that when even a part of the research
community is hyped about a *new witness* that momentum can have a tendency
to move more quickly than actual facts might warrant.
As I follow these threads, a bit belatedly, I must ask the question --
what difference does it make? If Judyth had continued to maintain her
anonymity, what would we not know about LHO that we do *know* now? It
seems that she provides LHO-Ruby connections, but that has been done by
other less new witnesses, such as Beverly Oliver, so that is not *new*
information. In addition, some of the statements attributed to Judyth
seem to be almost silly; so it is difficult to attach any value to them.
It had been my thinking that once a *witness* had at least a name, a job
description, a voice, and was willing to communicate with the research
community (things the MFTR was unable to do) that vetting such a witness
in terms of their relevance to the assassination would be a relatively
simple thing.
Not so, I am discovering.
Pamela
JFK Assassination Presidential Limousine SS-100-X
http://www.jfk100x.com
James K Olmstead
has to look at his DPD fingerprint card...it clearly shows that JR's index finger
of his left hand is missing the first joint. THIS IS NOT NEWS nor is it key
insight to the life of Jack Ruby and any relationship that individuals claim
to have had with him.
It does not support her story in ANY MANNER......it is just a fact that is
overlooked by many.
For those that question this all they have to do is look on page 210 in the
book In Search of Lee Harvey Oswald by Groden.
As a side note the DPD officer that took the print should have made a
seperate impression of the "second" joint of the index finger of his left
hand and marked it as such.
I'm missing the tips of two of my fingers on my right hand....very few people notice the
missing portions of my fingers. It takes several encounters with
some people before they even notice. I'm surprised that any JFK researcher
would find knowledge of a missing joint of one finger a KEY supporting
element of any story.
jko
<dli...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8tqu89$bl1$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...