Exonerating Lee!

[Dixie M Dea]

How does one attempt to exonerate LHO? Do they do so, by claiming what a
good shot he actually was, and not just once, but several times, within
one book? Do they practically put a gun in his hand, so to speak? If
indeed he was a good shot, then such claims of exoneration would tend to
not be so meaningful. Although, of course, being a good shot would not
automatically make him guilty of anything. However it does throw an area
of suspicion around him as being capable of shooting JFK. Judyth claims
he also had and kept his own weapons stashed at Bannister's building,

I have personally never believed LHO was any better then a low scoring
sharpshooter and not actually capable of shooting JFK. Was there any
need to pretend to be a poor shot when in the Marines? I wouldn't think
so, but actually just a question! Whatever one believes about LHO's
shooting ability, this does not seem to be exonerating him as claimed. I
do want to add that this is only my own opinion though.

The following are a few examples:
__________________________________
Lee Harvey Oswald
by Judyth Vary Baker

Volume 1

(1) Chapter 7 Page 97

<Quote>

"We first went to the shooting gallery in that huge amusement park, as
both of us liked to shoot, but found it was closed. However, for a small
bribe, the proprietor opened the gallery for us. After carefully looking
over the rifles available. Lee chose one and started firing without
hesitation. At first, I thought he was going to lose too much money, but
after a few poor shots. he then missed nothing, mightily impressing me."

(2) Chapter 10 Page 145

"I glanced a Lee, who smiled at me. I remembered that this young man,
when merely a teenager, had penetrated the Iron Curtain, and then had
returned to this country to roam it freely and unharmed by either side.
He was moreover, an excellent shot with a rifle. One look at him, with
his calm manner and self-confidence, gave me the assurance I needed."

(3) Chapter 11 Page 154

"Lee said he had deliberately shot himself in the arm when he was in the
Marines. He had been ordered to make his rather precipitous decline
toward seeming hatred for the United States look as genuine as possible.
It began with a bullet he directed into his own arm with a forbidden
firearm."

"I told him that wasn't very clever of him. Lee said that was the point
He was actually a good shot, but had to pretend he wasn't when he went
to the rifle range for tests--another concession to the legend he was
creating for himself."

(4) Chapter 13 Page 197

"Lake Pontchartrian was beautiful, with seagulls flying through the
misty blue sky over fishing boats bobbing upon vast miles of
silver-studded waves. We walked some distance before Lee spotted some
ducks. The mallards were paired off for spring nesting and madly in
love. Lee announced that he would bring in a duck for Susie Hanover. He
shushed me, knelt down, prepared his revolver, and put a cotton wad in
his right ear. He took aim with the revolver while still on one knee,
I put my hand on his head and begged for mercy for the ducks. Lee
laughed and told me to watch. He took aim at a drake's tail--it was over
a hundred feet. The bullet went zooming through the duck's tail
feathers. The duck scrambled into the air in confusion, a couple of
feathers flying loose. All the ducks at once took flight, but not before
Lee hit the tail of another mallard, bringing another feather falling
slowly to the ground."

"Lee checked his revolver, putting bullets into empty chambers. He said
he wasn't really going to shoot drakes and maiden ducks that were
pairing off and obviously in love."

(5) Chapter 10 Page 198

"Lee said it was time for more target practice and again shot through
the tail of a seagull. Though they wheeled away in fright, the
breadcrumbs brought them back again, and Lee shot again, for the fourth
time nicking off a tail feather. He shot a few more the same way. I
thought this so unusual that I remembered it all these years."

(6) Volume Two

Footnote 360 Page 668

"It seems every opportunity to demean Lee's mechanical ability was
employed. Lee did pretend mechanical stupidity while in the Soviet
Union, just as he pretended he was an impossibly poor shot with a rifle.
Neither was true."

<Unquote>

__________
Dixie

[curtj...@webtv.net]

Dixie M Dea wrote:
> How does one attempt to exonerate LHO? Do they do so, by claiming what a
> good shot he actually was, and not just once, but several times, within
> one book? Do they practically put a gun in his hand, so to speak? If
> indeed he was a good shot, then such claims of exoneration would tend to
> not be so meaningful. Although, of course, being a good shot would not
> automatically make him guilty of anything. However it does throw an area
> of suspicion around him as being capable of shooting JFK. Judyth claims
> he also had and kept his own weapons stashed at Bannister's building,
>
> I have personally never believed LHO was any better then a low scoring
> sharpshooter and not actually capable of shooting JFK. Was there any
> need to pretend to be a poor shot when in the Marines? I wouldn't think
> so, but actually just a question! Whatever one believes about LHO's
> shooting ability, this does not seem to be exonerating him as claimed. I
> do want to add that this is only my own opinion though.
>

Here is another example as IMO was part of the set up of the TSBD LHO.
While he was supposed to be at Irving on Nov. 9th, the was at the Sport's
Drome Shooting Range, and was impressive as well as flaunting his persona.
He would shoot against their policy of rapid fire, and hit targets with a
grace that would attract the clientele there. Of course he had a
magnificent scope on his rifle from the Orient. Two days earlier he goes
to a gun shop and furniure store with Marina and kids, and has work done
on a rifle that was a little too early in arrival to be the TSBD rifle
obtained after the murder. That work was to have a scope mounted. The
one sent from Klein's already came with a scope mounted. Of course on a
Thursday, he was at work because of his perfect attendance record. I bet
Judyth was with this 'LHO', the 'sharpshooter'. Marina denied the whole
furniture store experience, even though the two witnesses from the same
boro, were adamant it was her, and saw 'LHO' drive off from the premises.

CJ

[Dave Reitzes]

Dixie M Dea wrote:
> How does one attempt to exonerate LHO? Do they do so, by claiming what a
> good shot he actually was, and not just once, but several times, within
> one book? Do they practically put a gun in his hand, so to speak? If
> indeed he was a good shot, then such claims of exoneration would tend to
> not be so meaningful. Although, of course, being a good shot would not
> automatically make him guilty of anything. However it does throw an area
> of suspicion around him as being capable of shooting JFK. Judyth claims
> he also had and kept his own weapons stashed at Bannister's building,
>
> I have personally never believed LHO was any better then a low scoring
> sharpshooter and not actually capable of shooting JFK. Was there any
> need to pretend to be a poor shot when in the Marines? I wouldn't think
> so, but actually just a question! Whatever one believes about LHO's
> shooting ability, this does not seem to be exonerating him as claimed. I
> do want to add that this is only my own opinion though.

I don't mean to shift the subject away from Judyth, but Oswald was
actually an excellent shot in the Marines. Page 293 of John Lattimer's
KENNEDY AND LINCOLN reproduces two pages from Oswald's official Marine
Corps rifle score book. Lattimer notes that on one day Oswald
successfully struck a target 49 times out of 50 "at rapid fire from a
sitting position at 200 yards (more than twice the distance at Dallas)
and did it with no telescopic sight." Two days later Oswald scored 48
out of 50 on the same target.

If Oswald's fellow Marines considered him a poor shot (as Nelson
Delgado testified to the WC), I'd offer the suggestion that this may
have been some time before he developed the skills demonstrated in his
score book.

Judyth's portrayal of Oswald in the book strikes me as being nothing
short of saintly. Apparently, she has a hard time attributing any
faults whatsoever to him (although she concedes he beat his wife -- but
expresses admiration for his honesty in supposedly confessing this to
Judyth).

Dave

[David VP]

>>> "If Oswald's fellow Marines considered him a poor shot (as Nelson
Delgado testified to the WC), I'd offer the suggestion that this may have
been some time before he developed the skills demonstrated in his score
book." <<<

Actually, Delgado suggested just the opposite when he was on the witness
stand in 1986 as he answered the questions of lawyer Vincent Bugliosi.
That is to say, it was at the tail-end of LHO's Marine duty when he was
supposedly doing poorly on the rifle range (per Delgado's testimony).

It was also Delgado's impression that Oswald just wasn't trying to
accomplish good scores on the rifle range at certain times during Lee's
Marine training. Delgado said he felt that Oswald could have done better
if he had tried to do so.

Here's the verbatim Q&A session from the November 1986 TV Docu-Trial, "On
Trial: Lee Harvey Oswald":

BUGLIOSI -- "Mr. Delgado, I believe you testified before the Warren
Commission, that on the rifle range Oswald was kind of a joke, a pretty
big joke."

DELGADO -- "Yes, he was."

BUGLIOSI -- "You're aware that at the time Oswald was doing poorly on the
range, he was about to be released from the Marines, is that correct?"

DELGADO -- "Yes, he was."

BUGLIOSI -- "Are you aware that in 1956, when Oswald first joined the
Marines, and was going through Basic Training, he fired a 212 on the rifle
range with an M-1 rifle, which made him a 'sharpshooter' at that time --
are you aware of that?"

DELGADO -- "Yes."

BUGLIOSI -- "Given the fact that Oswald was about to get out of the
Marines when he was in your unit, and the fact that he showed no interest
in firing on the range -- you don't attribute his poor showing on the
range to his being a poor shot?"

DELGADO -- "No."

BUGLIOSI -- "He could have done better, you felt, if he tried?"

DELGADO -- "Certainly."

[Dr. Chad Zimmerman]

According to J, he could shoot birds out of the air without a shotgun....

Some shot.

Chad

"Dave Reitzes" <drei...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1156283525.8...@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...

[Dave Reitzes]

Thanks, David.

Er, does this mean you and I aren't the same person?

Dave \:^)

[Dixie M Dea]

Dave R. said.....

Re...."Judyth's portrayal of Oswald in the book strikes me as being

nothing short of saintly. Apparently, she has a hard time attributing
any faults whatsoever to him (although she concedes he beat his wife --
but expresses admiration for his honesty in supposedly confessing this
to Judyth)."

Dave

Dave...

Yes, that does seem to be true. Not only that, they coincidently had ALL
the very same interests from Day One. Wasn't it on the very second day
after they met at the Post Office, that he confessed beating his wife?
Wasn't it also on the very second day, he took her on a Mafia errand run
and told her all about his Uncle Dutz's Mafia connections. All this from
a quiet, very secretive type guy?

____________
Dixie

[tomnln]

I Prefer Official Records;

Oswald was a Lousy rifle shot...VIII 236-233.
Oswald was a Lousy shot withna "Shotgun" V-405

and so it goes

"Dr. Chad Zimmerman" <doc...@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:44eb...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...

[aeff...@hotmail.com]

Dave Reitzes wrote:
> Dixie M Dea wrote:
> > How does one attempt to exonerate LHO? Do they do so, by claiming what a
> > good shot he actually was, and not just once, but several times, within
> > one book? Do they practically put a gun in his hand, so to speak? If
> > indeed he was a good shot, then such claims of exoneration would tend to
> > not be so meaningful. Although, of course, being a good shot would not
> > automatically make him guilty of anything. However it does throw an area
> > of suspicion around him as being capable of shooting JFK. Judyth claims
> > he also had and kept his own weapons stashed at Bannister's building,
> >
> > I have personally never believed LHO was any better then a low scoring
> > sharpshooter and not actually capable of shooting JFK. Was there any
> > need to pretend to be a poor shot when in the Marines? I wouldn't think
> > so, but actually just a question! Whatever one believes about LHO's
> > shooting ability, this does not seem to be exonerating him as claimed. I
> > do want to add that this is only my own opinion though.
>
>
> I don't mean to shift the subject away from Judyth, but Oswald was
> actually an excellent shot in the Marines. Page 293 of John Lattimer's
> KENNEDY AND LINCOLN reproduces two pages from Oswald's official Marine
> Corps rifle score book. Lattimer notes that on one day Oswald
> successfully struck a target 49 times out of 50 "at rapid fire from a
> sitting position at 200 yards (more than twice the distance at Dallas)
> and did it with no telescopic sight." Two days later Oswald scored 48
> out of 50 on the same target.

Dave, you need a little education concerning military rifle range
specification and qualification minimum's STOP by alt.conspiracy.jfk...
Believe it or not there are *real life* Marines and ARMY infantrymen
there. You know, those that can speak with authority, NOT
speculation...

[aeff...@hotmail.com]

Doctah of Osteopathy, right?
David Healy

[David VP]

>>> "Er, does this mean you and I aren't the same person?" <<<

LOL.

I hope not! I enjoy being you!

I've heard that allegation multiple times in the past. Some CTer have
even thought I was actually Vince Bugliosi himself, which (come to
think of it) is probably the biggest compliment I have ever received in
my 40-some years on the planet. :)

A little light LN reading to pass some time:

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/1f24471a989efd43

[Peter Fokes]

On 23 Aug 2006 21:32:33 -0400, "David VP" <davev...@aol.com> wrote:

>>>> "Er, does this mean you and I aren't the same person?" <<<
>
>LOL.
>
>I hope not! I enjoy being you!
>
>I've heard that allegation multiple times in the past. Some CTer have
>even thought I was actually Vince Bugliosi himself, which (come to
>think of it) is probably the biggest compliment I have ever received in
>my 40-some years on the planet. :)

Damn. I thought you were Dick Van Dyke. No one else could possibly
know as much about that rifle episode!

hehe

PF

[David VP]

>>> "Damn. I thought you were Dick Van Dyke. No one else could possibly
know as much about that rifle episode!" <<<

LOL!

Thank you. You obviously refer to the "Cat Burglar" episode, which has Rob
(Dick) prowling around the house with a .22 rifle in search of a burglar.

I don't know a THING about ".22s" however. I only know about the wild
illogic that exists in that particular sitcom episode. :)

As JFK researcher Wallace Milam once said in a JFK TV documentary, it's
kind of sad (in a way) to know more about something that happened decades
earlier than about stuff that happened in the world just yesterday. (That
could include a segue from "The Dick Van Dyke Show" to "The JFK Case",
which both occurred at about the same time...the early '60s.)

But always remember this, kids --- If you're scared of a neighborhood
burglar breaking into your house, it MIGHT be a good idea to actually put
some glass in your bedroom windows. That will make it slightly harder for
any intruder to enter your dwelling. For some reason, Rob & Laura's
bedroom window contains no glass at all. Go figure. :)

www.amazon.com/gp/product/customer-reviews/B000H1CV9K/ref=cm_cr_dp_pt/002-3607414-3987209?ie=UTF8&n=130&s=dvd

[Anthony Marsh]

No, there are bullshitters there who try to bluff people and impress
their drinking buddies.

[Dave Reitzes]

David VP wrote:
> >>> "Er, does this mean you and I aren't the same person?" <<<
>
> LOL.
>
> I hope not! I enjoy being you!
>
> I've heard that allegation multiple times in the past. Some CTer have
> even thought I was actually Vince Bugliosi himself, which (come to
> think of it) is probably the biggest compliment I have ever received in
> my 40-some years on the planet. :)

Not bad, but I suspect I'm the only person to have the distinction of
being "outed" as both Gerald Posner and Harold Weisberg. \:^)

> A little light LN reading to pass some time:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/1f24471a989efd43

Thanks for the tip, David. I've added it to my JFK links page:

http://www.jfk-online.com/jfklinks.html

Vince Bugliosi, eat your heart out!

Dave

[David VP]

>>> "Thanks for the tip, David. I've added it to my JFK links page." <<<

Thanks, Dave.

~tips cap~

[Chad Zimmerman]

Would LHO's Marine shooting log count, Tom? If so, your selectivity is
missing something really interesting.

Chad

"tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:CDSGg.4791$W01.1324@dukeread08...

[Chad Zimmerman]

<aeff...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1156353729.6...@74g2000cwt.googlegroups.com...

> Doctah of Osteopathy, right?
> David Healy

Nope. DC not DO.

Chad