Statements That Sink The WC's Conclusions - #46

[Robert Caprio]

[b]Let’s resume with the issue of a visa for travel into Mexico. The
WC claimed LHO made a trip there in the last week of September 1963
while IGNORING evidence that showed he did NOT go. The WC would put
up scant evidence for this trip, and NONE of it showed he traveled
there by itself. The key piece was the claim that LHO secured a visa
while he was in New Orleans, but as I showed with the William Gaudet
post (the previous one in this series) he did NOT see LHO and he was
supposed to be the MAN BEHIND HIM IN LINE!

There was another corroborating witness for this and Jim Garrison
found her during his trial of Clay Shaw. Her name was Fennella
Farrington and she saw the man the WC claimed was LHO, and you will
see it was NOT LHO at all.

If LHO did NOT get a visa, and that is what the evidence shows, it
means he either did NOT go to Mexico City as the CIA and WC claimed OR
he was smuggled in by another person or group. Neither scenario is
good for the claims of the WC.

Who would have smuggled him in? You would have to put the CIA on the
list since it was THEIR claim that he was there all the while
providing NO evidence to show he was.[/b]

****************************


It is an early afternoon in New Orleans in mid-September 1963 and the
scene is the Mexican Consulate building. A young man, accompanied by
a woman with a scarf tied around her head, appear at the Consulate.
On this occasion, Mrs. Fennella Farrington happened to be there to
inquire about getting her family automobile returned from Mexico. It
had been left on a recent visit with her husband.

The young man, presumably LHO per the WC, asked the clerk at the desk,
"What is the weather like in Mexico City?"

"It's very hot," she replied. "Just like it is here today."

He then asked her -- now striking the sinister theme repeated
throughout these pageants -- "What do you have to do to take firearms
or a gun into Mexico?" This was a question that would catch almost
anyone's ear. The lady at the Consulate asked why he wanted to take a
gun, and [color=red][b]Fenella Farrington[/b][/color], standing
nearby, volunteered that "the hunting's wonderful."

The man, whom Mrs. Farrington described as "tall and very thin",
seemed resentful of her contribution, making no effort to show any
sign of appreciation. Mrs. Farrington also recalled that he appeared
ill at ease and not relaxed as were other tourists seeking visas.

Four days after the President's murder, Mrs. Farrington was visiting
relatives in Washington D.C. when the F.B.I. hunted her down. The
F.B.I. agent who called her from the Washington office gave her the
office number so that she could call back for confirmation of his
identity. This done, [color=red][b]he informed her that the Bureau
had located her because of the scene at the Consulate in New Orleans.
The scene had been photographed , he informed her, by an invisible
camera. [/b][/color][This would make one ask why we have NEVER been
shown this photograph (or photographs) IF it/they was/were depicting
LHO as claimed.]

[color=red][b]It had been set in operation when the young man
mentioned firearms [/b][/color]and, inasmuch as she was present, the
Bureau had traced her from the photograph. The young man, he added,
was Lee Harvey Oswald, whose picture had been taken at the same time.

[b](Note: Was the FBI saying they had VOICE ACTIVATED CAMERAS IN 1963?
IF so, I would love to know when and where these were used. I would
love more info on this, does anyone else have any history looking into
this?)[/b]

[color=red][b]The F.B.I. agent suggested to Mrs. Farrington that she
had ALSO seen Lee Harvey Oswald in Mexico City, even before the scene
at the Consulate. She replied firmly that she had NOT seen Oswald in
Mexico City. [u]Nonetheless, the agent insisted -- despite her
repeated DENIALS -- that she had met Oswald in Mexico.[/u][/b][/color]

Mrs. Farrington, and her cousin, [color=red][b]Mrs. Lillian Merilh[/b]
[/color], who had been with her at the Mexican Consulate, were later
questioned again by the same F.B.I. agent and others as well.
[color=red][b]This time the agents produced photos of Jack Ruby and
NOW INSISTED that Jack Ruby had been present at the Mexican Consulate
earlier that day, when both Mrs. Farrington and her cousin had been
there.[/b][/color] Both Mrs. Farrington and Mrs. Merilh [color=red][u]
[b]informed the agents that the photographs of Ruby did NOT depict
anyone they saw at the consulate.[/b][/u][/color]

[b](Note: Why were the F.B.I. insisting Jack Ruby was at the NEW
ORLEANS Mexican Consulate? Why would he be in New Orleans? Wouldn’t
this open a can of worms as he had a history of gun running for the
Mafia and Marcello ruled both Dallas and New Orleans? Where they
trying to tell us something here?) [/b]

This is what Jim Garrison said about the event:

“I heard the story from Mort Sahl and Mark Lane, who were working with
us at the time. Lane took a statement from her at my request. He
showed her 17 photographs, asking if any of them appeared to be the
young man at the consulate in New Orleans. She replied that two of the
pictures could have been the man. She picked out a picture of Lee
Oswald. And she picked out a picture of Kerry Thornley -- Oswald's
friend from the Marine days back at El Toro, who had later moved to
New Orleans.”

The Farrington affair had raised obvious questions. Why, for example,
was the F.B.I. trying to BULLY a witness into saying she saw Oswald in
Mexico City? And why was there NO picture of Oswald at the
Consulate? The hidden camera there was obviously good enough to take
an identifiable picture of Fennella Farrington and good enough to have
the Bureau on her heels in a short time. The F.B.I. agent told her
that it HAD A PHOTOGRAPH of the young man whom wanted to take a rifle
to Mexico, and that it was Lee Oswald. Yet the government had NEVER
released that photo. IF the photograph had been of Oswald, would the
government had been so shy about revealing it? The same goes for the
photo allegedly taken at the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City. Why did
this NOT depict LHO as claimed?

This topic was covered in Jim Garrison’s book -- "[i]On The Trail Of
The Assassins[/i]" pp. 75-77.

One more thing about [color=red][b]Kerry Thornley[/b][/color], he
would give very different testimony from ALL THE OTHER Marines
interviewed about LHO, and his was the ONLY one kept in full in the
volumes of the WC hearings. (Volume 11) Thornley moved to New Orleans
as early as 1961 and would stay until just a few days after the JFK
assassination. He was seen in the company of LHO quite a few times as
well, and this was confirmed by Barbara Reid who knew both of them.
She stated that Thornley usually wore his hair long, but when she saw
him, along with LHO, in early September at the Bourbon House he had
very short, cropped hair like LHO. Thornley had just come back from a
trip out of town. I wonder where he had gone on this trip? New Orleans
maybe?

[b]In his testimony before the WC Thornley made an interesting
observation that again destroys the claims of many WC defenders.[/b]

Mr. JENNER. Did you have occasion in those additional half dozen
instances of discussions with him, the viewpoint you have just
expressed, that is, that his initial raising of the issue was more by
way of provoking or shocking those about him rather than any
utterances on his part of sincerity in a belief that communism was
itself a religion?

Mr. THORNLEY. It became obvious to me after a while, in talking to
him, that definitely he thought that communism was the best--that the
Marxist morality was the most rational morality to follow that he knew
of. And that communism was the best system in the world.

I still certainly wouldn't--wouldn't have predicted, for example, his
defection to the Soviet Union, because once again he seemed idle in
his admiration for communism. He didn't seem to be an activist.

Mr. JENNER. [color=blue][b]Would you explain what you mean by idle in
his admiration of the communistic system?[/b][/color]

Mr. THORNLEY. Well, it seemed to be theoretical. It seemed strictly a
dispassionate appraisal--I did know at the time that he was learning
the Russian language. I knew he was subscribing to Pravda or a Russian
newspaper of some kind from Moscow. All of this I took as a sign of
his interest in the subject, and not as a sign of any active
commitment to the Communist ends.

Mr. JENNER. [color=blue][b]You felt there was no devotion there.[/b][/
color] That it was somewhat of an intellectual interest, a curiosity.
But I don't want to put words in your mouth, so tell me.

Mr. THORNLEY. I wouldn't put it quite that weakly.[color=red][b] While
I didn't feel there was any rabid devotion there[/b][/color], I
wouldn't call it a complete idle curiosity either. I would call it a
definite interest.

Mr. JENNER. A definite interest.

Mr. THORNLEY. [color=red][u][b]But not a fanatical devotion[/b][/u][/
color].

[b]So we see here a man who had quite a few discussions with LHO on
the subject of Communism saying he was NOT a fanatical devotee to the
system, and yet, the WC and many of its defenders have painted him as
being that way. Why? Why did the WC again and again ignore its OWN
evidence? Why did the WC NOT call Mrs. Farrington IF it was really
searching for the truth?

Let’s look at how Thornley described LHO.[/b]

Mr. JENNER. Let's get back to Oswald. Describe this individual to me.
First describe him physically.

Mr. THORNLEY. [color=red][u][b]Physically, I would say he was slightly
below average height[/b][/u][/color]. Had, as I recall, gray or blue
eyes. Always had. or almost always had a petulant expression on his
face. Pursed-up lip expression, either a frown or a smile, depending
on the circumstances. Was of average build, and his hair was brown,
and tending to., like mine, tending to bald a little on each side.

Mr. JENNER. Above the temple. What would you say he weighed?

Mr. THORNLEY. I Would say he weighed about 140 pounds, maybe 130.

Mr. JENNER. [color=blue][b]How tall was he?[/b][/color]

Mr. THORNLEY. [color=red][u][b]I would say he was about five-five
maybe.[/b][/u][/color] I don't know.

Mr. JENNER. How tall are you?

Mr. THORNLEY. I am five-ten.

Mr. JENNER. Was he shorter than you?

Mr. THORNLEY. Yes.

[b]Slightly below average height? 5’5”? What? Marine records listed
LHO’s height as 5’11”! The man shot in the DPD garage was listed as
5’9” by those that did his autopsy!

British author Michael Eddowes wrote a book in 1977 called [I]The
Oswald File[/I]. Eddowes would tell Jim Marrs that he had a background
in INTELLIGENCE that went back to World War II so his insight is quite
interesting and reliable IMO. He would NOTE numerous pieces of
evidence to support his theory that the real LHO was captured in
Russia and that a plant was returned. This one PERTAINS to the height
issue.[/b]

Quote on

In Warren Commission documents, including Marine and passport
application papers, [color=red][b]at least eleven give Oswald’s height
as five-foot-eleven[/b][/color], while at[color=red][b] least thirteen
documents—all produced AFTER Oswald’s return from Russia—give his
height as five-foot-nine.[/b][/color]

Quote off

[b]How can the WC defenders explain this difference? How can they
explain what LHO’s half-brother, John Edward Pic, said to the WC?[/b]

Mr. JENNER - What else did you notice about his physical appearance
that arrested your attention?

Mr. PIC - [color=red][b]His face features were somewhat different,
being his eyes were set back maybe, you know like in these Army
pictures, they looked different than I remembered him.[/b][/color] His
face was rounder. [color=red][b]Marilyn had described him to me when
he went in the Marine Corps as having a bull neck. This I didn't
notice at all.[/b][/color] I looked for this, I didn't notice this at
all, sir.

[b]People can get thinner, but how does your neck CHANGE? I guess the
same way your CHIN does, huh? Also, Pic would go on and describe how
LHO would introduce him as a half-brother AFTER his return from Russia
and that he had NEVER done that before.[/b]

Mr. JENNER - All right, tell us the circumstances. tell us what led up
to this incident, and tell us all about the incident.

Mr. PIC - Well, they made the phone call, and Lee said that they would
be picked up by their friends, and I think sometime between 6 and 7
that night he came by. Now, my brother Robert, whenever he introduces
me to anyone always refers to me as his brother Lee referred to me as
his half brother when he introduced me.

Mr. JENNER - On this occasion?

Mr. PIC - [color=red][b]It was very pronounced. He wanted to let the
man know I was only his half brother. And this kind of peeved me a
little bit. Because we never mentioned the fact that we were half
brothers.[/b][/color]

Mr. JENNER - You never had that feeling?

Mr. PIC - No, sir.

Mr. JENNER - [color=blue][b]Was this the first time that your brother
had ever introduced you to anyone as his half brother?[/b][/color] I
am talking about your brother Lee now.

Mr. PIC - [color=red][b]I think possibly, sir, this is the first time
he ever introduced me to anyone.[/b][/color]

Mr. JENNER - Was this the first time he had ever referred to you as
your half brother?

Mr. PIC - Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER - His half brother?

Mr. PIC - Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER - Is that so?

Mr. PIC - Yes, sir.

Mr. JENNER - And that irritated you on this occasion?

Mr. PIC - Yes, sir. Right then and there I had the feeling that the
hostile feeling was still there. Up until this time it didn't show
itself, but I felt then, well, he still felt the same way.

[b]Why did LHO do this when he had NEVER done this before? In the
book, [i]The Two Assassins[/i], by Renatus Harttogs, Pic would be
quoted as saying:[/b]

Quote on

The Lee Harvey Oswald that I met in November 1962, was NOT the same
Lee Harvey Oswald I had known ten years previously. (emphasis mine)

Quote off

[b]The topic of TWO Oswald’s has been discussed for many years (long
before Armstrong’s work) and it has never been resolved by the
authorities. JEH had suspicions as far back as June 3, 1960 about who
was using LHO’s identity.

We again see, the WC FAILED to support its claim that LHO applied for,
and received, a visa for entry into Mexico as the CIA claimed.
Meanwhile, they IGNORED more firm evidence showing he was NOT in
Mexico (Odio, Farrington, Gaudet, etc…).[/b]