There's no doubt the leather case shown in the Dallas Police evidence photo is a camera case. The Dallas police are competent enough that a camera case found in evidence should have spurred them to look for the camera that went in it. And they had no excuse for not knowing it was a camera because in that very same evidence photo they have a Minox light meter in an identical leather case. But they also had Minox film. If the Dallas police did not look for the camera that film went to then they are probably in the wrong business.
DiEugenio's PROBE article makes it clear that Michael Paine's camera was allegedly in a place where the original search should have uncovered it. The story that it wasn't found until later smells just as bad as the story of the Imperial Reflex camera miraculously appearing just when they needed to frame Oswald with the Backyard Photos. Only in this case they needed to un-frame Oswald for the spy the Minox camera revealed him to be. Those who say Oswald was an outsider wannabe spy are ignoring evidence like this that is beyond Oswald's independent ability to procure.
The failure to develop the film and present it in evidence is evidence itself of a corrupted inquiry and contempt by the authorities to accurately report the evidence to the public.
13-12-2015, 02:10 AM (This post was last modified: 14-12-2015, 02:59 PM by Deborra Ann Low.)
Albert Doyle Wrote:If the Dallas police did not look for the camera that film went to then they are probably in the wrong business.
They WERE probably in the wrong business, but that doesn't mean they were completely incompetent, even when mistakes were inevitably made owing to the urgency of the situation and it being such an high profile case. The FBI capitalizes on this far too much, I believe, for the purpose of doing a disappearing act with the Minox camera that Det. Gus Rose found in Oswald's seabag. The film inside may have even been of lesser importance to the FBI if they were concerned about the camera leading to Oswald being identified as an FBI informant, a CIA operative or both. With Michael Paine's Minox III camera being injected into the evidence, they were killing a few birds with one stone, (i.e., making the DPD look incompetent by not finding or even being interested in Michael Paine's Minox camera, even when Michael later claimed he informed DPD about his inoperable Minox camera damaged by salt water, but they seemed completely uninterested; they could confuse opinions about whether this was the actual camera Det. Rose claimed to find but somehow failed to confiscate; they could make the Minox camera seem more innocuous and have less importance if it actually belonged to Michael Paine rather than Lee Oswald; they could instill a strong measure of doubt as to whether the Minox camera was ever found in Oswald's seabag and maybe Det. Rose was having a lapse in memory about finding it there. Still the problem falls back to square one with the DPD's recorded serial number of the camera found by Rose. How did they obtain and record a serial number for a Minox model A, II camera if the only Minox camera eventually recovered from the Paine residence turned out to be a Minox model A, III. Plus, the camera charade has a far more sinister focus when so much effort is obviously being made to confuse the matter by inserting a new Minox camera and basically laying blame on the DPD for botching their own investigation, because they were extremely easy targets to make incompetency charges against, especially after Oswald's murder while he was in police custody and with so many officers being mentally and emotionally compromised after the Tippit killing. One can expect obfuscatory operatives to be professionals at making things look completely unintended or accidental to increase doubts about the veracity of witnesses, to confuse the chronology of events, and to obscure red flags that might otherwise lead to important information that must be kept secret. It's not far fetched or difficult to imagine that this is what took place here regarding Oswald's missing Minox camera. Oswald was a lone wolf and everything had to point in that direction. Loose ends had to be secured.
In "Oswald's Tale," Norman Mailer interviews witnesses from Russia who said that Oswald couldn't load film into a camera, couldn't put batteries in a radio, couldn't tune or adjust the antenna of a radio, and incidentally was a terrible shot. The Russians that knew him (and Marina), and presumably the KGB that interviewed these people, concluded that he was too incompetent to be a spy.
"All that is necessary for tyranny to succeed is for good men to do nothing." (unknown)
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."
But he somehow returned to the US to become a successful agent provocateur whose dealings were practiced with enough competency to still, 50 years later, be under contention as to whether he was a covert operator.
The Minox film was a cassette you just dropped in and it auto-loaded if you look at the evidence photo.
Why was the number one spy for America for the international scene, David Atlee Phillips, seen with Oswald?
Caulfield's idea was that Oswald was simply going to Russia and pretending to be a communist to build up credentials as an "expert witness" for a new "Red Scare" in the southern states to trap the segregationist and civil rights movements. All the McCarthy era ex-communist experts had lost their credibility by the late 50's. His New Orleans activities do truly seem to fit in that pattern.
The point is, if he was planning to renounce communism, and become a hero, and make a living testifying, he wouldn't need actual spy trade skills. It's also funny that this idea of a future plan is captured in a different form in O'Reilly's "Killing Kennedy."
The funny thing I just read in "Oswald's Tale" is that Oswald tells his girlfriends, who visit his apartment and see his books, want to know why he keeps (what is effectively elementary school) textbooks on Marks and Lenin. He says he hasn't studied them before, which contradicts a lot of claims he'd made both before and after his defection. It sure seems to me like Oswald's primary aim in defecting to Russia, basing on the stuff he did (and didn't do) there, and the writings in his journal, is to find a Russian wife. He wouldn't need spy skills for that either.
"All that is necessary for tyranny to succeed is for good men to do nothing." (unknown)
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."
14-12-2015, 03:52 AM (This post was last modified: 14-12-2015, 01:23 PM by Deborra Ann Low.)
Drew Phipps Wrote:In "Oswald's Tale," Norman Mailer interviews witnesses from Russia who said that Oswald couldn't load film into a camera, couldn't put batteries in a radio, couldn't tune or adjust the antenna of a radio, and incidentally was a terrible shot. The Russians that knew him (and Marina), and presumably the KGB that interviewed these people, concluded that he was too incompetent to be a spy.
Well, I have always leaned toward E. Howard Hunt's assessment of Mailer, "The writer who presumes to reveal the inner world of espionage without having experienced it, is comparable to a young man haunting a brothel exit and asking patrons what it was like." I wouldn't quibble about him being a terrible shot, but Oswald would have been a true anomaly if he hadn't yet mastered the art of putting batteries in a radio or adjusting an antenna. That being the claim, it's a wonder he could tie his shoes, sign his passport or speak English, let alone Russian. It's my guess, that if you're not looking to be outed as a spook, you might steer clear of doing spooky things. It would behoove you, in fact, to have the reputation of being completely techno-ignorant, and it wouldn't require acting lessons or spy training to feign that level of incompetence. I'm sure I'm dating myself here, but in my generation it wasn't uncommon for women to do such things with perfect ease and ulterior motives.
"All that is necessary for tyranny to succeed is for good men to do nothing." (unknown)
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."
In the photo provided in Det. Curry's book, there doesn't appear to be a camera in the camera case, even though the long chain that attaches to the camera is shown. I'm wondering if the camera case is sitting on top of the camera in the photo. That doesn't appear to be what's pictured, but I guess it could be possible. What doesn't make sense to me is, why would Gus Rose claim to have found a Minox camera if he hadn't seen it, and why would he mention that it had film in it if he was supposedly looking at a light meter and not a camera. Not only that, but why would he also state that he and Det. Stovall scratched their initials somewhere on the base of the camera if they hadn't done this? What does he gain by lying about this or being adamant that he couldn't have been making any mistake about what he found? Even if the Minox III that was at some point in the DPD archives was sealed shut (conveniently?) so the SN could not be seen, the two Det.'s initials should still be on the base of that camera if this is supposedly the same camera seen by Det.'s Rose and Stovall. It is also very strange that the FBI came up with SN27259 for the Minox Model A, III camera they obtained from Michael Paine, because according to the Minox Historical Society (see: http://www.minox.org/minoxencyclopedia/a/ModelA.html ), Minox Model A, III SNs started somewhere around SN31275, and SN27259 would place it in the range of the Minox Model A, II. Was the FBI trying to substitute Michael Paine's Minox Model A, III for Oswald's Minox Model A, II? Sounds like they used the serial number from Oswald's camera and claimed it was the S/N for Michael Paine's Minox III, and maybe for the simple reason they couldn't open Michael's camera to read the serial number and didn't expect anyone to pay that much attention to the serial number?
I thought I had read somewhere that Michael Paine had his Minox camera returned to him by the FBI and then he later claimed that someone stole it from him. Can anyone corroborate that story? If the Minox III camera was stolen, what camera did John Armstrong see to be able to report it was sealed shut like it was filled with cement? I hope I'm not muddying the waters with a bunch of hogwash disinfo that's floating around about this already confusing camera shell game fiasco, but the Probe article doesn't mention where the Minox III camera is now, and maybe because it hadn't been returned to Michael Paine until after the article was published? Can someone provide an update on this stuff or shed some verifiable light on this?
I sent your post to John and asked him about the Minox he saw. (Side note - I asked him once about the Klein's microfilm, famous for having the Rifle Order, coupon and envleope which was placed in a cannister, sealed and sent to the Archives - except that cannister is now empty - the FBI's SA DOLAN can be assigned blame for that process. http://www.ctka.net/2015/JosephsRiflePart1.pdf )
YOUR POST IS ACCURATE, TO THE BEST OF MYMEMORY. A FELLOW RESEARCHER, TAMARA CARTER, WAS GIVEN PERMISSION TO WEIGHT THEMINOX CAMERA IN THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES. IT WEIGHTED A LOT MORE THAN A REGULARMINOX CAMERA. I HAVE A MINOX CAMERA, AND THEY ARE VERY, VERY LIGHT WEIGHT.ALSO, UNKNOWN TO MOST PEOPLE, IS THAT MINOX FILM WAS ONLY DEVELOPED BY ONECOMPANY IN THE USA (IN NEW JERSEY). THERE ARE NO INITIALS ON THE MINOX AT THENATIONAL ARCHIVES, BUT THIS SMALL CAMERA IS VERY HEAVY COMPARED TO A REGULARCAMERA. THIS WAS NOT THE CAMERA FOUND BY THE DALLAS POLICE. PERHAPS BOTHCAMERAS WERE IN FBI CUSTODY AND, FOR SOME REASON, THEY WERE SWITCHED.OBVIOUSLY, GUS ROSE COULD NOT HAVE OPENED THE MINOX, LOOKED AT THE FILM, ANDINITIAL THE CAMERA IF THIS WERE THE CAMERA NOW IN THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES.
2 rolls exposed Minox
1 Camera "MINOX" (IRVING) #375
One Minox Canera #375
There is no doubt that a Minox was found during the search at the Paine's while the Imperial Reflex was left behind.
Quote:Minox Model A, III SNs started somewhere around SN31275, and SN27259 would place it in the range of the Minox Model A, II. Was the FBI trying to substitute Michael Paine's Minox Model A, III for Oswald's Minox Model A, II
Or any other Minox camera for that matter. My understanding was that it was the FBI - Our man Odum again - who obtrains the Minox from Michael at the end of January. That stretches the bounds of credibility one again to have them then say the Minox originally found was Paine's SN27259 when as you proved so well and John write on page 910 of his book - the Minox at the Archives - like the vast majority of evidence residing there - was created by the FBI to keep the connection between Ozzie and Intel secret.
Rose said, "Among the property we found a little Minoxminiature camera and on checking it, it did have a little roll of filmin it (along with 9 additional rolls of Min ox film) ..... All of the property we recoveredfrom the residence, I initialed it. Stovall and I initialed it and dated it forevidence."[SUP]175
[/SUP][SUP]175 [/SUP]National Archives, HSCA 180-10113-10251,Numbered Files 014341, p 10; HSCA interview of Gus Rose, pp. 10. The National Archives currently has a Minox III camera,found by the Dallas Police in Ruth Paine's garage. This camera is currently inoperable, isunable to be opened, and therefore the serial number remains unknown. The Min oxCorporation (and their web site) advises that Min ox I I I cameras were manufacturedwith serial numbers 3127 5 thru 58499. Therefore, the Minox which the FBI obtained fromMichael Paine on January 31, 1964 (serial number 27259) was not the camera found byDallas Police which is now in the National Archives. The serial number of MichaelPaine's camera, listed on an FBI Airtel of 2/2/64, shows that it was a Minox II (Minox IIcameras were manufactured with serial numbers up to 31500. The FBI's attempt to hidethe fact that Harvey Oswald owned a Minox camera is one of the best known anddocumented examples of their attempts to alter and fabricate evidence.
Once in a while you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter
