David Josephs Wrote:That would be Jim Hargrove Dawn.
====
Jim N... thanks for your kind words
I see that now Jim, thanks. The book will have a few conflicts... this is one of them.
One of the most mysterious times in young OSWALD's lives is the summer and fall of 1953 (North Dakota, Bronx Zoo photo Louise Robertson the "maid", Jacobi Hosptial references 2 years before opening....). Myra does not see HARVEY until Spring semester 1953/4 school year - CE1384 has OSWALD in Sept 1953 as 5'4" 115lbs. This is the Bronx Zoo photo - I found these rails were standard height 36"... THIS BOY is not the same LEE attending ps44 in NYC and one of the tallest/biggest/leader kids in the class. the inset is his 6th grade picture... the Bronx zoo is at least 12 if not 18 months later...
These are not the same boys - as John Pic so clearly pointed out.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]5542[/ATTACH]
Other than the line on the BJHS record these are the only two other people who support HARVEY being at BJHS in the SPRING 1954.
Myra and fellow teacher Dorothy Duvik followed Voebel into the basement
cafeteria and found Harvey on the floor with a small, upright piano, laying across his legs.
The two women, along with Voebel, pulled Harvey out from underneath the piano and
asked him what had happened.
My own analysis of that record (the BJHS record) is a bit different than John's at this point. From the grade cards for the two classes HARVEY took we see a complete set of TERM grades for SPRING 54 - the 2nd semester of 8th grade - while there is only 1 TERM GRADE for the FALL... the LAST one.
Which to me means that the student arrived late in the semester (as HARVEY usually did) and was only graded once suggesting HARVEY does not attend until about Nov 1953. If he was there earlier he would have more TERM GRADES in the fall than just the one... at least in my thinking.
NOTE: the 303 on the cards is LEE's homeroom # - on the third floor, which were only given to 9th graders. The thing to remember is that TWO RECORDS have been combined into ONE person... LEE, who started BJHS in JAN 1954. LEE was never the truant in NYC, did not go to YOUTH HOUSE and attended NYC school ps44 as expected... (yet the NYC school records are also "created" as the number of days it is said he attended school is simply wrong... the WCR tries to put 124 school days into the period from 3/23/53 thru 6/4/53... (I've posted these records side by side to show how they have been written, rewritten and changed...
I happen to believe that the 54-55 year is also a composite (see 2nd graphic) as the grade cards and cumulative records do not match... and there were more than 180 days in the SPRING semester... (180 was the minimum # of days in a school year... I think the BJHS record was manufactured after the fact by combining HARVEY and LEE's records. (Last school is listed as ps44: BYRON JHS - which did not exist and insured that BJHS would not get the records... ther are 3 ps44's in NY: Bronx, Queens and Manhattan - which one LEE attended is still not definite - it is possible H&L both attended a ps44 without being together)
From H&L p.87
"Room 303 is on the third floor of Beauregard Junior High School, while Myra's homeroom was in the basement cafeteria"
[ATTACH=CONFIG]5540[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]5541[/ATTACH]
David: Yes I realize it is Jim Hargrove, the person who started this thread. And does John Armstrong's website.
By the way thanks for all the great photographic work you are doing here David.
I am extremely busy with work and family matters at the moment, but As I looked through this l-o-n- g thread yesterday and today before court I was struck by all of your supporting documentation. I just wanted to make a quick acknowledgement.
Dawn
I am trying to work up a series of photos to see if the 1955 yearbook photo is of a truly different person than LHO's earlier schoolboy pictures but I thought I should jump back into the conversation you two are having to put in my two cents since I have a little experience with basement homerooms.
I attended McDonogh No. 28 on Esplanade Avenue in New Orleans in 7th grade (1968-69) and 8th grade (1969-7) and my 8th grade homeroom was in the basement. McDonogh No. 28 is about two miles from Beauregard Junior High. I've never been in Beauregard but from what I've read the two must have been quite similar. Three stories with the first story called the basement because you went up steps to enter the building and then you had to go down steps to the "basement". The basement had the cafeteria, the stage (for official functions), an area in front of the stage where the students would mill around in the morning before classes if they didn't go outside, the PE changing rooms, and just a couple of classrooms. The great bulk of the classrooms were on the 2nd and 3rd floors.
My 8th grade homeroom was in one of those classrooms just to the right as you entered the basement. The one neat thing about having a homeroom in the basement is that you got a locker in the basement which meant you could easily access your locker before school. As I remember you couldn't go upstairs until classes began. Outside was a giant black top. No grass. No trees. Some basketball hoops. All surrounded by a giant fence. From what I read about Beauregard it was the same way back in 1954-55.
Homerooms, as I remember, were strictly for attendance. You go there at the beginning of school, the teacher takes attendance, and then you go to your first class. While I remember many of my regular teachers and students I had in my regular classes, I wouldn't be able to tell you anything about my homeroom teacher or students in my homeroom. Homerooms were organized alphabetically by grade, so in 8th grade I was in a basement homeroom with a bunch of other 8th graders who names began to A's, B's and C's.
Myra somewhere talks about taking attendance on the stage or in the cafeteria but we never did that. That suggests she did not have a regular classroom like we did. But homeroom did not really require a room to take attendance.
David, you still seem to be stuck on the idea that Myra Darouse Larue had her homeroom in the 1953-54 school year but I think if you watch her interview carefully you will see that she clearly states she had a homeroom in the 1954-55 school year.
There are other things in her interview that I did not mention. The Youtube audio is rather choppy at times and the video is fast-forwarded for some reason in some sections with no audio.
In one section Myra seems to be saying that she used to see "Harvey" in the Beauregard school library that year AFTER she had him in her homeroom! This would mean she had him in her homeroom as a 7th or 8th grader in 1954-55, NOT a 9th grader.
Q: [garbled] you didn't see [garbled]
A: [garbled] summertime, he made some friends, he did... something happened, he found himself or something, but he still used that library [John Armstrong - Myra DaRouse Larue Interview Part 2, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gydTxr_ed8o, 1:23-1:40]
And despite the fact that she has insisted that she had her homeroom beginning in September 1954 (for the 1954-55) school year, by the end of the interview, the interviewer has her saying something different. There are actually two off-camera voices. I assume one if John Armstrong. And somewhere I have heard that Robert Groden was taking the video, so perhaps the other voice was Robert Groden. BTW, a man whom I believe must be Myra's husband (i.e., Mr. Larue), although he is never introduced in the video, also is interviewed and it seems he had something to do with preparing certain yearbooks for preparation but it is never made clear.
Q: His first year as recorded on the Beauregard school records was the 1953-54 school year. You read it as being enrolled in January 1954.
A: Hmm-hmm.
Q: So it would be approximately March or April of 1954 that you saw them in the fight on the west side of the school and then -- was it shortly thereafter that he and Voebel were playing around the...
A: No, the piano was before the fight outside!
Q: The piano was before the fight outside?
A: Oh, yeah.
Q: So the piano would have been how long after he -- when you entered
A: I'm coaching basketball.
Q. That's winter.
A: So you see that's like February or early March.
Q. Exactly.
...
Q: OK, let's go through that again. So in chronological order then, Oswald would have come to school and you would have asked him how he wanted to be known and he would have said to you -- Harvey.
A: Harvey.
Q: Then the next thing of any significance that happened is you were coaching basketball and you remember -- why don't you tell us about the fight, not the fight, the
A: The piano.
Q: Voebel comes running out
...
A: When he came to my homeroom he just came with a name.
Q: And that would have been February or March of 54.
A: Yea. There was no...that's how I know he lived on Exchange. When he came to my room he just came a name. No address or anything.
Q: Sure. [John Armstrong - Myra DaRouse Larue Interview Part 5, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=it33MLo6y_4, 0: 08-3: 24]
At this point the interviewer has Mrs Larue agreeing that she had her homeroom in 1953-1954. I don't believe Mrs. Larue knew what she was agreeing to because she had made it clear at the start when she had to put her thoughts together that her homeroom was in 1954-55. Unless there was something in the fast-forwarded section to get Mrs. Larue to change her mind (which I seriously doubt), I think this is highly suspicious and demands an explanation. Was the interviewer so determined to prove that "Harvey" had been at Beauregard in the spring of 1954 that he "tricked" Mrs. Larue into agreeing that she had her homeroom in 1953-1954 when she had stated so clearly that it was 1954-1955? Or was it a simple and unfortunate misunderstanding? I was truly inspired by reading Harvey and Lee but this kind of sleight of hand raises some serious concerns about the way that John Armstrong conducts interviews. I encourage all those interested in the mystery of the two Oswalds to watch the Larue video themselves and draw their own conclusions.
In reviewing this interview, there is absolutely no "trickery" or "slight of hand" on the part of the interviewers. It is clear that the two interviewers and the two people being interviewed (Myra and her friend) are simply trying to sort out an enormously complex history--the same history that we are attempting to understand in our forum conversation. There are no "leading questions" on the part of the interviewers and there is no attempt on the part of the interviewers "to put words in the mouth" of Myra DaRouse. Indeed, the majority of the interview consists of Myra simply telling her story.
You and I are both former teachers. So, let me put it in terms that you will certainly understand. Right now, you are asking sharp questions and going on the attack with your criticisms. But you have yet to add anything to advance our understanding and interpretation of the evidence about Oswald in New Orleans in 1953-55. As a teacher, I have the sense that I am interacting with a "smarty pants"!
To advance this discussion, I have several questions for you:
(1) The Warren Commission published records of one Oswald boy attending school in PS 44 in New York City (WCH Vol. XXII, p. 697) and another Oswald boy attending school at Beauregard Junior High in New Orleans (WCH Vol. XXII, p. 817) at the same time in fall 1953. How do you explain the discrepancy?
(2) Myra DaRouse recalls a boy she taught who is much shorter than the 5'4" Oswald boy measured in New York City the previous year. The shorter boy answers to "Harvey" and never engages in fights. But the much taller boy is remembered by Ed Voebel as a fighter. When specifically did Myra teach Harvey and when was Lee befriended by Ed Voebel?
(3) In fall 1954, there is overwhelming evidence that Harvey is a student for at least a six-week period at Stripling Junior High School in Ft. Worth. At this time, Lee is attending Beauregard in New Orleans. How do you account for the discrepancy?
If we can get the conversation focused around these topics, then we might generate productive discourse. If that doesn't happen, then I will be dropping out of this thread.
you hit on a very vital point IMO. I look forwardto what Bruce offers...
Like the phony xrays, coming to conclusions regarding a real life situation from fakes evidence is a fool's errand
other than the realization that the evidence is forged...
The NYC school records were created to reflect a certain situation: Ridglea (only LEE went there) Trinity Evangelical (a mystery), PS117 and PS44 one of three in NYC).. The record does not account for Jan/Feb and most of March 1953 stating the Oswald child was absent a huge % of the time and he was transferred on 1/16/53. The only speculation I can think of for the grade cards in the FALL for those two classes is that the would be the very end of the FALL semester yet before Jan 13, 1954... which really doesn't work.
So there must have been a Lee Oswald at the end of the FALL semester at BJHS AND PS44 in NYC at the same time... and at BJHS in the SPRING at the same time
IF THE RECORDS ARE TO BE USED.... (I think that HARVEY's BJHS card was simply made into LEE's with HARVEY disappearing from NOLA in June '54.)
and I KNOW one or more of these cards was recreated... the one on the right is the CE...
[ATTACH=CONFIG]5543[/ATTACH]
====
The size difference in the boys called OSWALD is staggering.... and the reason after 9th grade the school records gets even worse..
====
James,with regards to Stripling... that HOOVER sends men there on 11/23 is the real coup here... HOW does he know and WHY is it so vital?
It appears from the record that MO's place on Thomas across from Stripling was a constantly available location for her "stuff".
On 11/23/63 her address is 2220 Thomas, across from Stripling.
---------
Bruce - I have to concede that Myra's dates and the actual dates are at odds... "HER" homeroom versus "HARVEY's" maybe? and even so, she still talks of AFTER X-mas.
the ONLY evidence of OSWALD at BJHS in the FALL 1953 are those two term grades on the grade cards, that one line with the first "53-54" and the memory of Ed Voebel.
Once in a while you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter
Excellent points! We are really dealing with multiple layers of conflicting evidence about Oswald. As you suggest, it is like studying the autopsy X-rays and trying to link them to what the eyewitnesses observed at Bethesda. In attempting to understand Oswald, the work is closer to archaeology in digging through the following:
(1) the phony evidence from 1938-1959 when the identities of the two boys were merged to create a legend for the Oswald Project in the CIA's false defector program;
(2) the phony evidence from the summer of 1963 through November 22, with a string of Oswald impersonations from Mexico City to Dallas; and
(3) the period of November 22, 1963 until the publication of the Warren Report, during which the FBI and the Warren Commission shuffled the Oswald deck of evidence once again.
This is such a "cluster f____" of evidence that is small wonder that there is little agreement on the key issues even in the research community.
You're right about the significance of agents of the government visiting Assistant Principal Frank Kudlaty on November 23, 1963. The act of collecting the Stripling school records suggests that Orwell's "Big Brother" was at work to create a sanitized version of the life of Lee Harvey Oswald. It came as no surprise to me that there was not a single full-scale biography of Oswald published at the time of the fiftieth anniversary.
In our discussion of Oswald in New Orleans in 1953-55, one figure who may be as important as Kudlaty is Ed Voebel. This is the only student to have known both of the Oswalds during the period of their education. And the school where Voebel knew the two boys was Beauregard Junior High.
When the reality of the "Assassination" as CONSTRUCT takes hold... I believe we are allowed a POV that begins to shed some light.
You read chillingly as WILLIAM HARVEY orders a "complete 201 back file - appropriate dates - with copies in appropriate locations" to cover an operation or prepare for one.
and are at times led on with the OSWALD 201 paper trail from hell...
More of that evaluation of the mirage... only to glimpse a clearer picture of the CONSTRUCT...
What usually amazes me about analysis is that we somehow stop short of the subject organization of person's capability for evil given the reality of our conclusions...
In the true grand scope I see H&L part of an evolving game started well before JFK... where JFK is but a small expendable piece on that scale - POTUS or not.
I think the invention of H&L is brilliant and may have allowed infiltration into organizations who would have done us harm... I think the intelligence community has done a LOT of H&L..
The deepest of covers - the deepest of back stories.... this is what the 50's was about in the CIA... and what the history of many intelligence organizations is full of..
We MUST remember, imo, that Tampa and Chicago happened... Chicago was very close... would JFK go to Bethesda? Vallee be killed while escaping?... a different asset with a different back story...
But I bet if anyone had looked, there would have been VALLEE sightings in the most interesting of places... (fyi the WCD from Chicago ALL try to deny anything happened there... I looked them all up once and was amazed... James, the WCD is where the guts are... check 298 out for some amazing reading)
I have believed and will continue to believe that the CIA is part of the smokescreen... that the ONI is the true power and organization behind the "use of the HARVEY/LEE asset" in the removal of the president.... and has the most direct and long standing relationship with the MICC..
Harvey and Lee are real, were created with the express purpose of deep cover asset for anyone in the intelligence community who could use him ala Harry Dean and Nagel.
Cheers
DJ
btw - Here is a NYC map of what and where... for part of the time... summer of 52 into school... notice 2 PS44's... one by Pic and one up by MO/Lee's apartments
[ATTACH=CONFIG]5545[/ATTACH]
Once in a while you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter
Thank you, James. You were quite right to take me to task on my impertinent question. I guess I simply wanted to see what kind of reaction it would get. I have no idea why the video interview of Myra Darouse Larue seems to give such contradictory information about "Harvey". To even suggest a possible personal motivation was totally out of line. All I really needed to say was that I think that any conclusion based on Mrs. Larue's interview is premature until we know exactly what she said. I appreciate civility in this discussion as much as you and David so I apologize. I sense that we are all three in the same boat, researchers inspired by John Armstrong to look at the early years of LHO and let the evidence take us where the evidence will.
The Larue interview that I saw was sponsored by Poage on Youtube so I thought it was the official video. But I will take a look at the link you provide and see if I can see any differences.
As for being a "smarty pants", I have known quite a few over the years myself and I know how annoying they can be! But I'd say I was rather the little boy who keeps asking questions because he wants to understand, not because he wants to show how smart he is. I plead ignorance on a lot of this stuff because I simply do not know. But I would like to know very much. These students can be just as annoying, but I guess I have a tender spot in my heart for them because I was and am one. And we're worth it!
Also I should add that my approach to doing this kind of research is perhaps a bit different from the norm. My early schooling was all math and science. I got a BS in Chemical Engineering and worked for a big oil company for five years. After traveling around the world a couple of times and doing a lot of reading, I fell in love with history and went back to school to get an MA in American Studies and a PhD in History. I was a college professor for a few years before getting fed up with academia and becoming a high school history teacher where I have been happily employed for the past dozen or so years. I am passionate about historical research, but my whole approach is rooted in the kind of problem solving I did as an engineer. I approach historical problems just as I approached engineering problems. I immerse myself in the evidence until I can come up with a working hypothesis. Then I continue to pit my working hypothesis against all the evidence I can muster to see if it continues to stand up, modifying or jettisoning the working hypothesis as necessary.
You are also quite right to observe that in my first two posts I have not added anything "to advance our understanding and interpretation of the evidence about Oswald in New Orleans in 1953-55". Rest assured that at this stage in game, after having immersed myself in all the evidence I could find, I have come up with a working hypothesis which goes way beyond the 1953-55 years. I even went so far as to have communicated my working hypothesis to John Armstrong. He promptly rejected my hypothesis, saying I had no evidence. When I sent him part of the evidence, he rejected the evidence, saying it was faulty. When I asked him why it was faulty and what made his evidence better, he promptly cut me off. The running theme through the entire e-mail conversation was "READ MY BOOK! IT'S ALL THERE!" I had suggested to John in passing that I would eventually like to bring my hypothesis and evidence to some public forum, which he pooh-poohed as a waste of time. But I am not willing to give up just yet!
As for what my working hypothesis is, I would like to reserve that for the present because I know there is a lot of evidence that it does not explain and I don't want to get into a premature debate about what is wrong with it until I get a better handle on the evidence. So that is why I am focusing so much here on questioning the evidence. In my contributions I do want to focus on the 1953-55 years because my gut tells me this is where we can best sort through these two Oswalds. And, yes, my working hypothesis does involve two Oswalds and two Marguerites!
So I thank you for sticking with me despite my indiscretions. I'll keep plugging away at all the interesting evidence and ideas that you and David (and anybody else out there) raise and interjecting some evidence and ideas of my own as welL. But please don't get mad at me if I have trouble keeping up with you guys in upcoming posts. I'm still a working stiff and have a bunch of US History exams to grade!
It took me the better part of 9 months to put together my side-by-side based on the book and the source documents.
and I've only made it to Jan 1962 (p.400 out of 1000 in the book) while I have reviewed MANY of the Poage docs.... I have found numerous occassions where LEE and HARVEY are active in different parts of the world, or different parts of the same city
I look forward to discussing your 2 Oswald - 2 MO theory...
Going back to this most interesting time period... 1953.
Bruce, ask yourself who is attending PS44 during the time HARVEY is at YOUTH HOUSE? From April 23 to May 8 1953..
and to step back even more... In early Nov 1953 an event occurs that is denied by Robert, told by Pic and represents a HUGE CHANGE in little Oswald's behavior...
Up to that point L/H had been living with John and his wife but were asked to leave due to problems with the MO caretaker (I am not sure whether this is the mother or caretaker... my gut tells me it MUST have been LEE and his mother until they move to 1455 Sheridan or 825 E. 179th and that on that Nov day the REAL MO and HARVEY are at the apartment when they are visited... LEE's, now HARVEY's behavior, is a 180 degree change... This MAY have been onpurpose to estrange himself from John... Since John feels this boy WAS LEE yet had changed behavior so drastically... it MAY have been HARVEY already in the process of switching over...
Mr. PIC - Just a minute, sir. That is where I began my notes. August 1952, my
mother and Lee came to New York. They brought with them quite a bit of luggage,
and their own TV set. On my way home I had to walk about 8 to 10 blocks to the
subway, and Lee walked up to meet me as I was walking home, I told my wife and
Lee decided to go up and meet me. We met in the street and I was real glad to
see him and he was real glad to see me. 'We were real good friends. I think a
matter of a few days or so I took my leave. Lee and I visited some of the
landmarks of New York, the Museum of Natural History, Polk's Hobby Shop on 5th
Avenue. I took him on the Staten Island ferry, and several other excursions we
made.
Mr. JENNER - Did your brother's wife accompany him?
Mr. PIC - He wasn't married at that time, sir.
Mr. JENNER - He wasn't married?
Mr. PIC - I think this was, his leave was probably in October or November 1952, a matter of a month or two after they had moved out. We visited their apartment in the Bronx.
Mr. JENNER - Excuse me, where did your brother stay?
Mr. PIC - I think he stayed at the Soldier-Sailor-Airmen Club in New York.
Mr. JENNER - In any event he did not stay with you.
Mr. PIC - No, sir; he may have stayed with my mother also. I don't think so. Maybe for a night or two. We went out, my wife fixed him up with a date with one of her girl friends and we went out together a couple of times. So, we were invited up there for this Sunday dinner. So it was my mother, Lee, Robert, my wife, myself, and my son.
Robert was already there when we arrived. When Lee seen me or my wife he left the room. For dinner he sat in the front room watching TV and didn't join us whatsoever
Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir; we were corresponding infrequently, I would say--not very many letters between I and Lee direct when I was in the service, especially the first part of my tour in the service.
In 1952, after traveling from Camp Pendleton, Calif., to Jacksonville, Fla. I did have a 10-day leave. They were in New York City at that time.
Mr. JENNER. This was then some time in 1953, I take it? Mr. OSWALD. No, sir--1952.
Mr. JENNER. 1952?
Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir. This was---- Mr. JENNER. You mean your mother and Lee that is the period of time they were in New York City?
Mr. OSWALD. That's correct.
Mr. JENNER. Living there.
Mr. OSWALD. Yes, sir.
Mr. JENNER. Did you see them? Mr. OSWALD. No, sir; not at that time. I spent my leave in Fort Worth, because I did not feel I had enough time to travel to New York and down to Jacksonville, Fla. After completing metalsmith school at Millington, Tenn., I took a 10-day leave
Mr. PIC - .......When Lee seen me or my wife he left the room. For dinner he sat in the front room watching TV and didn't join us whatsoever.
Mr. JENNER - He did not join you for dinner?
Mr. PIC - No, sir. Didn't speak to me or my wife.
Mr. JENNER - That put a kind of pall on the visit, did it not?
Mr. PIC - Yes, sir.
Mr. JENNER - Did you--he didn't speak to you. Did you attempt to speak with him?
Mr. PIC - Yes, sir; I did.
Mr. JENNER - Did he answer you? Mr. PIC - He shrugged his shoulders a couple of times maybe. He wasn't interested in anything I had to say.
Mr. JENNER - He was definitely hostile to you and to Mrs. Pic?
Mr. PIC - Yes, sir.
Mr. PIC - That is right. So in February 1953, (this is in the middle of the Jan-March WHERE's LEE period when HARVEY is truant and sent to YOUTH HOUSE) my wife and I were again invited to their apartment. This may or may not have been the same apartment we originally visited. I don't remember, sir. I know it was up in the Bronx. I think it may have been a different apartment. Is that right?
Mr. JENNER - Yes.
Mr. PIC - As my wife and I walked in, Lee walked out and my mother informed us that he would probably go to the Bronx Zoo. We had Sunday dinner, and in the course of the conversation my mother informed me that Lee was having a truancy problem and that the school officials had suggested that he might need psychiatric aid to combat his truancy problem.
She informed me that Lee said that he would not see a head shrinker or nut doctor, and she wanted any suggestions or opinions from me as to how to get him to see him, and I told her just take him down there. That is all I could suggest.
(this would be the last time he sees his half brother until 1962, Thanksgiving.)
Mr. JENNER - How did he look to you physically as compared with when you had seen him last? Mr. PIC - I would have never recognized him, sir.
Mr. JENNER - What did you notice?
Mr. PIC - He was much thinner than I had remembered him. He didn't have as much hair.
Mr. JENNER - Did that arrest your attention? Was that a material difference? Did that strike you?
Mr. PIC - Yes, sir; it struck me quite profusely.
Mr. JENNER - What else did you notice about his physical appearance that arrested your attention? Mr. PIC - 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. His face was rounder. 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. I looked for this, I didn't notice this at all, sir.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]5547[/ATTACH]
Here is the 52-54 school years side-by-side.... If you can assist with accuracy abnd/or more detail - it would be appreciated
DJ
[ATTACH=CONFIG]5548[/ATTACH]
Once in a while you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter
David: Thanks for your posting and for your detailed chronology of the New York years. Are you suggesting that the violent behavior exhibited by Lee Oswald in New York was part of a charade, and that the boy was being directed to give the impression of a personality disorder as part of the creation of the Oswald "legend"? Would this be true for the notorious knife incident when Lee apparently threatened the wife of John Pic?
Bruce: The part of Myra DaRouse's interview that I find absolutely credible is the concern that she had for a little boy who appeared to her as an underdog. Her testimony about seeing him alone on the schoolyard well beyond the school hours was the experience that a dedicated teacher would remember. She even states that she felt the boy's home life was so dreary that he preferred to wander around the playground alone after the school day. We may not get closure on such matters as the homeroom, but what is clear to me is that Myra recreated for us a profile of a young student that is at odds with the Oswald created by the Warren Commission. In his discussion of the previous years in New York, David has presented some compelling data about two contrasting Oswald personalities being developed. Do you think that the testimony of Myra DaRouse supports that of Dr. Milton Kurion, who interviewed in NYC a little boy that is a virtual match for the young Oswald described by Myra?
James Norwood Wrote:David: Thanks for your posting and for your detailed chronology of the New York years. Are you suggesting that the violent behavior exhibited by Lee Oswald in New York was part of a charade, and that the boy was being directed to give the impression of a personality disorder as part of the creation of the Oswald "legend"? Would this be true for the notorious knife incident when Lee apparently threatened the wife of John Pic?
Bruce: The part of Myra DaRouse's interview that I find absolutely credible is the concern that she had for a little boy who appeared to her as an underdog. Her testimony about seeing him alone on the schoolyard well beyond the school hours was the experience that a dedicated teacher would remember. She even states that she felt the boy's home life was so dreary that he preferred to wander around the playground alone after the school day. We may not get closure on such matters as the homeroom, but what is clear to me is that Myra recreated for us a profile of a young student that is at odds with the Oswald created by the Warren Commission. In his discussion of the previous years in New York, David has presented some compelling data about two contrasting Oswald personalities being developed. Do you think that the testimony of Myra DaRouse supports that of Dr. Milton Kurion, who interviewed in NYC a little boy that is a virtual match for the young Oswald described by Myra?
James
The product of many hours... thanks... as I say, I have this type of chronology thru early 62... much more work to do as I also believe that LEE was in and around DALLAS the entire time.
I am suggesting one of two things... the boy that shined on Pic and family was either LEE acting out of character, or this is now HARVEY and he is avoiding the relatives and being put into action via the REAL mother.... Evidence suggests all along that puts the real MO and Robert at the center of it the charade.... and just WHO is the caretaker of HARVEY ????
It occurs to me that Pic must know his mother at this point... 10 years have not gone by so that his mother could look so different to him...
But the boy's behavior is puzzling. And then for LEE not to be there in February 1953, during the truancy days... suggests to me that LEE is now out of the picture (or being encouraged to lash out - the "knife" incident is still no completely known imo... the story of what occurred has many POVs...
If something concrete comes up for the Summer/Fall 52 and 53... I'd love to see it.
You are aware of the TIPPIT to Tippit call about HARVEY's father and uncle being NYC communists?
DJ
Once in a while you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter
