Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile

[James H. Fetzer]

Thanks for your notes. The Bringuire photos are NOT identical, which of course is the point. The right image has a distorted face due to repeated scanning, which introduced a roughly 10% exaggeration. And, in many ways, I am a "newbie" to this aspect of the case, but sometimes a pair of fresh eyes can see things that others have missed. There are photographs of me at different stages of my life, for example, that anyone but me might have a hard time recognizing. But they are photographs of me.

On the Oswald photos, there seem to me to be a lot of SIMILARITIES in the kinds of features that you usually are eager to measure and compare, including the shape of the ears and distance between eyebrows and things like that. You are the EXPERT and I am the amateur, but I have to sort it all out for myself. And a lot of this goes back to "The Many Faces of Lee Harvey Oswald". Judyth has challenged the conclusion by suggesting a series of interpolations:



I know I have wandered off the reservation in the minds of some. I have always followed logic and evidence to the bitter end, once I have opened my mind to tackling a research project, including, for example, video fakery and no planes on 9/11. This Judyth thing fascinates me because she knows so much and has a lot of supporting evidence. I don't even know if I wish it weren't so, but I believe her and I believe in her and there's really not much I can do about it until the evidence leads me in a different direction. I have a great deal more to learn, but I am doing my best to sort things out.

That's just the way I am when I am studying a case. I do not take for granted that she is right about everything any more than I have taken for granted that you are right about everything. But my interactions with her have been so detailed and so extensive that, if she is not "the real deal", then I am at a loss. Some of your objections to Judyth's story may even be well-founded, but your mind is so massively closed on this subject that I am having a hard time taking you seriously. It seems to me that you are disposed to discount virtually EVERYTHING she has had to tell us, though I do appreciate your list of things about her that you take to be true.

I really wish we were on the same side, but obviously that is not how this is playing out. My questions about John's work, by the way, are quite sincere. After all of our work proving the FAKERY of photographs and films and other forms of planted proof in this case, how do we know which documents and records are real and which are not? I think that is a rather important question, where I am just the least bit floored that you would think asking about how he determined which were real and which are not is out of the ballpark. That seems to me to be a rather basic question.

I have the sense from what you have said before that John vacuumed up all the documents are records he could find and put them together in his book. No doubt, there had to be more to it than that, but what is that MORE? Of course, I am only getting my feet wet here, because I have never explored this aspect of the case before. But I trust you no more doubt my sincerity than I do yours. It seems to me that you are not exercising your critical faculties in this case as you have in the past, but then of course that is what you think is happening with me.

The mouse thing was relevant because that is an actual event where a student reported that Judyth had pee'd on herself when she was doing lab work and it had come from a mouse. The story has hung around forever and she has had to deal with it again and again over the years. She wrote me that, after thinking about John's modus operandi, she supposed the story she had pee'd on herself would have been immortalized in his book, had he included anything about her at all. That he did not bothers me.

I want to believe that he was more circumspect about what he included than he was in dismissing her on the basis of a superficial encounter. Why don't we both think about how MOST of Judyth's story and MOST of John's research might all be true together? I am impressed by HARVEY & LEE but I am also impressed by Judyth--and it has nothing to do with infatuation. I am not going to let this go, and I trust our friendship is going to survive. I can also use your help if figuring out how all of these pieces fit together.

These latest questions are unworthy of any newbie to the case.

Mouse urine, indeed!