Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile

[James H. Fetzer]

DAVID LIFTON/JIM FETZER EXCHANGE ABOUT JUDYTH

NOTE: This is such an illuminating exchange with David Lifton
that I wanted to share it with the members of the forum. Based
upon a phone conversation with Judyth on 4 March 2000, David
concluded that she was a fake, a "fantasist", if you will, who has
concocted an elaborate fantasy in order to inject herself onto the
pages of history regarding the alleged assassin of JFK. This is a
strong stance to take, for which he believes he is fully justified.

The elements of his conversation with Judyth that led him to be
uncharitable in his estimation of her truthfulness and integrity
included (i) her description of how Lee was dressed on the day
that they met, (ii) her claim that she and Lee had known the
name of Lee's handler (David Atlee Phillips) (iii) and her claim
to have suggested that Lee take laxatives to excuse himself
from even being present on the day of the assassination.

Another claim that she made that he could not believe was the
story of them meeting for a rendevous at a hotel in the middle
of the jungle in Mexico in the resort of Cancun, which he found
incredible, especially since Cancun did not exist at the time. As
Judyth has explained in post #665 on page 45, the hotel was not
situated in the city of Cancun but in the village called Kan Kun,
where it has existed since the 1930s. Lifton made a mistake
over the phone, because they are both pronounced the same.

HE ONLY TELLS YOU TO FOCUS ON "CANCUN" AS HE HEARD IT
OVER THE PHONE. I WAS CRUCIFIED OVER THAT ISSUE UNTIL
DEB BERT AND OTHERS NOTED THAT MAYALAND WAS BUILT
RIGHT THERE AT CHICHEN-IZA, WHERE I SAID LEE AND I
WOULD MEET. LOOK AT A MAP AND POINT YOUR FINGER
HERE -- THE OLD MAPS WE LOOKED AT SAID "KANKUN",
THE NEW ONES SAY THE CITY "CANCUN". And she's right!

In that same post, she has explained that David Lifton made
a second mistake in assuming that Lee had arrived in New
Orleans on the same day he went for an interview. As she
corrects the record, Lee arrived on April 25th, they met the
morning of the 26th, and he arrived in presentable clothing
for his interview that afternoon. This is the second blunder
that David Lifton has made in dismissing Judyth's account.

With regard to knowing the name of Lee's handler, which,
as we know today, was David Atlee Phillips, Judyth has also
explained--in that post but also others--that they overheard
the name "Phillips" being mentioned by Boatner's secretary
and Bill Monaghanm which they used as data in fashioning
a conjecture about his identity. It was less certain that we
often associate with knowing but not without supporting
evidence. I would refer to it today as "an educated guess".

What Judyth has to say in response to David's rejection is
completely reasonable to me, especially when she has her
own supporting evidence about the existence of the hotel
in the middle of the jungle. She even explained to him at
the time of their telephone conversation--which is quoted
in part in post #408 on page 28--so David should have
known that he was imposing too strong an interpretation
upon what Judyth had said to him about figuring it out.

He also debunks the laxative story, which is his right.
But think about it. He faulted Judyth on three counts,
where in each case she appears to have been right and
Lifton was wrong. If we used a "three strikes" rule, then
it would follow that Lifton has "struck out"! What is most
important about all of this, however, is that the points he
took to be false about Judyth's story were implausible.

In other words, they sounded "far-fetched", beyond the
realm of plausibility in his mind. And they were highly
implausible--but they turned out to be true! And there
is more than one aspect to this. Not only are they true,
but they are so implausible that only someone who knew
they were true would offer them as elements of a story
about their relationship with Lee on any other grounds!

The situation, from a logical point of view, means that
these implausible but true elements of Judyth's story
demonstrate (a) that she is not "a fantasist" making
this stuff up--I mean, ask yourself, if you were making
up a story would you included elements like these?--
and (B) that her credibility is dramatically enhanced
each time one of the implausible elements turns out
to be true. That is the case here but also elsewhere.

The story about the laxatives strikes me as fascinating
on several counts, because with her knowledge about
medicine and physiology--wanting to have Lee out of
the picture on the day of the assassination but without
raising alarm among his associates--she came up with
a very practical and easily implemented solution to the
dilemma: create the simulation of a physical illness. I
can't imagine how anyone could fantasize about ExLax!

David tells me that he is "sorry to see you taken in by
all this malarky." But it's only "malarky" if it isn't true.
So far as I can see, the efforts to debunk Judyth have
backfired again and again. Even the most implausible
elements of her story have turned out to be true. And
each time that happens, it enhances her credibility. So,
as I explained to him, I am very comfortable being in
my position--standing with Judyth, in whom I believe.

Here is our email exchange and David's attachments:

Third Email from me to David Lifton:

Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 09:00:44 -0500 [09:00:44 AM CDT]
From: jfetzer@d.umn.edu
To: "David S. Lifton" <dlifton@earthlink.net>
Cc: jfetzer@d.umn.edu
Subject: Re: Your Judyth phone call transcript . . .

David,

Thank you for this very appropriate letter, which I appreciate. I will
discuss the matter with Judyth and find out if she would be willing to
sign a release. Debra is a flyweight and her conduct does not surprise
me. The three points you make about meeting Lee, Cancun, and laxative
have been rebutted by Judyth on the Simkin forum. Many of her replies
are also appearing on the Deep Politics Forum. While I understand your
concern--given your beliefs about her, based upon your interpretation of
the facts of the matter--I remain convinced that she is "the real deal"
and serves as a enormous reservoir of information about the man accused
of the crime. The very initial implausibility of what she said to you,
in light of "the rest of the story", only reinforces my belief in her.

I am not about to abandon her. Not only does she know more about Lee
than anyone else in the world but she is far better at research than
95% of those who have ever studied the case. You may find this rather
ironic, but as I became more and more convinced of her authenticity, I
contemplated suggesting that you collaborate with her in producing the
definitive study of Lee! That of course is not about to occur, but I
am proud to stand with her and do all I can to bring her story to the
public for the light that it sheds on the murkiest aspect of the case.
I presume you have no objection to my sharing this letter with Judyth
and I do appreciate having the attachments. Thank you for all of this.

Warm regards, my friend!

Jim

P.S. I hope you will contribute to discussion of "the two Oswalds",
which I am coming to believe is the greatest scam perpetrated
in the history of the study of JFK--apart from accusing Lee!

Second Email from David Lifton to me:

Quoting "David S. Lifton" <dlifton@earthlink.net>:

Jim,

There was a time, years ago--and specifically, 10 years ago--when the
cassette tape of Judyth (and some copies) sat nearby. This was in the
aftermath of that March 2000 phone call, when I reviewed it multiple times,
with a good friend, and with Robert Chapman, and formed the opinions I did.

As you know, I concluded she was a very smart (but deluded) woman who was a
fantast, and who was methodically inserting herself into the record,
wherever she could. The proper medical word for this was "pseudologia
fantastica" and it has also been referred to as "mythomania."

As I have already said, I am very sorry to see you taken in by all this,
because there's little question in my mind that this will impact negatively
on your work in other areas--and I am very interested in those "other
areas," especially those involving the falsification of the medical evidence
in this case, and the Zapruder film.

But back to Judyth:

It was very obvious what she was doing, and how she was going about doing
it, and rather early on, I decided to opt out, because I did not want to
engage in further debate on the matter. But I watched as Paul Hoch, Reitzes,
and others, systematically destroyed just about every claim she was making.

As to my phone call with her on March 4, 2000:

I offered to have the phone call transferred to an MP-3 file and posted on
the internet--IF Judyth would sign a proper release, so there would be no
legal issues.

At the time, Shackelford, et al, were screaming this was unfair, that she
would certainly NOT sign a release, etc.

And so there the matter rested.

But with this one footnote, or postscript, and that concerns the only
transcript that was ever made of the conversation.

THE DEBRA CONWAY TRANSCRIPT

The only transcript that was ever made was one created by Debra Conway. She
offered to make a transcript, but the experience was very disappointing. At
the time (as I recall) Debra was going through a phase where she thought
Judyth was authentic, and so she was protective of her.

After she heard the tape, Debra behaved peculiarly. She refused to send me
the transcript, or return my tape, unless I agreed never to post it on the
internet. Since, by that time, I had had enough of this nonsense, and
really had no interest in posting it, I agreed. Shortly thereafter, the
transcript was sent to me, and the tape returned.

Then, the fun and games started.

THE DEBRA CONWAY INTERLUDE

Some two years later, the matter of Cancun came up, and I dug up the
transcript to verify something. To my surprise,there was no mention of
"Cancun" on the transcript. For a few days, I was confused. I consulted
with Paul Hoch and Robert Chapman. Had we all imagined this? Was Cancun
mentioned only in the manuscript, but not in the phone call?

Then I had to dig up the tape, which I did, and set aside time to check the
tape. Within minutes, I had verified that the Cancun statement was there,
and then --checking the transcript--confronted the fact that Debra Conway
had omitted the Cancun statement from the transcript. Let me say that
again: Debra Conway prepared a transcript which OMITTED the Cancun
statement, which was on the tape.

As far as I was concerned, that was the end of the line for me, as far as
Debra Conway was concerned. I could not believe that this omission was
anything but deliberate.

I spent a few minutes checking other parts of the transcript, and found
other errors, and decided it was an unreliable document.

So I never relied on it, never posted it anywhere, and simply filed it away.

As I said, I put the whole Judyth episode behind me, some eight years ago
(at least).

As to your request:

First of all: I never made a word-for-word transcript.

Second: The only transcript that was ever made, to my knowledge, is the
inaccurate one that Debra Conway made, and which omits the Cancun reference,
an omission I believe to have been deliberate.

As I have said before: if Judyth will sign a proper legal release, I will be
willing to have the entire conversation, from beginning to end, transferred
to an MP3 or a WAV file, and post it on the Internet.

Then there will be a level playing field, and everyone can hear her the
manner in which she conducted herself in that conversation, and what she
said.

Everyone can then hear, among other things, the following:

* Judyth's reference to that last conversation with LHO, in which she talked
of intending to meet him in Cancun.

*Judyth's statements in which she suggested to Lee that he take a laxative
and pretend to be sick, so that he would not have to show up and fire shots,
etc.

€My careful questioning of her as to what Lee was wearing at that very first
meeting at the U.S. Post Office, where she claimed--repeatedly (and with
considerable emphasis, as I recall) -that he was dressed in workman's
clothes, looked somewhat grubby etc., whereas I very well know otherwise.
Specifically, from my own research and careful study of the chronological
data in the 26 Volumes (and specifically, the Rachal exhibits, and the
Rachal affidavit) that she was supposedly dressed in a suite and tie.
Specifically, and now quoting the Warren Report (which quotes that record):
"Neat. Suit.Tie. Polite." (Rachel Exhibit No. 1) And, in the June, 1964
Rachal affidavit: "I reacll that Oswald was neatly dressed with a suit,
dress shirt, and tie on the occasion of our initial interview." (11 WCH
475).

When Judyth signs a release, I'll post the entire conversation on the
Internet.

Meanwhile, attached find 3 items that may be of interest.

--the Rachal exhibit, an affidavit, which offers evidence contradicting the
way Judyth says LHO was dressed on 4/26/63, the day she first met him



--Her statements about knowing both the name Bishop and Phillips, when she
worked at Reily



--The laxative story







Again, I'm sorry to see you taken in by all this malarky.

DSL

First Email from me to David Lifton:

David,

Judyth has asked me to request a copy of
the transcript (which I am sure you have
created) of your phone call with Judyth.
I would be most appreciative if you would
provide a copy to me so that I can verify
its contents with Judyth. She is actually
very good at this, as I discovered when we
verified the transcript of my first YouTube
interview with her. Thanks for sending it.

Warm regards,

Jim