James Lateer's THE THREE BARONS: THE ORGANIZATIONAL CHART OF THE KENNEDY ASSASSINATION

[James Lateer]

Maybe soon I can figure out how this software works. Since I have Me and Lee by Baker on my top 10 books list, here's why:
(1) Baker clearly was using some sort of method the source of was not quite clear. She couldn't have remembered every act of every morning noon and night of a three month period 50 years ago. Maybe she had a diary which she didn't want anyone to know about for legal reasons or security reasons. Maybe she dramatized or fictionalized some stuff about going to a certain restaurant on a certain day, etc.
(2) Her information about the weaponized cancer research project is backed up by Ed Haslem in Dr. Mary's Monkey. Haslem's father was a medical school professor in New Orleans at the time.
(3) Baker is sometimes accused of going through the facts of LHO in New Orleans and fictionalizing a role for herself to explain all the missing and unknown facts, such as Oswald's whereabouts on each day, etc.
(4) The point is that Baker explains the missing facts on an airtight basis. Whether her narrative is bare bones or embellished to me is secondary.
(5) The facts she accounts for are as many as 100. The big one is her explanation as to why Ed Butler and Dr. Alton Ochsner went to DC to testify while Oswald was still in jail on 11-24-63. This, of course, is on record.
(6) She also explains why LHO was "applying" for the job in the Mental Hospital 100 miles from his home and didn't drive a car.
(7) She explains the details of what Oswald was doing in working for Reily Coffee Company. This includes the reason why Garrison reported that his NOLA witnesses were hired away from Reily Coffee and sent to NASA to shield them from testimony.
(8) The main reason (I think) people are Judyth V Baker deniers is that The Ochsner Clinic is such a big deal in New Orleans today. Its just too shocking to believe that Ochsner was an American Dr. Mengele.
(9) At worst, Me and Lee is another book like "Treason For My Daily Bread." "Treason" by Lebedev presents the only detailed portrayal of how the real issues over in Europe translated to the murder of JFK all the way over to Dallas. It's a unique rendition of "on the ground" operations. It's the only fairly accurate portrayal of the central process of the assassination issues and chain of events. Although fictional, the author clearly had some inside knowledge or extremely depthy research. Either way, it is what it is and it's extremely valuable to understanding the JFK murder.
(10) According to my factor analysis using books as the variable, Me and Lee closely correlates to other books which link New Orleans suspects such as On The Trail by Garrison and Heritage of Stone by Garrison. So Judyth V. Baker is working with exactly the right set of NOLA characters. How she fits them together may be slightly flawed or embellished in a certain way but that is apparently for literary and rhetorical reasons, i.e. in order to best tell the story, not to mislead anyone about the plot or as to who is guilty. And frankly, there may be no embellishment or exaggeration at all. It may be hard to know the exact answer to that question.

[David Josephs]

Maybe soon I can figure out how this software works. Since I have Me and Lee by Baker on my top 10 books list, here's why:
(1) Baker clearly was using some sort of method the source of was not quite clear. She couldn't have remembered every act of every morning noon and night of a three month period 50 years ago. Maybe she had a diary which she didn't want anyone to know about for legal reasons or security reasons. Maybe she dramatized or fictionalized some stuff about going to a certain restaurant on a certain day, etc.
(2) Her information about the weaponized cancer research project is backed up by Ed Haslem in Dr. Mary's Monkey. Haslem's father was a medical school professor in New Orleans at the time.
(3) Baker is sometimes accused of going through the facts of LHO in New Orleans and fictionalizing a role for herself to explain all the missing and unknown facts, such as Oswald's whereabouts on each day, etc.
(4) The point is that Baker explains the missing facts on an airtight basis. Whether her narrative is bare bones or embellished to me is secondary.
(5) The facts she accounts for are as many as 100. The big one is her explanation as to why Ed Butler and Dr. Alton Ochsner went to DC to testify while Oswald was still in jail on 11-24-63. This, of course, is on record.
(6) She also explains why LHO was "applying" for the job in the Mental Hospital 100 miles from his home and didn't drive a car.
(7) She explains the details of what Oswald was doing in working for Reily Coffee Company. This includes the reason why Garrison reported that his NOLA witnesses were hired away from Reily Coffee and sent to NASA to shield them from testimony.
(8) The main reason (I think) people are Judyth V Baker deniers is that The Ochsner Clinic is such a big deal in New Orleans today. Its just too shocking to believe that Ochsner was an American Dr. Mengele.
(9) At worst, Me and Lee is another book like "Treason For My Daily Bread." "Treason" by Lebedev presents the only detailed portrayal of how the real issues over in Europe translated to the murder of JFK all the way over to Dallas. It's a unique rendition of "on the ground" operations. It's the only fairly accurate portrayal of the central process of the assassination issues and chain of events. Although fictional, the author clearly had some inside knowledge or extremely depthy research. Either way, it is what it is and it's extremely valuable to understanding the JFK murder.
(10) According to my factor analysis using books as the variable, Me and Lee closely correlates to other books which link New Orleans suspects such as On The Trail by Garrison and Heritage of Stone by Garrison. So Judyth V. Baker is working with exactly the right set of NOLA characters. How she fits them together may be slightly flawed or embellished in a certain way but that is apparently for literary and rhetorical reasons, i.e. in order to best tell the story, not to mislead anyone about the plot or as to who is guilty. And frankly, there may be no embellishment or exaggeration at all. It may be hard to know the exact answer to that question.

Uh, yeah.... not so much James. Take a few minutes and read thru this please... Judy's house of cards tumbles very easily.... and this addresses what she considers her "best" evidence

https://statick2k-5f2f.kxcdn.com/images/...ker-DJ.pdf

[James Lateer]

Mr. Josephs: What a sheer pleasure to read through your pointed and detailed analysis of the problems with the information presented by Judyth Vary Baker. Having read Me and Lee and also Dr. Mary's Monkey by Ed Haslem, I would agree that there are valid questions which can be raised about her info. Let me analyze the items you questions one at a time.

(1) The visit to Clinton, LA.---The issue about the testimony of the barber, the car, the baby carrier in the car, etc. is a very difficult thing to critique. Eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable regarding physical descriptions of people, cars, sequencing of events and so on. Just look at the testimony as to who shot officer Tippit. Oswald apparently got his hair cut in Clinton by a barber. That's about all you can take away from that entire situation. What car, his companions, his conversations, are all going to be blurry. That's all I can conclude.

(2) As for the reason for the presence of Oswald in Clinton, you should read the book General Walker...by Dr. Jeffry Caufield. Dr. Caufield completely explains why Oswald was there. LHO was trying to infiltrate the civil rights group CORE in cooperation with the Louisiana Sovereignty Commission and the Senate committee of Senator James O. Eastland. The central target of this effort, James Dombrowski, was head of the SCEF in New Orleans. I personally went through 110 boxes of Dombrowskis papers including his interrogation by Eastland, his FBI file, etc. There is no possible doubt in my mind that Oswald was working for Eastland to destroy the Civil Rights movement through the courts.

(3) There seems to be little doubt that Dr. Alton Ochsner was working on this cancer projects. Why else would he go to Washington and testify to Eastland's committee WHEN OSWALD WAS STILL ALIVE AND IN JAIL? He testified together with Ed Butler. Butler's testimony that day was classified and withheld and is still withheld today. Jack Ruby claimed he (Ruby) was injected with cancer. That cancer apparently came from the cancer project. The autopsy of Ruby found that the cancer in his lungs was not lung cancer, but some other variety of cancer. The average lung cancer victim lives 8 months. Ruby died in four weeks.

(4) The question about the W-2 is valid. I worked as a student computer operator beginning in 1966 and operated an IBM 1401 which was the first mainframe they sold to businesses. Over the 40 following years, I prepared thousands of W-2s and 1099's using computers. The W-2 which you analyze which belonged to Judyth Vary Baker was a computer form, a "pin-feed" form due to the holes on the side. The name of the company Wm B. Reily & Co. is computer-printed but the name, address and dollar amounts are done on a typewriter. These blank computer forms were printed and provided to employers by companies like UARCO business forms and received IRS approval just for their version of the form. This means that each form could be unique to the seller of the forms although they all had to pretty much follow the IRS guidelines for the spacing.

I don't know why the company name would be printed on computer but the employee information typed? Companies often put the computer pin-feed forms into a typewriter, but the entire form would be blank and hand-typed. The company name would not be computer-printed all by itself. There is probably a reason for that, but I have no idea what the reason would be. As for which copy was kept by the employee, anyone who has manually done their taxes knows that the original and copies B,C,D are often confused since they have the same information. Again, like the eyewitness testimony in Clinton, I don't see anything conclusive except that it would be diffiicult for Judyth Baker to obtain pin-feed W-2 forms years later, since the IRS did not provide pin-feed forms for the current year, much less for years long past.

(5) IMHO just forget the fact that Senator George Smathers was a groomsman at JFK's wedding. I have to apologize, because unfortunately I read the memoirs of the widow of Hale Boggs, "Lindy" Boggs. She claimed that she and Hale Boggs were best personal friends with JFK. Mrs. Boggs admitted that she rushed her relatives into the Oval Office just before 11-22-63 so they wouldn't miss out on meeting JFK. Mrs. Boggs not only endorsed (in my reading of it) the murder of JFK but she also endorsed (in my reading) the murder of Huey Long back in the 1930's. So the fact that Smathers was a "close buddy" of JFK would mean absolutely nothing to the type of people who murdered him.

(6) Smathers was involved in the investigation of General Julius Klein by the Fulbright Foreign Relations Committee in 1963. General Klein admitted that Smathers was one of his adversaries. Klein was the "shadow ambassador" for West Germany and the bag man involved in the payoffs to the Senators who obligingly covered up the assassination. Look at the following link where Smathers is in a tussle with General Klein and I.G. Farben (Clay Shaw's files were found in a box in the archives labeled "I G Farben)."

https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=u...p;seq=1970

(7) As proven by Dr. Caufield, Jim Garrison was hopelessly compromised in attempting to do his duties regarding the assassination. Garrison, as DA, had represented the very right wing, Louisiana Sovereignty type officials and other people who were using Oswald as an informant. Also, as former military, former FBI and an elected official, he was bound to cover the butt of the FBI, the military and elected officials. Having worked in government, I know people in government cover for each other, except in flagrant bribery cases or similar situations. So if you eliminate all those groups who had a history with Garrison, who is left? Almost nobody.

I also feel that Garrison was prone to draw very shaky conclusions from very solid evidence. An example would be the theory that Oswald was going to be proven to be a mental patient at the Jackson Mental Hospital. That is not even a remote possibility in my opinion.

To summarize, in reading Me and Lee by Judyth Vary Baker, my main complaint is that I don't see how she claimed to remember everything she did at every hour of the day or night for a 3 month period 50 years in the past. Can you remember what you did on Sepember 23, 1966? Or January 20, 1969? I can't. She must have had a diary or journal and she must have concealed that fact to keep it out of the hands of authority, attorneys, thieves or other people. That's all I can guess at as an explanation.

The other thing is that since Ms. Baker (who in telling her story comes across as almost a saint, I have to say), does boast that she has a tested IQ of 160. So it would not be surprising if she used "artistic license" to dress up her narrative, just to show off her intelligence, if for no other reason. If I had an IQ of 160, I would probably show off, too.

Again, many thanks to you, Mr. Joseph for sharing your insightful analysis of a very (Vary) controversial subject!

James Lateer