Judyth Vary Baker: Living in Exile, Part 2
Interview with Dean Hartwell, DEAD MEN TALKING, about the death of JFK and the relationship between Lee Oswald and Judyth Baker.
REASON #1. Documents and researchers prove Baker and Oswald worked together for months at Wm. B. Reily Co., a coffee company in New Orleans, and that these jobs were pre-arranged cover jobs:
a) The A-1 employment agency shows records for both Oswald and Baker. Reily Coffee Company interviewed both Baker and Oswald on the same day (May 9, 1963). The Reily ads were 2 weeks old, but no one was hired until Baker and Oswald were interviewed. Note: Baker has much additional corroborating evidence, such as check stubs, w-2 forms, exactly matching Oswald’s dates, plus:
b) Oswald, as a ‘gift’ on Baker’s birthday, May 15, pretended to job-hunt at A-1 again, and though employed at Reily’s, told A-1 nothing about having been hired there; at this time, Oswald is on record for the visit, which was to induce A-1 to reduce an unjust fee placed against Baker by A-1, due on May 27. Baker has all relevant records for this event.
c) They were interviewed and hired the same day (May 9) by the same person.
d) They began work the same day, on May 10, at the same address, a block from Reily Coffee Co.
e) They were working in the same small sub-company of Reily, called The Standard Coffee Company, even though that small suite did not have a maintenance man (Oswald’s job for Reily) and Baker was Vice President William Monaghan’s secretary (Monaghan’s two offices were located in the Reily building). Baker was there to launder Oswald’s past so he could transfer with a clean record to Reily’s, for Oswald had been a fake defector to the USSR and had returned from that mission without arrest or detaining, to start new assignments. Reily was known for its ‘patriotic’ anti-communist position.
f) Both Oswald and Baker were transferred on the same day, one week later, to Reily, across the street.
g) The day Oswald was fired (July 19) an ad was ordered to replace Baker; a modified ad with more inducements appeared 2 weeks later when the first ad did not produce a replacement for Baker.
h) The day Oswald was arrested for distributing pro-Castro pamphlets (August 9) Baker was forced to resign. Baker had been at Reily’s primarily to cover for Oswald’s and her activities elsewhere.
i) Baker and Oswald rode the same bus to and from work (Magazine St. bus): there was only one stop between their respective bus stops; their apartments were within walking distance; both Oswald and Baker lived within minutes of each other, and key persons and places mentioned in Edward T. Haslam’s shocking new book (see below). Oswald and Baker bonded when he helped her after a police raid.
Bus 11, riding the Magazine Street.
REASON #2: Baker has the testimonies of living witnesses confirming her intimate relationship with Oswald in New Orleans:
a) William “Mac” McCullough, who was a musician, bouncer and bodyguard for New Orleans godfather Carlos Marcello, describes seeing Oswald and Baker together at a park, a restaurant, and seeing them together on several other occasions. His mother worked at a restaurant where Baker and Oswald ate, and he also saw them at a hotel where he sang and played the piano.
b) Anna Lewis, wife of DAVID FRANKLIN LEWIS (known witness in JFK murder case) who was a private investigator for Guy Banister and an associate with Jack Martin in investigations and political activities in New Orleans, has testified on two audiotapes and on film that she and her husband accompanied Baker and Oswald on double dates in New Orleans, plus sessions of talk at Thompson’s Restaurant in New Orleans, over a period of months. Lewis was pressured to recant her statements but refused to do so.
Video interview with Anna Lewis
c) Baker told her sister, Lynda, that her secret lover had been killed while serving his country, and that he was working for the government in secret missions on the first anniversary of Oswald’s death in 1964, charging Lynda never to mention the matter again. Lynda finally spoke out decades later after Baker released her from this promise.
REASON #3: Baker identified former Customs Agent Charles Thomas, also known as Arthur Young, as the person who was introduced to her by Oswald as the agent who expedited Oswald’s passport (along with others, to disguise the matter) to be issued only 24 hours after requested. Thomas described meeting and befriending Oswald in Buffalo, New York, when Oswald was a young teen.
a) Baker described tattoos on the fingers, silver hair, German accent, his previous Customs station in Buffalo, NY, his connection to anti-Castroites and to the Mafia in Miami, and marriage to a Chitimacha Indian woman to Thomas’ granddaughter, whom she met in a class at The University of Louisiana at Lafayette, LA.
b) The granddaughter, Kelly Thomas, verified that Charles Thomas also used the name Arthur Young, and then brought forth photos showing Cuban and mafia associates; the granddaughter and her family also had photos showing the tattoos on the fingers, the silver hair, verified the German accent and the Customs post in Buffalo, NY, which Thomas headed, even having a photo of the customs station at Buffalo. Charles Thomas had been dead for years and had kept his past a secret from the outside world, living in obscurity on the Chitimacha Indian reservation with his Chitimacha wife after the assassination.
c) Baker contacted researcher Joan Mellen with details about Thomas; Mellen later wrote in her book that she had obtained evidence that Oswald worked with Customs and described his connections to Customs, without giving Baker any credit for the lead. This lack of giving credit has occurred several times with researchers.
REASON #4: Baker has provided a cashed $30 American Express money order receipt dated May 27, 1963, linked to her bank records and receipts and to letters from Oswald indicating his use of $30 for office rent on the same date.
a) The American Express receipt is linked in such a way as to show it was illogical for Baker to have purchased it for any reason other than to give Oswald an untraceable $30 ‘donation’ that he, with limited income, would not have to account for via his small salary. $30 = approx. $270 in today’s funds.
b) An American Express file about Oswald exists in Rotterdam, Holland.
c) Oswald received multiple American Express money orders from an unknown source in 1963.
d) Witness Delphine Roberts has testified to Anthony Summers that Oswald had an office.
REASON #5: Baker has a green glass which has been in her possession since 1963, given to her by Oswald, known to many by 1980 as given to her by Oswald.
a) Over 30 people heard Baker, in 1980, explain that the glass had been given to her by Lee Harvey Oswald at Reily company, in 1963, and that they had ‘worked together’ there.
b) Baker’s son, Josiah, has confirmed this; he also remembered his mother describing streetcar and bus rides with Oswald in New Orleans.
c) Baker’s daughter, Sarah, remembers accidentally throwing away a note that Oswald wrote that was kept in the glass, and has been able to describe the note, and how upset her mother was. This event occurred during a household move from Orlando, Florida, to Lafayette, Louisiana. She also affirms that the green glass was given to her mother by Oswald.
REASON #6: Baker provides evidence that her job and Oswald’s job at Reily’s were cover jobs for clandestine activities elsewhere.
a) Baker provides time cards and clock-in/clock-out records showing Oswald’s outrageously late clock-ins, for which he was unaccountably not docked, while others who were late were docked, with Warren Commission testimonies backing her information; the clock-outs are precise, the clock-ins, irregular. Baker provides explanations: these and other details, such as 4907 mail problems, were not noticed by researchers–until Baker pointed out much that was obviously wrong in the official record.
b) Baker provides inside knowledge of Oswald’s whereabouts that for the first time explains them logically, with important direct and circumstantial evidence to support her statements; many of her statements have been confirmed later by other researchers, following her leads; usually, she was not given any credit for these leads, but comparing her statements with researchers’ ‘finds’ confirm her pre-knowledge.
c) Baker provides a financial information/character report on Oswald showing how it was deliberately created and rigged by herself and Oswald to cover up Oswald’s past, including his nearly 3-year stay in Russia as a defector, so that the highly conservative, anti-communist Reily Co. would be able to employ Oswald; a close and careful examination of all testimony concerning this document proves collusion.
REASON #7: Edward T. Haslam investigated Baker and has confirmed her ability to conduct secret lab activities in New Orleans as described thoroughly in his landmark 2007 book, Dr. Mary’s Monkey. Haslam, a New Orleans native who knew some of the persons encountered by Baker and Oswald, only learned about Baker’s still being alive through Sixty Minutes investigators. Haslam describes Baker and Oswald’s clandestine activity together in New Orleans, with verified information as to its importance.
a) Baker provides substantial reasons for why she should never have been employed at Reily’s as a Vice President’s secretary, when her expertise was in cancer research and medical technology: New Orleans’ Ochsner Clinic was world-renowned as a cancer research center.
b) It’s reasonable to assume that Baker would not leave her studies, family, and friends in Florida simply to become a secretary in New Orleans. Her ease in obtaining a well-paying chemistry research position soon after her return to Florida proves she had no reason to leave unless it was originally, as she asserts, to work under the prestigious Doctors Ochsner and Sherman.
c) Haslam himself is a living witness that Judyth Vary Baker was impersonated in New Orleans in the 1970’s when he was trying to find out more information about the clandestine lab activities.
Interview with Ed Haslam, author of “Dr. Mary’s Monkey”
REASON #8: Film producer Nigel Turner had successfully presented six documentaries in the popular series, The Men Who Killed Kennedy, a secure fixture on The History Channel that ran more than two decades. On the recommendation of known CIA asset Gerry Hemming, Turner investigated Baker and her witnesses for over a year. He photographed much of her evidence. He filmed her for 38 hours and matched 55 hours of her spoken testimony taken months earlier on a tape recorder with her filmed testimony. He had witnesses Baker knew nothing about verifying many of her statements. Turner was contracted by The History Channel to produce two more documentaries in the popular series–The Smoking Guns, and The Guilty Men–but requested and received permission (and then filmed) a third segment – The Love Affair, about Oswald and Baker’s romance and clandestine activities together in New Orleans, and their continuing relationship until Oswald’s death two days after Kennedy’s assassination. But Turner got too close to the truth, and all hell broke loose, destroying his series.
The Love Affair (The Men Who Killed Kennedy)
a) The Love Affair was the first and only time in Turner’s series where only one person–-Baker–was featured for the entire documentary. Though banned in America, it is currently an underground favorite on YouTube and is a popular underground film overseas.
b) Living witness statements supporting Baker’s testimony were illegally withheld by a third hostile party who essentially stole the videotapes. They were later recovered, but were not included in the documentary. There may have been plans to produce a sequel to the documentary with witnesses.
c) There was an outcry from Official Version Oswald-did-it important people, such as former President Ford, Jack Valenti and Mrs. Lyndon Johnson and her friends, over the new documentaries, and suddenly, three were banned, though the series was supposed to run for nine years.
The Men Who Killed Kennedy 7 of 9 – The Smoking Guns
d) Over 50,000 copies–prepaid–were destroyed and money returned, as a board of historians were called together by The History Channel to pronounce the documentaries falsely incriminating of former President Lyndon Johnson, who is clearly indicated as ruthless and involved. However, NONE of the historians met with or conferred with ANY of the witnesses, including Baker, nor did they look at ANY evidence whatsoever. This was the first documentary ever banned by The History Channel, or by anyone, so far as we are aware. In 2007, The History Channel lampooned Baker’s testimony.
e) Nigel Turner was systematically maligned on the Internet and has been incommunicado since 2004.
f) Baker was systematically maligned on the internet with big, impressive websites against her, and with newsgroup posts creating lies (such as that Baker claimed to be of Russian nobility, or that she said she was offered $600,000 for her story by a tabloid, or that she was a close friend of Dr. Suess, that Liberace learned how to play the piano on her father’s piano, and other ridiculous statements ‘proving’ she was non-credible!). Other statements claiming to be Baker’s flooded newsgroups, ruining her reputation. Arrest threats, job loss, and death threats began to plague her life.
The Men Who Killed Kennedy 9 of 9 – The Guilty Men
Reason #9: Wealthy Dutch researcher and film producer Wim Dankbaar investigated Baker and her witnesses for six years and fully supports her testimony and story.
a) Dankbaar provides DVDs of Baker and her witnessess’ statements and their stories on his website.
b) Dankbaar twice tried to produce a movie about Baker’s story, but was stopped the first time by a contract by a co-producer (Woods) who demanded Baker’s lifetime story rights, and the second time by a specious lawsuit by Robert Vernon, who stole evidence and spread lies about Dankbaar and Baker on the Internet. Vernon also distributed pornography about Baker and urged potential witnesses not to talk to Baker or Dankbaar. Important corroborating evidence, such as phone call records and films, have now vanished. Some witnesses were threatened and lost their jobs. Baker was hit twice by vehicles in Dallas.
Reason #10: Famed Dutch investigator Peter DeVries, noted for uncovering political crimes and frauds, and solving murder cases, investigated Baker in 2005-2006.
a) DeVries fully supported Baker’s testimony and story in an internationally televised miniseries shown across Europe in 2006.
b) DeVries recently uncovered new evidence in the Aruba murder case famed in the US, using secret cameras and microphones, uncovering a confession no one else was able to obtain.
Reason #11: CBS’s Sixty Minutes investigated Baker’s testimony and story for eighteen months and nearly filmed it three times. They called it their “longest and most expensive investigation” in their entire history. But an insider told Baker that (now disgraced, for lying about Bush) higher-up Dan Rather closed the investigation. “The door was slammed shut in our faces,” according to Sixty Minutes’ founder, Don Hewitt, explaining the problem to C-Span. “I brought that woman in to New York!” he stated. Hewitt called the story the most important story in Sixty Minutes’ history. Emails from Sixty Minutes producer Phil Sheffler state “we did not walk away from this story.”
a) When the investigation closed, Sixty Minutes had not yet interviewed Baker’s living witnesses!
b) Sixty Minutes was advised by Brian Duffy of US News & World Report to drop the investigation because there was ‘not enough evidence.’ Duffy was later found to have written a large article for USN&WR supporting Gerald Posner’s ‘Case Closed’ (Oswald-did-it) book–-a big embarrassment to Duffy if Baker’s story became known to the general public. Duffy had just been re-hired by USN&WR and would later become a chief editor there.
c) Sixty Minutes’ chief source to check Baker’s reliability, Howard Liebengood, had been privy to all CIA and MKULTRA documents gathered by the HSCA, and was a renowned and trusted specialist in the Kennedy assassination. Liebengood confirmed Baker’s knowledge in general, and also her knowledge, specifically, of secret MKULTRA documents they had both seen, in front of CBS producers, Dr. Howard Platzman, and Baker. He urged CBS to film Baker.
d) Liebengood died of a sudden and unexpected heart attack just a few days after retiring, and just before his promise to help Baker’s story get filmed by Sixty Minutes.
Reason #12: More evidence and witnesses: At the time of the Sixty Minutes’ investigation, Baker did not know what evidence was important. She had avoided all contact with the case for three and a half decades. Only after she was allowed to look at records in the case was she able to recognize what evidence she possessed that was important, such as the American Express money order, and Oswald’s time cards, which she had initialed.
a) Baker kept evidence from 1960-1964 concerning her cancer research, her relationship with Oswald, and the events in her life immediately before and after his death, much of which her family saw (such as Reily check stubs) without realizing what was important and what was not. The collection of evidence was finally placed in twelve 50-page books. Baker did not save anything but family photos and an occasional item from any other year. The mass of materials from this time period is rich and detailed.
b) break-ins, robberies, and even kidnapping has resulted in the loss of some evidence, but all of it has been seen and photographed numerous times, and has been successfully linked to Oswald’s activities.
c) new witnesses such as William Livesay (confirms secret medical experiments in 1963 were going on at Jackson hospital using Angola prison volunteers), Edwin Lea McGeHee, Gerry Patrick Hemming, Kelly Thomas, Mary Ferrell (gray Russian book unknown to public and a unique possession of Oswald’s, described by Judyth to Ferrell in front of witnesses), and many others confirm previously unknown details Baker has given.
d) Baker described Bobby Kennedy’s involvement with Guy Banister and knowledge of Oswald, divorce plans of Oswald, details about Oswald’s Mexico City visit which were later confirmed by new witnesses.
One of Oliver Stone’s key conspirators in JFK is New Orleans private investigator and former FBI agent Guy Banister. 
e) Baker’s presence in a car with Oswald in Jackson (by two different witnesses of repute), and Baker’s explanation of the Clinton matter (which for the first time logically places Oswald, David Ferrie, and Clay Shaw together as seen by–-but unable to be explained by–-eight disparate witnesses in Clinton, Louisiana), where a black Cadillac sat for five hours for no known reason (however, Baker’s testimony clears up the matter, with additional new evidence from the Clay Shaw Grand Jury testimonies finally released to the internet) (see the banned documentary, The Love Affair).
Reason #13: Dr. John Williams, a US professor with a doctorate in statistics, collected data and statistics about the confluences and evidence Baker has presented, with the help of witness Kelly Thomas Cousins, and produced an analysis of events indicating that the chances that Baker and Oswald knew each other intimately are 99%.
1032 Marengo St. Baker lived here in 1963, close to Oswald. 
a) Dr. Williams also produced a statistical study indicating that there was only one chance in a MILLION that Oswald and Baker did NOT have prearranged jobs with Reily.
b) Dr. Williams has now published two technical papers in The Dealey Plaza Echo which publishes journal style papers on the JFK/RFK/MLK assassinations in Great Britain.
Reason #14: Why is Baker’s life being threatened? She is currently in hiding in a Scandinavian country under EU political asylum rules and regulations due to denigrating Internet and television productions, break-ins, robberies, burglaries, Internet stalking, persecution, live stalking, arrest threats, and death threats.
a) Baker’s book has twice gone to print without her permission, with changes and excisions.
b) Baker wants the REAL book to get published, and will support and authorize its sales.
c) Baker will not return to the United States until after the book is published: she is willing to risk her life to promote the book.
d) “If I had said Oswald DID IT, today I’d be a rich woman, instead of in hiding, fearing for my life.” (JVB) The book is true. It’s relevant, pointing to Oswald’s innocence and indicating a Coup d’etat.
anna lewis said her exhusband david lewis died may 5,1998.
ancestry dot com = David Franklin Lewis ( 1940 – 1997)birth in Harris Texas.
Anna Lewis said I give you a description of David Lewis he was 5ft8,
he wore black suit,white shirt and black tie his shoes were black,
and he might not have had two nickles to rub together but his shoes,
suit was immaculate.(perfect)David Lewis died May 5,1998.died cancer.
anna lewis said :We started hang around more or less would meet at
Thompsons Restaurant ,discuss the Cuban Situation what we were going to do __!We would go to the 500 club Carlos marcello was a very nice distinguised looking gentleman,if you didnt know he was involved mafia you could have really fell in love with him, andI saw David Ferrie at the 500 club was mostly meeting place besides thompson (restaurant) St charles ave,
Thompson's(Restaurant Hotel Bar Club) was for poor people place the 500 club was for high class.We were there at 500 club David Ferrie was there with us (lee ,anna,David ,Judy) Carlos Marcello, and , Jack Ruby .anna lewis saidDavid Ferrie my opinion was a kind man ,he conned people into doing what he wanted them to do ,into doing,what he wanted- just like Lee Harvey Oswald too. And David Ferrie didnt like me. I was at his apt he had microscopes little tubes he burnt stuff in and I thought he was a druggie / drug dealer.Anna Lewis said :David Lewis was a follower not a leader he did what you wantedhim to do and they type of person you would expect to hang around with Lew Harvey Oswald.David Lewis could tell jokes,
did practical jokes pranks on you ,but you couldn't do it on him,
because he went into a tizzy which Lee Harvey Oswald was same way.
Lee Harvey Oswald did not consume alcohol neither did David Lewis.
I met Judy (Baker) one day we were at Thompson's Restaurant.
Lee Harvey Oswald was a possessive man when he told Judy
( Oswalds Girlfriend Judyth Vary Baker) to jump she better ask
how high .Lee was a very quiet man he definitely did not look like
someone that would kill the president ,He listen to other people talk,
what they had to say, but he never commented on anything but when
Lee Harvey Oswald did speak you had better listen to him what he had
to say, Like Judy ( Oswalds Girlfriend Judyth Vary Baker)was like him,
and Lee does not like to have somebody talk when he is talking.
Anna Lewis said: Jack Martin came to our house ,to check our phones,
because our phones were bugged.and David Lewis thought house bugged.
I told nobody nothing because I'm not a snitch.I believe people should
live their life I dont stick my nose in.FOOTNOTESTrial.500 club-ST Louis/ Bourbon St at 441 Bourbon Street.(now is Bourbon St Blues Company)
when Dan Marvin stated on , The Truth Shall Set you Free by Nigel Turner , when the people running the training for the assassinations program at Fort Brag N C brought out a mock set up of Dealy Plaza and said Gentlemen we are going to show you how to take out a nations leader and the cover up that followed . Dan said they showed them where the shooters were located . they saw film but most importantly. they told us that Lee Harvey Oswald was a PATSY just like he said he was . This means he shot no one that day . That's all I needed to hear. I talked to Dan many times . He was a God fearing man of the highest honor and esteem . He had found the Lord and wanted to get all this off of his chest before he died. Like Judyth he was threatened . he had people threaten his grand children . He told me much about the assassination and where the shooters were positioned . Lee Oswald is my hero as was Dan Marvin.
I have read with great interest the comments on this site, having just listened to an interview with the lady in question. It seems to me that where people generally go wrong is in their collective gullibility. You see we humans cannot resist the pitfall of 'judging a book by its cover' – simple misconceptions, such as 'look at him he drives a grand and expensive car – he MUST be rich or famous' whilst the truth is HE was simply a Chauffeur! We attribute, and assume many things about 'celebrities' politicians, film-stars – certain in our assessments when in fact we know absolutely nothing about the real person behind the mask. I have through my life in 'impulse sales' needed to make 'gut' decisions on thousands of people. In the early days of my learning, through 'trial and error' I came to acquire an ability to 'suss – out' the genuine people from the 'frauds' – the 'buyers from the lookers' (I am eighty now!). I well recall two events in my life. Firstly the murder of JFK. And secondly the 9/11 tragedy. I vividly recall, and will NEVER forget the scenario where LHO was being ushered into an office in the Dallas P.D. Hands behind his back, when he paused and claimed he was a 'patsy'. From that moment until now I have never thought anything other than that he was not guilty. A fleeting moment in time – but one on which I stake my life – that LHO was indeed a 'patsy'. In the case of 9/11. When I saw the aeroplane hit the twin towers my instant reaction was – this is a 'fraud'. I always remember my dear father, who died when I was about eleven years old, coming out with 'pearls of wisdom' which, over the years I am happy to say, have stood me in great stead. One of those sayings was 'the eyes are the windows of the soul' – in the case of LHO please try and look again at the film clip which I referred to in the corridor of the Dallas P.D. – look very closely, VERY closely, at his demeanour and his eyes. Please. In the case of the interview with the lady in question, if EVER anyone came across as a 'buyer' and NOT a 'looker' then she is 'the real McCoy'.
Thats the beauty of the net.Ones circle of contacts can easily expand to people of the same interests.No one in my day to day give a crap either.
Thats the beauty of the net.Ones circle of contacts can easily expand to people of the same interests.No one in my day to day give a crap either.
Fraud.
Hey John,
The warren Commission was not unanimous. 3 out of 7 did not agree with the findings. There are many problems with the WC. I suggest you read some of the leading questions and interviews (it is quite a shock to read witnesses being cut off from crucial answers and being railroaded to conform with the official story). You bring up a very good question about what was it that united people against JFK. Remember his family had made their fortune during prohibition and when he turned on the mafia, it was seen as hypocritical. He made enemies with big oil by taking away government rebates on oil exploration (This equated to hundreds of millions in 1963 dollars per year). He made enemies in the CIA with very public sackings and having sex with some powerful peoples wives. He was a drug addict. He was blamed for flip flopping during the Cuban missile crisis. Before the crisis, the Russians had said remove your missiles from Turkey and we won't install ours in Cuba. Well, after calling his bluff and bringing the world to the brink of war, the USA did remove the Turkey missiles. A pathetic song and dance for nothing and the military frowned upon that. He challenged the fed reserve and the silver market. He had the Vietnam war looming and had his own opinions on how to proceed with that. So what was it that united the conspirators? I think they saw him as a traitor and someone that was selling everyone out. Maybe a loose canon who had suspicious connections or lines of communication to the Kremlin. If they could just get rid of him and get back to business as usual…they certainly had a megalomaniac in LBJ waiting in the wings to play ball.
Thank you for your insightful and well organized opinion. I agree that Judyth seems very intelligent and credible and I am having trouble understanding why these other people seem to go out of their way to discredit her. It seems to me there can only be one reason for trying to discredit her. And that is to cover up something she is saying. Otherwise why would anyone care enough? I feel sorry for Judyth. I think she did know Lee and is explaining her story exactly as she remembers it. The possibility does exist, though, that she was duped at the time of her relationship with Lee. And Lee might have been duped too. I'm sure he didn't sign up to be a patsy. What we suspect is that there was a conspiracy, (and a rather large one), to kill JFK. If clandestine things like Judyth is saying took place then somewhere in that group of people she and Lee were dealing with are the ones who orchestrated JFK's murder. Whether they were truly CIA or Navy Intel, or just mobsters duping Lee and Judyth into believing they were government agents, it still remains that the Warren commission blatantly disregarded all of this evidence. And that without a doubt implicates a government connection. So the real question, the one that has bothered me all of my life, is what reason did so many very important people believe Kennedy needed to be murdered? I mean, I understand why Hitler's men conspired to kill him. He was an insane man committing genocide. No brainer. But Kennedy? What did he do that was so atrocious that such a large group of powerful people would have been complicit in covering up his assassination as though it was necessary for our freedom and lifestyles to be unmarred? Conspiracies from just pure hatred and greed have happened before. Et tu, Brute? But are we to believe that everyone on the Warren Commision, Secret Service, FBI, and other conspirators were all led by simple hatred and greed?
Can you confirm whether Ms Baker knew someone named Marcia Gardner who also worked at the Ochsner clinic?
Yes Judyth confirmed the photo is, Cruz's father in NOL w/ Oswald.
Judyth Baker is now being quoted as verifying the Trump statements about Rafael Cruz being the previously unidentified helper of Oswald distributing pamphlets (Source: Roger Stone on the Alex Jones InfoWars show). According to Stone, Baker essentially said Cruz was definitely part of the anti-Castro Cubans who worked with LHO.
Has Jim Fetzer or Judyth Baker commented on the National Inquirer story showing what looks like Ted Cruz' dad, Rafael with Lee Harvey Oswald?
and the show goes on
Why on earth would she have "confabulated" this story? You have only to read it to see the level of details, many of which explain and fill in obscure gaps in researchers' work, such as why the black Cadillac carrying JVB, LHO, Ferrie and Clay Shaw, plus an orderly, was stopped in a small town (either Clinton or Jackson, can't recall) while they were waiting at a pay phone for a phone call to tell them to join to convoy to the mental hospital where the cancer virus would be administered. The car was waiting several hours and witnesses described them; and why LHO got in a line to register to vote (a bet, because only blacks were in line during a voter drive, and they were being turned away). LHO was briefly registered before they realized he didn't live there. This is just one of the many details. You sound as if you have not read, or did and have a pre-fab opinion.
It's pretty evident he fired nothing that day. He only wanted to try and save the president, and knew if he tried to get out of it, "they" would get his family. That's how they do. He had saved JFK a few wks earlier by calling the FBI in Chicago and warning them. The SS agent that spent 3 yrs in a mental hospital for criticizing the CIA protection of JFK, confirmed that a man named "Lee" had called to warn of a plot. Chicago had been one of the places they would try to get Kennedy.
The campaign has been going on for years. McAdams web site is one; a man named "Reizes" is another. Also, someone named "Roy." Judyth addressed their criticisms, and what seem to be to me, downright lies, in her book about David Ferrie.
I have just finished reading her new book, i come from prince edward island, a small province on the east coast of Canada. yes i am not from the USA but have always been interested in the Lee H. Oswald story, my opinion of the book, coming from your everyday sort of person, is that this book puts a spin on the what ive been lead to believe for 20 odd years, she has put a personal account into Lee's story, something that has taken too long for someone to do, yes there is little doubt that Lee was set up as a patsy, it also makes you realise that the assassination of JFK runs deeper then anyone could try to figure out, between the mafia and the loose actions of the CIA and FBI, chances are that the truth will never see the light of day, man is so bent on trying to become rich and keep their legacy squeaky clean that this cover up will more than likely never be uncovered. Did someone assassinate JFK, well yes but who and why, we know Lee didnt shoot him, i do believe Jack shot him to save him, as for anything more it is just hear say, at some point a death bed confession will tell the truth, there is nothing more real then a dieing man wanting to clear his conscience. As for Judy Vary Baker, i wish you a peaceful rest of your life, thank you for your story, best book i have ever read. GSC
If Judyth is correct then we can expect a campaign to discredit her or an attempt to quiet her as many others have been quieted in the assassination of JFK. I just got her book "Me & Lee", will evaluate what I find there and decide how I view her info.
I also met Judyth in Dallas, on the 22nd,briefly, and the next day at an Assassination mini symposium of sorts, also attended by by Dick Russell and Ernst Titovets. She is the real deal, and seeing her in an almost social setting (there were only 20 or so people there) she is disarmingly genuine. Lee has been treated disgracefully by his fellow Americans, but I do think, despite the 50th anniversary propaganda blitz, that more and more people will begin to realise this. I for one bore uninterested friends constantly with my belief that not only is he innocent but actually a hero. This is in no small part thanks to Judyth's ceaseless efforts. She has my admiration and support.
I met Judyth in Dallas on Nov. 22, 2013. I found her to be entirely credible. Based on my knowledge of the Kennedy case over 50 years (and one book authored), nothing she said to me or wrote in her book is anything but authentic.
This is very good, Dr Fetzer! You forgot one little fact: Judyth told Haslam he had the wrong photo of Mary Sherman; it was a picture of her sister. How would she know that if she had never met her? I think thats a very powerful piece of circumstantial evidence. I myself cant see anything that says she is not the real deal. After talking to her several hours I know one thing; she is NOT a person that could defend "that many lies" that this story demands. Everything points to it being true.
I believe that Oswald was the "Lee" who phoned a tip about the planned assassination attempt of JFK in Chicago, and as a consequence the punishment for his good deed was what happened a few weeks later. Very sad, this world is truly filled with evil, and power does corrupt.
I think LHO was as said in JFK a "patsy" sheep-dipped into actually beleiving the CIA/M.I.C. actually needed because of his "secret agent" qualities. He might have even fired the Mannlicher at the president but I doubt he fired the fatal shot.
(And I would not use the moniker "anonymous" by choice, I simply did not understand the "name and URL"-thing, it kept giving me problems – my name is Paul, if it matters)-
I have read the book, which I pre-ordered a year ago, literally, which only arrived a few weeks ago (curious?).
I must say, as one who does not particularly focus on conspiracy or non-conspiracy, let alone modern-day politics (simply because I do not understand them, and rarely even vote), this book made me sit up and take notice.
I cannot emphasize this enough, as I am an artist, predisposed to non-convention and, as of the last few years, partial to Oswald in my artistic pursuits – however, not in the "oh-he-was-the-bad-guy-let's-lampoon-him" sense. I had the pleasure of speaking to his brother twice, and not even discussing "that thing" in 1963, rather to ask what color Mr. Oswald's eyes were. Admittedly peculiar, I know, but I say this because I simply DO not understand, or really wish to understand, "that stuff" and "that thing" in 1963. Until I read this book, and had to re-read and observe every annotation in detail to re-absorb and digest what I had just read. While I found some things (recollections of near word-for-word conversations and the events within a particular day, down to the time of day, giving it rather a diary aspect), it all made sense.
It all made sense, and was so absolutely logical. And it made me think. A lot.
I have to say, I initially pre-ordered this book thinking it would be the torrid salaciousness one would expect of the pulp-novel ilk, and was quite surprised, in a positive way, to find it was far from that.
It would be easy to dismiss my opinion perhaps because I AM the occasional "cutting-edge eccentric artist who doesn't even watch the news because he doesn't want or doesn't get it," but I am just stating my thoughts.
This book really did move me in many ways, from the absolute sense of it all, the "why-would-she-make-it-up-when-it-would-possibly-do-her-harm" aspect, and the different light in which she paints Mr. Oswald.
And if I dare say, on this, the 47th anniversary of his violent passing that silenced so many things that day, I feel a peculiar but palpable sense of sorrow all around, particularly for him this time around, regarding "that thing" of 1963.
I was at the videotaping and pulled her aside after the shoot. She explained to me that when she accompanied her husband David to a park in New Orleans where they met Oswald (and the two men walked off to chat), David was still working directly for Banister. That was the case in 1962. In 1963, however, David was working directly for Trailways (and, according to Judyth, sending info along to Banister re Cuban exiles traveling to the US). She was adamant about the meeting taking place in 1962. Anna is salt of the earth. She has no reason to lie (indeed, such a lie helps no one, so is a highly unlikely lie). It could be a mistake, or evidence of Oswald's peripatetic habits. Judyth has said, with respect to Oswald's various duties, that he did more hopping around from city to city than known to anyone, with the exception of Ferrie, who was his pilot on at least some of these jaunts. Gerry Hemming, for one, reports seeing Oswald in Miami in 1962, I believe. The real sticking point is that Anna recalls the meeting with David taking place before Oswald returned from Russia, which was in June, if memory serves. I tend to doubt that this was an impostor. Anna got to know Judyth's Oswald quite well the following spring and summer.
I am wondering about Anna Lewis' statement that she met Oswald in early 1962. This is, of course, impossible because he was in the USSR until the summer of 1962. Has she ever explained on this misstatement? Perhaps she meant 1963.
Just wondering.
Judyth has a Full Scale IQ of 143, which is considered to be within the very superior range of functioning. Here is a graphic: http://i50.tinypic.com/2rzwc51.jpg
And here is another graphic which is the abstract of a research project in Melanogenesis which Judyth did when she was 18 years old: http://i47.tinypic.com/ajrptz.jpg
since this is so hot a topic, I'll just add a few more cents in.
I think that one possibility that one has to wrap their head around is this:
Judyth is the namesake for a "Judy Baker" CIA project and she is the one who writes the fictional dialogue in the books . Either she's a genius and can recall all those conversations with Jack Ruby, et al, or it's fiction. And all the documentation is being done by other people in the agency working on this project.
Just something to chew on. I haven't definetely decided it.
The good news is, if above is true, this is a "good CIA" project (is that an oxymoron or what?) by the "good guys" like Judy herself, who in this vision is a long term CIA asset brought to the attention of the agency in Bradenton in high school due to her great science achievements and then recruited for various projects. If she really did work at Reilly, that was a CIA outfit. in the late 90s they recruited her for this project, knowing she'd be superb at fiction writing and was brilliant and charming. Why did she agree?, because she believed that Oswald truly deserved better in history and the people working on this project believe that to. Is it not possible that over these long years, many CIA people couldn't feel for Oswald's plight, after all, he was one of them?
RESPONSE (2):
Tue, 2 Mar 2010
Jim, I haven't read Judyth's book so I can't comment on her claims. But I do think it is well established that she worked at Riley Coffee and that was a spy nest which could cause her harassment based on that alone. She may have confabulated details about Oswald and created more than was there to put together a book.
Normally when someone like Judyth is harassed by intel they are being harassed for things different than what they think. She may know something that is more important than she realizes, some little detail could be behind all her harassment.
And Bill Kelly's and others claims that her story adds nothing may be true, but that may have nothing to do with her value to exposing the intel aspects of the case. And the last possibility is that some witnesses were clandestinely drugged with weird chemicals from Technical Services at the CIA, things like BZ which could damage one's white matter, hippocampus and cause some confabulations.
If she is a "hanger on" who has confabulated a story to write a book and get attention, that does not in and of itself mean that she doesn't know something that intel wants covered up. According experienced retired intel ops I have talked too many such witnesses are seriously harmed emotionally by the harassment process which are designed to destroy folk's credibility.
Now Jim, as one of the world's top experts on logic, if not the top one, you don't need to be reminded of the faulty logic which many appear to be using to attack Judyth with. Correlation isn't necessarily an indicator of causation, and non-correlation of aspects of a story does not mean both are false if one is false and vice versa. So part of her story could be confabulated or emotionally enhanced and that does not mean another part is not true and neither means that she might not be harassed for totally unknown reasons of some small detail she represents or could expose not directly related to her book or her story. This unrelated small detail issue is one which often gets folks harassed by intel according to experts I have consulted with. The first questions always should be, "what info or detail does this lady represent or is linked to that could be a loose end or a threat to intel?"
Jim, thanks for telling me about your new web site. . . .
Best regards form one truth junkie to another.
Judyth is so controversial that I thought I would invite an expert in the area of psychological operations and covert actions to review what I have posted about her, including my blogs and YouTubes. I sent him the following invitation, to which I received these responses, one before and one after reviewing this thread. He is a very candid guy and would tell me if he thought I were making a mistake.
Sent: Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Jim,
I would like you to check out what I am finding out about Judyth Baker at http://www.youtube.com/user/JamesFetzerNews#p/a or show archives at http://radiofetzer.blogspot.com or my blog, where I have just posted the second about her, http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com, or, of course, The Education Forum, where I have a thread about her at http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=15559 Some friends, Jack White, David Lifton and, Rich DellaRosa, do not take her seriously. Those who have found her credible include Jim Marrs, Nigel Turner, Ed Haslam, Wim Dankbarr, Howard Platzman, and now me.
Thanks.
Jim
RESPONSE (1):
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 2010
I believe that she is credible. And her claims about being harassed by intel make sense based on what has happened to other key witnesses. I forget the name of the lady at the curb [Jean Hill] who was taken upstairs in front of some generals and was told she only heard three shots, and then had an FBI car down the street outside her house for over a year (these FBI even sabotaged her car one time).
Often witnesses like her are so harassed that this takes a toll on them emotionally over the years causing them to act somewhat disturbed which affects their credibility to researchers who examine their story. The more folks doubt them and the more they get harassed and criticized, the more upset and irrational they often come across.
So Jim, unless proven otherwise, she comes off as credible to me.
http://www.amazon.com/review/R2S38HJ9O3NFBR/ref=cm_cr_pr_viewpnt#R2S38HJ9O3NFBR
I would check out above amazon review which makes excellent points by Mr. Calhoun before making a decision on ms. Baker's credibility.
However, Jim F. and others have done extensive work with her, and they are very thorough reseachers and intelligent men, so that gives a lot of weight to her story. Plus, she herself seems brilliant in interviews.
Mr. Fetzer,
You've certainly done a lot of research here to support your claim. It makes me wonder why people so adamantly disbelieve Judith Baker.
Thank you for your efforts here to support her case. I'm not sure that I'll buy her book, but it sounds as though she certainly has suffered to try and tell her story.
— Bill Grote