Post by Rob Caprio on Oct 26, 2021 13:00:54 GMT -5
All portions ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2024
3.bp.blogspot.com/_YV2gEA9DNhw/THHp6lI1AhI/AAAAAAAAeik/HxA28E9I088/s1600/RaulCastroyNikolaiLeonoventrusas.jpg
The House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) would look into the area of Mexico City quite a bit and would issue a report on it (known as the Lopez Report), but unfortunately this report would be locked away for years. When it was finally released and viewed, it became clear that IF Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) was in Mexico City, Mexico, as claimed, he certainly never went to the Cuban Consulate or the Russian Embassy as claimed.
A key person to the Cuban Consulate issue was not called by the Warren Commission (WC) and his comments were severely limited in the WC’s Report (WCR). The HSCA would rectify this by calling him to get more information on the man he saw come to their consulate back in late September 1963. This post will look at this individual.
The HSCA says…Eusebio Azcue.
*********************************
Eusebio Azcue never wavered in his testimony to the HSCA as he said the man that came to the Cuban Consulate (CC) and applied for a visa to Cuba was NOT LHO. Azcue was in charge of the Cuban Consulate as he told the HSCA this during his testimony.
Mr. CORNWELL. In 1963, what was your occupation?
Senor AZCUE. Consul of Cuba in Mexico, Mexico City.
Mr. CORNWELL. What was the basic nature of your occupation between that date and 1963?
Senor AZCUE. I was an architect in Mexico before the triumph of the revolution. At the time the revolution triumphed, I was requested to take charge of the Cuban consulate in Mexico City.
Mr. CORNWELL. For how long a period of time or until what date did you hold that position?
Senor AZCUE. Until November 18, 1963, though since the month of September of 1963 I had started to turn over affairs to the new consul who was to replace me, Mr. Alfredo Mirabal.
We see he was the Consul at the Consulate, thus, he was Sylvia Duran’s boss at the Consulate. He would be asked about Commission Exhibit (CE) 2564 (known as JFK Exhibit F-408 for the HSCA) which was allegedly the visa application LHO filled out when he allegedly visited the CC on September 27, 1963.
Mr. CORNWELL. Senor Azcue, this particular document bears the name Lee Harvey Oswald, and the date September 27, 1963. Do you recall the occasion upon which this application was filed with your consulate? …If you recall the occasion on which this specific application was filed, would you describe that occasion for us.
Senor AZCUE. Certainly, with pleasure. Yes, this gentleman appeared on the date indicated at the consulate, requesting a visa to travel to Cuba. This gentleman was referred to, as was the usual practice in the consulate, to Mrs. Sylvia Duran, a Mexican citizen, who was responsible for handling these contacts with persons applying for such visas.
He then mentions the issue of a photograph being needed for the visa application. Take a look at CE 2564 to see what I am referring to.
CE 2564: www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/pages/WC_Vol25_0422b.jpg
Mr. CORNWELL. Senor Azcue, in a previous interview with the staff you stated that the very first occasion to your memory on which you saw this individual was 1 to 2 days before the date on this application. Is that still accurate to the best of your memory?
Senor AZCUE. It is something that I cannot state categorically. I cannot state whether it was on the very same day, a day before, or several days before, and I am in a position to explain why…. And at that point he agrees to proceed to fill the application out in order to process the visa. At that point, he leaves the consulate, conceivably to look for some photographs. One could think whether he returned on that very same date with the photographs; it is possible that he might have returned on that very same date with the photographs, or that he might have returned the following day. As far as the date that appears herein, and bearing in mind that I received him on three occasions, maybe it would be possible to determine that on this very same date, it is possible, I cannot fully guarantee this, it is possible that on that same day he might have made the first two visits to the consulate; one during the morning very early, and the second one a little later, bringing the photographs in order to complete the application. There is a sufficient time for such a thing.
This shows us the man left to get a photograph or have one taken, but the WC never bothered to cover this issue for us. If he had the photograph already that appears on CE 2564 when was it taken? Or, if he had the picture taken in Mexico City, where did he have it taken and where did he have it developed? Why were these important questions not addressed and answers provided to us by the WC?
They then go back to CE 2564 to discuss the signature.
Mr. CORNWELL. If I could direct your attention again to the JFK exhibit F-408, I would like to ask you first, was the document signed in your presence?
Senor AZCUE. No. It is not necessary. It is never necessary. This is a document that is provided to him by the secretary. It is filled in by the secretary. She affixes the photograph, turns it over to him, and right there he signs, until it is sent, forwarded to Cuba, through the pouch.
Mr. CORNWELL. Would it have been necessary, under the usual custom and practice of your office at that time, for the document to have been signed on the premises of the consulate?
Senor AZCUE. This document or this application does not leave the desk of the secretary. She types it out and places the photograph, places the seal, and hands it over for the individual's signature.
Does the signature on the visa application look like LHO’s known signature? It looks different to me and here are some comparisons to look at. Here is Arnold Johnson Exhibit 1:
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh20/pages/WH_Vol20_0139b.jpg
Arnold Johnson Ex. 5: www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh20/pages/WH_Vol20_0144a.jpg
Arnold Johnson Ex. 7: www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh20/pages/WH_Vol20_0147a.jpg
As you can see they are all look nothing like the one seen on the application. Since this was signed in front of Duran we have to think it was NOT LHO or he deliberately signed it differently. Why would he do that? Also, back to the photograph, what are the odds of him bringing SIX photographs with him? Pretty small in my mind, so again, where would he have photographs taken and developed since Azcue said they made six copies of the visa!
Mr. CORNWELL. You told us earlier that the normal procedure for the preparation of such applications was that more than one copy of the document was made, is that correct?
Senor AZCUE. Yes, six. Six photographs, six signatures, and six copies of the application is complete.
Mr. CORNWELL. Do you feel certain about your memory today as to the number of copies that are made or were made in 1963?
Senor AZCUE. Yes, absolutely. There was never an exception made. They come already together in a bunch.
Mr. CORNWELL. The copies as opposed to the original, the carbon copies, were they signed separately or was the carbon paper used to transfer a signature from one to the other?
Senor AZCUE. No, one by one, because the paper is very thick. This is Mimeograph-type paper.
Thus, where did LHO, if it was him, get six photographs made as the odds of him bringing six copies with him is pretty small IMO? After this questioning a five minute recess was needed and they told Azcue to leave the room! I wonder why?
Chairman STOKES. Will counsel suspend for a moment? I think this would be an appropriate place for us to take a 5-minute recess at this time. The Chair requests that as the witness departs from the room, that all persons remain in their seats please until the witness has left the room after which we will have a 5-minute recess.
The HSCA would present JFK Exhibit F-407 to Azcue and ask him if they looked the same, then they questioned him about the photograph seen on each one. Here is F-407:
www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/d/d3/Photo_hsca_ex_407.jpg
Mr. CORNWELL. Senor Azcue, the pictures on the upper lefthand portion of each document would appear to be of the same individual; is that correct?
Senor AZCUE. Yes, sir.
Mr. CORNWELL. Do those pictures of that individual appear to you to be the same individual who visited the consulate in Mexico City on the occasions you have previously described to us?
Senor AZCUE. Truly, this photograph is one that I saw for the first time when the honorable U.S. committee members came to Cuba in April of this year, and I was surprised that I believe that it was not the same person. Fifteen years had gone by so it is very difficult for me to be in a position to guarantee it in a categorical form. But my belief is that this gentleman was not, is not, the person or the individual who went to the consulate.
They would ask him about seeing LHO closer to the assassination and this is what he said.
Mr. CORNWELL. Directing your attention to the period of time immediately after the assassination, the day of the assassination or the day after the assassination, did you during that period of time have an occasion to see pictures of the alleged assassin in the newspapers or to observe on television the man identified at that time as Lee Harvey Oswald?
Senor AZCUE. Yes, sir, not so close to the date, not in the first few days, not immediately thereafter. Some time I calculate approximately-and I say this because I am not a great movie fan, but it was in mid-December approximately--I saw at that time the film in which Ruby appears assassinating the Oswald who was there, and I was not able to identify him and only 2 months had gone by since I had seen the Oswald who appeared at the consulate. And I had a clear mental picture because we had had an unpleasant discussion and he had not been very pleasant to me and I did not recognize when I first saw him. I did not recognize Oswald. The man who went to the consulate was a man over 30 years of age and very thin, very thin faced. And the individual I saw in the movie was a young man, considerably younger, and a fuller face.
Mr. CORNWELL. What color hair did the individual have to the best of your memory who visited the consulate?
Senor AZCUE. He was blond, dark blond.
Mr. CORNWELL. Did the individual you saw in the movie, the person who was killed by Jack Ruby, resemble more closely the individual in these photographs to your memory than the individual who visited the consulate?
Senor AZCUE. I believe so.
He is describing someone who is NOT LHO clearly and he said the photograph on the application did NOT match the man who came to the CC. Then the HSCA asks him to look at F-434 to see if this looks like the man who came to the CC. Here is F-434:
www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/f/f9/Photo_hsca_ex_434.jpg
Mr. CORNWELL. Did the individual who visited the consulate look like that individual?
Senor AZCUE. No.
Mr. CORNWELL. What differences were there?
Senor AZCUE. Many differences. The individual who visited the consulate is one whose physiognomy or whose face I recall very clearly. He had a hard face. He had very straight eyebrows, cold, hard, and straight eyes. His cheeks were thin. His nose was very straight and pointed. This gentleman looks like he is somewhat heavier, more filled, his eyes are at an angle with the outside of his eye, at an angle with his face. I would have never identified him or recognized him. I believe I can recall with fairly good accuracy the individual in such a way that I could recognize him now in a group of 100, that is better than a photograph of him because obviously during a period of 15 years he might change. I think I could recognize him, and this is not him.
Mr. CORNWELL. We would like to show you what has been previously admitted into evidence in this case as Exhibit 194. As you can see, Senor Azcue, the pictures on the right are simply blowups of the same visa application, but I would like to direct your attention to the two pictures on the left which come from photographs taken by the Dallas Police Department. I ask you if that individual looks like the man who visited the consulate?
Senor AZCUE. I would have never recognized him as I did not recognize him in the movie where he dies, and I can, however, identify him as or think of him as the person who was killed or assassinated by Ruby. It is a question of personal evaluation on my part. But it is very clearly imprinted.
Azcue constantly says the LHO who was shot dead in Dallas was NOT the same man who came to the CC. There is NO doubt about that. If you look at the two exhibits given (F-407 and F-434) LHO does NOT look the same as Azcue mentioned. He does look heavier and his face looks fuller in F-434 to me. The signature is again different from what we saw on CE 2654 too. After constant denial by Azcue that the man he saw was LHO, Mr. Preyer takes over the questioning and just ignores all those comments with this question.
Mr. PREYER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Azcue, it is good to see you again. As I understand it, at the time Lee Harvey Oswald visited the consul in Mexico there were three people who could have seen him: yourself, Sylvia Duran and Mr. Mirabal. Is that correct?
Isn’t this reminiscent of what the WC constantly did? Why bother to question him if you are going to ignore what he says? He then tried another way around this issue by asking him a hypothetical question.
Mr. PREYER. If analysis of that handwriting, of that signature on the visa application showed it to be Lee Harvey Oswald's signature, would you still believe that the man who visited you in the consulate was not Oswald?
Senor AZCUE. Under such circumstances I would have to accept that I was being influenced or that I was seeing visions.
As has been said in regards to the WC many times, this kind of questioning would not have been allowed in a court of law. The witness has clearly said many times the man that he saw at the CC was not LHO, but the HSCA seems unwilling to accept this and keeps asking him to change his statement with questions like this one. The HSCA report finally had to admit what Preyer and Cornwell did not want to accept however.
Quote on
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/pages/HSCA_Report_0140b.gif
The committee did, however, obtain independent evidence that someone might have posed as Oswald in Mexico in late September and early October 1963. The former Cuban consul in Mexico City, Eusebio Azcue, testified that the man who applied for an in-transit visa to the Soviet Union was not the one who was identified as Lee Harvey Oswald, the assassin of President Kennedy on November 1963. Azcue, who maintained that he had dealt on three occasions in Mexico with someone who identified himself as Oswald, described the man he claimed was an imposter as a 30-year-old white male, about 5 feet 6 inches in height, with a long face and a straight and pointed nose.
In addition, the committee interviewed Silvia Duran, a secretary in the Cuban consulate in 1963. Although she said that it was in fact Oswald who had visited the consulate on three occasions, she described him as 5 feet 6, 125 pounds, with sparse blond hair, features that did not match those of Lee Harvey Oswald. The descriptions given by both Azcue and Duran do bear a resemblance--height aside--to an alleged Oswald associate referred to in an unconfirmed report provided by another witness, Elena Garro de Paz, former wife of the noted Mexican poet, Octavio Paz. Elena Garro described the associate, whom she claimed to have seen with Oswald at a party, as very tall and slender [with] * * * long blond hair * * * a gaunt face [and] a rather long protruding chin." (HSCA Report, pp. 250-251)
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/html/HSCA_Report_0140b.htm
Quote off
Both Azcue and Duran described someone who did NOT match LHO so who was it that was claiming to be him? Senator Dodd would pick up the questioning and again Azcue would say the man that he saw at the CC was not LHO.
Mr. DODD. …Based on the testimony you have given, if we are to believe your testimony with regard to the description of the individual that you said you saw that day, it would vary quite significantly, or significantly from the actual photographs of Lee Harvey Oswald, the one on the visa application and the photograph that you see to your left over here. They would be different than the person that you saw in the Cuban Consulate, isn't that correct?
Senor AZCUE. For me, yes. When I saw in April the photograph placed on the application, I was surprised by his looks or similarity with the Lee Harvey Oswald who had been killed. This was my reaction in front of you. You were the ones who showed me that picture. That was the first time that I saw that application completed with the photos and all of the other information.
Mr. DODD. But what you saw was someone that was very different looking from the person that you met in the Cuban Consulate in September of 1963?
Senor AZCUE. Yes, as different as I found him when I saw him in film. The image I had of the individual who showed up at the consulate was the man in his thirties, maybe 35 years old, and with the very thin face. You will recall that he had very natural lines, very thin straight nose, except for all of the items I mentioned, and this gentleman appeared to me to be much younger and with a much fuller face. That is the evaluation I have with absolute certainty. It is My truth.
I wonder why Dodd framed the question with the comment “if we are to believe your testimony”? Did they suspect him of lying? If so, why didn’t they show he did? He would confirm the man he saw was NOT LHO with a fourth person.
Mr. THONE. Consul Azcue, did I understand, and I may not have gotten it right this morning, that when you went back to Cuba you saw a film which depicted the shooting by a Mr. Ruby of Lee Harvey Oswald, and at the time you were concerned that this wasn't the same person at all that was at the consul applying for a visa?
Senor AZCUE. Exactly. Only 2 months back I had seen the individual who appeared at the consulate. So I had his image clearly engraved in my mind, and I did not recognize him in the movie.
The poor man had to say the same thing over and over again. He said the man that claimed to be LHO presented a card showing he was a member of the Communist Party.
Mr. FITHIAN. …Mr. Azcue, you testified that Oswald produced a document showing his Membership in the U.S. Communist Party. To your knowledge was that document valid?
Senor AZCUE. I did not concentrate much of my attention on the documents themselves. And I could not see whether they were authentic or not. The person who saw them, or the person who made the notations might have been Sylvia. But she had no way of telling whether they were authentic or not, any of the documents. That is the reason that he addresses himself to the Soviet Embassy, so that they in turn could tell us whether the Soviet documents are or are not valid.
We know it was not valid or that it was not LHO since as we saw in the “Statements That Sink The WC’s Conclusions” series there is NO evidence showing that LHO ever joined the Communist Party, thus, it was not him or he somehow managed to either make or find a fake card.
Based on all of this we can see why the WC never bothered to call Eusebio Azcue as he would have made it plain to see that LHO was NOT the man who came to the CC three times in late September 1963. So who was impersonating LHO then? Why was a “loner” being impersonated in Mexico City? Answers to these questions could open some doors to what really happened on November 22, 1963.
3.bp.blogspot.com/_YV2gEA9DNhw/THHp6lI1AhI/AAAAAAAAeik/HxA28E9I088/s1600/RaulCastroyNikolaiLeonoventrusas.jpg
The House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) would look into the area of Mexico City quite a bit and would issue a report on it (known as the Lopez Report), but unfortunately this report would be locked away for years. When it was finally released and viewed, it became clear that IF Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) was in Mexico City, Mexico, as claimed, he certainly never went to the Cuban Consulate or the Russian Embassy as claimed.
A key person to the Cuban Consulate issue was not called by the Warren Commission (WC) and his comments were severely limited in the WC’s Report (WCR). The HSCA would rectify this by calling him to get more information on the man he saw come to their consulate back in late September 1963. This post will look at this individual.
The HSCA says…Eusebio Azcue.
*********************************
Eusebio Azcue never wavered in his testimony to the HSCA as he said the man that came to the Cuban Consulate (CC) and applied for a visa to Cuba was NOT LHO. Azcue was in charge of the Cuban Consulate as he told the HSCA this during his testimony.
Mr. CORNWELL. In 1963, what was your occupation?
Senor AZCUE. Consul of Cuba in Mexico, Mexico City.
Mr. CORNWELL. What was the basic nature of your occupation between that date and 1963?
Senor AZCUE. I was an architect in Mexico before the triumph of the revolution. At the time the revolution triumphed, I was requested to take charge of the Cuban consulate in Mexico City.
Mr. CORNWELL. For how long a period of time or until what date did you hold that position?
Senor AZCUE. Until November 18, 1963, though since the month of September of 1963 I had started to turn over affairs to the new consul who was to replace me, Mr. Alfredo Mirabal.
We see he was the Consul at the Consulate, thus, he was Sylvia Duran’s boss at the Consulate. He would be asked about Commission Exhibit (CE) 2564 (known as JFK Exhibit F-408 for the HSCA) which was allegedly the visa application LHO filled out when he allegedly visited the CC on September 27, 1963.
Mr. CORNWELL. Senor Azcue, this particular document bears the name Lee Harvey Oswald, and the date September 27, 1963. Do you recall the occasion upon which this application was filed with your consulate? …If you recall the occasion on which this specific application was filed, would you describe that occasion for us.
Senor AZCUE. Certainly, with pleasure. Yes, this gentleman appeared on the date indicated at the consulate, requesting a visa to travel to Cuba. This gentleman was referred to, as was the usual practice in the consulate, to Mrs. Sylvia Duran, a Mexican citizen, who was responsible for handling these contacts with persons applying for such visas.
He then mentions the issue of a photograph being needed for the visa application. Take a look at CE 2564 to see what I am referring to.
CE 2564: www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/pages/WC_Vol25_0422b.jpg
Mr. CORNWELL. Senor Azcue, in a previous interview with the staff you stated that the very first occasion to your memory on which you saw this individual was 1 to 2 days before the date on this application. Is that still accurate to the best of your memory?
Senor AZCUE. It is something that I cannot state categorically. I cannot state whether it was on the very same day, a day before, or several days before, and I am in a position to explain why…. And at that point he agrees to proceed to fill the application out in order to process the visa. At that point, he leaves the consulate, conceivably to look for some photographs. One could think whether he returned on that very same date with the photographs; it is possible that he might have returned on that very same date with the photographs, or that he might have returned the following day. As far as the date that appears herein, and bearing in mind that I received him on three occasions, maybe it would be possible to determine that on this very same date, it is possible, I cannot fully guarantee this, it is possible that on that same day he might have made the first two visits to the consulate; one during the morning very early, and the second one a little later, bringing the photographs in order to complete the application. There is a sufficient time for such a thing.
This shows us the man left to get a photograph or have one taken, but the WC never bothered to cover this issue for us. If he had the photograph already that appears on CE 2564 when was it taken? Or, if he had the picture taken in Mexico City, where did he have it taken and where did he have it developed? Why were these important questions not addressed and answers provided to us by the WC?
They then go back to CE 2564 to discuss the signature.
Mr. CORNWELL. If I could direct your attention again to the JFK exhibit F-408, I would like to ask you first, was the document signed in your presence?
Senor AZCUE. No. It is not necessary. It is never necessary. This is a document that is provided to him by the secretary. It is filled in by the secretary. She affixes the photograph, turns it over to him, and right there he signs, until it is sent, forwarded to Cuba, through the pouch.
Mr. CORNWELL. Would it have been necessary, under the usual custom and practice of your office at that time, for the document to have been signed on the premises of the consulate?
Senor AZCUE. This document or this application does not leave the desk of the secretary. She types it out and places the photograph, places the seal, and hands it over for the individual's signature.
Does the signature on the visa application look like LHO’s known signature? It looks different to me and here are some comparisons to look at. Here is Arnold Johnson Exhibit 1:
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh20/pages/WH_Vol20_0139b.jpg
Arnold Johnson Ex. 5: www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh20/pages/WH_Vol20_0144a.jpg
Arnold Johnson Ex. 7: www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh20/pages/WH_Vol20_0147a.jpg
As you can see they are all look nothing like the one seen on the application. Since this was signed in front of Duran we have to think it was NOT LHO or he deliberately signed it differently. Why would he do that? Also, back to the photograph, what are the odds of him bringing SIX photographs with him? Pretty small in my mind, so again, where would he have photographs taken and developed since Azcue said they made six copies of the visa!
Mr. CORNWELL. You told us earlier that the normal procedure for the preparation of such applications was that more than one copy of the document was made, is that correct?
Senor AZCUE. Yes, six. Six photographs, six signatures, and six copies of the application is complete.
Mr. CORNWELL. Do you feel certain about your memory today as to the number of copies that are made or were made in 1963?
Senor AZCUE. Yes, absolutely. There was never an exception made. They come already together in a bunch.
Mr. CORNWELL. The copies as opposed to the original, the carbon copies, were they signed separately or was the carbon paper used to transfer a signature from one to the other?
Senor AZCUE. No, one by one, because the paper is very thick. This is Mimeograph-type paper.
Thus, where did LHO, if it was him, get six photographs made as the odds of him bringing six copies with him is pretty small IMO? After this questioning a five minute recess was needed and they told Azcue to leave the room! I wonder why?
Chairman STOKES. Will counsel suspend for a moment? I think this would be an appropriate place for us to take a 5-minute recess at this time. The Chair requests that as the witness departs from the room, that all persons remain in their seats please until the witness has left the room after which we will have a 5-minute recess.
The HSCA would present JFK Exhibit F-407 to Azcue and ask him if they looked the same, then they questioned him about the photograph seen on each one. Here is F-407:
www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/d/d3/Photo_hsca_ex_407.jpg
Mr. CORNWELL. Senor Azcue, the pictures on the upper lefthand portion of each document would appear to be of the same individual; is that correct?
Senor AZCUE. Yes, sir.
Mr. CORNWELL. Do those pictures of that individual appear to you to be the same individual who visited the consulate in Mexico City on the occasions you have previously described to us?
Senor AZCUE. Truly, this photograph is one that I saw for the first time when the honorable U.S. committee members came to Cuba in April of this year, and I was surprised that I believe that it was not the same person. Fifteen years had gone by so it is very difficult for me to be in a position to guarantee it in a categorical form. But my belief is that this gentleman was not, is not, the person or the individual who went to the consulate.
They would ask him about seeing LHO closer to the assassination and this is what he said.
Mr. CORNWELL. Directing your attention to the period of time immediately after the assassination, the day of the assassination or the day after the assassination, did you during that period of time have an occasion to see pictures of the alleged assassin in the newspapers or to observe on television the man identified at that time as Lee Harvey Oswald?
Senor AZCUE. Yes, sir, not so close to the date, not in the first few days, not immediately thereafter. Some time I calculate approximately-and I say this because I am not a great movie fan, but it was in mid-December approximately--I saw at that time the film in which Ruby appears assassinating the Oswald who was there, and I was not able to identify him and only 2 months had gone by since I had seen the Oswald who appeared at the consulate. And I had a clear mental picture because we had had an unpleasant discussion and he had not been very pleasant to me and I did not recognize when I first saw him. I did not recognize Oswald. The man who went to the consulate was a man over 30 years of age and very thin, very thin faced. And the individual I saw in the movie was a young man, considerably younger, and a fuller face.
Mr. CORNWELL. What color hair did the individual have to the best of your memory who visited the consulate?
Senor AZCUE. He was blond, dark blond.
Mr. CORNWELL. Did the individual you saw in the movie, the person who was killed by Jack Ruby, resemble more closely the individual in these photographs to your memory than the individual who visited the consulate?
Senor AZCUE. I believe so.
He is describing someone who is NOT LHO clearly and he said the photograph on the application did NOT match the man who came to the CC. Then the HSCA asks him to look at F-434 to see if this looks like the man who came to the CC. Here is F-434:
www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/f/f9/Photo_hsca_ex_434.jpg
Mr. CORNWELL. Did the individual who visited the consulate look like that individual?
Senor AZCUE. No.
Mr. CORNWELL. What differences were there?
Senor AZCUE. Many differences. The individual who visited the consulate is one whose physiognomy or whose face I recall very clearly. He had a hard face. He had very straight eyebrows, cold, hard, and straight eyes. His cheeks were thin. His nose was very straight and pointed. This gentleman looks like he is somewhat heavier, more filled, his eyes are at an angle with the outside of his eye, at an angle with his face. I would have never identified him or recognized him. I believe I can recall with fairly good accuracy the individual in such a way that I could recognize him now in a group of 100, that is better than a photograph of him because obviously during a period of 15 years he might change. I think I could recognize him, and this is not him.
Mr. CORNWELL. We would like to show you what has been previously admitted into evidence in this case as Exhibit 194. As you can see, Senor Azcue, the pictures on the right are simply blowups of the same visa application, but I would like to direct your attention to the two pictures on the left which come from photographs taken by the Dallas Police Department. I ask you if that individual looks like the man who visited the consulate?
Senor AZCUE. I would have never recognized him as I did not recognize him in the movie where he dies, and I can, however, identify him as or think of him as the person who was killed or assassinated by Ruby. It is a question of personal evaluation on my part. But it is very clearly imprinted.
Azcue constantly says the LHO who was shot dead in Dallas was NOT the same man who came to the CC. There is NO doubt about that. If you look at the two exhibits given (F-407 and F-434) LHO does NOT look the same as Azcue mentioned. He does look heavier and his face looks fuller in F-434 to me. The signature is again different from what we saw on CE 2654 too. After constant denial by Azcue that the man he saw was LHO, Mr. Preyer takes over the questioning and just ignores all those comments with this question.
Mr. PREYER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Azcue, it is good to see you again. As I understand it, at the time Lee Harvey Oswald visited the consul in Mexico there were three people who could have seen him: yourself, Sylvia Duran and Mr. Mirabal. Is that correct?
Isn’t this reminiscent of what the WC constantly did? Why bother to question him if you are going to ignore what he says? He then tried another way around this issue by asking him a hypothetical question.
Mr. PREYER. If analysis of that handwriting, of that signature on the visa application showed it to be Lee Harvey Oswald's signature, would you still believe that the man who visited you in the consulate was not Oswald?
Senor AZCUE. Under such circumstances I would have to accept that I was being influenced or that I was seeing visions.
As has been said in regards to the WC many times, this kind of questioning would not have been allowed in a court of law. The witness has clearly said many times the man that he saw at the CC was not LHO, but the HSCA seems unwilling to accept this and keeps asking him to change his statement with questions like this one. The HSCA report finally had to admit what Preyer and Cornwell did not want to accept however.
Quote on
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/pages/HSCA_Report_0140b.gif
The committee did, however, obtain independent evidence that someone might have posed as Oswald in Mexico in late September and early October 1963. The former Cuban consul in Mexico City, Eusebio Azcue, testified that the man who applied for an in-transit visa to the Soviet Union was not the one who was identified as Lee Harvey Oswald, the assassin of President Kennedy on November 1963. Azcue, who maintained that he had dealt on three occasions in Mexico with someone who identified himself as Oswald, described the man he claimed was an imposter as a 30-year-old white male, about 5 feet 6 inches in height, with a long face and a straight and pointed nose.
In addition, the committee interviewed Silvia Duran, a secretary in the Cuban consulate in 1963. Although she said that it was in fact Oswald who had visited the consulate on three occasions, she described him as 5 feet 6, 125 pounds, with sparse blond hair, features that did not match those of Lee Harvey Oswald. The descriptions given by both Azcue and Duran do bear a resemblance--height aside--to an alleged Oswald associate referred to in an unconfirmed report provided by another witness, Elena Garro de Paz, former wife of the noted Mexican poet, Octavio Paz. Elena Garro described the associate, whom she claimed to have seen with Oswald at a party, as very tall and slender [with] * * * long blond hair * * * a gaunt face [and] a rather long protruding chin." (HSCA Report, pp. 250-251)
www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/report/html/HSCA_Report_0140b.htm
Quote off
Both Azcue and Duran described someone who did NOT match LHO so who was it that was claiming to be him? Senator Dodd would pick up the questioning and again Azcue would say the man that he saw at the CC was not LHO.
Mr. DODD. …Based on the testimony you have given, if we are to believe your testimony with regard to the description of the individual that you said you saw that day, it would vary quite significantly, or significantly from the actual photographs of Lee Harvey Oswald, the one on the visa application and the photograph that you see to your left over here. They would be different than the person that you saw in the Cuban Consulate, isn't that correct?
Senor AZCUE. For me, yes. When I saw in April the photograph placed on the application, I was surprised by his looks or similarity with the Lee Harvey Oswald who had been killed. This was my reaction in front of you. You were the ones who showed me that picture. That was the first time that I saw that application completed with the photos and all of the other information.
Mr. DODD. But what you saw was someone that was very different looking from the person that you met in the Cuban Consulate in September of 1963?
Senor AZCUE. Yes, as different as I found him when I saw him in film. The image I had of the individual who showed up at the consulate was the man in his thirties, maybe 35 years old, and with the very thin face. You will recall that he had very natural lines, very thin straight nose, except for all of the items I mentioned, and this gentleman appeared to me to be much younger and with a much fuller face. That is the evaluation I have with absolute certainty. It is My truth.
I wonder why Dodd framed the question with the comment “if we are to believe your testimony”? Did they suspect him of lying? If so, why didn’t they show he did? He would confirm the man he saw was NOT LHO with a fourth person.
Mr. THONE. Consul Azcue, did I understand, and I may not have gotten it right this morning, that when you went back to Cuba you saw a film which depicted the shooting by a Mr. Ruby of Lee Harvey Oswald, and at the time you were concerned that this wasn't the same person at all that was at the consul applying for a visa?
Senor AZCUE. Exactly. Only 2 months back I had seen the individual who appeared at the consulate. So I had his image clearly engraved in my mind, and I did not recognize him in the movie.
The poor man had to say the same thing over and over again. He said the man that claimed to be LHO presented a card showing he was a member of the Communist Party.
Mr. FITHIAN. …Mr. Azcue, you testified that Oswald produced a document showing his Membership in the U.S. Communist Party. To your knowledge was that document valid?
Senor AZCUE. I did not concentrate much of my attention on the documents themselves. And I could not see whether they were authentic or not. The person who saw them, or the person who made the notations might have been Sylvia. But she had no way of telling whether they were authentic or not, any of the documents. That is the reason that he addresses himself to the Soviet Embassy, so that they in turn could tell us whether the Soviet documents are or are not valid.
We know it was not valid or that it was not LHO since as we saw in the “Statements That Sink The WC’s Conclusions” series there is NO evidence showing that LHO ever joined the Communist Party, thus, it was not him or he somehow managed to either make or find a fake card.
Based on all of this we can see why the WC never bothered to call Eusebio Azcue as he would have made it plain to see that LHO was NOT the man who came to the CC three times in late September 1963. So who was impersonating LHO then? Why was a “loner” being impersonated in Mexico City? Answers to these questions could open some doors to what really happened on November 22, 1963.