Post by Rob Caprio on Jul 20, 2022 19:19:50 GMT -5
All portions are ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2024
thebluepaper.com/wp-content/uploads/Photo_hsca_ex_179.jpg
The Warren Commission (WC) claimed that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) had shot and killed President John F. Kennedy (JFK) all by himself on November 22, 1963. They also claimed he had shot and killed Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit (JDT) on the same day all by himself.
One of their primary pieces of evidence was a set of photographs that became known as the “Backyard Photographs” (BYPs) since they were allegedly taken in the backyard of a Neely Street house that LHO was allegedly renting. These consisted of Commission Exhibit (CE) 133-A and CE 133-B during the lifetime of the WC, but later on additional copies would be found. A third copy was found in 1967 among George DeMohrenschildt’s belongings and was designated 133-C. In 1976 another copy was found by the widow of former Dallas Police Department (DPD) officer Roscoe White and it was designated 133-D (some call it the “Dees” copy which was Geneva White's new last name).
The ironic thing is that the 133-D copy found among Roscoe White’s possessions by his wife and turned over to Senator Richard Schweiker during his investigation into JFK’s assassination (this would lead to the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) being formed in 1977) has the SAME POSE as the DPD recreation photograph! Look for yourself.
CE 712 (DPD recreation photograph): merdist.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/FBI-1964-reenactment.jpg
133-D photograph: www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/infojfk/jfk2/2p367f188.jpg
Why would the DPD recreation photographs match the photograph found in Roscoe White’s possessions, but NOT the two official copies found (CE 133 A & B)? This is an intriguing question and one that the WC never dealt with and WC defenders have NEVER answered.
This post is not about the photographs however as I have done quite a few on them already, but instead the focus of this post is the camera that was supposedly used to take them.
******************************************
During Marina Oswald’s WC testimony she is shown CE 136 and asked if she has seen it before.
CE 136: www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/pages/WH_Vol16_0268a.jpg
Mr. THORNE. Exhibit 136 is a camera contained within a leather case.
Mrs. OSWALD. This is a Russian camera.
Mr. RANKIN. Is that the camera you used to take the pictures you have referred to?
Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember exactly whether it was an American camera or this.
She is clearly not sure if this was the camera used to take the BYPs or not (if you believe she took them at all) as she says it is a “Russian camera”, but she is not sure if this or an “American camera” was used by her on March 31, 1963. She is then questioned about CE 137.
Mr. THORNE. Exhibit 137 is a camera in a leather case.
Mr. RANKIN. Have you ever seen that camera before?
Mrs. OSWALD. No.
Mr. DULLES. Is that a Russian camera?
Mrs. OSWALD. No.
The odd thing is when you go to Historymatters.com to look at CE 137 you don’t find it. CE 136 is on page 511, but when you go to page 512 you see CE 139 at the top of the page. Why? Both CE 137 and CE 138 (flash attachment for “some type of camera") have disappeared. Again, I ask, why? Was it the Minox camera that we were NOT allowed to see back in 1964?
As we have seen the alleged camera to be used was NOT turned into the authorities until February 1964 when Robert Oswald gave it to the FBI. FBI expert witness Lyndal Shaneyfelt would tell us this in his testimony.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Shaneyfelt, I now hand you an Imperial Reflex Duo Lens camera. Let me state for the record, that this camera was turned over to the FBI by Robert Oswald, the brother of Lee Harvey Oswald, on February 24, 1964.
Robert Oswald identified the camera as having belonged to Lee Oswald and stated that he, Robert, had obtained it from the Paine residence in December 1963, several weeks after the the assassination.
On February 25, 1964, Marina was given the camera and she identified it as the one which she had used to take the pictures 133A and 133B
Mr. Shaneyfelt, are you familiar with this camera?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I am.
I need to ask a question here. When did Marina Oswald confirm a camera shown to her was the one she used again? She was shown CE 136 and CE 137 and did NOT say either was the one she used on March 31, 1963, so what camera is Mr. Eisenberg referring to?
Mr. EISENBERG. When did you receive the camera, Mr. Shaneyfelt?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. It was--I can't pinpoint the date exactly, I don't have the notes here for that. It was, I would say, the latter part of February, not too long after it had been recovered on February 24.
Mr. EISENBERG. Was it in working order when you received it?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; it had been slightly damaged.
Mr. EISENBERG. Could you explain that?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. In order to be able to make a photograph with the camera, I had to make slight repairs to the shutter lever, which had been beat. I straightened it and cleaned the lens in order to remove the dirt which had accumulated. These were the only things that had to be done before it was usable to make pictures with it.
Mr. EISENBERG. And the shutter lever you are referring to is the little red-tipped lever protruding at the outside of the camera?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.
Mr. EISENBERG. What did you do with it exactly?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. I bent it out straight. It was bent over.
Mr. EISENBERG. Could a layman have performed these repairs?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; he could have.
So was the WC lawyer suggesting that the shutter level CONSTANTLY got bent in this camera? If not, why was he asking if a “layman” (i.e. LHO) could have performed this repair? If so, we have to believe that LHO had fixed it to be used on March 31, 1963, but in the time between then and the FBI receiving it on February 24, 1964, it got bent again! What could be causing this camera’s shutter level to be constantly getting bent?
Back to that misleading question by Mr. Eisenberg (actually outright lie) we see that Marina Oswald did NOT identify the camera allegedly used by her on March 31, 1963, until her June 11, 1964, appearance before the WC! Shaneyfelt testified on April 23, 1964, so why was he telling him that on February 25, 1964, Marina Oswald had identified what camera was allegedly used? This is from her June 11, 1964, WC testimony.
Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, will you examine the cameras of your husband and TELL US WHICH ONE TOOK the pictures that showed your husband with the rifle and the pistol, as you will recall?
The pictures I am asking you about are Exhibit Nos. 133-A and 133-B which you will recall are the ones that you said in your prior testimony that you took yourself.
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. Which one of these cameras.
Mrs. OSWALD. This is the first and last time in my life I ever took a photograph and it was done with this gray camera.
Mr. REDLICH. Mr. Rankin, the Commission exhibit numbers of the two cameras, one is Commission Exhibit No. 136 and one is Commission Exhibit No. 750.
CE 750: www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pages/WH_Vol17_0275b.jpg
Mr. MCKENZIE. And the gray camera she is referring to Mr. Rankin, for the purpose of the record is Commission Exhibit No. 750, isn’t that right, Mrs. Oswald?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. That is the gray camera you just said you took pictures with, is that correct?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. The other camera also belonged to Lee, but I don’t use it. (V, p. 405)
This testimony clearly shows she did NOT identify the camera allegedly used on March 31, 1963, UNTIL June 11, 1964! So why was the WC lawyer telling FBI witness Shaneyfelt that she had selected the camera used already when he testified in late April? This was pure fabrication by the WC.
Things get more confusing when we read some of the interviews Marina Oswald did with the FBI. In a report dated February 1, 1964, we see the following comments by Marina Oswald regarding the cameras in question.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/pages/WH_Vol22_0112b.gif
Marina was questioned concerning cameras which were owned by Lee Harvey Oswald and her. She said that they owned two cameras. One of these cameras was a Russian camera which had been purchased by Lee Harvey Oswald at Minsk in September, 1961. This camera had been cheap in price but it was a good camera.
The other camera owned by the Oswalds was a United States made camera which Lee Harvey Oswald had owned prior to his entry into the U.S. Marine Corps and this was the camera which he had taken pictures with when he was in the Marine Corps. When he went to Russia, Oswald left this camera with his brother Robert Oswald. When Oswald and Marina returned from Russia, Robert returned the camera to Oswald and it was among the effects the Oswalds had on November 22, 1963. (CE 1155, p. 194)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0112b.htm
Quote off
So this says they owned two cameras, a Russian one (CE 136 called a “Cuera-2”) and an American one (called a “Realist”), and we have to assume these were the two shown to her during her February 1964 testimony. If so, and what other camera could have been shown to her (perhaps the Minox?), that means the American camera was the mysterious CE 137 that is missing from the twenty-six volumes today. But, remember, she said she had NEVER seen that camera before. How could this be if this was the camera LHO had purchased before his departure in the Marine Corps?
Also, a minor note here, but I want to mention it. Why is everyone else mentioned in these FBI reports written either with their middle name included or at least their middle initial included, but NOT Marina? Why is Marina simply written as Marina? Why NO Marina Middle Name Oswald for her? Just wondering.
As we have come to expect nothing is what it seems to be or is what is written in FBI reports. Less than three weeks later Marina Oswald was interviewed again by the FBI and this time she said something different about the cameras.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/pages/WH_Vol22_0113b.gif
She was also shown a photograph of the Stereo Realist, which is item 378 [FBI inventory list], which has Serial Number A60979. She COULD NOT IDENTIFY THIS CAMERA. She stated it was NOT THE PROPERTY OF OSWALD as far as she knew. She advised to her knowledge she had NEVER SEEN THIS CAMERA. (CE 1156, p. 196) (Emphasis added)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0113b.htm
Quote off
So less than three weeks after saying the “Realist” was the camera LHO owned when he went into the Marine Corps, the camera he used to take all the photographs of him in the Marine Corps, and the camera he left with his brother Robert when he left for Russia, it was NOW NOT the camera LHO owned and a camera she had EVER SEEN BEFORE! Of course we have no access to CE 137 to see what this “Realist” looked like and this is important as a week later she was asked about the American camera for a third time by the FBI. Here is what she said this time.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/pages/WH_Vol22_0408b.gif
She advised that she believed she took the photograph with the American camera which Oswald owned. She repeated Oswald owned two cameras—one an American camera and the other a Russian-made camera, which she has identified as the Smena-2 (English translation of “Cuera-2”). She said the American camera had a grayish color, somewhat like aluminum. It was a box-type camera. She is not completely sure however, as to whether the camera had an extending bellows. She can recall that she sighted the camera by looking down into the viewer She said she did not know where this camera is now. Marina advised she could identify this camera. (CE 1404, p. 448)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0408b.htm
Quote off
So now we see the work of the authorities in play. We have gone from a camera of American origin being shown to Marina Oswald before the WC which she said she had NOT seen before, to an American camera known as a “Realist” which LHO purchased before he went into the Marine Corps, to Marina Oswald saying she had NEVER seen the “Realist” camera before and finally arriving at the camera the WC would claim she used—the Imperial Reflex camera. Boy, that was simple, huh?
This one simple issue (like the issue of LHO’s dominant hand and the chicken lunch in the TSBD) shows how the WC operated when “searching for the truth.” There is more in this issue to consider. On February 28, 1964, J. Edgar Hoover (JEH) wrote a letter to J. Lee Rankin in which the camera used to allegedly take the BYPs is discussed.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/pages/WH_Vol24_0269a.jpg
On February 24, 1964, Mr. Robert Lee Oswald, brother of Lee, furnished to a Special Agent of the Dallas Office of this Bureau a Duo-lens Imperial Reflex camera which he stated was the property of Lee. . . . Robert advised that he obtained this camera from the residence of Mrs. Ruth Paine, Irving, Texas, in December, 1963. . . . On February 25, 1964, this camera was displayed to Marina Oswald and she immediately identified it as the American camera which belonged to her husband and the one which she used to take the photograph of him with the rifle and the pistol. (CE 2083, p. 519)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0269a.htm
Quote off
The problem with this claim by the FBI is Robert Oswald had already testified and the FBI included NO report with him in which he “advised” anything in their twenty-six volumes, thus, there is no independent testimony from Robert Oswald to corroborate the claim the FBI ascribed to him. IOWs, there is NO way to know that he found this camera in the residence of the Paine’s, therefore, this leaves the door open for it having been found somewhere else. By the way, the twenty-six volumes also lack the “February 25” interview with Marina Oswald in which she allegedly identified the camera Robert Oswald allegedly found in the Paine’s house. Is this why the WC lawyer told Shaneyfelt she had identified it?
On March 16, 1964, the FBI did a report on an interview they conducted with Robert Oswald. In this report they said Robert had collected possessions of LHO from the Paine house which included an American-made camera. This is what he said about it.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/pages/WC_Vol25_0335a.gif
He stated that he had never made this camera available to the authorities before February 24, 1964, because he had never been asked for it previously, and because he could see no evidentiary value to anyone interested in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, of this cheap camera which belonged to Lee Harvey Oswald. He stated it had never occurred to him that anyone would be interested in the camera. (CE 2466, p. 468)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0335a.htm
Quote off
He is right of course as even IF it was the camera used to take the alleged BYPs it has never been shown how they have anything to do with the assassintion of JFK. The fact this camera would not be turned over until three months after the assassination would also call into question the validity of this evidence in a court of law. The odyssey continues though as we have more evidence in the twenty-six volumes to consider. In another FBI report dated March 26, 1964, we see that they showed both the “Cuera-2” (Russian camera) and the American-made (“Stereo Realist”) were not recognized by Robert Oswald. While he said he could not definitively say these were or were not LHO’s cameras he said he did NOT recognize them. Keep in mind, in Marina’s first FBI interview she claimed the American-made camera was left with Robert Oswald the WHOLE TIME LHO was in Russia so he should have been able to recognize it IF that was the camera shown to him.
A new person is introduced to the story of the cameras, Detective John McCabe of the Irving Police Department, at this point in this FBI report. Detective McCabe said he was present at the search of the Paine’s house on November 23, 1963, as the Irving PD had jurisdiction for the Paine house. The report describes what he saw.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/pages/WC_Vol25_0411b.gif
Detective McCabe advised that he assisted the Dallas Police Officers in this search and is certain that he saw a light gray box camera in a box in Mrs. Paine’s garage. McCabe stated that this camera was in a box which contained books and photographs which belonged to Lee Harvey Oswald. McCabe stated that he searched this box and did NOT take the camera since he did NOT consider it to be of evidentiary value….He took the camera out of the box, put in on a dresser and searched the box in detail, and then put the camera back in the box.
He described the camera as of a square, reflex type which appeared in such POOR CONDITION that he believed it was NOT capable of taking pictures.
Detective McCabe stated that in his opinion the Dallas Police Officers, who were also participating in the search, did not see this camera and did not search this particular box. He stated that he had already searched the box and told them so. He did NOT point out the camera to them. (CE 2257, p. 2) (Emphasis added)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0411b.htm
Quote off
Why did McCabe NOT consider the camera he saw to be of evidentiary value when he would have had NO idea at that point what might have been of value or not? Why did he make this call? He also said it was in poor condition and did not think it worked anymore so how could it have been used to take the alleged BYPs with? Why did he NOT show it to the Dallas Police Officers also conducting the search? I find it odd that he claimed to have told them about it and none of them wanted to see it, thus, he is the ONLY person who claimed to see a reflex type camera in the Paine’s garage on November 23, 1963. And NOT so oddly, given the pattern of this case, he was NEVER CALLED TO TESTIFY BY THE WC. I wonder why?
We are left with one cop’s word for it that a reflex type camera was found and seen in the Paine’s garage on November 23, 1963. Robert Oswald supposedly found the camera that McCabe saw in the Paine’s garage on December 8, 1963, and then turned it into the authorities on February 24, 1964, was not asked about these things in his WC testimony. Also, the FBI report that made reference to him stating these points cannot be found in the twenty-six volumes. This means we really have NO chain of custody for this camera the WC would claim took the BYPs on March 31, 1963.
Despite producing NO evidence that made it clear that the Imperial reflex camera was used to take the alleged photographs (remember, Marina said this was the ONLY time in her life she supposedly took pictures with a camera) the WC wrote this in their Report.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0308b.gif
An Imperial reflex camera, which Marina Oswald testified she used to take 133-A and 133-B, was subsequently produced by Robert Oswald, Lee Harvey Oswald’s brother. (WCR, p. 592)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0308b.htm
Quote off
The Imperial reflex camera was seen by ONE person supposedly, McCabe; and Marina Oswald only identified the Imperial reflex camera (CE 750) after being show another camera that has disappeared (CE 137); and there is NO evidence to support that Robert Oswald found an Imperial reflex camera on December 8, 1963, among LHO’s possessions. NOTHING the WC wrote is factual as there is NO chain of custody for this camera and no evidence that it was used to take photographs that have NOT been proven to depict LHO in them holding a rifle and a pistol.
thebluepaper.com/wp-content/uploads/Photo_hsca_ex_179.jpg
The Warren Commission (WC) claimed that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) had shot and killed President John F. Kennedy (JFK) all by himself on November 22, 1963. They also claimed he had shot and killed Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit (JDT) on the same day all by himself.
One of their primary pieces of evidence was a set of photographs that became known as the “Backyard Photographs” (BYPs) since they were allegedly taken in the backyard of a Neely Street house that LHO was allegedly renting. These consisted of Commission Exhibit (CE) 133-A and CE 133-B during the lifetime of the WC, but later on additional copies would be found. A third copy was found in 1967 among George DeMohrenschildt’s belongings and was designated 133-C. In 1976 another copy was found by the widow of former Dallas Police Department (DPD) officer Roscoe White and it was designated 133-D (some call it the “Dees” copy which was Geneva White's new last name).
The ironic thing is that the 133-D copy found among Roscoe White’s possessions by his wife and turned over to Senator Richard Schweiker during his investigation into JFK’s assassination (this would lead to the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) being formed in 1977) has the SAME POSE as the DPD recreation photograph! Look for yourself.
CE 712 (DPD recreation photograph): merdist.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/FBI-1964-reenactment.jpg
133-D photograph: www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/infojfk/jfk2/2p367f188.jpg
Why would the DPD recreation photographs match the photograph found in Roscoe White’s possessions, but NOT the two official copies found (CE 133 A & B)? This is an intriguing question and one that the WC never dealt with and WC defenders have NEVER answered.
This post is not about the photographs however as I have done quite a few on them already, but instead the focus of this post is the camera that was supposedly used to take them.
******************************************
During Marina Oswald’s WC testimony she is shown CE 136 and asked if she has seen it before.
CE 136: www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/pages/WH_Vol16_0268a.jpg
Mr. THORNE. Exhibit 136 is a camera contained within a leather case.
Mrs. OSWALD. This is a Russian camera.
Mr. RANKIN. Is that the camera you used to take the pictures you have referred to?
Mrs. OSWALD. I don't remember exactly whether it was an American camera or this.
She is clearly not sure if this was the camera used to take the BYPs or not (if you believe she took them at all) as she says it is a “Russian camera”, but she is not sure if this or an “American camera” was used by her on March 31, 1963. She is then questioned about CE 137.
Mr. THORNE. Exhibit 137 is a camera in a leather case.
Mr. RANKIN. Have you ever seen that camera before?
Mrs. OSWALD. No.
Mr. DULLES. Is that a Russian camera?
Mrs. OSWALD. No.
The odd thing is when you go to Historymatters.com to look at CE 137 you don’t find it. CE 136 is on page 511, but when you go to page 512 you see CE 139 at the top of the page. Why? Both CE 137 and CE 138 (flash attachment for “some type of camera") have disappeared. Again, I ask, why? Was it the Minox camera that we were NOT allowed to see back in 1964?
As we have seen the alleged camera to be used was NOT turned into the authorities until February 1964 when Robert Oswald gave it to the FBI. FBI expert witness Lyndal Shaneyfelt would tell us this in his testimony.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Shaneyfelt, I now hand you an Imperial Reflex Duo Lens camera. Let me state for the record, that this camera was turned over to the FBI by Robert Oswald, the brother of Lee Harvey Oswald, on February 24, 1964.
Robert Oswald identified the camera as having belonged to Lee Oswald and stated that he, Robert, had obtained it from the Paine residence in December 1963, several weeks after the the assassination.
On February 25, 1964, Marina was given the camera and she identified it as the one which she had used to take the pictures 133A and 133B
Mr. Shaneyfelt, are you familiar with this camera?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; I am.
I need to ask a question here. When did Marina Oswald confirm a camera shown to her was the one she used again? She was shown CE 136 and CE 137 and did NOT say either was the one she used on March 31, 1963, so what camera is Mr. Eisenberg referring to?
Mr. EISENBERG. When did you receive the camera, Mr. Shaneyfelt?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. It was--I can't pinpoint the date exactly, I don't have the notes here for that. It was, I would say, the latter part of February, not too long after it had been recovered on February 24.
Mr. EISENBERG. Was it in working order when you received it?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. No; it had been slightly damaged.
Mr. EISENBERG. Could you explain that?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. In order to be able to make a photograph with the camera, I had to make slight repairs to the shutter lever, which had been beat. I straightened it and cleaned the lens in order to remove the dirt which had accumulated. These were the only things that had to be done before it was usable to make pictures with it.
Mr. EISENBERG. And the shutter lever you are referring to is the little red-tipped lever protruding at the outside of the camera?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct.
Mr. EISENBERG. What did you do with it exactly?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. I bent it out straight. It was bent over.
Mr. EISENBERG. Could a layman have performed these repairs?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; he could have.
So was the WC lawyer suggesting that the shutter level CONSTANTLY got bent in this camera? If not, why was he asking if a “layman” (i.e. LHO) could have performed this repair? If so, we have to believe that LHO had fixed it to be used on March 31, 1963, but in the time between then and the FBI receiving it on February 24, 1964, it got bent again! What could be causing this camera’s shutter level to be constantly getting bent?
Back to that misleading question by Mr. Eisenberg (actually outright lie) we see that Marina Oswald did NOT identify the camera allegedly used by her on March 31, 1963, until her June 11, 1964, appearance before the WC! Shaneyfelt testified on April 23, 1964, so why was he telling him that on February 25, 1964, Marina Oswald had identified what camera was allegedly used? This is from her June 11, 1964, WC testimony.
Mr. RANKIN. Mrs. Oswald, will you examine the cameras of your husband and TELL US WHICH ONE TOOK the pictures that showed your husband with the rifle and the pistol, as you will recall?
The pictures I am asking you about are Exhibit Nos. 133-A and 133-B which you will recall are the ones that you said in your prior testimony that you took yourself.
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. Which one of these cameras.
Mrs. OSWALD. This is the first and last time in my life I ever took a photograph and it was done with this gray camera.
Mr. REDLICH. Mr. Rankin, the Commission exhibit numbers of the two cameras, one is Commission Exhibit No. 136 and one is Commission Exhibit No. 750.
CE 750: www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pages/WH_Vol17_0275b.jpg
Mr. MCKENZIE. And the gray camera she is referring to Mr. Rankin, for the purpose of the record is Commission Exhibit No. 750, isn’t that right, Mrs. Oswald?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes.
Mr. RANKIN. That is the gray camera you just said you took pictures with, is that correct?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. The other camera also belonged to Lee, but I don’t use it. (V, p. 405)
This testimony clearly shows she did NOT identify the camera allegedly used on March 31, 1963, UNTIL June 11, 1964! So why was the WC lawyer telling FBI witness Shaneyfelt that she had selected the camera used already when he testified in late April? This was pure fabrication by the WC.
Things get more confusing when we read some of the interviews Marina Oswald did with the FBI. In a report dated February 1, 1964, we see the following comments by Marina Oswald regarding the cameras in question.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/pages/WH_Vol22_0112b.gif
Marina was questioned concerning cameras which were owned by Lee Harvey Oswald and her. She said that they owned two cameras. One of these cameras was a Russian camera which had been purchased by Lee Harvey Oswald at Minsk in September, 1961. This camera had been cheap in price but it was a good camera.
The other camera owned by the Oswalds was a United States made camera which Lee Harvey Oswald had owned prior to his entry into the U.S. Marine Corps and this was the camera which he had taken pictures with when he was in the Marine Corps. When he went to Russia, Oswald left this camera with his brother Robert Oswald. When Oswald and Marina returned from Russia, Robert returned the camera to Oswald and it was among the effects the Oswalds had on November 22, 1963. (CE 1155, p. 194)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0112b.htm
Quote off
So this says they owned two cameras, a Russian one (CE 136 called a “Cuera-2”) and an American one (called a “Realist”), and we have to assume these were the two shown to her during her February 1964 testimony. If so, and what other camera could have been shown to her (perhaps the Minox?), that means the American camera was the mysterious CE 137 that is missing from the twenty-six volumes today. But, remember, she said she had NEVER seen that camera before. How could this be if this was the camera LHO had purchased before his departure in the Marine Corps?
Also, a minor note here, but I want to mention it. Why is everyone else mentioned in these FBI reports written either with their middle name included or at least their middle initial included, but NOT Marina? Why is Marina simply written as Marina? Why NO Marina Middle Name Oswald for her? Just wondering.
As we have come to expect nothing is what it seems to be or is what is written in FBI reports. Less than three weeks later Marina Oswald was interviewed again by the FBI and this time she said something different about the cameras.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/pages/WH_Vol22_0113b.gif
She was also shown a photograph of the Stereo Realist, which is item 378 [FBI inventory list], which has Serial Number A60979. She COULD NOT IDENTIFY THIS CAMERA. She stated it was NOT THE PROPERTY OF OSWALD as far as she knew. She advised to her knowledge she had NEVER SEEN THIS CAMERA. (CE 1156, p. 196) (Emphasis added)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0113b.htm
Quote off
So less than three weeks after saying the “Realist” was the camera LHO owned when he went into the Marine Corps, the camera he used to take all the photographs of him in the Marine Corps, and the camera he left with his brother Robert when he left for Russia, it was NOW NOT the camera LHO owned and a camera she had EVER SEEN BEFORE! Of course we have no access to CE 137 to see what this “Realist” looked like and this is important as a week later she was asked about the American camera for a third time by the FBI. Here is what she said this time.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/pages/WH_Vol22_0408b.gif
She advised that she believed she took the photograph with the American camera which Oswald owned. She repeated Oswald owned two cameras—one an American camera and the other a Russian-made camera, which she has identified as the Smena-2 (English translation of “Cuera-2”). She said the American camera had a grayish color, somewhat like aluminum. It was a box-type camera. She is not completely sure however, as to whether the camera had an extending bellows. She can recall that she sighted the camera by looking down into the viewer She said she did not know where this camera is now. Marina advised she could identify this camera. (CE 1404, p. 448)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0408b.htm
Quote off
So now we see the work of the authorities in play. We have gone from a camera of American origin being shown to Marina Oswald before the WC which she said she had NOT seen before, to an American camera known as a “Realist” which LHO purchased before he went into the Marine Corps, to Marina Oswald saying she had NEVER seen the “Realist” camera before and finally arriving at the camera the WC would claim she used—the Imperial Reflex camera. Boy, that was simple, huh?
This one simple issue (like the issue of LHO’s dominant hand and the chicken lunch in the TSBD) shows how the WC operated when “searching for the truth.” There is more in this issue to consider. On February 28, 1964, J. Edgar Hoover (JEH) wrote a letter to J. Lee Rankin in which the camera used to allegedly take the BYPs is discussed.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/pages/WH_Vol24_0269a.jpg
On February 24, 1964, Mr. Robert Lee Oswald, brother of Lee, furnished to a Special Agent of the Dallas Office of this Bureau a Duo-lens Imperial Reflex camera which he stated was the property of Lee. . . . Robert advised that he obtained this camera from the residence of Mrs. Ruth Paine, Irving, Texas, in December, 1963. . . . On February 25, 1964, this camera was displayed to Marina Oswald and she immediately identified it as the American camera which belonged to her husband and the one which she used to take the photograph of him with the rifle and the pistol. (CE 2083, p. 519)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh24/html/WH_Vol24_0269a.htm
Quote off
The problem with this claim by the FBI is Robert Oswald had already testified and the FBI included NO report with him in which he “advised” anything in their twenty-six volumes, thus, there is no independent testimony from Robert Oswald to corroborate the claim the FBI ascribed to him. IOWs, there is NO way to know that he found this camera in the residence of the Paine’s, therefore, this leaves the door open for it having been found somewhere else. By the way, the twenty-six volumes also lack the “February 25” interview with Marina Oswald in which she allegedly identified the camera Robert Oswald allegedly found in the Paine’s house. Is this why the WC lawyer told Shaneyfelt she had identified it?
On March 16, 1964, the FBI did a report on an interview they conducted with Robert Oswald. In this report they said Robert had collected possessions of LHO from the Paine house which included an American-made camera. This is what he said about it.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/pages/WC_Vol25_0335a.gif
He stated that he had never made this camera available to the authorities before February 24, 1964, because he had never been asked for it previously, and because he could see no evidentiary value to anyone interested in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, of this cheap camera which belonged to Lee Harvey Oswald. He stated it had never occurred to him that anyone would be interested in the camera. (CE 2466, p. 468)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0335a.htm
Quote off
He is right of course as even IF it was the camera used to take the alleged BYPs it has never been shown how they have anything to do with the assassintion of JFK. The fact this camera would not be turned over until three months after the assassination would also call into question the validity of this evidence in a court of law. The odyssey continues though as we have more evidence in the twenty-six volumes to consider. In another FBI report dated March 26, 1964, we see that they showed both the “Cuera-2” (Russian camera) and the American-made (“Stereo Realist”) were not recognized by Robert Oswald. While he said he could not definitively say these were or were not LHO’s cameras he said he did NOT recognize them. Keep in mind, in Marina’s first FBI interview she claimed the American-made camera was left with Robert Oswald the WHOLE TIME LHO was in Russia so he should have been able to recognize it IF that was the camera shown to him.
A new person is introduced to the story of the cameras, Detective John McCabe of the Irving Police Department, at this point in this FBI report. Detective McCabe said he was present at the search of the Paine’s house on November 23, 1963, as the Irving PD had jurisdiction for the Paine house. The report describes what he saw.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/pages/WC_Vol25_0411b.gif
Detective McCabe advised that he assisted the Dallas Police Officers in this search and is certain that he saw a light gray box camera in a box in Mrs. Paine’s garage. McCabe stated that this camera was in a box which contained books and photographs which belonged to Lee Harvey Oswald. McCabe stated that he searched this box and did NOT take the camera since he did NOT consider it to be of evidentiary value….He took the camera out of the box, put in on a dresser and searched the box in detail, and then put the camera back in the box.
He described the camera as of a square, reflex type which appeared in such POOR CONDITION that he believed it was NOT capable of taking pictures.
Detective McCabe stated that in his opinion the Dallas Police Officers, who were also participating in the search, did not see this camera and did not search this particular box. He stated that he had already searched the box and told them so. He did NOT point out the camera to them. (CE 2257, p. 2) (Emphasis added)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0411b.htm
Quote off
Why did McCabe NOT consider the camera he saw to be of evidentiary value when he would have had NO idea at that point what might have been of value or not? Why did he make this call? He also said it was in poor condition and did not think it worked anymore so how could it have been used to take the alleged BYPs with? Why did he NOT show it to the Dallas Police Officers also conducting the search? I find it odd that he claimed to have told them about it and none of them wanted to see it, thus, he is the ONLY person who claimed to see a reflex type camera in the Paine’s garage on November 23, 1963. And NOT so oddly, given the pattern of this case, he was NEVER CALLED TO TESTIFY BY THE WC. I wonder why?
We are left with one cop’s word for it that a reflex type camera was found and seen in the Paine’s garage on November 23, 1963. Robert Oswald supposedly found the camera that McCabe saw in the Paine’s garage on December 8, 1963, and then turned it into the authorities on February 24, 1964, was not asked about these things in his WC testimony. Also, the FBI report that made reference to him stating these points cannot be found in the twenty-six volumes. This means we really have NO chain of custody for this camera the WC would claim took the BYPs on March 31, 1963.
Despite producing NO evidence that made it clear that the Imperial reflex camera was used to take the alleged photographs (remember, Marina said this was the ONLY time in her life she supposedly took pictures with a camera) the WC wrote this in their Report.
Quote on
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/pages/WCReport_0308b.gif
An Imperial reflex camera, which Marina Oswald testified she used to take 133-A and 133-B, was subsequently produced by Robert Oswald, Lee Harvey Oswald’s brother. (WCR, p. 592)
www.historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0308b.htm
Quote off
The Imperial reflex camera was seen by ONE person supposedly, McCabe; and Marina Oswald only identified the Imperial reflex camera (CE 750) after being show another camera that has disappeared (CE 137); and there is NO evidence to support that Robert Oswald found an Imperial reflex camera on December 8, 1963, among LHO’s possessions. NOTHING the WC wrote is factual as there is NO chain of custody for this camera and no evidence that it was used to take photographs that have NOT been proven to depict LHO in them holding a rifle and a pistol.