JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends

[Tomtomkent]

The Odio Incident is intriguing precisely because of Odio's credibility. Vincent Bugliosi devotes forty pages to Odio in his book Reclaiming History and concludes that her story is credible and it probably was Oswald who visited her apartment in the company of two anti-Castro Cubans in late September of 1963.

The HSCA also concluded Odio was credible but also said, as you do, so what?




The incident is anomalous because it doesn't fit within the overwhelming matrix of the evidence of Oswald's guilt. As Jean Davison said, "no one could explain what it meant." I does not, however, mitigate that guilt.

Being unusual is not the same as being sinister or evidence of a conspiracy. The event does not even seem to be conncected to the day of the shooting in any meaningful way.

Let's look at it this way: If that is the best evidence we have that LHO was part of a conspiracy it does not connect the conspiracy to the shooting.

It does not take the gun out of Oswalds hand.

It does not add another shooter.

It does not even suggest that Oswald had a different motive.



So I too ask... So what? It appears the sort of event that is given undue significance with hindsight, by people who want there to be a conspiracy. It is significant because it doesn't gel with what we know, but then we know Oswald was so fickle what does that itself mean? He was STILL fickle on yet another occassion? Meh.

 

[RoboTimbo]

The two words are:

(Trumpet fanfare, please) Ta,ta,ta,ta tah tah:

Sylvia Odio​

Google it. WC it. HSCA it, Macadams It, and then come back on this board and say it ain't so!

Were there two other words you were thinking of that would provide evidence of a conspiracy? Those two don't do it.

There are still some other outstanding questions which you've not answered. Do you anticipate ever having the ability to answer those?

 

[Tomtomkent]

Posner looked at Odio, and found nothing credible.
'Case Closed", 177.
"It is physically impossible for Oswald to visit Odio in Dallas when she claims he did."
The person she says may have been Oswald was most likely William Seymour, who greatly resembled Oswald.
She could not identify Oswald from photographs shown her by the Warren Commission.
And despite her tendency toward exhibitionism and need for attention, never contacted anyone, except to casually mention it to a neighbor after her breakdown the day of the assassination.

In other words, it hardly proves a conspiracy? Just checking...

 

[I Ratant]

Mrs. Odio -may- have met some "greasy kind of low Cubans", one of which she said was a 'Leon Oswald' an American, with two other men.
At the time she claims, LHOLN was in Mexico looking for a visa to Cuba from the Cuban embassy in Mexico City and then to the Soviet embassy, and not in Dallas.
Oswald made a panic show in the Soviet embassy, pulling the .38 out and waving it around when he returned the next day, and found the Soviets had no desire to grant the visa from Mexico City. They told him to go to the embassy in DC.
The CTwinkies make much of this as "proof" of something or other.
The Soviets just considered him psychotic.
Posner devotes several pages to the event.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Mrs. Odio -may- have met some "greasy kind of low Cubans", one of which she said was a 'Leon Oswald' an American, with two other men.
At the time she claims, LHOLN was in Mexico looking for a visa to Cuba from the Cuban embassy in Mexico City and then to the Soviet embassy, and not in Dallas.
Oswald made a panic show in the Soviet embassy, pulling the .38 out and waving it around when he returned the next day, and found the Soviets had no desire to grant the visa from Mexico City. They told him to go to the embassy in DC.
The CTwinkies make much of this as "proof" of something or other.
The Soviets just considered him psychotic.
Posner devotes several pages to the event.

Somebody else with a name that sounds like LHO may have been seen by somebody when LHO was elsewhere?


OMG it MUST HAVE BEEN A CONSPIRACY! There is no possible way a person could be WRONG about somebody she later failed to recognise? Erm...


So when is this evidence of a conspiracy turning up again?

 

[Walter Ego]

Posner looked at Odio, and found nothing credible.
'Case Closed", 177.
"It is physically impossible for Oswald to visit Odio in Dallas when she claims he did."

Posner's rejection of Odio's story is contingent on the date the two Cubans and "Leon" came to her door which she thought was September 26 or 27. More likely it was the 25th.

The issue was covered in the PBS Frontline documentary Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?

NARRATOR : [A]uthor Gerald Posner believes Silvia Odio is mistaken about the date on which the three men appeared at her door.

Mr. POSNER : It's physically impossible for Lee Harvey Oswald to have been at the Odio residence on the days that she describes. She says that he was either there on the 26th or 27th of September, a Thursday or Friday, maybe, at the very earliest, Wednesday, the 25th.

SILVIA ODIO : The reason that I remember so clearly was because that same night or I think either that night or the night afterwards, I wrote my father and I also told a friend of mine, who was my father confessor, about the visit.
NARRATOR : Odio talked to Father Walter McCann after the phone call from Leopoldo.

Father WALTER McCANN : I think I can pin a date to this conversation with Silvia. It was the day in which I spoke to her about her attending a charity event at which Janet Leigh was going to appear in Dallas.

NARRATOR : If Father McCann is correct about Janet Leigh, then the three men must have visited the Odios two days earlier, on September 25th, the only night Oswald could possibly have been in Dallas.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/oswald/etc/script.html

She could not identify Oswald from photographs shown her by the Warren Commission.

Incorrect. She did identify Oswald when questioned by the Warren Commission. Vincent Bugliosi confirmed this in Reclaiming History (pp. 1308-1309).

And despite her tendency toward exhibitionism and need for attention, never contacted anyone, except to casually mention it to a neighbor after her breakdown the day of the assassination.

Also incorrect. She told her father and her priest about the incident prior to the assassination (Bugliosi p. 1310). Also see the highlighted section of the Frontline interview quoted above.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Intresting. Most tellings I am familiar with were closer to the version I Ratatant discussed.

 

[Walter Ego]

Intresting. Most tellings I am familiar with were closer to the version I Ratatant discussed.

As I said above, Bugliosi covered the Odio Incident in great detail and believes the visit did take place on Sept. 25, 1963, when Oswald's movements are not accounted for and he believes the basic details are those as described by the Odio sisters.

The incident is a real enigma but, as I've also said, it in no way mitigates Oswald's guilt in the JFK assassination or confirms a conspiracy to frame Oswald.

 

[I Ratant]

As I said above, Bugliosi covered the Odio Incident in great detail and believes the visit did take place on Sept. 25, 1963, when Oswald's movements are not accounted for and he believes the basic details are those as described by the Odio sisters.

The incident is a real enigma but, as I've also said, it in no way mitigates Oswald's guilt in the JFK assassination or confirms a conspiracy to frame Oswald.

.
Two reviews of "Reclaiming History"
.
http://www.ctka.net/2008/bugliosi_review.html
.
http://www.reclaiminghistory.blogspot.com/
.
Bugliosi also successfully prosecuted the bastard couple that murdered the guy's wife for the insurance. I knew the guy and the victim as being nice people, we lived in the same apartment building.
At least, she appeared content.
.
I'd be cautious of placing a lot of credence in the words of a bullshipper, once they know what the answers should be.
Did Bugliosi talk to the Odins, for instance, how long after Posner's book came out?

 

[kookbreaker]

Posner's dealing with Odio was apparently one of his very few missteps in 'Case Closed'. Unfortunately, Bugliousi takes him way too much to task for it, essentially calling him worse than most of the JFK CT buffs. I thought that was most uncalled for and a sour note of the book IMO.

 

[Robert Prey]

Were there two other words you were thinking of that would provide evidence of a conspiracy? Those two don't do it.

There are still some other outstanding questions which you've not answered. Do you anticipate ever having the ability to answer those?

I only answer single questions,

 

[Robert Prey]

Being unusual is not the same as being sinister or evidence of a conspiracy. The event does not even seem to be conncected to the day of the shooting in any meaningful way.

Let's look at it this way: If that is the best evidence we have that LHO was part of a conspiracy it does not connect the conspiracy to the shooting.

It does not take the gun out of Oswalds hand.

It does not add another shooter.

It does not even suggest that Oswald had a different motive.



So I too ask... So what? It appears the sort of event that is given undue significance with hindsight, by people who want there to be a conspiracy. It is significant because it doesn't gel with what we know, but then we know Oswald was so fickle what does that itself mean? He was STILL fickle on yet another occassion? Meh.

You need to re-read the definition of "conspiracy" under Federal Law which I provided, and contemplate it in relation to the Odio incident.

 

[Robert Prey]

I guess my reaction to Sylvio Odio is "and...?"

She could be remembering wrong, but assuming she isn't so what?

Oswald's wherabouts on the day in question were not well known.

He was in the company of a couple of anti-Castro Cubans. He could easily have been conning them or bumming a ride from them. Knowing Oswald he probably thought he was being a clever undercover agent who was going to report directly to Castro once he got to Cuba.

It was September, Oswald's plans at that point were to defect to Cuba. I don't think JFK's visit to Dallas was even in the works at that time.

Sylvia's testimony doesn't make anyone else guilty, nor does it remove the evidence pointing at Oswald.

That's not the point. Oswald may or may not have been a shooter. But the Odio incident proves conspiracy, nonetheless.

 

[Tomtomkent]

You need to re-read the definition of "conspiracy" under Federal Law which I provided, and contemplate it in relation to the Odio incident.

Or perhaps you should admit that two words is simply too little. I have googled and googledthose two words and see NOTHING to suggest conspiracy. So make a better case, or supply actual evidence.

 

[Robert Prey]

Your single best piece of evidence for the above bare assertion?

Oh, there are so many. Here's one:

“Well, you know if we do find out that this is a conspiracy you know that we have orders from Chief Justice Warren to cover this thing up.” -- Warren Counsel Wesley Liebler

REPRODUCED AT THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES

RELEASED PER P. L. 102-526 (JFK ACT) 5-2-96
as published in Sylvia Odio vs. Liebeler & the La Fontaines
By Jim DiEugenio

http://www.ctka.net/pr996-odio.html

 

[RoboTimbo]

I only answer single questions,

You hadn't answered a single one of mine.

Oh, there are so many. Here's one:

“Well, you know if we do find out that this is a conspiracy you know that we have orders from Chief Justice Warren to cover this thing up.” -- Warren Counsel Wesley Liebler

REPRODUCED AT THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES

RELEASED PER P. L. 102-526 (JFK ACT) 5-2-96
as published in Sylvia Odio vs. Liebeler & the La Fontaines
By Jim DiEugenio

http://www.ctka.net/pr996-odio.html

No, that doesn't prove your bare assertion that the Warren Commission Report is a whitewash. Try again. Also:

What hypothesis are you putting forward for how JFK was killed and what is your single best piece of evidence for your hypothesis?

 

[Robert Prey]

Or perhaps you should admit that two words is simply too little. I have googled and googledthose two words and see NOTHING to suggest conspiracy. So make a better case, or supply actual evidence.

I'll be patient with you and try to spell it out. Under the conspiracy law if more than one person even contemplates a crime together, that is conspiracy. IN the Odio incident, the parties connected Kennedy, Assassination and Oswald, with Oswald, or someone impersonating Oswald, before the crime was ever committed. That is evidence of Conspiracy.

18 U.S.C. 371 "makes it a separate Federal crime or offense for anyone to conspire or agree with someone else to do something which, if actually carried out, would amount to another Federal crime or offense. So, under this law, a 'conspiracy' is an agreement or a kind of 'partnership' in criminal purposes in which each member becomes the agent or partner of every other member.

In order to establish a conspiracy offense it is not necessary for the Government to prove that all of the people named in the indictment were members of the scheme; or that those who were members had entered into any formal type of agreement; or that the members had planned together all of the details of the scheme or the 'overt acts' that the indictment charges would be carried out in an effort to commit the intended crime. "

 

[Robert Prey]

You hadn't answered a single one of mine.


No, that doesn't prove your bare assertion that the Warren Commission Report is a whitewash. Try again. Also:

What hypothesis are you putting forward for how JFK was killed and what is your single best piece of evidence for your hypothesis?

JFK was killed by a bullet or bullets fired to his head, at least one of which came from the Grassy Knoll. I'll get into the evidence for this conclusion in a few days time after these other discussions diminish.

 

[RoboTimbo]

JFK was killed by a bullet or bullets fired to his head, at least one of which came from the Grassy Knoll. I'll get into the evidence for this conclusion in a few days time after these other discussions diminish.

It shouldn't take too long for you to post your single best piece of evidence for a bullet coming from the grassy knoll. Don't you want the truth to be told?

 

[Robert Prey]

You hadn't answered a single one of mine.


No, that doesn't prove your bare assertion that the Warren Commission Report is a whitewash. Try again./QUOTE]

OK. Here's another (there are so many):

"The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial."
Nov. 25, 1963
Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach

Sound like an open minded search for the truth?