The integrity of evidentiary contentions is based upon verifiable accuracy and correction of all mistakes and if the claims are repeated but not verified they remain merely unproven assertions. Yet claims are not compelling, evidence is. Claims, no matter who offers them require substantial proof and unbelievable assertions require substantial evidence and uncorrected mistakes lead to future greater errors. Seeking greater answers to past questions regarding the grand claims of Judyth Baker I decided to ask her directly and this inquiry began publicly conducted in Baker's Vindication Facebook group. Baker’s own prior claims were at times her references; they were not supported by verifiable evidence and relied largely upon faith in the writer and so when I began my polite, if direct questioning, my prior article was offered.
No subversion was attempted; I directly challenged her claims, yet also stated if I was wrong, I remain willing to accept any evidence that proves her various accounts. Other reasonable people with evidence also challenged these claims as well and the evidence to prove her claims is more important than just the claims themselves. No matter how often a person asserts something, repeated assertion is not truth, the truth needs to be proven for effective investigation and reasonable doubts must be dispelled and myths consigned to the dustbin of history.
Less than ten years ago, Baker wrote "Me and Lee" and in the book, she offers claims "based on her life" yet unfortunately the account is lacking most required evidence and most firsthand legal corroboration. This absence of evidence renders all of the related claims doubtful at best and supports that all feasible myths contain their undoing within their own incongruent stories and each at some point defies reason and proof. The first of Baker's many wholly unproven ideas states Oswald knew endless facts about Cuba; she asserts he was told to memorize them by his unproven bosses. The problem is when asked questions about Communism, Marxism, and Cuba during interviews Oswald never offered substantive information and why should he do so for her and neglect to on media programs where he could spread his alleged ideas?i Yet this is just the beginning of the later deemed memoir.
Baker attests that Oswald had knowledge of a restaurant in the territory of Mafia boss Carlos Marcello with a contact referred to as "Mr. P" and then offers a wholly unsubstantiated tale regarding this unnamed figure. Lee Harvey Oswald never mentions this to a single person in his lifetime verifiably and these represent additional claims without evidence. Baker claims that a message is sent to Oswald's uncle and this information is widely known far before her story emerges.ii Evidence proved Charles Murret possessed Mafia connections during official inquires, yet Baker provided none of it.
Baker refers to David Ferrie as Dr. Ferrie, Ferrie was never a doctor, nor possessed a doctoral degree of any sort.iii She claims that the Tulane Monkey Research Center supplied her and the alleged "cancer" bio-weapon project, of which there is no proof, nor verifiable scientific basis for any of her claims. She is absent the documents, W-2's, prisoner medical records, chemical analysis, schematics of the weaponization method, etal.iv Baker asserts she was assisting Ferrie and Dr. Mary Sherman with cancer research yet Baker, Ferrie, and Oswald did not possess the necessary scientific training. None of them was qualified to do advanced medical experimentation, nor the weaponization of cancer. They lacked a suitable lab with the necessary devices, experience in handling dangerous material, and no certifications required to obtain such material.v No evidence exists to support any of this.
Another myth associated with Baker is her implications that she, Oswald, David Ferrie, and others knew and aided the Castro assassination plots.vi Baker asserts that David Ferrie asked to her to join the Castro plots and claims she waited to talk to Dr. Ochsner before accepting, yet the primary evidence dispels her claim. There is substantial evidence of the Castro Plots but Ferrie, Baker, Oswald, and Ochsner were never in a position to have knowledge of them.vii
The verifiable evidence does not support anything Baker suggests but does prove Allen Dulles suppressed evidence from the President's Commission. It does offer that some officials were not honest and obstructed justice but we already know that and can prove this with primary evidence without the fables offered by some. Baker asserts she impersonated Marina Oswald and she claims Oswald wanted to pass her off at Guy Banister's office, yet there is no feasible reason why Oswald would do so and if Oswald cared about her or knew her, why bring her and attempt the additional unnecessary deception? No witness corroborates her assertions yet again.
Baker claims she and Oswald went to the Murret home, yet the Murret family, guests, and not a single neighbor ever mentions her. This account relies on belief alone and in one instance, she claims Oswald weeps over her lack of confidence in his ability to protect her.viii He had physical confrontations with the police, endured accusations, and press coverage implied his guilt as the lone suspect and yet he never was observed weeping. When officials ignored Oswald's civil rights, he was angry. When the public hated and cursed him at every turn, he still declared his innocence and he never cried. It is highly improbable he would over a feasibly mythical short-term girlfriend and had greater proven matters on his mind.ix
Baker subsequently states Oswald drove them elsewhere but Oswald had no significant driving experience, license, and no car.x Baker also claims Oswald made repeated overnight plane trips without access to necessary funds and she never mentions specifics or provides evidence for these stories.xi The weight of evidence crashes upon these many insubstantial beliefs. Often when a criticism of Mrs. Baker's claims emerges, the preferred response is "have you read the book?" I have, it has not helped answer questions but offers endless new problems. The book further damages her claims when compared against verifiable evidence and her evolving tales and it proves that her ideas are untenable and most offered are lackluster and without evidence.
In a ponderous display, a radio show host Popeye stated he would give a "free t-shirt" to anyone who took a picture of Baker's book next to Lee Harvey Oswald's grave. Baker responded "Fantastic" and explained she collects such pictures.xii She also held a gathering photographed at Oswald's grave and these gruesome promotions support a few of the worst claims made regarding Baker's true intentions. Perhaps Oswald was never the focus, their alleged relationship unproven, her claims without significant evidence, and herself the star. She feasibly occupies a role without much verifiable proof of anything. A probable myth has wasted over a decade of people's time and obscured the facts but all myths are undone by reasonable doubts and evidence.
i. Judyth Vary Baker, "Me and Lee", Trine Day Publishing, 2010, p. 126
ii. Ibid, p. 135
iii. Ibid, p. 137
iv. Ibid, p. 365
v. Ibid, p. 141, 165
vi. Ibid, p. 165-166
vii. House Select Committee on Assassinations, Segregated CIA Files, Roselli, John, Box 1, File 943, February 15, 1972, p. 2, 3, National Archives and Records Administration Identification Number: 1993.07.01.10:13:43:620800
viii. Ibid, p. 137
ix. Ibid, p. 143
x. Me and Lee, p. 171
xi. Ibid, p. 365, citation no. 5
xii. Down the Rabbit Hole w/Popeye, Judyth Vary Baker interview, April 29, 2012, federaljack.com
Edited: December 2017