New JFK Witness

Loading...

Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon
Upgrade to the latest Flash Player for improved playback performance. Upgrade now or more info.
8,426
Loading...
Alert icon
Sign in or sign up now!
Alert icon

Uploaded by on Sep 6, 2006

New Witness in the JFK murder

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

License:

Standard YouTube License

  • likes, 1 dislikes

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (43)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • @nicenonya3 What occured in Dealey Plaza at 12:30 pm on 11/22/63 is not a sideshow, it is the essence of the case. All the speculation about why he was killed is meaningless without the facts of the actual shooting. And after over 47 years there exists no evidence that anyone other than Oswald was involved in the assassination. For whatever reasons Judyth Baker wishes to inject herself into the conspiracy theories. But her story falls apart under even the slightest scrutiny.

  • @JohnDavidStutts1 READ HER BOOK<ASK HER,SHE'S ON FB,watch her clips,I don't care what you believe,remain ignorant of the facts, and keep dwelling on all the Dealy plaza sideshows of who did the shooting, instead of why JFK was killed!

  • @nicenonya3 Please tell me what makes her story believable? As I mentioned above, until Baker began telling her story, the idea of Oswald being involved with any woman other than Marina in 1963 was an idea that simply did not exist. The fact is, not even conspiracy theorists ever put forth the idea that Oswald had a mistress until Judyth Baker came along. But I guess we are just supposed to take Baker at her word. Why, because she weaved Bannister, Ferrie, Ruby and Shaw into her story?

  • OSWALD NEVER SHOT ANYONE !!! damn you people are stupid!!

    James Files has the story,only he isn't telling the whole story because he is still covering for those involved

  • @JohnDavidStutts1 NOT BELIEVABLE to someone who doesn't have any braincells

  • @nicenonya3 Judyth Vary Baker's story is simply not believable. She took the one true fact, that she and Oswald were co-workers at the Reilly Coffee Company, and ran with it. The only time Judyth, or anyone remotely resembling Judyth, enters into the story is when she injects herself into it. No one corroborates Oswald having a mistress. She'd have been better off just saying she had a one night stand rather than concocting her fantastic tale of conspiracy and star-crossed lovers.

  • Lee Harvey Oswald Parafine test-NEGATIVE 0n youtube

  • Look up Judyth Vary Baker,she will set you loner nutters straight...HOW MANY PEOPLE HAVE TO COME FORWARD BEFORE YOU PULL YOUR HEADS OUT OF YOUR ASSES????

  • Too bad you haven't done all your homework,James Files tells the story that Oswald was with him in Mesquite,TX setting up the scope on his Remington fireball XP-100,Oswald never shot anyone,the only reason he had any nitrates on his hand was because Lee was holding the spent shells from the XP-100.LHO was getting change for his coke when the shots were fired,the woman who worked at the TSBD finally decided it was safe to tell her story,haven't read the latest book to get her ...

  • @nicenonya3 He tested negative on his cheek. He actually tested positive on his hands. The negative cheek result was to be expected. Why the Dallas PD ever did such a test is beyond me. There is no way that a bolt action rifle, such as the Carcano, will leave any paraffin on the cheek. The gases needed to leave nitrates are sealed in by the bolt. In any case, paraffin tests are basically worthless either way, and there is a mountain of solid evidence that proves Oswalds guilt.

Loading...

Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more