글쓴이 보관물: russianbooks_hy1n5m

Peter Vronsky Curriculum Vitae

Peter Vronsky is an investigative historian, author, filmmaker and new media artist.  He holds a Ph.d. in the history of espionage in international relations and criminal justice history from the University of Toronto. He was born in Canada and has been shooting and producing investigative documentaries and independent films since 1975.    

Peter Vronsky is the author of a true-crime history bestseller, Serial Killers: The Method and Mandness of Monsters (Berkley Books – Penguin Group, 2004.) The sequel Female Serial Killers: How and Why Women Become Monsters was published by Berkley Penguin in 2007.  His current book based on his doctoral dissertation is Ridgeway: The American Fenian Invasion and the 1866 Battle That Made Canada (Allen Lane – Penguin Random House Canada, 2011) a controversial study of the hidden history of Canada’s first modern battle. 

He worked extensively in Europe, the former Soviet Union, Middle-East, South Africa and in Canada and USA producing and directing numerous cutting edge investigative

documentary television specials on subjects ranging from early punk rock and flashback syndrome in Vietnam war veterans to organized crime and nuclear materials smuggling in the break-away regions of the former Soviet Union.  

Peter Vronsky is the creator of a body of formal video art works exhibited in the 1980s internationally, a former Sony Corporation Artist-in-Residence, and a cited historian of Lee Harvey Oswald’s journey to the USSR in 1959-1962.

Vronsky earned a Ph.D. in the History Department of the University of Toronto in the fields of criminal justice history and intelligence in international relations.  His doctoral thesis, “Combat, Memory and Remembrance in Confederation Era Canada: The Hidden History of the Battle of Ridgeway, June 2, 1866” on the origins of the Canadian secret services during the Civil War era and the Fenian Crisis in Canada  focuses on the 1866 battle near Fort Erie, Ontario fought by Canadian volunteers to stop a 1000 strong invasion force of heavily armed Fenian Irish-American insurgents. The dissertation was published in 2011 by Penguin Books as Ridgeway:  The American Fenian Invasion and the Forgotten 1866 Battle That Made Canada,  a volume in their  Canadian History series, edited by Robert Bothwell and Margaret Macmillan.  

Vronsky currently lectures in international relations history, the American Civil War, terrorism and the history of the Third Reich at Ryerson University.

Vronsky is the producer-writer-director of the acclaimed feature documentary about underground Stalinism in the last days of Soviet Russia: Mondo Moscow: The Art & Magic of Not Being There (1992), produced for TV Ontario and broadcast in City-TV’s primetime movie slot for four years running. He was the director of Crash’n’Burn (1977)–an early look at Punk Rock in Toronto and on the road in New York.   

He was the co-writer of the National Film Board of Canada feature documentary The Un-Canadians (1996).  Vronsky is also the director of a dramatic feature film: Bad Company (1978).  

In between his own independent productions, Peter Vronsky has worked as a production manager, line producer, director of photography and new media artist.  He field-produced Venice and Adriatic Region coverage for CNN and shot undercover and hidden camera sequences for CTV’s W5 and CBC’s The Fifth Estate, investigative TV programs.

Vronsky’s last undercover shoot took him to the troubled breakaway republic of Chechnya, where his hidden cameras documented the secret market for nuclear weapons materials for a CTV-Discovery Channel USA-FujiTv-ORF Stornoway Productions co-production of The Hunt For Red Mercury (1993). 

Vronsky was the Director of Photography on I’ll Fly Away Home (2004) and Life Could Be A Dream (2002), feature documentaries for Bravo Canada/Bravo USA

In  2000 Vronsky was the founding Bureau Chief of the Queens Park/Toronto Bureau of Epress.ca, Canada’s first officially accredited internet streaming video news portal.  Later that year he joined GlobalNetFinancial.com, a Los Angeles-based global investment streaming video news and online trading platform with sites in Europe and North America, where he was their Broadband Content Specialist. GlobalNetFinancial perished in the 2001 dot-com stock market collapse. Vronsky is highly experienced in convergence of television and video with the Internet, non-linear interactive scripting and online streaming content design.

In 1997-2000 Vronsky was the Head of Documentary and English Language Production in Italy for Panavideo, a service producer for RAI, the Italian national television broadcasting network.  Vronsky produced live and taped television broadcasts in the Venice region and is an expert on the logistics of film and video production management in the water-bound city. 

Vronsky has extensive international production experience as a producer, director and/or director of photography on locations in Russia, Italy, Germany, France, Spain, Netherlands, UK, Austria, former Yugoslavia, Jamaica, South Africa, and in North America. 

 
Peter Vronsky’s 1991-1992 research and journey to the USSR to locate a series of never-before-interviewed witnesses to accused assassin Lee Harvey Oswald’s life there is a subject in professor John Newman’s academic study of Oswald’s alleged CIA connections (Oswald and the CIA.)  The results of Vronsky’s research and interviews have been featured in numerous books and television programs, including Norman Mailer’s Oswald’s Tale: An American Mystery, Vincent Bugliosi’s 2007 Reclaiming History:  The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, best-selling author David Lifton’s upcoming biography of Oswald, and PBS’s definitive 1993 television biography of Oswald produced by Frontline.  Vronsky maintains an often cited website focusing on Oswald’s life in the USSR and is a recognized authority on Lee Harvey Oswald’s time in the USSR.
(See: Lee Harvey  Oswald In Russia Website )

Vronsky has more than twenty years of experience in the field of digital new media, starting with his role as Artist-in-Residence at the Sony Corporation in 1983-85 where he experimented with Sony’s then state-of-the-art digital graphics and interactive laser optical systems.  He created a number of formal experimental video art works and new media installations, exhibited internationally and in Canada, including a group showing at the Art Gallery of Ontario and at Canada House in London, England.

Peter Vronsky is fluent in English, Russian and Italian, and currently resides in Toronto Canada and Venice Italy.

His main website is www.petervronsky.org

PETER VRONSKY BOOKS 

Female Serial Killers: How and Why Women Become Monsters

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION  Serial Spartacism:  The Politics of Female Aggression

  • Female Serial Killers:  How Many?
  • Monster:  The Unquiet Killer
  • The Nature of Female Violence
  • The Study of Female Aggression
  • The Depths of Serial Depravity
  • Feminism and the Female Serial Killer
  • Defining the Female Serial Killer
  • Classifying the Female Serial Killer
  • Characteristics of Female Serial Killers

PART I:  THE PSYCHOPATHOLOGY AND BRIEF HISTORY OF THE FEMALE SERIAL KILLER

CHAPTER 1  The Nature of the Feminine Beast:  The Psychopathology of Female Monsters

  • How Female Serial Killers Are More Deadly Than Males
  • Murder as the Female Signature
  • Surveying Serial Killers Male and Female
  • Average Age
  • Victim Selection
  • Murder Site
  • Weapon of Choice
  • Female Serial Killers Compared to Singular Female Murderers
  • Comparing Male and Female Serial Killers as Children
  • Childhood Trauma
  • The Macdonald Triad in Females
  • The Nature of Aggression in Girls
  • Obesity, Loneliness, and Fantasy in Female Serial Killers
  • The Making of Serial Killers
  • Diagnosing Serial Killers:  Psychopathy and ASPD (Antisocial Personality Disorder)
  • The Psychopath
  • The Nature of the Psychopath
  • Problems in Defining Psychopathy and ASPD
  • What Causes Psychopathy?
  • The Female Psychopath and ASPD

CHAPTER 2  The Quest For Power, Profit and Desire:  A Brief History of Female Serial Killers

  • Female Serial Killers in Early History
  • The Empire of Death:  Female Serial Killers in Ancient History
  • Agrippina the Younger–The Empress of Poison
  • Valeria Messalina–The Teenage Serial Killer
  • Elizabeth Bathory–The True Story of the Blood Countess
  • Female Serial Killers in the Pre-Industrial Age
  • The Rise of the Modern Female Serial Killer
  • The Birth of Mass Media and True Crime Literature
  • Burial Insurance and the Rise of Female Serial Murder
  • The Great Female Serial Killer Epidemic of the “Hungry ’40s”
  • Arsenic and Its Effects
  • Sarah Dazely; Eliza Joyce; Sarah Freeman; Mary Ann Milner; Sarah Chesham; Mary May
  • The Sale of Arsenic Act (1851)
  • Mary Emily Cage; Catherine Wilson; Mary Ann Cotton; Catherine Flannagan & Margaret Higgens
  • Female Serial Killers in 19th Century USA
  • Lydia Sherman–American Borgia
  • Sarah Jane Robinson
  • Jane Toppan–American Serial Killer Superstar

PART II  SELECTED CASE STUDIES OF FEMALE SERIAL KILLERS AND ACCOMPLICES IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY

CHAPTER 3   The Cult and Passion of Aileen Wuornos:  The Post-Modern Female Serial Killer

  • Aileen Wuornos
  • As a Child
  • Cigarette Pig
  • Missing Years Adrift
  • Tyria “Ty” Moore:  Aileen Finds True Love
  • The First Murder
  • “The Psychic Abolition of Redemption”–Aileen’s Second Murder
  • Serial Murder
  • Downfall and Arrest
  • Lover’s Betrayal
  • “I Killed ‘Em All Because They Got Violent With Me and I Decided to Defend Myself”
  • Explaining Aileen Wuornos
  • Aileen’s Defense–“I Though I Gotta Fight or I’m Going to Die”
  • “Everywoman’s Most Forbidden Fantasy”: Feminist Martians to Aileen’s Defense
  • “On a Killing Day”–What Triggered Aileen?
  • The Prostituted Serial Killer

CHAPTER 4  Murdering Friends and Intimates:  Black Widows and Profit Killers 

  • Velma Barfield–The Death Row Granny
  • Dorothea Puente Montalvo–Making Crime Pay

CHAPTER 5  Loving Us to Death:  Serial Killer Moms, Angels of Death and other Murdering Caregivers

  • Genene Jones–Baby Killing Nurse
  • Munchausen Syndrome By Proxy (MSP or MSBP)
  • Marybeth Tinning–the Killer Mom
  • Christine Falling–the Killer Babysitter

CHAPTER 6  Sex, Death and Videotape:  The Female as Serial Killer Accomplice

  • Females as Accomplices in Sexually Sadistic Serial Murders
  • Wives and Girlfriends of Sexual Sadists
  • High Dominance Women
  • Martha Beck & Raymond Fernandez–The Honeymoon Killers
  • Myra Hindley & Ian Brady–The Moors Murderers
  • Carol Bundy & Douglas Clark–The Sunset Boulevard Killers
  • Charlene & Gerald Gallego–The Sex Slave Killers
  • Karla Homolka & Paul Bernardo–The Ken & Barbie Killers

CHAPTER 7  Nazi Bitches and the Manson Killer Girls:  Making Female Missionary Cult Serial Killers

  • State Serial Murder in the Third Reich
  • Ilsa, She-Wolf of the SS
  • Ilse Koch–The Bitch of Buchenwald
  • The Feminist Defense of Koch
  • “…Kill Them in a More Decent Way…”
  • The Tattooed Skin Collection
  • Irma Grese–The Beast of Belsen
  • “Sport”
  • The Making of State Serial Killers
  • The Manson Cult Women–Charlie’s Hippie Killer Girls:  Susan Atkins, Linda Kasabian, Patricia Krenwinkle, Leslie Van Houten, Mary Brunner, Lynette Fromme
  • The Tate Murders:  “Have You Ever Tasted Blood?  It’s Warm and Sticky and Nice.”
  • The LaBianca Murders
  • The Murder of Gary Hinman
  • Who Was Charlie Manson?
  • Flowers and Acid:  Manson in the Valley of Thousands of Plump White Rabbits
  • Mary Brunner–The Family Matriarch
  • Lynette Alice Fromme–Squeeky
  • Susan Atkins–Sexy Sadie Mae Glutz
  • Charlie’s Apocalypse
  • Patricia Krenwinkle-Big Patty
  • Linda Kasabian-Yana the Witch
  • Leslie Van Houten–Lulu With no Nickname
  • The Method to Charlie’s Madness

CHAPTER 8  Recognizing the Predatory Woman:  Profiling Female Serial Killers

IDENTITIES NAMES OF CATHARS BURNT AT MONTSEGUR MARCH 16 1244

  1. Raymond AGULHERPerfect at Tarascon in 1204 and present at Montsegur from 1234.

  2. Guilleme AICARD.  Resident at Montsegur from 1234 with his wife and three sons.  Received consolamentum on the night of March 13.

  3. Pons AIS.  Perfect present at Montsegur from the start of the siege where he was a miller.

  4. Pierre ARAU. Perfect.

  5. Bernard d’AUVEZINESPerfect.

  6. Raymonde BARBE from Mas Saintes-Puelles, sister of Perfect Raymond du Mas (Raymond de Na RIca).

  7. Raymond de BELVIS.  Crossbowman from Arnaud and seigneur of Usson.  Arrived at Monsegur circa May-June 1243.  Received consolamentum March 13.

  8. Arnaud de BENSA.  From Lavelanet, sergeant, wounded end of February 1244, received consolamentum March 4.

  9. Etienee BOUTARRAPerfect

  10. BRESILHAC.  Dispossesed knight from Caihavel.  Present at Montsegur from 1236 and received consolamentum on March 13.

  11. Pons CAPELLE, from Gaja.  Perfect arrived at Montsegur circa 1242 with his son, a sergeant.

  12. Guidraude de CARAMANPerfect.

  13. Arnaud des CASSES.  Knight and seigneur of Casses.  A believer since 1220 and a perfect before 1243.

  14. CLAMENS.  Present at the seige.  Around 13 March 1244 is named as having transfered Church treasury into the custody of Pierre-Roger de Mirepoix.  Presumably a Cathar perfect.

  15. Jean de COMBEL  Knight from Laurac.  Believed to have accepted consolamentum during the truce.

  16. Saissa de CONGOST.  From a seigniorial family at Puivert.  Perfecta from 1240. Householder on Montsegur.

  17. Raymonde de CUQ.  Sister or cousin of Berenger, the seigneur of Lavelanet.  Perfecta at Lauran in 1230.  Lived with Corba de Pereille at Montsegur.

  18. Guillaume DEJEAN, perfect from Tarabel, ordained deacon at Montsegur.

  19. Guillaume DELPECH.  Sergeant.  Arrived to reinforce Montsegur May 21, 1243.  Received consolamentum on March 13.

  20. Arnaud DOMERGUE, of Laroque d’Olmes.  Sergeant residing at Montsegur since since 1236 with his wife.  Received consolamentum March 13, 1244.

  21. Bruna DOMERGUE, wife of Sergeant Arnaud Domergue.  Received consolamentum March 13.

  22. Rixende DONAT of Toulouse.  Perfecta.

  23. India de FANJEAUX.  A Lady from the Lahille branch of Fanjeaux.  Perfecta in 1227 and householder on Montsegur.

  24. Guillaume GARNIER.  Cow herder from d’Odars near Lanta and a believer since 1230.  Sergeant at Montsegur in 1243.  Received  consolamentum on March 13, 1244.

  25. Arnajud-Raymond GAUTI, knight from Soreze and Durfort.  Believer in 1237.

  26. Bernard GUILHEMPerfect.

  27. Etienne ISARN of Casses.  At Montsegur with his brother.   Perfect.

  28. Raymond ISARN, brother of Etienne.  Perfect.

  29. Guillaume d’ISSUS, knight and co-seigneur of Montgaillard in Lauragais.  Believer in 1230.  Present at Montsegur since 1243 and reported “burnt.”

  30. Jean de LAGARDE.  Condemned by the Inquisition in Moisac in 1233 and escaped to Montsegur.  Burnt.

  31. Bruna de LAHILLE, sister of Guillaume.  Believer in 1234.  Perfecta at Montsegur in 1240

  32. Guillaume de LAHILLE.  Dispossesed knight from Laurac.  Defender of Castelnaudary against Amaury de Montfort in 1219-1220.  At Montsegur from 1240.  One of the leaders of the massacre of the Inquisitors at Avignonet.  Seriously wounded 26 February 1244, and received consolamentum on the night of March 13.

  33. LIMOUX (Limos).  Perfect at Montsegur.

  34. Raymond de MARSEILLAN.  Dispossessed knight from Laurac.  Believer in 1232.  Received consolamentum on March 13.

  35. Bertrand MARTY.  From Tarabel. Cathar bishop at Toulouse. Head of the Cathar Church at the time of the seige.  Known to be at Montsegur in 1232 and reported “burnt with all the others.”

  36. Guillelme MARTY.  From Montferrier.  Baker at Montsegur and perfect.

  37. Pierre du MAS.  From Mas Saintes-Puelles, perfect in 1229 and reported present at Montsegur in March 1244.  Probably executed.

  38. MAURINA  (MAURY)  Perfecta.

  39. Braida de MONTSERVER.  Related to Arnaud-Roger de Mirepoix.  Believer in 1227, and received consolamentum during a grave illness in 1229 at Limoux.  Arrived as a perfecta at Montsegur in 1240.

  40. Arsende NARBONA.  Wife of sergeant Pons NARBONA, consolamentum on March 13.

  41. Guillaume NARBONA, rider to knight Raymond de Marseillan, and brother of Pons Narbona, consolamentum on March 13.

  42. Pons NARBONA, of Carol and Cerdagne.  Sergeant, consolamentum with his wife on March 13, 1244.

  43. Raymond de NIORTPerfecta from Belesta.  Arrived clandestinely at Montsegur in October 1243 with a letter from the Cathars of Cremona in Italy.

  44. Arnauld d’ORLHAC, from Lavaur.

  45. Corba de PEREILLE.  Wife of Raymond de Pereille.  A believer who received consolamentum with her daughter on March 13, 1244.

  46. Esclarmonde de PEREILLE, daughter of Raymond and Corba de Pereille.  Received consolamentum with her mother on March 13, and subsequently burnt on March 16, 1244.

  47. PERONNE.  Perfecta, arrived at Montsegur in 1237.

  48. Guillaume PEYRE, sergeant, agent of Raymond de Pareille.  Perfect. With CLAMENS, consigned the Cathar treasury at Montsegur to Pierre-Roger Mirepoix on March 13, 1244.

  49. Guillaume RAOUPerfect.

  50. Alazais RASEIRE.  From Bram or district.  Captured at Montsegur and returned for execution by fire at Bram.

  51. Jean REY.  From Saint-Paul-Cap-de-Joux. Courier.  Arrived at Montsegur on January 1, 1244, bearing a letters from the Cathars of Cremona.  Received consolamentum March 13.

  52. Pierre ROBERT.  Merchant from Mirepoix.  Believer since 1209 — arrived at Montsegur 1236. Consolamentum March 13.

  53. Pierre ROBERTPerfect.  Assisted in the consolamentum of Raymond de Ventenac, mortally wounded in 1243.  Perhaps same individual as No. 52.

  54. Martin ROLAND.  Brother of sergeant Bernard de Joucou and uncle of the Narbona brothers.  Believer in Lavelanet in 1232 and a perfect at Montsegur in 1240.

  55. Bernard de SAINT-MARTIN.  Dispossessed knight from Laurac. One of the leaders of the massacre of the Inquisitors at Avignonet.  Believed to have received consolamentum with the mercenary knights Guillaume de Lahill and Brezihac de Cailhavel on March 13..  Burned on March 16.

  56. Raymond de SAINT-MARTINPerfect and deacon.

  57. Pierre SIRVENPerfect, assistant to Cathar Bishop Bertrand Marty.

  58. TAPARELPerfect.

  59. Rixende de TELLE (or TEILH).  Mother superior of the perfectae at Montsegur during the siege.

  60. Arnaud TEULY, from Limoux.  Arrived at Montsegur before Feberuary 14, 1244.  Received consolamentum March 13.

  61. Raymond de TOURNEBOUIX.  Sergeant.  Received consolamentum March 13, 1244 and subsequently burnt on March 16.

  62. Marquesia UNAUD of Lanta.  Seamstress to the Cathars at Montsegur.  Believer since 1224 and ordained a perfecta at Montsegur at 1234.

  63. Ermengarde d’USSAT.  Believer at Montsegur from 1240.  Received consolamentum on March 16.

Battle Map 2

 PREVIOUS MAP        NEXT MAP  

Limestone Ridge Battle Map 2 June 2, 1866 8:00 – 9:30 A.M. The Fenian regroup and counter-attack after the Canadian form a square in the middle of the road.

MAP LEGEND

2nd Battalion Queen’s Own Rifles Toronto

13th Battalion  Volunteer Infantry Hamilton Caledonia and York Country Companies Fenian Brotherhood (FB) Irish Republican Army (IRA) 

Battle of Fort Erie

PREVIOUS MAP           NEXT MAP

Battle of Fort Erie June 2, 1866 4:00 – 5:30 P.M. As eight hundred Fenians return to the town of  Fort Erie at 5:00 P.M. after their victory at Limestone Ridge, seventy-one Canadians attempt to make a stand.

MAP EGEND

Welland Canal Field Battery and
Dunnville Naval Brigade Fenian Brotherhood (FB) Irish Republican Army (IRA) 

Extended History of Constables in England and the Colonies

SOURCES:

(1.) J. A. Sharpe, `The Law, Law Enforcement, State Formation and National Integration in Late Medieval and Early Modern England’, in X. Rousseau and R. Levy (eds), Le penal dans tous ces etats: Justice, etats et societes en Europe (XIIe-XXe siecles), Publication des Facultes universitaires Saint-Louis, 74 (Brussels, 1997), pp. 65-7, 79-80.

(2.) B. H. Putnam, `The Transformation of the Keepers of the Peace into the Justices of the Peace, 1327-80′, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 4th series, 12 (1929), 24-41.

(3.) E. Powell, `The Administration of Criminal Justice in Late-Medieval England: Peace Sessions and Assizes’, in R. Eales and D. Sullivan (ed.), The Political Context of Law (London, 1987), pp. 49-59; A. J. Verduyn, `The Politics of Law and Order during the Early Years of Edward III’, ante, 108 (1993), 842-67; A. Musson, Public Order and Law Enforcement: The Local Administration of Criminal Justice in England, 1294-1350 (Woodbridge, 1996); R. C. Palmer, English Law in the Age of the Black Death: A Transformation of Governance and Law, 1348-1381 (Chapel Hill, NC, 1994); S. Walker, `Yorkshire Justices of the Peace, 1388-1413′, ante, 108 (1993), pp. 281-311.

(4.) A. Musson and W. M. Ormrod, The Evolution of English Justice: Law, Politics and Society in the Fourteenth Century (Basingstoke, 1998), pp. 72-4.

(5.) H. Cam, `Shire Officials: Coroners, Constables and Bailiffs’, in J. Willard, W. A. Morris, and W. H. Dunham (ed.), The English Government at Work, 1327-1336 (3 vols; Cambridge, Mass., 1945-50), vol. 3, pp. 165-7.

(6.) H. M. Jewell, English Local Administration in the Middle Ages (Newton Abbott, 1972), pp. 37, 173-4; A. Harding, `The Origins and Early History of the Keeper of the Peace’, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th series, 10 (1960), 86, 88-90.

(7.) H. R. T. Summerson, `The Structure of Law Enforcement in Thirteenth Century England’, American Journal of Legal History, 23 (1979), 315-17.

(8.) H. Cam, The Hundred and the Hundred Rolls (London, 1930) and Liberties and Communities in Medieval England (London, 1963).

(9.) Robert Palmer, The County Courts of Medieval England, 1150-1350 (Princeton, NJ, 1982).

(10.) In the same way, there was an overlap in the terminology employed for the county keepers which could vary from the Latin `custos’ or `conservator’ to the French `guardein’.

(11.) Public Record Office, JUST 3/50/2 m6 (1337 — Norfolk). All subsequent ms references are also to documents in the Public Record Office.

(12.) Proceedings before the Justices of the Peace in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries: Edward III to Richard III, ed. B. H. Putnam, Ames Foundation (London, 1938), pp. xxxvii-xxxviii.

(13.) Cam, `Shire Officials’, pp. 166-7; Cam, Liberties and Communities, pp. 200-4; H. Summerson, `Maitland and the Criminal Law in the Age of Bracton’, Proceedings of the British Academy, 89 (1996), 136-7; P. King, `Decision Makers and Decision Making in the English Criminal Law, 1750-1800′, The Historical Journal, 27 (1984), 27, 55-6.

(14.) M. C. Powicke, Military Obligation in Medieval England (Oxford, 1962), pp. 64, 119-20; H. R. T. Summerson, `The Enforcement of the Statute of Winchester, 1285-1327′, Journal of Legal History, 13 (1992), 232.

(15.) Statutes of the Realm (hereafter SR), 1101-1713, ed. A. Luders et al. (11 vols; London, 1910-28), vol. 1, pp. 96-8; Powicke, Military Obligation, p. 120.

(16.) JUST 1/746 m5 (Chirbury Hundred), m6 (liberty of Shrewsbury).

(17.) For example: JUST 1/746 m4 (1306 — Shropshire).

(18.) JUST 1/746 m5, 5d.

(19.) Summerson, `Maitland and the Criminal Law’, 137.

(20.) SR, vol. 1, p. 258 (c. 3); Cam, Liberties and Communities, p. 152.

(21.) SR, vol. 1, p. 268 (c. 14); Cam, `Shire Officials’, pp. 169-70.

(22.) SR, vol. 1, pp. 307-9, 311-13; B. H. Putnam, The Enforcement of the Statute of Labourers during the First Decade after the Black Death, 1349-59 (New York, 1908).

(23.) L. R. Poos, `The Social Context of Statute of Labourers Enforcement’, Law and History Review, 1 (1983), 28-31, 34.

(24.) Harding, `Early History’, 99-100; Cam `Shire Officials’, pp. 167-9.

(25.) Parliamentary Writs and Writs of Military Summons, ed. F. Palgrave (2 vols in 2 parts; London, 1827), vol. 2, pt. 2 (appendix), pp. 11-12.

(26.) A phrase found in the Statute of Winchester and also used regularly in the preface to general commissions of the peace and of oyer and terminer: come plusours maufesours et destourbours de nostre pees …

(27.) C 66/155 m7d.

(28.) C[alendar of] P[atent] R[olls] 1321-4, pp. 60-1.

(29.) CPR 1321-4, p. 382.

(30.) C 66/159 m12d.

(31.) South Lancashire in the Reign of Edward II, ed. G. H. Tupling, Chetham Society, 3rd series, 1 (1949), pp. xxii, lviii; S. Waugh, `The Profits of Violence: The Minor Gentry in the Rebellion of 1321-1322 in Gloucestershire and Herefordshire’, Speculum, 52 (1977), 843-69.

(32.) R. Horrox, Richard III. A Study of Service (Cambridge, 1989), pp. 11, 23.

(33.) CPR 1327-30, p. 481.

(34.) CPR 1327-30, p. 481 (25 December 1329).

(35.) C 66/172 m2d: ad felonias et transgressione … perpetractas ad sectam nostram vel aliorum versus eos inde prosequi volencium audiendas et terminandas sumpto ad hoc si necesse fuerit posse comitatu predicti.

(36.) Verduyn, `Politics of Law and Order’, 847.

(37.) The king’s bench rolls provide evidence of indictments heard before Richard Damory and his associates (county keepers of the peace) and before the mayor and bailiffs and keepers of the peace of the city of Oxford (KB 27/281 Rex mm 20d, 22).

(38.) CPR 1343-5, pp. 509-10.

(39.) K. Fowler, The King’s Lieutenant: Henry of Grosmont, First Duke of Lancaster, 1310-1361 (London, 1969), pp. 48-51.

(40.) R. Stewart Brown, `Two Medieval Liverpool Affrays’, Transactions of the Lancashire and Cheshire Historical Society, 85 (1933), 71-81.

(41.) C 66/213 m15d.

(42.) A fresh county peace commission was issued in 1346 and included an array clause (CPR 1345-8, pp. 231-2).

(43.) For one of the few early examples see A. J. Verduyn, `The revocation of urban peace commissions in 1381: the Lincoln petition’, Historical Research, 65 (1992), 108-111.

(44.) E. G. Kimball, `Commissions of the Peace for Urban Jurisdictions in England, 1327-1485′, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 121 (1977), 449-51.

(45.) CPR 1307-13, p. 415.

(46.) Ibid., p. 480.

(47.) For example: JUST 3/51/4 m8 (Northampton); Rolls of the Warwickshire and Coventry Sessions of the Peace, 1377-1397, ed. E. Kimball, Dugdale Society, 16 (1939), pp. xxiv-xxv.

(48.) CPR 1338-40, p. 140 (12 May).

(49.) CPR 1345-8, p. 176 (16 July).

(50.) Kimball, Warwickshire Rolls, pp. xxv-xxvi; W. M. Ormrod, `York and the Crown under the First Three Edwards’, in S. Rees Jones (ed.), The Government of Medieval York, Essays in commemoration of the 1396 Royal Charter, Borthwick Studies in History, 3 (1997), p. 32.

(51.) For example: CPR 1361-4, pp. 530 (Beverley), 531 (Knaresborough and Stancliff), 531 (addressed to the Chancellor of Oxford University and the Mayor of Oxford); Kimball, Warwickshire Rolls, p. xxiii.

(52.) Kimball, Warwickshire Rolls, p. xxiii.

(53.) S. Rees Jones, `York’s Civic Administration, 1354-1464′, in S. Rees Jones (ed.), Government in Medieval York, pp. 116-18.

(54.) W. A. Morris, `The Sheriff’, in Morris and Strayer (ed.), English Government at Work, vol. 2, pp. 57, 68-9; E. Powell, Kingship, Law and Society (Oxford, 1989), pp. 74-6.

(55.) JUST 1/353 m6.

(56.) B. H. Putnam, The Place in Legal History of Sir William Shareshull (Cambridge, 1950), p. 63.

(57.) For example: JUST 3/96 m15d (1296 — Warwickshire), 31/1 m1 (1307 — Leicestershire), 51/4 m8 (1324 — Northamptonshire), 32/1 m3, 3d (1329 — Lincolnshire).

(58.) For example: JUST 1/96 m59d (1299 — Cambridgeshire), JUST 3/48 m16 (1312 — Norfolk), 32/1 m7d (1331 — Lincolnshire).

(59.) JUST 3/95 m6 (1295).

(60.) For example: JUST 3/51/3 m14 (constables of the peace in Peterborough).

(61.) 1 Henry V c. 5; Powell, Kingship, p. 67.

(62.) SC 8/41/2034.

(63.) For example: JUST 3/166 m1.

(64.) JUST 3/119 m10d (Norfolk).

(65.) JUST 3/133 m1d (1341 — Lincolnshire).

(66.) Musson, Public Order and Law Enforcement, pp. 107-22.

(67.) JUST 3/96 m16d.

(68.) JUST 3/51/4 m3.

(69.) F. M. Pollock and F. W. Maitland, The History of English Law before the Time of Edward I (2nd edn; repr. Cambridge, 1968), vol. 2, pp. 578-80; R. B. Dobson and J. Taylor, Rymes of Robin Hood: An Introduction to the English Outlaw rev edn (Stroud, 1997), p. 29.

(70.) JUST 3/47/3 m1 (Norfolk).

(71.) JUST 3/125 m8d (1331 — Norfolk).

(72.) Select Cases in the Court of King’s Bench, ed. G. O. Sayles, Selden Society, 74 (London, 1957), vol. 4, pp. 88-91.

(73.) JUST 3/145 m8d (1360 — Yorkshire).

(74.) JUST 3/96 m42.

(75.) JUST 3/74/3 m1.

(76.) JUST 3/112 m12.

(77.) JUST 3/115B m4, 4d.

(78.) JUST 3/22/2 m2.

(79.) JUST 3/214/3 m16.

(80.) JUST 3/127 m15d.

(81.) JUST 3/134 m2.

(82.) Essex: JUST 3/18/5 m10; Hertfordshire: JUST 3/22/2 mm2, 3d, 4d, 5d. Unfortunately, no indictments before the Lancashire sub-keepers can be found on the surviving gaol delivery roll for 1324-6 (JUST 3/29/2).

(83.) JUST 3/18/5 m18d.

(84.) For example: JUST 1/333 (Hertfordshire), JUST 3/50/2 (Norfolk), 51/4 (Northamptonshire).

(85.) JUST 3/117 m14 (1326 — Norfolk).

(86.) JUST 3/51/4 m7 (1324 — Northamptonshire).

(87.) JUST 3/119 m10 (1328 — Norfolk).

(88.) JUST 3/51/4 m7.

(89.) JUST 3/48 m12.

(90.) JUST 3/125 m1 (Norfolk).

(91.) JUST 3/156 m3.

(92.) A statute of 1327 refers to `sheriffs and bailiffs of liberties and all others that do take indictments in their turns or elsewhere’ in the context of the correct procedure for making indictments and presenting them to the gaol delivery justice (SR, vol. 1, p. 257 (c. 17)), but does not indicate that certain officers were preferred for hearing them. Professor Cam considers the apparent vacillation to be the result of a clash between the Crown’s policy of `the more presentments the better’ and the desire among some judges that the hearing of indictments be restricted to certain authorized or accepted personnel (Cam, `Shire Officials’, pp. 168-9).

(93.) For example: JUST 3/31/2 mm5, 7 (Lincolnshire); 96 m47 (Warwickshire); 51/4 mm3, 6, 7 (Northamptonshire); 112 mm12-13d, 15, 16 (Surrey).

(94.) For example: an indictment for homicide taken before the bailiffs of the town of Derby and bailiffs of the Earl of Lancaster OUST 3/55/3 m2d); the indictment of John Culverd for the death of Isolde, his wife, taken before the keepers of the peace of the town of Oxford (JUST 3/115B m1); and the indictment of William son of Matilda Maydenman for the death of Luke Marshal, heard before William Farnham, constable of the peace for the hundred of Bocking in Surrey OUST 3/112 m23d).

(95.) JUST 3/134 m64d.

(96.) JUST 3/156 m2.

(97.) For such developments see Musson and Ormrod, Evolution, pp. 51, 61-2, 66-8.

(98.) Summerson, `Structure of Law Enforcement’, pp. 318-24.

(99.) JUST 3/49/1 m21.

(100.) JUST 3/48 m4.

(101.) JUST 3/49/1 m49.

(102.) JUST 1/467 m14d.

(103.) JUST 3/116 m5d.

(104.) JUST 3/48 m6.

(105.) JUST 1/746 mm1, 2d-4d, 5d.

(106.) JUST 1/333 m4.

(107.) KB 27/254 mm11, 12; Tupling, South Lancashire, pp. 37, 42.

(108.) JUST 1/428 mm2-3.

(109.) JUST 1/429 mm16, 16d, 18.

(110.) Kimball, Warwickshire Rolls, pp. li, liii: the writ to the sheriff in the 1395 commission specifically instructed him to summon the borough constables. Generally the borough constables presented three times as many offences as the ordinary presenting jurors, though a third of these were economic trespasses and only one sixth were felonies.

(111.) Ibid., p. liv.

(112.) Putnam, Proceedings, p. xcix.

(113.) A. Musson, `Twelve Good Men and True? The Character of Early Fourteenth-Century Juries’, Law and History Review, 15 (1997), 120-1.

(114.) Musson, `Twelve Good Men and True’, pp. 227-8.

(125.) P. C. Maddern, Violence and Social Order: East Anglia 1422-1442 (Oxford, 1992), p. 52.

(116.) Sessions of the Peace in the City of Lincoln, 1351-1354 and the Borough of Stamford, 1351, ed. E. G. Kimball, Lincoln Record Society, 65 (1972), p. xxix.

(117.) JUST 3/29/2 mm32, 33.

(118.) JUST 3/29/2 mm12, 32, 33, 39.

(119.) JUST 3/112 m29d.

(120.) JUST 3/125 m15.

(121.) CPR 1317-21, p. 17; 1321-4, p. 370.

(122.) JUST 3/5/2; CPR 1324-7, p. 286.

(123.) CPR 1331-4, p. 61; 1330-4, p. 293.

(124.) CPR 1321-4, p. 382; 1330-4, pp. 286, 295, 297.

(125.) CPR 1321-4, p. 382; 1338-40, p. 137.

(126.) CPR 1348-50, p. 533; 1361-4, p. 66.

(127.) This was certainly the case by the sixteenth century (K. Wrightson, `Two Concepts of Order: Justice, Constables, and Jurymen in Seventeenth-Century England’, in J. Brewer and J. Styles (ed.), An Ungovernable People: the English and their Law in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (London, 1980), p. 26).

(128.) Five of the 1345 Lancashire sub-keepers were styled as knights in the commission; at least two others were distrained to knighthood: Gilbert Skaresbrek (C 47/1/8 m13) and David Egerton (E 198/3/22 m3).

(129.) For the dispute between the Chastiloun and Nowers families that erupted in the mid-1330s and culminated in Ralph Chastiloun’s death and Roger Nowers’ disgrace, see Musson, Public Order and Law Enforcement, pp. 259-60, 274-6.

(130.) This area is explored more fully in Musson and Ormrod, Evolution, pp. 68-70.

(131.) M. K. McIntosh, Controlling Misbehaviour in England 1370-1600 (Cambridge, 1998), pp. 27-8, 40-1; King, `Decision Makers’, p. 26.

(132.) G. R. Owst, Literature and Pulpit in Medieval England, 2nd edn (Oxford, 1961), pp. 169-71.

(133.) `Piers Plowman’ by William Langland: an edition of the C-text, ed. D. A. Pearsall (London, 1978), CIII ll. 175, 177.

(134.) JUST 1/850 m5.

(135.) JUST 1/850 m1d, m4 (Suffolk), 596 m6d (Norfolk).

(136.) JUST 3/145 m3 (1360), m17 (1361 — Yorkshire).

(137.) For example: JUST 1/891 m6 (Surrey).

(138.) For example: JUST 1/746 mm4-5d (Shropshire).

(139.) JUST 1/20 mm4-5 (Bedfordshire), 70 mm2-3 (Buckinghamshire), 596 mm1-4 (Norfolk), 850 mm6-8d (Suffolk).

(140.) C 66/155 m7d.

(141.) CPMR 1323-64, p. 189.

(142.) Owst, Literature and Pulpit, p. 326.

(143.) A. P. Baldwin, The Theme of Government in Piers Plowman (Woodbridge, 1981), p. 28; Owst, Literature and Pulpit, pp. 162, 169-70, 328-9.

(144.) For example: JUST 1/1395 m1; Sessions of the Peace for Bedfordshire, 1355-59, 1363-4, ed. E. G. Kimball, Bedfordshire Historical Record Society, 48 (1969), pp. 34, 47-8, 73, 74, 75; Poos, `Social Context’, pp. 31-3; Wrightson, `Two Concepts of Order’, p. 31.

(145.) Maddern, Violence and Social Order, p. 72.

(146.) C. Dyer, Everyday Life in Medieval England (London, 1994), p. 231.

(147.) Summerson, `Structure of Law Enforcement’, 315-17, 325-7; Wrightson, `Two Concepts of Order’, pp. 23-6 (quotation at p. 25).

(148.) Dyer, Everyday Life, p. 231.

(149.) C. Dyer, `The Social and Economic Background to the Rural Revolt of 1381′, in R. H. Hilton and T. Aston (ed.), The English Rising of 1381 (Cambridge, 1981), pp. 17-19; A. J. Prescott, `Judicial Records of the Rising of 1381′, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of London (1984), p. 100.

Minsk Part 2: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Minsk KGB

KGB IN MINSK January 1960.

Shortly before Oswald was to leave Moscow for Belorussia in January 1960, the KGB chief of counterintelligence in Minsk, received a small dossier on Oswald from Moscow Central. The file contained mostly reports by Intourist informants and officials, a summary of Oswald’s request for asylum and official disposition thereof, and a report on Oswald’s “suicide attempt.”  No details were furnished on Oswald’s military history, family, past life in the US, etc.  Oswald was characterized in the file as a disgruntled former US Marine private claiming to be a Marxist and seeking Soviet citizenship.KGB CHIEF OF COUNTERINTELLIGENCE MINSK 1960:  COLONEL GOLUBTSOV?

In Oswald’s Tale:  An American Mystery Norman Mailer interviewed that Minsk KGB officer, giving him the pseudonym of “Igor Ivanovich Guzmin.”  I believe that his actual name is GOLUBTSOV.  According to Mailer,  he was born in 1922 and was assigned by Moscow Central to Minsk KGB counterintelligence in 1946.   He retired in 1977 as head of  Belorussian Republic counterintelligence.  His primary assignment from 1946 to 1953 was to hunt down former collaborators with the Nazi occupation forces, although that probably included and extended to anybody Stalin wanted purged in the postwar era.  Golubtsov also would be concerned with capturing agents infiltrated by parachute or land into the Minsk area by US and British intelligence services: four such US agents were captured in 1951 alone. (These would have been former Soviet citizens working for US intelligence.)  Oswald was identified as a potential threat to the USSR and not as a possible source for intelligence.  There were express orders that Oswald was not to be formally debriefed.    The Oswald case was only one of many for which Golobutsov was responsible in Minsk   According to Golubtsov, the KGB was considering the following factors and scenarios in their analysis of Oswald’s threat potential:

    Oswald’s former service in the Marines was alarming, as the KGB perceived the US military as frequent recruiting ground for US intelligence agents;
    Oswald’s claim of being a Marxist, was suspicious in view of his apparently poor proficiency in Maxist-Leninist theories;
    Oswald, it was feared, perhaps spoke better Russian than he let on;
    Oswald was on an intelligence assignment to check out how the Soviet authorities handle US defectors;
    Oswald was a genuine immigrant to the USSR;
    Oswald was mentally unbalanced. 

Golubtsov understood his mission as ensuring that Lee Oswald was not a threat to the USSR, without Oswald having a bad time; just in case he really was a genuine immigrant to the USSR and a potentially valuable propaganda scoop.

OSWALD MINSK KGB CASE OFFICER:  CAPTAIN ALEXANDER FEDOROVICH KOSTIKOV

Two days prior to Lee Harvey Oswald’s arrival in Minsk, Colonel Golubtsov chose a case officer who would coordinate the network of informants and day-to-day surveillance operations around Lee Oswald.  Mailer gives this officer the pseudonym of “Stepan Vasilyevich Gregorieff.”  His real name is ALEXANDER FEDOROVICH KOSTIKOV.  (No known connection to Valery Vladimirovich Kostikov, the Mexico City USSR Embassy resident KGB officer whom Oswald allegedly met with in 1963.  Another example of the remarkable coincidences that occur in the JFK mystery:  what are the odds that two KGB officers with the same name would become connected to Lee Harvey Oswald? ) 

Alexander Fedorovich Kostikov would remain as the case officer until Oswald’s departure home, and would then be further involved in the KGB’s actions in Minsk after the assassination. Alexander Fedorovich Kostikov personally ran and debriefed, all or some of the Russian informants close to Lee Harvey Oswald.

Alexander Kostikov was a local Belorussian born in the Mogilov area,  according to Mailer’s account.  During the war Kostikov had supervised the interrogation of German prisoners.  After the war he revealed a talent in recognizing spies among former Soviet citizens who returned to the USSR from the West.  Although he was not fluent, he spoke and understood a little English.  He was a seasoned officer who resided with his family, as it was the custom, in comfortable apartment blocks reserved for KGB command officers. His commander was his neighbor in the same building.  On the Oswald case, Alexander Kostikov was three ranks away from reporting to the top in Moscow.

LEE HARVEY OSWALD ARRIVES IN MINSK

Friday, January 8, 1960: Day 1 in Minsk.

Oswald traveled by train from Moscow by himself unescorted. He would have departed from Moscow’s Beloruski Vogzal, a few blocks outside the Ring Road on Gorky Street (now Tvesrskayaya).  Should Oswald have attempted to get off the train at any point before his destination, he would have been quickly and easily apprehended by local authorities.  Oswald arrived in Minsk either on the night of January 7 or morning of January 8.  He was met at the old Minsk station, (today no longer standing) by two Soviet “Red Cross” employees and brought to the Hotel Minsk, in the center of the city.  He was checked into room 453, a budget accommodation intended for Soviet citizens.  According to his Historic Diary, Oswald was greeted on his first day by the mayor of Minsk, who promised him an apartment and warned him about “uncultured” persons who might insult foreigners. 

Saturday, January 9, 1960: Day 2.  

According to KGB surveillance reports transcribed in Mailer’s volume, Oswald exited the Hotel for forty-five minutes, from 11:40 AM until 12:25PM.  During that period he visited a few stores in the neighbourhood–a butcher, a grocery, and a bookstore. He also returned to the train station and looked at a photo display and stepped into a restaurant for a moment.  He apparently “paid attention to people entering after him.” After returning to his hotel, he had lunch in the dining room and afterwards went up to his room.  At 4:40 PM he came down to the hotel restaurant and returned to his room forty-five minutes later.  The KGB suspended the surveillance at 11:00 PM.

Sunday, January 10, 1960: Day 3.

Oswald exited his hotel for 25 minutes to purchase an electric plug.  Except for taking meals alone in the hotel restaurant, he did not exit again.  Surveillance is suspended at midnight. 

In his first three days in Minsk, Oswald only steps out into the streets for a total of 75 minutes. Oswald writes in his Historic Diary“January 10, The day to myself.  I walk through the city.  Very nice.”  Very much in the same way as he remained closed up in his hotel complex in Moscow, Oswald makes only brief forays into Minsk, preferring to remain in his room or the hotel restaurant below.

Monday, January 11, 1960: Day 4.

Oswald writes in his Historic Diary:

    January 11

    I visit Minsk Radio Factory where I shall work. There, I meet Argentinian immigrant Alexander Ziger, born a Polish Jew, immigrated to Argentina 1938, and back to Polish homeland (now a part of Belorussia) in 1955.  Speaks English with an American accent.  He worked for an American company in Argentina.  He is head of the department, a qualified engineer in late 40’s, mild-mannered, likable.  He seems to want to tell me something.

      [ NEXT:  THE “EXPERIMENTAL SHOP” AT THE MINSK RADIO FACTORY ]

KGB surveillance photo of Lee Harvey Oswald and KGB confidential informant Pavel Golovachev taken on Victory Square near Oswald’s apartment.

KGB HQ Minsk

 
HQ on Prospekt Lenina looking north east 



Minsk Railway Station circa 1960

 
Lee Harvey Oswald withAlexander Romanovich Ziger

(Person in the center is named Anatoly)

Lee Harvey Oswald Minsk Balcony Photo 1962

Pavel Golovachev, took this photograph some time in the early summer of 1961, two or three months after Marina and Lee Oswald were married.

He made several prints which the Oswalds took with them, along with the negatives, when Lee moved back to the USA in 1962. One print, signed with a dedication by Oswald, remained with Golovachev after the Oswalds left for the US. 

After the assassination, the FBI seized the photograph. Eventually it was included in the evidence as a Warren Commission Exhibit and has been often reproduced. In the USSR after the assassination, all photographs, letters, and other items from Oswald still remaining in Golovachev’s possession, were sequestered by the KGB. Golovachev was warned by the KGB not to discuss his relationship with Oswald. Several years later, Golovachev was horrified to discover that he still had a photograph in his possession, moreover one signed personally by Oswald. In fear of KGB retribution for failing to surrender the item, Golovachev made a photographic copy of the photo and the inscription on the back, and then destroyed the original item. He carefully hid the negative and kept it hidden until we arrived in 1991. Even then, Golovachev was visibly shaken by the prospect of printing the forbidden image of Lee Harvey Oswald against the Minsk skyline. 

Golovachev said that while taking that photograph, Oswald first revealed to him his intention to return to the USA. Golovachev then warned Oswald that he was a KGB informant, and that others among their circle might also be reporting to the KGB. (Golovachev was periodically and systematically interviewed by the KGB about Oswald, whom he met at the Minsk radio factory shortly after Lee began work there in January 1960.The sample of handwriting is almost of forensic quality — not only documenting Oswald’s handwriting, but also revealing pen-stroke characteristics — rarely seen in print reproductions of Oswald’s writings.

Lee Harvey Oswald in Moscow Part 3

Copyright © Peter Wronski 1991-2004

Next Page

Previous Page

MAIN PAGE

DAYS 7 – 13 :  Thursday, October 22 – Wednesday October 28, 1959   BOTKIN HOSPITAL & “ELDERLY AMERICAN”

[above] Ward 7 Botkin Hospital Moscow 1992

In his Historic Diary, Lee Harvey Oswald wrote:

Oct. 22. Hospital – I am in a small room with about 12 others (sick persons), 2 orderlies and a nurse. The room is very drab as well as the breakfast. Only after prolonged (2 hours) observation of the other patients do I realize I am in the Insanity ward. This realization disquiets me. Later in afternoon I am visited by Rimma. She comes in with two doctors.  As interpreter she must ask me medical questions: Did you know what you were doing? Answer, “yes”. Did you blackout? No, etc.  I then complain about poor food; the doctors laugh, apparently this is a good sign.  Later they leave. I am alone with Rimma (amongst the mentally ill) she encourages me and scolds me, she says she will help me get transferred to another section of the hospital (not for insane) where food is good.

After being observed for a day in the psychiatric ward, Lee Harvey Oswald was judged not to be dangerous to himself or “to other people.”  He is transferred to Ward 7 , a building where foreign patients are treated.  (It is unclear whether the building is reserved exclusively for foreigners.)  

[CE 895] includes official medical records describing Oswald’s treatment and psychiatric interview released by the USSR to the Warren Commission in 1964.  Unfortunately, only US State Department translations are published in the Warren Hearings volumes. I have never seen the Russian language originals.

     

In his journal Oswald wrote:

Oct. 23. Transferred to ordinary ward (airy, good food), but nurses suspicious of me(they know). Afternoon. I am visited by Rosa Agafonova of the hotel tourist office who asks about my health; very beautiful, excellent English, very merry and kind; she makes me very glad to be alive. Later Rimma visits. Oct. 24. Hospital routine; Rimma visits me in afternoon

Oct 25. Hospital routine; Rimma visits me in afternoon

Then something extraordinary occurs. Oswald notes in his diary:

Oct. 26. An elderly American at the hospital grows suspicious about me for some reason, maybe because at Embassy I told him I had not registered as most tourists and I am in general evasive about my presence in Moscow and at hospital.

 A KGB report released in 1999, also makes note of this event but with an astonishing detail:

“In the building where Oswald was staying, one other American was receiving treatment at the same time.  This person was visited by a friend, a staff member of the U.S. Embassy.  The latter took an interest in Oswald and asked whether he was registered at the U.S. Embassy and what had happened to him.  Oswald, according to him, did not tell him anything.     

“On October 24, the Embassy called and asked when Oswald would be discharged from the hospital.”

[US Department of State, Office of Language Services, Translation Division, LS no.0692061-4  JS/PH,   1999.] 
[ Click here to see Original Document  (284k) ]

But according to all official history,  the US Embassy had no knowledge of Oswald’s presence in Moscow until October 31, a full week later, when he appeared there to renounce his citizenship. Who from the US Embassy was visiting the hospital and who telephoned on October 24 inquiring about Oswald? And above all, why did they not make further calls?  

The first clue that there was some concern about this question, appears in the Warren Hearings .  In WH Vol. 5, p. 569, the former Ambassador to the USSR, Llewellyn E. Thompson  is questioned on July 28, 1964:      

MR. SLAWSON:  Mr. Ambassador, I have a name of an American citizen, Mr. William Edgerton Morehouse, Jr., who, according to the records of the Department of State was hospitalized in a hospital in Moscow in the fall of 1959.
   According to the records furnished us by the Russian Government, and according to the personal diary kept by Lee Harvey Oswald, he, too, was hospitalized in the latter part of October, and commented–Oswald commented in his diary–that in his ward with him was what he described as an elderly American.   We are trying to locate that American.  We think that possibly this Mr. Morehouse was that person.  I wonder if you had ever heard of Mr. Morehouse before, or know who he might be?

AMBASSADOR THOMPSON:  I have no recollection of having heard of this man before.

MR. SLAWSON:  Do you have any recollection of any other American that might fit this description?

AMBASSADOR THOMPSON:   No; I do recall that there have been American tourists who have been in the hospital in Moscow.  But I don’t recall at that particular date whether there were any.

THE CIA AND THE SEARCH FOR THE “ELDERLY AMERICAN”

For More Go To:   [ A. J. Weberman’s Site ]

On February 4, 1964, Lee H. Wigren C/SR/CI Research made an inquiry regarding the elderly American.
[CIA 523-220]

On August 12, 1964, the CIA reported: “American citizen Waldemar Boris Karapatnitsky last known address West Berlin, visited relatives USSR 1959, and believed hospitalized Botkina Hospital Moscow in bed next to OSWALD October 21, 1959, to October 28, 1959. Subject a retired machinery importer-exporter born January 14, 1886, Ukraine…Subject denounced 1950 by neighbor as communist based on conversations between informant and SAC. No further derog. traces.” 
[CIA 797-872] 

From 1958 to 1962, Counter-Intelligence HT-LINGUAL intercepted 15 letters mailed either to the Soviet Union from the United States by Boris Karapatnitsky, or mailed from the Soviet Union and received by him in the United States.
[CIA Memo 5.1.64 HT Lingual Items Relating to OSWALD Case] 

The CIA was reluctant to take the testimony of Boris Karapatnitsky because of “complications that would later arise,” and discussed the problem with David Slawson.  David Slawson told the CIA he would get the State Department to take Boris Karapatnitsky’s statement. 
[WC Memo Slawson to Rocca and Bagley 8.12.64; CIA 797-872]

From the State Department report: “A Mission Officer called on Boris Karapatnitsky on August 14, 1964, under pretext of checking residences of older U.S. citizens residing in Berlin. Karapatnitsky said he thought he knew why the officer had come and stated he had intended to visit consular section for advice concerning problem. He described problem as follows: He had been informed by a friend in New York that a Secret Service agent, representing the Warren Commission, had inquired about him asking Kara had been in USSR certain time and if he had known OSWALD. Showed Consular Officer letter from friend dated August 10, 1964, surmising that Sovs had furnished names of all patients in hospital at time of OSWALD’S hospitalization and that he had been traced from there. Kara said he had never heard of OSWALD until after assassination of President Kennedy. He volunteered there had been only one American in Karapatnitsky’s room in hospital but he was 69 year old industrialist . In response to repeated he had heard nothing about OSWALD in the USSR and could recall no reason to believe their paths have crossed.”
[CIA 794-871; DOS interview with Karapatnitsky]

The unnamed “69 yeat-old industrialist” is probably William Edgerton Morehouse, about whom Ambassador Thompson was questioned above.

Llewellyn E. Thompson’s July 28, 1964 testimony before the Warren Commission continues:

MR. SLAWSON:  If an ordinary American tourist or businessman in Moscow were to receive an injury in, say, an automobile accident or some other normal method, would he normally be put into the same ward as Embassy people were placed, or would he receive treatment right along with normal Soviet citizens?

AMBASSADOR THOMPSON:    I think that there is an emergency hospital type where he probably would normally be taken, rather than Botkinskyaya.  I cannot be sure of this.  But we had an American doctor in the Embassy who would normally be called in on cases of this kind, and if he felt the case required it he would probably apply to have him taken to Botkinskaya.

 MR. SLAWSON:   Do you recollect who this doctor was in the fall of 1959?

AMBASSADOR THOMPSON:    I believe at that time it was an Air Force officer.  It sometimes rotated among the services.  But I am almost certain it was an Air Force officer.  I could get the name, but I don’t recall it at the moment.  I just don’t recall the name.

MR. SLAWSON:   Mr. Ambassador, do you think it would be unsual of the Soviet Government to permit someone in Oswald’s circumstances, that is a would-be defector from his own government, to be treated in the same ward as other Americans, or particularly as Americansx who might come under the category of this important person or Embassy official ward you were speaking of?

AMBASSADOR THOMPSON:    I would think it is probably somewhat unusual.  This doctor could give you expert testimony on this, because he has been involved in almost all cases.

MR. DULLES:  Do you happen to know whether that doctor is in the United States at the present time?

AMBASSADOR THOMPSON:    He was in Texas the last I heard.  I draw a blank on his name at the moment, although I know him quite well.

Who is the “Air Force officer” doctor that Thompson knows “quite well” but cannot recall his name?  Who was, as Thompson testified “in Texas the last I heard”?  

The following 1961 CIA document referring to “the Doctor” at the US Embassy in Moscow and the need for “coordination with the US Air Force” is clearly referring to the same individual whose name Thompson could not remember.  The document can be found at the CIA’s own website http://www.foia.ucia.gov/  in the section dealing with the Penkovsky intelligence operation.

The individual referred is must be Dr. Alexis Davison, whose mother’s, (Natalia Alekseevna Belimisheva Davison) address in Atlanta was discovered in Oswald’s address book. [CE 18]  Natalia Alekseevana arrived in the USA with her father after the Russian Civil War but she returned to the Soviet Union in 1924.  There she met and married the father of Alexis Davison, a US Red Cross official. 
      Alexis Davison, as an Embassy doctor had conducted a medical examination of Marina in 1962 in Moscow prior to the Oswalds’ departure for the USA.  Davison could not recall giving his address to Lee or Marina but testified before the HCSA that in doing so, “this was not an unusual thing to do since my family had always been very hospitable to Russians who visited Atlanta.” 

Davison was an agent for the CIA, providing “passive communication support” for a major intelligence operatation in Moscow involving the Russian spy GRU Colonel Oleg Penkovsky.  In May 1963, Penkovsky was arrested and Davison was one of the US diplomats ordered out of the USSR.  Penkovsky was later shot as a traitor by the Russians. While the CIA denies that Davison undertook any other intelligence functions other than those in the Penkovsky operation, many of Davison’s files remain classified.  Was he a full-time CIA operative or a casual agent as the CIA alleges?  

But Davison was not the doctor at the US Embassy in 1959 when Oswald first arrived.  Davison did not arrive in Moscow until May 1961.  What was Thompson thinking when he confused Davison with the doctor who might have been visiting the Botkinskaya hospital when Oswad was there?  Was he confusing the doctors or the CIA agents?

The Warren Commission did not follow up on the identity of the Embassy doctor in 1959.  The probability is very high that it was the Embassy medical officer who was visiting the “elderly Amercican” in the hospital and encountered Oswald.  As it stands today, it is a mystery who on October 24 called from the US embassy inquiring about Lee Harvey Oswald.  What is most odd, is how the Embassy inquiry into Oswald was so suddenly dropped.   

On the morning of October 28, Lee Harvey Oswald was released from the hospital. 

Copyright © Peter Wronski 1991-2004

Previous Page

Next Page

MAIN PAGE

Lee Harvey Oswald in Moscow Part 4

Copyright © Peter Wronski 1991-2004

Previous Page

Next Page

MAIN PAGE

October 28, 1959 – January 7, 1960.
US Press and Waiting in Moscow

On the morning of October 28, 1959, Lee Harvey Oswald was released from the Botkinskaya Hospital.  Instead of being returned to his previous lodgings at the Hotel Berlin, he was booked into the nearby Metropole Hotel.  The art-deco era Metropole is arguably one of Moscow’s most luxurious old-style hotels.  Oswald was given Room 233 (the numbering system had been changed since then) a second floor luxury suite with a balcony overlooking the Bolshoi Ballet and Sverdlov Square. ( In his diary, written much later than the events taking place, Oswald wrote that he was in “Room 214.”  He was mistaken.)  KGB headquarters, where Oswald’s fate was being discussed was three blocks away within view of the hotel. Oswald was charged 30 rubles a day for his room, which he paid out of a fund of 800 rubles he had remaining.

According to KBG Colonel Nechiporenko’s book, Passport to Assassination, upon his release from the hospital, Oswald had been given his train ticket to Helsinki and advised that the next day he would be seen at OVIR (the Visa and Registration office.)  The circumstances seemed similar to those on the eve of his apparent suicide attempt the previous week. But on October 29, according to Nechiporenko, Oswald was advised by the head of OVIR that he could remain in the USSR pending a final decision by the Supreme Soviet on his request for citizenship. 

Oswald wrote in his diary:

October 28

Leave Hospital in Intourist car with Rimma for Hotel Berlin.  Later, I change hotel to Metropole.  Rimma notified me that the passport and registration office wishes to see me about my future.  Later, Rimma and car pick me up and we went the office to find four officials waiting for me (all unknown to me).  They ask how my arm is, I say OK; they ask, Do you want to go to your homeland?  I say no, I want Soviet citizenship.  They say they will see about that…  They make notes.  “What papers do you have to show who and what you are?”  I give them my discharge papers from the Marine Corps.  They say, “Wait for our answer.” I ask, “How long?”  “Not soon.”
Later, Rimma comes to check on me.  I feel insulted, and insult her.

Oct 29

Hotel room 214, Metropole Hotel.
I wait.  I worry.  I eat once, stay next to phone.  Worry.  I keep fully dressed.

Oct. 30

Hotel Room – I have been in hotel three days; it seems like three years. I must have some sort of a showdown!

The next day Oswald once again takes dramatic action.  For October 31, his diary entry reads:

I make my decision. Getting passport at 12:00, I meet and talk with Rimma for a few minutes. She says, ‘Stay in your room and eat well.’ I don’t tell her about what I intend to do since I know she would not approve. After she leaves, I wait a few minutes and then I catch a taxi. ‘American Embassy,’ I say.

It is likely that Oswald planned his actions at the embassy well in advance.  US Counsel Richard Snyder would later testify that Oswald appeared to be well prepared and focused during his appearance at the embassy to ostensibly renounce his citizenship.  It is my opinion that Oswald chose October 31 as the day to appear there only because the Soviet authorities returned his passport that day.  Oswald writes in his diary that he needed to “get” his passport.  I would venture that his passport was taken for another three-day processing at OVIR to amend his residency from Hotel Berlin to the Metropole.  Oswald would have probably known that he risked being turned away at the embassy by Soviet police stationed outside if he could not produce a US passport.  Moreover, he must have also known that if he appeared at the embassy without a passport in hand he would find it difficult getting any service.

Oswald arrived at the US Embassy at approximately 12:30 p.m. 

The US Embassy was then and is still today located on Tchaikovsky Street, a section of the multi-lane “Ring Road” which encircles the inner zone of Moscow.  It  is a nine story building occupied by the US since 1953.  It would come to house roughly one hundred American embassy staff and almost the same number of Soviet employees — all without exception, KGB agents or full-time KGB officers. 

The first floor of the embassy housed the consular section, where Oswald would make his presence known.  Although I am unsure of the disposition in 1959, in the 1980’s, the second, third, and fourth floors, contained the living quarters of embassy staff and Marine guards and their mess hall.  The floors above the sixth were off limits to Soviet employees.  The seventh floor contained the offices of the CIA and the State Department’s political department, the eighth contained the State Department’s economic and scientific sections, while the ninth floor housed the Ambassador’s office and secure communications rooms — the so-called CPU (Communications Programs Unit.)  The restricted floors were accessible only from the ninth floor after passing a Marine guard checkpoint.  

Lee Harvey Oswald’s actions inside the US embassy on October 31, are outside the scope of my research.  I found no Russian witnesses who could enlighten me as to what transpired inside.  According to the official history, Oswald presented himself to Consul Richard Snyder and declared his intention to renounce his citizenship.  Snyder, according to his testimony, stalled Oswald by saying he did not have the necessary papers on hand to accept Oswald’s renunciation.  Snyder interviewed Oswald for approximately an hour, extracting from him his mother’s address back in the USA, the motives for his defection and information on his arrival route.  At some point in the interview, Snyder asked Oswald if he was willing to serve the Soviet state.  Oswald’s unfortunate reply was cabled back to the State Department that weekend  :   

“Oswald offered the information that he had been a radar operator in the Marine Corps and that he had voluntarily stated to unnamed Soviet officials that as a Soviet citizen he would make known to them such information concerning the Marine Corps and his specialty as he possessed. He intimated that he might know something of special interest.”     [FSD-234]

What military information did Oswald have access to?  According to Oswald’s Marine crew commander at El Toro, Lt.. John Donovan:

“He had access to the location of all bases in the west coast areas, all radio frequencies for all squadrons, all tactical call signs, and the relative strength of all squadrons, number and type of aircraft in a squadron, who was the commanding officer, the authentication code of entering and exiting the ADIZ, which stand for Air Defense Identification Zone. He knew the range of our radar. He knew the range of our radio. And he knew the range of surrounding units’ radio and radar…  There are some things which he knew on which he received instructions that there is no way of changing, such as the MPS 16 height-finder radar gear… He had also been schooled on a piece of machinery call a TPX-1, which is used to transfer radio–radar and radio signals over a great distance. Radar is very susceptible to homing missiles, and this piece of equipment is used to put your radar antenna several miles away, and relay the information back to your site which you hope is relatively safe. He had been schooled on this.”  [WC Vol. 8 p.298]

In the end, Oswald was told by Snyder to return to the embassy on Monday if he wanted to follow through in renouncing his citizenship.  The frustrated Oswald abandoned his passport with Snyder and departed.  Oswald would not return to the embassy until two years later, after he began the process of returning home to the USA.  Overall, Oswald’s appearance at the embassy remains a strange event with multiple layers of possible explanations.

Why did Oswald bother stopping in at the embassy?  Most defectors went directly to their Soviet destination without contacting the US embassy.  Was Oswald staging a performance for the benefit of the Soviets in an attempt to force their hand in granting him citizenship?  Was Oswald staging a performance in his role as a US intelligence operative as part of a legend that would be put to later use in the USA?  Or was Oswald genuinely intending to give up his US citizenship and betray his country by revealing classified military data?  One thing is sure.  Once Oswald’s visit to the embassy became known to the Soviets, even the most remote consideration of using him in the future as a Soviet agent in the USA would have been dropped. Exposed, Oswald was useless to the Russians in that capacity.  That too might have been Oswald’s motive for his dramatic visit to the embassy.  Moreover, by leaving his passport at the embassy, Oswald insured that the document remained out of Soviet hands.    

Whatever his motive, however, Oswald opened himself to possible charges of espionage and attracted the attention of US intelligence agencies, including the FBI, but not, remarkably the CIA, as far as we know.  No CIA file dating to the period of Oswald’s visit to the embassy has been located so far.  It would be another year before the CIA apparently opened a so-called “201” file on Lee Harvey Oswald (which remarkably identified him as Lee Henry Oswald.)

As soon as Oswald returned to his room at the Metropole, US journalists, alerted by the embassy, began calling at his door requesting an interview.  The KGB report stated that on November 1,2, and 3, numerous US journalists, “including Stevens,” called on Oswald but that he had refused to grant any of them an interview.  They even sent him tickets to a puppet theater, attempting to lure him out of his room.  Oswald did not take the bait. Except for UPI Moscow Bureau Chief Robert J. Korengold, AP’s Alfred Goldberg, Aline Mosby and the recently KGB-identified Stevens, we do not know who these reporters were who made the first attempts to interview Oswald. 
[Nechiporenko p. 37]
[US Department of State, LS no.0692061-4  JS/PH,   1999.]  [ Click here to see Original KGB Document  (284k) ]
 

Who was Stevens?

The “Stevens” named in the KGB report, was probably Edmund Stevens, the Christian Science Monitor Moscow correspondent.  He is mentioned by name in the report because he had a special relationship with the Soviets going back decades. Stevens was a ‘semi-defector’ himself, first arriving in Moscow in 1934 at the age of twenty-four to work for a Soviet publishing agency. 

According to the conservative Accuracy In Media (AIM) lobby group, Stevens had been secretly a member of the Young Communist League USA since 1931 and he joined the Communist Party – USA in 1938. The American-Russian Chamber of Commerce hired him that year in Moscow, and he began writing for the Manchester Guardian and the London Daily Herald.

When Stevens returned to the U.S. in 1939, he was given the privileges of bringing his Russian wife with him and retaining ownership (as far as one could “own” in the USSR) of his house in Moscow.  In the US, Stevens defended Soviet policies, including the Hitler-Stalin pact in 1939. During the war he served as a war correspondent for the Christian Science Monitor and as an adviser in the delegation of W. Averell Harriman at a conference of Stalin and Churchill in 1942.  Stevens supported Soviet claims to spheres of interest in Eastern European countries but eventually Stevens became disillusioned with Stalin.  Stevens returned to Moscow only after Stalin’s death in 1953.  He reported for several media organizations and was the Christian Science Monitor’s Moscow correspondent.   

Stevens apparently enjoyed a lavish life style in the USSR. For almost 30 years he lived in what was called a luxurious log cabin in traditional Russian style; when this dwelling was demolished to make room for a housing development, the government gave him a three-story mansion in downtown Moscow. Stevens’ wife was permitted to send art objects to New York for sale, a privilege denied other dealers.  

According to AIM, Steven’s membership in the USA Communist Party was not revealed until after his death in Moscow in 1992.  

 
At some point during this period, Radio Moscow interviewer and suspected KGB agent Lev Setyaev visited Oswald and the so-called “defector” photograph was taken in his hotel suite by a yet-unidentified photographer.  Setyaev’s visits to Oswald are not mentioned anywhere in the documents the Russians released to the US in 1999.

According to Nechiporenko, another intelligence officer, posing as an Intourist official with the name Andrei Nikolayevich, interviewed Oswald on November 4th.  The officer told Oswald he would get in touch with him to help him settle in the USSR.  He never contacted Oswald again, and when Oswald asked Rimma a week later to find the individual, she was informed by Intourist that nobody by that name was employed there.

According to the above cited KGB report, on November 5th, Oswald told Rimma Shirakova of his visit to the US embassy.  It is likely that Soviet US Embassy employees and microphones planted  in the building had already made the KGB well aware of Oswald’s visit to the embassy.

Oswald made the following entries for November:

Nov. 1 More reporters, three phone calls from brother & mother. Now I feel slightly exhilarated, not so lonely. Nov. 2 Fifteen days of utter loneliness. I refuse all reporters, phone calls. I remain in my room; I am racked with dysentery. Nov. 15 

I decide to give an interview. I have Miss Mosby’s card so I call her. She drives right over. I give my story, allow pictures.  Later story is distorted, sent without my permission, that is: before I ever saw and OKed her story.  Again I feel slightly better [slighted and bitter ?] because of the attention.

Nov. 16

A Russian official comes to my room, asks how I am. Notifies me I can remain in USSR till some solution is found with what to do with me; it is comforting news for me. 

Once again, the entries in Oswald’s journal are not necessarily synoptic with the real chain-of-events. It was on Friday, November 13th, that Oswald granted reporter Aline Mosby an interview but was very unhappy with the resulting article which appeared on November 15 in the US press.

Missing from Oswald’s diary is his extensive interview of November 16 with Priscilla Johnson McMillan, a figure who would play a reoccurring role in shaping the written record of the JFK assassination. Johnson was a veteran traveler to Moscow who returned to the Soviet Union for her fourth time on November 15, 1959. Previously she worked as a translator in the US Embassy but now she was returning to Moscow as a reporter for NANA (North American Newspaper Alliance.) The next day, while picking up her mail from the US Embassy she was tipped off by McVicker to the Oswald’s presence in the Metropole Hotel. Coincidentally, Johnson’s room was one floor above Oswald’s. Perhaps less coincidentally, Johnson had extensive contacts with the CIA and had even applied to the agency for employment in 1952 but withdrew her application before she would have been turned down. She was characterized as “screwball, goofy and mixed-up” in the CIA refusal to grant her security clearance at the time of her application. Nevertheless, on May 6, 1958 the CIA’s Soviet Russia Division requested “operational approval” to use Johnson for a CIA operation still classified today. Johnson was also debriefed by the CIA on numerous occasions prior and after her meeting with Lee Harvey Oswald. [John Newman, Oswald and the CIA, pp. 61-67.]

Priscilla Johnson McMillan and the CIA

CIA document released to the National Archives on March 25, 1977.

Chief, [redacted] 12 April 1957

Attn: [redacted]

[redacted]

Chief, Contact Division, OO [redacted]

Priscilla Johnson [redacted to end of line]

1. In November 1956 [redacted] expressed an interest in subject asked that we obtain a sample of her writings. We at last have been successful in contacting subject, and enclose herewith a sample of her writing. This particular article has been rejected by several publishers.2. Subject is now living with two other girls at 131 A East 62nd St., New York, telephone TEmpleton 8-3673. She is not employed and is spending most of her time writing a book about her recent trip to Moscow.

She is thinking seriously of another visit to the USSR, and has promised to keep us advised of her plans.

CIA Document Released 1993.

Contact Report Meeting with Priscilla Johnson on 11 December 1962.

1. Circumstances of Meeting: Priscilla Johnson was selected as a likely candidate to write an article on Yevtushenko in a major U.S. magazine for our campaign…..She had been an OO source and they had a clearance on her for contact and debriefing…

2. Impressions and Assessment: Miss Johnson impressed me as being able, astute and conscientious, qualities that I have noted in the articles of hers that I have read….Although concerned about making her articles accurate as to fact and free from any external influence, I think she might be worked around to writing an article in which she genuinly [sic] believed, but which would also further our purposes for Yevtushenko. She also has other information that would be well worth getting on several young Soviet writers.

[…]

4. Yevtushenko: Miss Johnson agreed with our evaluation of Yevtushenko, but only up to a point. She said that those in whom she had the greatest faith in the USSR consider Yevtushenko to be still on their side of the line and think of him as a defender of their causes in internal literary matters at any rate…..She was, therefore, reluctant to attack him all out. I did not raise the issue of her writing an article at our inspiration, but raised the general problem of whether it would not help to have him attacked here so that he could go back to the USSR and plead for greater freedom in order to continue as a [sic] effective propagandist. She got the idea and thought there might be something to it. She said she was going to write a series of articles for the REPORTER including one on him and that she thought she must write only the truth, without defining exactly what that was to me.

5. Despite her statements in the paragraph above, I think that Miss Johnson can be encouraged to write pretty much the articles we want. It will require a little more contact and discussion, but I think she could come around…. Basically, if approached with sympathy in the cause she considers most vital, I believe she would be interested in helping us in many ways. It would be important to avoid making her think that she was being used only as a propaganda tool and expected to write what she is told. I don’t think she would go along with that idea at all. On the other hand, she is searching for both more information and more understanding of the problem of the Soviet intellectual and is consequently subject to influence.

Donald JAMESON [sic]
Chief, SR/CA

Oswald’s decision to give interviews is often related to his being told by the Soviets that he he will now be allowed to remain in the USSR.  In his diary, Oswald writes that he is informed of this on November 16th.  If this is correct then this would not include his interview with Mosby which he gave on November 13th.  Johnson who interviewed Oswald on the evening of November 16, reported that Oswald was sure that he was going to be allowed to remain in the USSR. 

Priscilla Johnson’s interview with Oswald gives us little further insight into the motives behind his journey to the the USSR.  He maintained the same position that he held with the Soviet authorities and US Embassy officials:  he was disillusioned with the capitalist system, he was a Marxist, he wanted to live in a socialist state.  One observation of Johnson’s, however, does offer some insight into how Oswald was spending his time in Moscow.  Writing years later, Johnson says:

He looked about seventeen. Proudly, as a boy might, he told me about his only expedition into Moscow alone. He had walked four blocks to Detsky Mir, the children’s department store, and bought himself an ice cream cone. I could scarcely believe my ears. Here he was, coming to live in this country, forever, and he had so far dared venture into only four blocks of it.
[Priscilla Johnson McMillan, Marina and Lee, p. 84]

In fact, Oswald had ventured out even less than that.  Detsky Mir was only two blocks away from the hotel.  This is a valuable observation because Johnson would be the last American to see Oswald in Moscow.  Shortly afterwards he would “vanish.” According to a memo sent at the time by US Consul McVickar, Johnson stated that Oswald told her that he’d be leaving the hotel at the end of the week.  Johnson later denied that Oswald told her anything of the sort, but said that she believed on her own that Oswald had checked out of the hotel that week because he was no longer in his assigned room.

According to Rimma Shirakova’s 1992 statements to Norman Mailer, Oswald was merely moved to a cheaper room on a higher floor and that he would take all his meals in his room.  That is entirely possible.  Rosa Agafonova, the Hotel Berlin interpreter told us that Oswald would often come and visit her at the Service Bureau in the Hotel Berlin and that he spent New Year’s Eve there.  They would chat and he would practice his Russian.  At one point, she and several other people from Intourist took Oswald out and bought him a winter fur hat.  Lev Setyaev stated that he met with Oswald several times that winter.  But neither Agafonova or Setyaev knew anything about his room.  Setyaev told me that on subsequent visits to Oswald, he would meet him in the lobby of the hotel. 

It is suspicious that from November 1959 to early January 1960, when Oswald left for Minsk, nobody from the US press or embassy searched for him or bumped into him accidentally. Nobody at the embassy was even slightly curious as to what happened to the young American threatening to reveal vital military secrets to the Soviets.   Priscilla Johnson lived in the same hotel in which Oswald stayed!  The hotel is of medium size, and entry and exit to and from the hotel would be restricted to a few doors by Soviet policy of checking identification before letting anyone proceed inside.  It is remarkable that in all those weeks Johnson did not bump into Oswald in the lobby, the restaurant, or in any of the few local shops. Yet that appears to be exactly what happened.

In his diary for the period, Oswald wrote:

Nov. 17 – Dec. 30. I have bought myself two self-teaching Russian language books. I force myself to study 8 hours a day. I sit in my room and read and memorize words. All meals I take in my room. Rimma arranged that. It is very cold on the streets so I rarely go outside at all for this month and a half. I see no one, speak to no one except every now and then Rimma, who calls the ministry about me. Have they forgotten? During December, I paid no money to the hotel, but Rimma told the hotel I was expecting a lot of money from USA. I have $28 left. This month I was called to the passport office and met 3 new officials who asked me the same questions I answered a month before. They appear not to know me at all.

I attempted in every way to confirm that indeed Oswald was where he says he was. If there is any missing period in Oswald’s life, then this is the most extensive.  Weeks go by without there being any witnesses to Oswald’s activities.  We have only Rimma Shirakova’s statements to Mailer, placing Oswald living in the Metropole Hotel from mid-November to early January.

Late in December, Oswald was informed that he would be granted a one-year temporary residency and that he would be sent to live in Minsk where he would work in an electronics factory.  Rimma Shirakova states that he was deeply disappointed;  Oswald hoped he would be allowed to study in University in Moscow.  He wept bitterly, she said.

On January 4, 1960, Oswald was issued a Soviet internal passport, citing his citizenship as “stateless.” It was valid for one year.   He was given a one-time grant of 5000 old rubles ($500) to settle his hotel bill and purchase a train ticket for Minsk.  There would also be a monthly subsidy of  70 new rubles ($70) from the Soviet Red Cross.

On January 5 or 6, 1960 Oswald took the eight hour journey west from Moscow to Minsk.  A local KGB surveillance team was awaiting his arrival there.

Previous Page

Next Page

MAIN PAGE