(PART 1015)


Hidell's name only enters the pubic consciousness once the rifle order has been traced.


The arresting officers don't mention it because they didn't know about it.



There were two pieces of "Hidell" identification taken out of Oswald's wallet by the police after LHO's arrest. And the signature of "Alek J. Hidell" that appears on the Selective Service System card (CE795 and CE796) is in the handwriting of Lee Harvey Oswald, without a shred of a doubt.

So, unless Oswald was framing himself, then it's quite obvious that the name "Hidell" wasn't just made up from whole cloth by the police after the assassination. Certain conspiracy mongers, as usual, will try desperately to mold the evidence into something it is not....just as Lee Farley was attempting to do when he uttered this outlandish and ridiculous statement (for which there is ZERO credible evidence to offer up as support for it):

"The whole "Hidell" situation is beyond bizarre and I don't buy for a second that Oswald had this ID on him in the patrol car." -- L. Farley

Of course, all reasonable people who aren't lifetime members of the "Anybody But Oswald" fan club also know that the name "Hidell" was written BY OSWALD HIMSELF on the two order forms that Oswald filled out for the revolver and the rifle. There is no question about that irrevocable fact (despite the constant protests coming from the ABO members).

There's also this testimony from Gerald Hill:

GERALD L. HILL -- "I asked Paul Bentley, "Why don't you see if he has any identification." Paul was sitting sort of sideways in the seat, and with his right hand he reached down and felt the suspect's left hip pocket and said, "Yes, he has a billfold," and took it out. I never did have the billfold in my possession, but the name Lee Oswald was called out by Bentley from the back seat, and said this identification, I believe, was on the library card. And he also made the statement that there was some more identification in this other name which I don't remember, but it was the same name that later came in the paper that he bought the gun under."

DAVID W. BELIN -- "Would the name Hidell mean anything? Alek Hidell?"

MR. HILL -- "That would be similar. I couldn't say specifically that is what it was, because this was a conversation and I never did see it written down, but that sounds like the name that I heard."

MR. BELIN -- "Was this the first time you learned of the name?"

MR. HILL -- "Yes, it was."


There is also Marina Oswald's Warren Commission testimony regarding the name Hidell. Marina, however, must have been confused about when she first heard the fictitious name "Hidell", because she couldn't possibly have heard the name "Hidell" on either one of Lee Oswald's WDSU radio appearances, because the name "Hidell" is never mentioned once during either of those two New Orleans radio programs in August 1963.

I suppose conspiracy theorists think that the name "Hidell" was placed into Marina Oswald's mouth during the Warren Commission testimony excerpted below (due to the fact we know she's wrong about when she first heard the name).

But regardless of Marina's confusion about the radio programs, it's fairly obvious that Marina herself knew that her husband was using the name Hidell as an alias at some point well prior to the assassination of JFK:

J. LEE RANKIN -- "Have you ever heard that he used the fictitious name Hidell?"


MR. RANKIN -- "When did you first learn that he used such a name?"

MRS. OSWALD -- "In New Orleans."

MR. RANKIN -- "How did you learn that?"

MRS. OSWALD -- "When he was interviewed by some anti-Cubans, he used this name and spoke of an organization. I knew there was no such organization. And I know that Hidell is merely an altered Fidel, and I laughed at such foolishness. My imagination didn't work that way."

MR. RANKIN -- "Did you say anything to him about it at that time?"

MRS. OSWALD -- "I said that it wasn't a nice thing to do and some day it would be discovered anyhow."


MR. RANKIN -- "Except for the time in New Orleans that you described, and the time you called to Dallas to ask for your husband, do you know of any other time your husband was using an assumed name?"

MRS. OSWALD -- "No, no more."

MR. RANKIN -- "Did you think he was using that assumed name in connection with this Fair Play for Cuba activity or something else?"

MRS. OSWALD -- "The name Hidell...was in connection with his activity with the non-existing organization."

MR. RANKIN -- "Did you and your husband live under the name Hidell in New Orleans?"

MRS. OSWALD -- "No."

MR. RANKIN -- "You were never identified as the Hidells, as far as you knew, while you were there?"

MRS. OSWALD -- "No. No one knew that Lee was Hidell."

MR. RANKIN -- "How did you discover it, then?"

MRS. OSWALD -- "I already said that when I listened to the radio, they spoke of that name, and I asked him who, and he said that it was he."

MR. RANKIN -- "Was that after the arrest?"

MRS. OSWALD -- "I don't remember when the interview took place, before the arrest or after."

MR. RANKIN -- "But it was in regard to some interview for radio transmission, and he had identified himself as Hidell, rather than Oswald, is that right?"

MRS. OSWALD -- "No--he represented himself as Oswald, but he said that the organization which he supposedly represents is headed by Hidell."


Nothing I say will make any difference. I'm not wasting my time on you any longer. You ask for a CITATION and then pre-empt it with [an] excuse.


Just as I thought. There is no proof for your claims concerning an "Oswald" wallet being found next to J.D. Tippit's body on Tenth Street.

I already knew there was no such "proof" for your ridiculous claims about an "Oswald" wallet from 10th Street being handed over by Captain Fritz to the FBI, because it couldn't be more obvious that no "Oswald" wallet was found on 10th Street at all.


What the damn point? I'm done with you.


You pretty much said that same thing yesterday, Lee. I guess you changed your mind:

"I've had my fill of Dave [Von Pein] to be honest. Nothing I pose gets addressed by him. He just takes you in circles." -- Lee Farley; 08/15/10


I'm still waiting for the day when a conspiracy theorist (ANY conspiracy theorist) can explain all of their theories and suspicions and speculations about all the so-called "fake" evidence in the JFK case in a logical, coherent, believable, and reasonable fashion.

Am I expecting too much when I ask for some conspiracy believer to attempt such an explanation?

I was kind of hoping I could find at least a few CTers at The Education Forum who were willing to place on the table some semblance of such "conspiracy coherence". But, thus far, my hopes are just that....hopes.

And I truly think the reason that no CTer can provide such "coherence" to their conspiracy plots and theories is due to the fact that their theories are TOTALLY WORTHLESS when anyone tries to fit them into the BIG PICTURE of the assassination of President Kennedy.

With a perfect example of such worthlessness being something I've been talking about for years -- which is the built-in INCOHERENCE and ABSURDITY that exists when trying to piece together two of the biggest pro-conspiracy points that CTers try to pass off as the truth (in tandem with one another!):

1.) Lee Harvey Oswald was being set up and framed as a LONE PATSY for JFK's murder months in advance of November 22, 1963.


2.) There were 2, 3, or maybe 4 gunmen firing at JFK from various directions in Dealey Plaza.

Attempting to reconcile the inherent absurdity, complexity, insanity, and sheer impossibility of the above two things (which are things that many conspiracists actually think DID occur in conjunction with one another) is just about an impossible (and futile) task.

Maybe that's why I rarely get an answer whenever I dare ask conspiracy theorists why they believe in both #1 and #2 above.

David Von Pein
August 14, 2010
August 16, 2010