In late September of 1964, Chief Justice Earl Warren handed a thick book to President Lyndon B. Johnson at the White House. That heavy tome was the final "Warren Commission Report" regarding the investigation into the November 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

The seven-member Warren Commission panel (plus its staff of counsel members and legal staff), in a nearly ten-month probe into the circumstances surrounding the murder of JFK, arrived at a conclusion which has divided America ever since -- they concluded that Lee Harvey Oswald, by himself, had fired all of the bullets that struck down and killed President Kennedy in Dallas, Texas.

A vast majority of people vehemently disagree with these WC findings. I, however, am not a member of that majority. Lee Harvey Oswald was indeed, in my opinion, the sole gunman that day in Dallas. The physical evidence (as well as the circumstantial evidence) that is currently in the official record tells me that Oswald was most certainly the murderer of America's 35th President.

And when virtually ALL of the hard, PHYSICAL evidence in a criminal case leans one way and supports one single conclusion, reaching an opposite conclusion (as many conspiracy theorists have done with respect to the evidence in the JFK case) -- i.e., that Oswald is totally INNOCENT of the two murders he was charged with on 11/22/63 (both JFK's and police officer J.D. Tippit's as well) -- defies all logic and reasoned thinking.

Like most things in life, the John Kennedy murder case can be reduced (in most areas within it) to common sense and the hard, documented physical evidence, and we all know where the latter leads -- right straight into the two guns of one Lee Harvey Oswald (his Mannlicher-Carcano rifle plus his revolver, the latter which was used to kill Officer Tippit). Plus, the "common sense" part of that equation leads directly to Lee Oswald and his weaponry as well. And "common sense" would tell anybody that Oswald is guilty.

I was thinking recently about the following quote by author-attorney-LNer Vincent Bugliosi (I think a lot about his comments, because they make so much "sense" of the "common" variety)....

"Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in the assassination of President Kennedy. The evidence is absolutely overwhelming that he carried out the tragic shooting all by himself. In fact, you could throw 80 percent of the evidence against him out the window and there would still be more than enough left to convince any reasonable person of his sole role in the crime." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi

....And then, just for the sake of illustrating the validity of the above-mentioned statement made by Mr. Bugliosi, I went about the task of tossing out certain pieces of evidence that lead toward Oswald's guilt in both the JFK and Tippit murders, and I came to the conclusion, after stripping away several items
that point to his guilt, that the following two things prove Lee Harvey Oswald guilty beyond a reasonable doubt (or at least they prove his guilt beyond all of my personal "reasonable doubt")......

1.) Lee Harvey Oswald's rifle was positively the weapon that was used to assassinate President Kennedy and wound Texas Governor John Connally. (With said weapon being found inside the building where Oswald was definitely located at 12:30 PM on November 22, 1963, when both of these men were wounded by rifle fire.)

2.) Oswald was seen carrying a bulky paper package into his place of employment at the Texas School Book Depository Building on the morning of 11/22/63, and Oswald (beyond a reasonable doubt) lied about the contents of this package to a co-worker.

* As an extension to #2 above --- We KNOW Oswald lied about the "curtain rods" based on the following:

A.) No "curtain rods" were found anywhere within the Book Depository after the assassination.

B.) Oswald definitely did not carry any package inside his roominghouse at 1026 N. Beckley Avenue when he arrived back home just prior to 1:00 PM on the afternoon of the assassination.

A and B above add up to the inescapable fact that: No "curtain rods" were in that paper package on 11/22/63.

Adding #1 to #2 above, all by themselves, with nothing else in evidence but those items, makes Oswald a guilty assassin.

Now, when you start adding in the wealth of ADDITIONAL physical and circumstantial evidence against Oswald -- his guilt is then proven not beyond just a "reasonable" doubt...but it's proven beyond any SPECK of a doubt.**

** Things like: Oswald's prints on a paper bag IN THE SNIPER'S NEST, with an incriminating "right palmprint" of Oswald's later discovered by the police in the very spot on that bag which equates perfectly with the precise way Buell Wesley Frazier said Oswald carried the bag in his right hand! That's a very important point, IMO, and is undeniably strong physical evidence of Oswald's guilt.

Plus there are these additional items:

....Eyewitness Howard Brennan's positive identification of Oswald as a gunman in the Sniper's Nest window. [See Warren Commission Volume 3, Page 148.]

....The Tippit murder that was unquestionably committed by Oswald.

....The fingerprints of Oswald located on the rifle, plus his prints located on multiple boxes DEEP WITHIN THE SNIPER'S NEST.

....Oswald having no verifiable alibi for the precise time when President Kennedy was being gunned down on Elm Street at 12:30 PM on 11/22/63.

....Oswald dashing out of the Book Depository building at approximately 12:33 PM, just minutes after a U.S. President had been shot within yards of Oswald's workplace.

....And Oswald's other lies he told to the police after his arrest (apart from the obvious large lie regarding the curtain rods).

But it all starts with the basic points brought out by #1 and #2 above. The evidence (and Oswald's own words and actions) tell a reasonable person that Lee Harvey Oswald was guilty as ever-lovin' sin of two murders in 1963, and there's nothing any conspiracy theorist (or anybody else on the planet) can do or say to change that basic of all facts.

The conspiracists will continue to try to set Oswald free, of course, like always. But the more a reasonable person examines the evidence (and applies just a small dose of ordinary common sense to these facts in evidence), the more hollow, shallow, and inept all those pro-conspiracy arguments become.

David Von Pein
January 2006