DATE: 7/19/2007
FROM: Rosemary Newton
TO: David Von Pein


Hi Dave,

Vince [Bugliosi] called me this afternoon after being told by a friend of his in Arizona that he had seen many "conspiracy" postings on the internet regarding the charge of his using ghostwriters in the making of Reclaiming History. It's the same old story. Vince asked him if he had seen the responses from Pat Lambert, Dale Myers, and his secretary, and he said he had not.

Knowing that you are a whiz when it comes to the internet putting responses where it counts, would you be able to put the 3 replies from Pat, Dale, and myself somewhere you think necessary. I wish I had your capability in doing this.

Also, would John McAdams be able to help with this? Let me know what you think.

Regards again, your e-mail pal,


SUBJECT: David Lifton's Craziness
DATE: 7/20/2007
FROM: David Von Pein
TO: Rosemary Newton


Hi Rosemary,

I have just now re-posted to the McAdams JFK Google Forum all of the information that you requested be posted (plus some of my own comments re: the matter as well). .... I also placed a link on that goes directly to the Google post I linked above. The full discussion starts HERE.

I haven't heard any further nonsense from Lifton on the stupid "ghostwriting" charge. Maybe your excellent letter shut him up. Hope so.

If I can be of further help, please let me know. These silly allegations from Lifton boil my blood too. And the thing that REALLY burns my toast is when Lifton had the gall to say this about V. Bugliosi:

"If he [Bugliosi] wants to write about the JFK case, he should stick to the facts." -- D. Lifton

I responded to the above absurdity with this comment (which is included within the link I provided above):

"Can David Lifton REALLY not see the astounding hypocrisy that resides within the above statement. Mr. Lifton has no more been able to "stick to the facts" in his book "Best Evidence" than a snowflake could survive in Death Valley in
August. Absolutely incredible. (But hilarious.)" -- DVP

Hopefully everyone who reads about Mr. Lifton's silly "ghostwriting" charges re: Vincent's book will step back and realize that such comments are coming from a kook who actually believes that JFK's body was stolen off of Air Force One.

If there is anyone with less credibility when it comes to a particular assassination theory than David S. Lifton, I'm not aware of who it might be (although a few other kooks do come close, I'll grant you).

Even Mr. Bugliosi has singled out Lifton's body-altering nonsense as the one JFK theory that truly "takes the cake". I agree completely. And I've said so (even before Vince did)....RIGHT HERE.

David V.P.


SUBJECT: Re: Help!
DATE: 7/20/2007

FROM: David Von Pein
TO: Rosemary Newton


A follow-up to my last mail.......

If Vince ever wants to respond directly to the silly ghostwriting allegations, I'd be more than happy to post Vince's words on the Internet.

You could get a verbatim response directly from Vince; then you could write out that response in an e-mail to me....I can then easily copy-&-paste Vince's words from your e-mail directly into any post I make on the Internet (at McAdams' website or at Amazon or elsewhere).

Anyway, that's just a thought....and it didn't hit me until after I already sent my last mail to you.

In any event, if you or Vince ever need any more help in battling the crazy conspiracy theorists of the world, I shall be very glad to assist you.




SUBJECT: Thank you!
DATE: 7/22/2007
FROM: Rosemary Newton
TO: David Von Pein


Hi Dave,

Sorry I didn't back to you sooner, but I took a "fun day" off. Again, Vince really appreciates your help. Not having a computer, and not being interested in owning one, he really doesn't understand (although he sure is learning) how discussions with opposing views take place on the internet. Admittedly, I never indulged in this myself until Lifton's allegation was brought to my attention by Pat Lambert and I was angry enough to respond.

I'm sure the conspiracy community will never "die out" regarding the JFK assassination. But fortunately, there are those like yourself (but it appears not as articulate) who at least voice reason, common sense, and above all, facts. I'm sure there are those who believe that Booth didn't shoot Lincoln, and the earth is flat.

I mentioned to Vince your suggestion about responding himself and with your help posting it on the net. He said no, and again, I wasn't surprised. Even if he was video-taped showing him for the last 20 years writing with his #2 pencil on a yellow pad and dictating the numerous tapes to be transcribed, these morons still wouldn't believe what they saw and heard. You know, "don't confuse me with the facts, my mind is made up."

In any event, Dave, keep up your excellent work and please keep in touch with me.




Vincent Bugliosi's secretary (Rosemary Newton) wrote to me on July 19, 2007, and asked me if I would re-post the following Internet messages which rebut the stupid allegations that Mr. Bugliosi's JFK book was "ghostwritten" by various authors.

From Rosemary's e-mail to me [which I've included above], I get the feeling that Mr. Bugliosi is getting a little more perturbed about the accusations started by David Lifton (or at least I think that Lifton started the rumor [during his May 24, 2007, appearance on "Black Op Radio", which can be heard at the links below]).

Anyway, I too think it's a good idea to let people read the truth once again regarding Lifton's ridiculous "ghostwriting" allegations with respect to Bugliosi's magnificent book, "Reclaiming History". So, I'll give the following few posts a deserved instant replay:



I have received several accounts of remarks David Lifton made about me on the Black Op Radio program of May 24th concerning Vince Bugliosi's book "Reclaiming History."

For the record: I did not write one single word of Vince Bugliosi's book, not even a footnote. I never saw Vince Bugliosi's manuscript. I never saw any portion of Vince Bugliosi's manuscript. I didn't even get a peek at the galleys. No comma, colon, semi-colon, parenthesis, hyphen, apostrophe or period is my doing, to say nothing of sentences, paragraphs and a whole chapter. Because I have been traveling, I have not even seen the published book and have only sketchy, second hand reports of what it says.

I have indeed been in touch with Bugliosi; we have talked on the telephone and I provided him with some documents. That is the full extent of my involvement in his book.

I cannot imagine what prompted Lifton to make such a stunningly false allegation about me. But false it is. I am not a ghostwriter. I have never been a ghostwriter. I have no intention of being a ghostwriter.

Since I know unequivocally that Lifton is wrong about the role he assigned to me, I see no reason to believe he is correct about the other unidentified writers on whom he has bestowed the credit for having written Vince Bugliosi's book.

David Lifton owes me an apology.

David Lifton owes Vince Bugliosi an apology.

Patricia Lambert
[July 2, 2007]



This is in response to David Lifton's outrageous, malicious and contemptible lie regarding Vincent Bugliosi's book, Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, where he claims ghost writers wrote this great book (which will be read by generations to come, long after Mr. Lifton and the rest of us are gone, including all the die-hard conspiracy theorists), where I say, unequivocally, that NO section of Mr. Bugliosi's book was ghostwritten.

How do I know? Simple. I was the one (as Mr. Bugliosi's secretary for many years in the writing of this book) who transcribed a great number of tapes of his dictation and, much more, and with no exaggeration, thousands of yellow pad sheets of his handwriting as well as his handwritten faxes on every single section of the book.

I can vouch for the fact that Vincent Bugliosi is a man of integrity, principle, and I might add, a perfectionist with a capital "P." He is someone who has spent years researching this subject, as evidenced by the over 10,000 citations in his book (perhaps the most heavily sourced non-fiction book of any kind ever), which included not only his countless telephone calls and letters, but personal interviews as well.

Indeed, if anyone looks at the 170 pages of citations (source notes) in the CD endnote, you will see that at least 99% of the interviews upon which Mr. Bugliosi's book was, in considerable part, written, were interviews of witnesses he personally conducted. That, Mr. Lifton, if you are reading this, is what an author of Vincent Bugliosi's caliber does.

What could possibly cause you, Mr. Lifton, to tell such an unmitigated falsehood? Mr. Bugliosi told me he heard you had been working on an Oswald biography for many years and couldn't complete it.

Mr. Bugliosi not only completed his biography of Oswald (I typed up every single word of this section of Reclaiming History from Mr. Bugliosi's dictation and handwriting), but it's an excellent biography, and, I might add, was one of my favorites to transcribe. Mr. Lifton, is the reason behind your blatant falsehood that you find it hard to believe Mr. Bugliosi could do something you couldn't?

(Don't feel bad. Hundreds of people before you, including me, have absolutely marveled at Mr. Bugliosi's incredible capacity for productive work and achievement. For example, after the televised docutrial of Oswald in London, Gerry Spence, his legal adversary, said, "No other lawyer in America could have done what Vince did in this case." What makes what Mr. Bugliosi does all the more unbelievable is that he does everything with just a yellow pad and pencil.)

Or are you simply furious at Mr. Bugliosi for preempting your work on the Oswald biography? This appears to me to be the real reason for the preposterous story you are now peddling.

The pure and simple fact is that David Lifton, along with many, many other conspiracy theorists who are mentioned in Reclaiming History, are depicted and debunked as being illogical and not having one iota of common sense dealing with this subject—albeit, some more than others. So be it! Get on with your fantasies and stop criticizing logic.

Everyone knows that a conspiracy in anything is more intriguing and captivating than the old, boring, straight facts. But that happens to be the case in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

Again, Mr. Lifton, if you are reading this, sometimes things are just that (very boring, but excruciatingly true). I might add that I took notice of the fact that you did not dwell on the content of Mr. Bugliosi's dealing with specific issues (e.g., autopsy, acoustic, Zapruder film, etc.). Instead, you have made an allegation that not only is totally false, but completely irrelevant to the merits of the book.

By the way, Mr. Lifton (if you're still reading this), you called Vincent Bugliosi a "street bully" in his writing style. But I thought you said ghostwriters wrote his book?

If you're still with me, Mr. Lifton, there can be little question that what you have written is libelous. When I asked Mr. Bugliosi if he intended to sue you, he said, "I've been told by someone who knows him that he's judgment proof. However, if he continues this slander and libel of his, it's possible I may end up suing him anyway, and have him working for me the rest of his life paying off the automatic judgment against him. The same is true of Joan Mellen, someone named Ric Landers, and anyone else who peddles this phony story and whose name comes to my attention."

One final point, Mr. Lifton. I have figured out a way to shut you up. You can come to my home and I will show you the hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of words I typed up from Mr. Bugliosi's handwriting for his book as well as from a great number of tapes of his dictation on the book. If I can't do this, I'll give you $100,000. If I can, you give me $100,000. Is that a deal? If you're afraid to do this, then please shut your mouth and remove your trash from the internet.

Rosemary Newton
[July 3, 2007 Pacific Time]
[Posted again by Rosemary Newton at on July 5, 2007]



I wouldn't be surprised if the section on Garrison [in Bugliosi's book] read a lot like the Lambert book, since the Lambert book is the definitive one on Garrison.



Deja vu.....

Before reading Mr. McAdams' post regarding Lambert, I was about to write the exact same type of response after thinking this matter over in my own head.

It dawned on me that people could probably accuse ANY good, thorough author (who has researched his case and uses a LOT of cites, as VB does, 10,000+ of them!) of "ghost writing", so to speak.

This due to the narrative that is weaved by VB as he takes someone else's words from another source (book) and weaves it into his OWN narrative of events.

Vince, in point of fact, does this many times throughout the first narrative chapter (a chronology of the "Four Days In November"). In fact, I recall saying to myself several times while reading that chapter...."He got that directly from Mrs. Paine"...or "That's Marina talking there". (Even when quotes weren't being placed around the text.)

Obviously, Vince has utilized a lot of words from different people (authors and witnesses and police, etc.) to weave his own narrative of events throughout this huge book.

But the key is....He's providing a direct citation and source note for everything he's writing. In fact, I did a quick look-see in the index just now...and I found that Pat Lambert is listed on 19 different pages in "Reclaiming History" [and she's actually mentioned on many more pages than what the index indicates, too].....and it seems that all are within the "Stone/Garrison" chapter (which, naturally, makes sense).

[EDIT: In addition to referring to Patricia Lambert by name on approximately two dozen pages within "Reclaiming History", Vincent Bugliosi also uses Lambert and her book "False Witness" as a source a total of 52 times (20 times in the "Source Notes" file on the "Reclaiming History" CD-ROM disc; and an additional 32 citations referring to Lambert's book in the "Endnotes" file).



"Like a medieval Bible scholar, Bugliosi carried off the whole ["Reclaiming History" book] project by himself, without typewriter, computer, BlackBerry, cellphone, or research assistant. He drafted the book on yellow legal pads, then dictated much of it onto 72 one-hour and eight 90-minute audio tapes. A secretary transcribed the tapes and sent him the transcripts, which he then revised extensively with long, yellow-pad inserts, producing 8 to 10 drafts of each chapter." -- The Boston Globe; May 28, 2007

[The complete Boston Globe article is linked HERE.]



Unfortunately for the ghost-writer theorists, I have it directly from Pat Lambert that she did not write the chapter on Garrison. She was appalled when she first heard this claim about her.



Of course she [Patricia Lambert] didn't. No confirmation from her is even required, in my opinion.


Because knowing how Vince Bugliosi works, there's no way in hell he'd want to SHARE the glory of "Reclaiming History" with ANY other writer(s).

The kooks probably think I'm slamming the door on my own foot with this statement, because Vince DOESN'T share the spotlight with any other "ghostwriters" they (the kooks) think were involved.

But what I'm alluding to is Vincent's inner mindset--his ego. No way he'd want his "magnum opus" (as he, himself, has called the book) to be written by anyone else...even if only his name is on the cover. That could be part of the reason Fred Haines' names was dropped from the cover as a co-author, as originally planned in '98.

Yes, Vince has a decent-sized ego. I readily admit that. I think he does indeed. But I also think that that ego is a DESERVED ONE. He's EARNED the right to have that ego regarding certain books he has had published.

And that ego, plus 21 years' worth of very hard work, ... tells me more than anything else that David Lifton's "ghostwritten" accusation is a load of bullshit.

I'm nearly finished with the whole book, and I haven't noticed any huge variation in writing "style" or "syntax", etc. Just the opposite actually. In fact, the "sameness" of some of Vincent's terminology is extremely consistent throughout the whole book -- e.g., "Warren Commission critics and conspiracy theorists" being FULLY written out in those exact words on many, many pages over various chapters, without [Vince] ONCE resorting to shorthand like "CT" or "LN" or even "WC". Never once. No abbreviations at all. Consistent throughout the book too, as of the late chapters I'm now engaged in.

Or do some kooks believe that VB carefully went through all the "ghostwritten" text and made sure to change one writer's "CT" to "Conspiracy Theorists", etc., over and over again?

Then again, some kooks believe Lifton's body-alteration they, naturally, are likely to believe in things far less fanciful, but nonetheless still untrue, like this latest VB bashfest.



Well said, David. But, like you, I too needed no confirmation. I would not know as well as you do, but I'd be quite surprised if Vincent Bugliosi didn't have a healthy sized ego. By God he's earned it.

I was so terribly impressed with "OUTRAGE" and the points he made, his logic, his very reasonable requirement that others in life meet the fundamental guidelines of common sense and LOGIC...and competence for that matter.

He said so many of the things that have frustrated me about others in life. And he said them well. I have been a huge fan of Vincent Bugliosi for quite some time. I share his deep frustration with the less than objective incompetents of the world.

Anyway, another 5-star post for David Von Pein.



Will she [Pat Lambert] be putting that in writing, Ken?

The quote is not worth two dead flies if she doesn't.



But David Lifton's totally uncorrobated bullshit is worthy of ALL your consideration, isn't Mr. Kook?

This madhouse/asylum is a veritable microcosm of the "$3 Bill Kooks" that Vince [Bugliosi] has spoken of.

The irony abounds in torrents. And a bigger pleasure for me is....these kooks don't even realize it!



If he [Vincent Bugliosi] wants to write about the JFK case, he should stick to the facts.



Can David Lifton REALLY not see the astounding hypocrisy that resides within the above statement.

Mr. Lifton has no more been able to "stick to the facts" in his book "Best Evidence" than a snowflake could survive in Death Valley in August. Absolutely incredible. (But hilarious.)



Reclaiming History was written (or perhaps "assembled," is a better word) by someone who wants to take credit for it all, without acknowledging the truth about how the book was written.



I guess it's going to take that lawsuit (which Vince B. hinted at) to get David S. Lifton to shut his trap about the ghostwriting crap after all.

But, like any good conspiracy-loving kook, Lifton (whose "ghostwriting" theory has already been totally debunked) will continue to spin the story to his own perceived advantage for months or years to come.

Absolutely pathetic.

I'd remind Mr. Lifton to glance at pages 1514 and 1515 of "Reclaiming History", where Mr. Bugliosi gives full credit to the "two people who made noteworthy writing contributions" (VB's direct quote from pp. 1514-1515). Those "two people" being Dale K. Myers and Fred Haines.

So much for not "acknowledging" their "noteworthy writing contributions".

A few more reminders for Mr. Lifton:

"I am proud to say that I have done 99.9 percent of my own research for everything I wrote in this book (which is typical for me, not feeling comfortable relying on others to do research for me)." -- Page 1516; "RECLAIMING HISTORY: THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY"; Copyright 2007 by Vincent Bugliosi




[Paul] O'Connor's story never changed. And so the answer is: "Yes, Mr. Bugliosi, O'Connor said that repeatedly..."



What difference does it really make WHEN O'Connor told his three-pronged fairy tale (body bag/no brain/shipping casket), or how many times he uttered the same crazy triple tale of absurdity? Via scads of other evidence, O'Connor was still proven dead-wrong each time he told it.

Yes, Vince made an error when he said O'Connor never told the HSCA his triple fairy tale prior to 1978. But Vince ACKNOWLEDGES THIS ERROR IN HIS OWN BOOK. He didn't hide anything. He was being up front concerning the O'Connor error he made.

But the bigger overall point with respect to Paul O'Connor is: O'Connor (for whatever reason we can only guess about) said he saw things that just simply DID NOT OCCUR ON NOV. 22, 1963. And Bugliosi, rightly so, blasts him regarding those errors.



I have by no means exhausted my information on the subject of ghostwriting. Nor do I have any real interest in figuring out who wrote the original drafts of each and every chapter.



But it was nice of you, David, not to slander Patricia Lambert's name again, as you continue your anti-Bugliosi campaign and your unsupportable quest to prove that "Reclaiming History" was "ghostwritten".

Is Patricia off the hook now? And would you care to apologize for your error with respect to Ms. Lambert? Or would you rather remain wishy-washy on that particular subject too?



[The various sections of "Reclaiming History"] do seem to be written in markedly different styles.



This is total nonsense, of course. I've read the whole book cover-to-cover (and all the endnotes too), and there is positively no difference in writing "style" or technique throughout the book. It's ALL VINCE B. from start to finish.

And the next silly allegation is?.....



No doubt, Bugliosi wrote some (and perhaps a lot) of his own book.



Gee, how nice of Mr. Lifton to make such a heartwarming concession.

(Who's got the "eyeroll" icon? I need it here....badly.)



There is nothing honorable or nice about the way Bugliosi writes about these issues, or addresses an adversary.



What makes you think that conspiracy authors (such as yourself), who have distorted history and the true facts surrounding the assassination of President Kennedy for decades on end, deserve the SLIGHTEST bit of respect...or deserve to be treated "nice"?

You're living in a dream world, Mr. Lifton (and you obviously have been living in that world ever since your body-altering fantasy began in 1966).

Mr. Bugliosi isn't obligated to play "nice" when dealing with conspiracy-loving theorists who, as I said, have deliberately distorted the historical record relating to JFK's death (Jim Garrison and Oliver Stone to name but two additional examples).

In fact, I think Vince was far too polite to some of the CTers that he writes about in his book. He could have lambasted them even more than he did. And they would have deserved it (IMO).

An excerpt from "Reclaiming History":

"One could safely say that David Lifton took folly to an unprecedented level. And considering the monumental foolishness of his colleagues in the conspiracy community, that's saying something." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi; Page 1066

Sometimes, as they say, the truth hurts, Mr. Lifton.



To put it mildly, Bugliosi has an "attitude" problem.



Yeah, I think so too....and that's because he didn't bash your stupid body-stealing theory NEARLY hard enough in his book. You only got 14 pages, David. Stone and Garrison got 90. You should consider suing Vince for equal time. After all, your nonsense is just as good as Jim's and Oliver's, right?



The JFK assassination is a very complex problem.



It's only "complex" due to people like you, who have distorted history (big-time). Vince Bugliosi is merely "reclaiming" that distorted history.



The NY Times reporter who interviewed me on the subject noted that Mr. Bugliosi "is not an immodest man," an understatement if there ever was one.



LOL. Which means, of course, just the opposite of what the reporter (and you) intended it to mean. For, if Vince is "not immodest" (as claimed above)....then he's....modest.



If, as Mr. Bugliosi says, "this is a book of inserts," then I believe I know very well what that probably means. Substantial amounts of writing were done by third parties.



Another LOL.

This is just EXACTLY the sort of hilarious backward mindset exhibited by conspiracists that Mr. Bugliosi talks about (at some length) in "Reclaiming History"....i.e.,

Vincent Bugliosi (per Lifton's theory) has had his book "ghostwritten" by many different people, but then Vince just goes right ahead AND PLACES WORDS IN HIS BOOK THAT (per Lifton) LEAD STRAIGHT TO THE NOTION THAT THE BOOK WAS, IN FACT, GHOSTWRITTEN (via VB's remark about using gobs of "inserts").

That's very similar, IMO, to when the CTers claim that a certain JFK-assassination conspirator did something to advance the "covert, secretive plot", but then they just went right ahead and WROTE UP A MEMO OR SOME OTHER DOCUMENT that can be accessed by researchers in future years that would prove the existence of the conspiracy the plotters should have been desperately attempting to hide at all costs.

So, per this VB example, I guess Vince wanted to keep it a secret that the book was ghostwritten, but he decided (for whatever reason) to place in that very same book evidence (per Lifton) that shows the book was ghostwritten.

I love the "CT Mindset". (Mainly because I don't have a mindset like that.) ;)

One more time (for effect).....

"I am proud to say that I have done 99.9 percent of my own research for everything I wrote in this book (which is typical for me, not feeling comfortable relying on others to do research for me)." -- Page 1516 of "Reclaiming History"

All lies...right, DSL?

And to think...David said on Black Op Radio that he (David Lifton) was thinking about suing Vincent Bugliosi! That would be like Lee Harvey Oswald threatening to sue the city of Dallas for false arrest on 11/22/63.

Vince has the conspiracy-loving crowd all worked up into a foaming-at-the-mouth lather. It's utterly hysterical to watch too....particularly Mr. Lifton's pathetic attempts (via mile-long "I Was Right After All" type of posts) to reconcile in his own mind the validity of his worthless "ghostwriting" tale.

Lifton's next chapter will probably be subtitled --- Bugliosi wrote nothing! Arlen Specter wrote the whole "RH" tome by himself in Pennsylvania!

BTW, Vince said on a radio interview that his wife actually came up with the title for the book ("Reclaiming History")....a title that fits perfectly, too, IMO. So, I guess this will give Mr. Lifton yet another "subcontractor" to chew on.

David Von Pein
July 6, 2007


Linked below is Dale Myers' excellent article about David Lifton's silly ghostwriting allegations:


Here's an excerpt from the above article:

"Lifton is questioning Bugliosi's credibility? Isn't Lifton the guy that claimed
at one time that snipers were firing from inside artificial trees that had been
installed and removed from the grassy knoll by crane? .... Lifton's problem is
not Bugliosi's book or the secret gaggle of authors who supposedly wrote the
master's work for him. David Lifton's problem is himself. As long as he continues
to haunt the fringes of rational thought we can expect to be entertained with
more ridiculous and unfounded accusations."
-- Dale K. Myers; July 5, 2007


And here are some follow-up comments made by Myers in May 2008:

"As to Mr. Lifton's 'ghostwriting' allegations regarding Vincent Bugliosi's
book, ... charges and assertions without support don't mean much to me.

"I note that in the year since Mr. Bugliosi's secretary Rosemary Newton
challenged Lifton...that Mr. Lifton failed to grab what would apparently
be (according to Lifton's 'ghostwriting' claims) an easy $100 grand, and
instead continues to trash-talk Mr. Bugliosi's book.

"Seems to me there would be an easy way to settle all of this - Why
doesn't Lifton simply post the contracts for all of Mr. Bugliosi's 'ghostwriters'
which he claims to be privy to?

"I know the idea of some kind of evidentiary support for an allegation is
a novel idea to most conspiracy theorists, but come on! Even
you recognize
that extraordinary charges require extraordinary proof, yes?

"As to your question: "Do you then categorically deny that any such
relationship existed between yourself and Vince Bugliosi?", perhaps you
missed Mr. Bugliosi's acknowledgements on page 1515 of Reclaiming
-- Dale K. Myers; May 7, 2008



August 17, 2006 (Part 1)

August 17, 2006 (Part 2)

May 24, 2007 (Part 1)

May 24, 2007 (Part 2)

March 11, 2014