(PART 403)


It is amazing to hear [James] DiEugenio blathering on about the rifle being found being a Mauser, when a film cameraman was there, filming it when it was found and the photos of Carl Day carrying it out of the TSBD show it to be a Carcano. LOL, seems there is no end to the drivel coming from dear old Jim, a true Garrisonite.


Yep. It's the thing conspiracy-loving kooks do the best. They keep resurrecting already trashed theories, and then they apparently hope that nobody remembers that each of these stupid theories has already been thoroughly explained in non-conspiratorial ways.

As many CTers try to do, Jim DiEugenio also tries to maneuver and rework the Z-Film's head-shot sequence into a "CT Only" type of framework.

But what DiEugenio, specifically, does in his anti-Bugliosi review (and during his frequent appearances on "Black Op Radio") is pathetic and reprehensible, IMO.

It's actually kind of a triple-bill of absurdity and distortion on Jim's part, too. Here's the "triple-bill" I'm referring to:

1.) DiEugenio has the gall to imply that JFK's head is in the "exact position" in Z-Frame 313 as it was 1/18th of a second earlier in Z312....which is total rubbish, of course. And DiEugenio has got to know it's rubbish too, because we know he's seen the Z-Film IN MOTION many, many times in his life.

Therefore, since we know Jim's seen the film many times (and undoubtedly has viewed frames 312 and 313 in super slow-motion, like all of us have done many, many times) -- then we know that Jim doesn't have a leg to stand on when he said to the sparse "Black Op Radio" audience that JFK's head is in the "exact position" in Z313 as it was in Z312.*

* NOTE: When he said those words on BlackOp last month, he prefaced the remark by misrepresenting Vince Bugliosi's REASON for putting a picture in his book of the "high contrast" picture of Z313....with Jim, for some stupid reason, saying that Vince uses that high-contrast version of Z313 to show that the President's head is "leaning forward" at the moment of the head shot.

Of course, as anyone can easily see by reading page 486 of VB's 2007 book, "Reclaiming History" (which is, indeed, the exact page number cited by DiEugenio when Jim discusses this topic in Part 4 of his "RH" review on Jim's website), Bugliosi is certainly NOT talking about the "forward lean" or "tilt" of Kennedy's head when VB refers to the high-contrast photo of Z313.

Vince, instead, utilizes the high-contrast picture to emphasize the fact that all of the blood and brain tissue is seen to the FRONT of JFK's head, indicating (of course) the likelihood that the bullet that just caused that terrible spray of bodily fluid came from BEHIND the President.

For DiEugenio to totally misrepresent Mr. Bugliosi with regard to this important matter is, IMO, just about as disingenuous (and sneaky) as you can get.

And Jim's "exact position" remark is just flat-out dead wrong too, as we all know. And even if Jim wanted to come back with the argument that he was ONLY talking about the degree of "lean" or "tilt" of JFK's head in both Z312 and Z313, his argument wouldn't go very far either.

Because even THAT argument would be invalid, because when JFK's head moves forward between 312 and 313, the "forward lean" of his head DOES CHANGE SLIGHTLY (i.e., in Z313, Kennedy's head can certainly not be said to be in the "exact position" it was in in Z312...even from JUST a "leaning forward" standpoint).

But it was obvious to me that DiEugenio's distortions (and his misrepresentations of what Bugliosi meant by certain things relating to Z-frames 312 and 313) are part of a concerted effort on his part to try and REMOVE (or just DENY) as much of the verified Zapruder Film evidence that exists that tells a reasonable person that JFK was shot FROM BEHIND at the important moment when the bullet struck him at Z313. And numbers 2 and 3 below go toward meeting that desired goal of Jim's as well.

2.) DiEugenio's comment about how it looks like only "the front" part of JFK's head is "being impacted" at Z313 is a real "WTF?" moment.

Jim must think that an ENTRY hole for a bullet is the HUGE hole, vs. EXIT holes being the large and irregular-shaped ones.


And, again, as with Jim's distortions in #1, this #2 item is designed to rewrite the history of this murder, as James tries to impress upon people something that is just plain dumb -- i.e., that the great big hole at the right-front of JFK's head was the "impact" point for an incoming bullet fired from the front.

How stupid does Jim think his listeners are? Granted, a lot of conspiracy kooks are mighty stupid....but geez.

3.) With BlackOp host Len Osanic's help (it was Osanic who first mentioned this #3 item, with DiEugenio, right on cue it would seem, jumping in with both feet firmly in his mouth to completely agree with the incredibly wrong thing that Len just uttered), DiEugenio actually had the additional audacity to suggest that both of the Connallys (John & Nellie) WEREN'T splattered with debris from the fatal shot that struck JFK in the head.

Talk about misleading people. This one is a beaut in that regard.

Of course, as virtually all JFK researchers know (without even having to think about it and without even needing to look up any of Nellie's or JBC's testimony), both John and Nellie Connally were definitely "covered" with debris from the fatal gunshot that hit JFK's head. To quote John Connally himself:

"I could see blood and brain tissue all over the interior of the car and all over our clothes. We were both covered with brain tissue." -- JOHN B. CONNALLY; 1978 HSCA TESTIMONY

So, we can see from the above three points that James DiEugenio (like many other CTers) is practically DESPERATE to rewrite the history of this assassination.

And while he's attempting to rewrite history, Jim is obviously willing to just toss the testimony of both John Connally and Nellie Connally out the nearest window (and I don't believe for one second that DiEugenio could have possibly gone this long without hearing at least ONE of the many, many interviews [or WC/HSCA sessions] with the Connallys, where they each have stated many times that they were splattered and "covered" with JFK's brains and blood).

When I hear a CTer like Jim DiEugenio make blatantly incorrect remarks like he has done on multiple recent Black Op Radio shows, I have to ask the following question:

Since Jim is perfectly willing to totally misrepresent and mangle certain KNOWN FACTS regarding the assassination of President Kennedy, then why in the world would anyone take seriously anything else he might say about a "conspiracy" in the JFK case?

David Von Pein
December 21, 2008
February 16, 2009