(PART 524)


I believe that Lee Oswald shot neither JFK or Tippit. Can I prove it? Of course not. Just as the Warren Commission failed to prove LHO committed the murders.


That's kinda what I figured.

In other words -- Mr. Jeff Shaw will totally ignore the dozens of pieces of evidence that prove Oswald to be guilty of BOTH 11/22 murders.

Jeff must believe that all of those DOZENS of pieces of evidence are "faked", "forged", "planted", and/or "manufactured". Right, Jeff?

BTW, is there any particular reason that the DPD wanted to paint poor Oswald as the killer of their fellow officer (Tippit), all the while the DPD doesn't give a damn about letting the real killer of their fellow officer go scot-free?

Or was it only the "Feds" who forged all the evidence against Saint Oswald for Tippit's murder (and not the Dallas Police)?

How about the 13 witnesses who positively IDed LHO as either Tippit's killer or the only man with a gun fleeing the scene? Were all 13 of them "coerced" into picking out an INNOCENT man as the killer?

What would it take to get YOU, Jeff, to positively identify a person in a police line-up, even though you KNOW darn well that the man you just IDed was innocent?

Would ANY amount of coercion and strong-arming be enough to get you to do such a vile thing, Jeff?

Now, multiply that vile deed by THIRTEEN different witnesses who IDed LHO.

Sounds pretty silly to believe that 13 people would do that, doesn't it?

At the very MOST, those witnesses would have simply been wishy-washy and said "I can't say for sure if the killer is in that line-up"....instead of going whole-hog and positively IDing an INNOCENT man as the killer or the man fleeing the scene.

See how stupid the CT version of events sounds when it's put into print? I sure do.


The line-ups were really fair, [weren't] they (he says sarcastically)[?]


Great excuse there, David Williams.

So, what you're really implying is this:

Since the line-ups weren't exactly "fair" to poor Oswald, it must mean that all of the many witnesses who positively IDed Mr. Oswald as the bad guy did so because Oswald was the one person in the line-ups who "stood out" (so to speak).

I've got two words that easily knock down that type of silly argument (which most certainly is the type of argument you are implying):

That's nuts.


That's nuts, you mean like WC star witness to [the] Tippet [sic] killing, Helen Markham, who [Warren Commission counsel member Joseph] Ball called "an utter screwball"[?]


Are you therefore implying that Mrs. Helen Markham would have been willing to positively I.D. an INNOCENT man (Lee Oswald) as the murderer of J.D. Tippit?

If so, Mrs. Markham was not only a "screwball", she was a criminal.

Now, what about the other dozen witnesses? Are they all "screwballs" too.

And, IMO, Johnny Brewer should really also be included amongst the large batch of "Tippit witnesses". Brewer is never included in that collection of "Tippit" witnesses, because he was located several blocks from the actual Tippit murder scene.

But what Brewer saw (just a few blocks from where Tippit was killed and only about 20 minutes after the murder) definitely links him in with the general batch of "Tippit" witnesses, in my opinion.

And what Brewer saw Oswald doing is extremely incriminating behavior on Oswald's part -- i.e., lurking in Brewer's shoe-shop doorway while police cars scream by with sirens blazing behind him, as he deliberately attempts to ignore/dodge the police cars.

Plus: Brewer said that Oswald looked "funny" and "scared" and his hair was mussed up. And then Brewer gives what amounts to a "positive identification" of the suspect (Oswald) inside the Texas Theater when he (Brewer) steps up on the stage and points out Oswald to the police.

Then, a minute or two later, the man Brewer pointed out pulls a gun and tries to use it on more cops in the theater. Plus, LHO exclaims one of two things -- "It's all over now" and/or "This is it".

Both statements are very incriminating unto themselves. Can you imagine a totally INNOCENT person uttering either of those things as the cops try to grab him?

Now, what was Jeff saying about Oswald being innocent of shooting policeman J.D. Tippit on Tenth Street?

Heavens to Murgatroyd, Oswald just BEING IN THE AREA OF TIPPIT'S MURDER BRANDISHING A PISTOL is extremely incriminating circumstantial evidence of LHO's guilt.

How can any sensible person possibly deny the truth that resides within my last sentence above?

(And I haven't even mentioned any of the ballistics evidence yet.)


Oswald was being arrested for killing Tippet [sic; ~sigh~], yet Brewer heard a policeman shout "kill the President will you".


A perfectly natural assumption on the DPD's part (to link LHO to JFK's murder at that particular time, considering the fact that this same man had just killed a bluecoat).

And anyway...so what? Even if some cop did say "Kill the President, will ya?!" -- who cares? He was right!

And if there had been a poll taken of the many witnesses who were outside the theater when Oswald was arrested, I'd bet that almost all of them would have been of the opinion (at that exact point in time at approximately 1:55 PM CST on 11/22/63) that the man who was being dragged out of the theater was very likely the same man who killed the President less than ninety minutes earlier (especially if those people outside the theater had been privy to the fact that a policeman had just been killed nearby also, which most of those people probably were not aware of at that time, with Brewer being an exception; we know he heard that news on his radio at work).


Mr. Von Pein, [Lee Harvey Oswald] was a human being and an American citizen deserving of a swift and fair trial. What he received was swift execution at the hands of a conspirator.

To you, the conpirators and the government agents who participated in the cover-up, he was nothing more than a pawn relegated to the trash heap for political expediency. Your callous disregard for justice is exceeded only by your willful ignoring of common sense and decency.


Here, Jeff. You can borrow Mr. Benny's violin. Your last tearful (and ridiculous beyond all belief) speech needs some stringed music behind it:

In summary -- Lee Oswald was a double-murderer....and he was a double-murderer who tried to kill a total of FOUR people in the calendar year of 1963, with Officer McDonald being #4.

So forgive me for not bowing at the waist at the sight of Sweet Lee Harvey.


I'm of the opinion that had the man picked up as the alleged killer of JFK and Tippit been allowed to live to see a trial, he probably would have been convicted. However, over the ensuing years, as the truth began to trickle out, that conviction would have been overturned.


You know David, your "taunts" here are like a manager who would send his player to the plate without a bat and then make fun of his measly batting average. It's much the same way in this debate; much of the evidence (our bats, if you will) were taken away (altered, destroyed) from the critics and now you ask why we can't hit (prove conspiracy).

And despite all that, you Warren Commission apologists are still struggling to keep the ever-eroding foundation of your theory intact.


It boils down to this immutable reality, Mr. Shaw ---

You and all the other "Oswald Was Really Innocent And Was Framed" conspiracy theorists have no choice but to believe in an extraordinary thing (since every bit of the evidence leads in one direction only--toward the guilt of Lee Harvey Oswald), and that extraordinary belief is this one --- you have to believe that ALL of the "hard evidence" (i.e., the physical evidence) in the JFK and J.D. Tippit murder cases was faked or fabricated or manufactured in order for your "Oswald Was Really Innocent And Was Framed" theory to have any hope of being accurate.

I'm going to defer now to ballistics expert Larry Sturdivan, who wrote a terrific book on the JFK assassination that came out in 2005, called "The JFK Myths: A Scientific Investigation Of The Kennedy Assassination". Sturdivan wrote something in that book that just oozes common sense regarding the often bandied-about subject of "fake and planted evidence" with respect to President Kennedy's murder. I offer up Larry's sage observations now:

"While one of the pieces of physical evidence could conceivably have been faked by an expert, there is no possibility that an expert, or team of super-experts, could have fabricated the perfectly coordinated whole.

This brings to mind the recurrent theme in most conspiracy books. All the officials alternate between the role of "Keystone Kops," with the inability to recognize the implications of the most elementary evidence, and "Evil Geniuses," with superhuman abilities to fake physical evidence that is in complete agreement with all the other faked evidence. It is as near a certainty as anything involved in this case that, individually or collectively, they were neither.

All of them--Secret Service, FBI, police, postal employees, Warren Commissioners, laboratory workers, and others involved in the investigation--were ordinary human beings. Like the rest of us, they were capable of making mistakes but, within their areas of expertise, they certainly possessed far more skill and experience than their critics."
-- Larry M. Sturdivan; Page 246 of "The JFK Myths" (c.2005)

David Von Pein
May 11, 2009