(PART 948)


DVP, you don't really believe that anyone has authenticated the back yard fake photos, do you?


Of course I do. The HSCA did a great amount of work on the photos and they found "no evidence of fakery in any of the backyard picture materials".

Go to HSCA Volume 6 and learn a few things, Ken.


They didn't get the heads aligned correctly and they didn't get the shadows lined up correctly.


Watch the video below and then come back here and tell me that the shadows are all messed up....


Even a complete novice could tell those photos are fake within a couple minutes of looking. But you're telling us that you buy it hook line and sinker. You can tell, without any doubt whatsoever, but for some reason you can't see any differences in that rifle and the TSBD rifle?


That's why the HSCA hired a panel of several "experts" in the field of photography. They were hired to examine the backyard pictures in order to determine whether they were fake or not. And they did make a determination --- "The panel detects no evidence of fakery in any of the backyard picture materials."

You just don't like that conclusion, Ken. So, therefore, you have decided that YOU are a much better photo expert and analyst than the 20 members of the House Select Committee's Photographic Panel.

Pardon me if I go with the true experts in this field, however.


We know that Marina only said that she took a photo after they told her she was booked on a flight to Russia, but if she remembered taking the photos, they could cancel her travel plans.


More pure bunk from Kenneth Drew's keyboard.

You really don't have a clue about the actual evidence in this case, do you, Ken? (Either that, or you have decided on your own to just totally dismiss ALL of the evidence as fake and phony. Right?)

Anyway, you should know that it was proven that Oswald's camera (and ONLY that camera) could have taken one of the backyard pictures (the one in which the negative still exists). Therefore, we know that LHO's own Imperial-Reflex camera took one of those pictures. Do you think the plotters stole Oswald's camera too? Or do you think the Warren Commission and the FBI lied through their collective teeth (yet again) when they said that Oswald's camera was the only camera on Earth that could have captured one of those backyard images?

A good hunk of advice for you, Ken, IMO, is this....

Stop the myths. And stop pretending every single piece of evidence pointing to Oswald is counterfeit.

That's good advice for any CTer, in fact. Too bad more of them don't take it.


There is no proof JFK was shot with a rifle, there is no proof of what weapon was fired at him, there is not one piece of evidence linking any human to having fired at him, and there is not one piece of evidence that any shots have ever been fired from the sniper's nest.

To sum it all up, your total is Zero.


Good gosh Almighty, you really do reside in Fantasy Land, don't you?

Why not just pretend JFK wasn't killed at all?


Did I say JFK wasn't shot? I said "there is no proof he was shot with a rifle." Well, can you, or anyone, prove that? No.

I said there is no proof of what type of weapon was fired at him? Well, is there?


Yeah, right, Ken.

Kennedy must have been shot with a bow and arrow instead of a rifle --- even though there were bullet fragments from a RIFLE found right there in the car. And those were fragments from not just any ol' rifle. They were from the C2766 rifle. But that little fact means zilch to a conspiracy hobbyist and fantasist like you. Perhaps you think those bullet fragments were already there in the limousine BEFORE the car passed the Depository on November 22, eh?

Your posts are getting more ridiculous with each passing hour.

Time for a new hobby, Ken. Maybe croquet. Or bird watching. Because you're really lousy at this "JFK" thing.


There is not any evidence of any shot ever having been fired from the sniper's nest.


Yeah, all those witnesses who saw a gun in the sixth-floor window (Brennan, Couch, Euins, Jackson, and Worrell) must have all been imagining it. They must have really seen a bow & arrow instead.

And those three spent bullet shells in the Sniper's Nest must have been figments of Luke Mooney's imagination when he found the Nest at 1:12 PM on November 22. Right, Ken?

And Williams, Jarman, and Norman must have been dreaming when they heard the shots coming from over their heads. And Norman was also dreaming when he heard three shells hit the plywood floor directly above him. Must have been nails or screws instead, just as Gerry Spence laughably suggested to Harold Norman when he had Norman on the witness stand in 1986. Right, Kenny?

During his cross-examination of Harold Norman, Spence was actually suggesting to the jury that perhaps--just perhaps--the jury should consider the possibility that the metal objects Norman heard hitting the floor on 11/22/63---at the exact same time JFK was being shot with rifle bullets from the Depository---were not bullet shell casings at all....but were, instead, possibly screws or nails striking the floor.

In other words, somebody just happened to be dropping some screws or nails on the floor directly above Norman at the same time somebody was ALSO shooting at JFK with a gun in the same location on the sixth floor.

If I had been on that jury in London in '86, I doubt I could have kept from busting a gut with laughter when Spence threw that one up for the jury's consideration. But, incredibly, Gerry threw it up there just the same.


The Three Headshot Scenario [LINK]



Golly, even if someone shot from 6th floor TSBD, no proof any hit POTUS. No proof LHO did any shooting.

You know, if only you could have place[d] LHO in the Dal-Tex building.


Good gravy! Does anybody in this place (except me) ever say anything that isn't covered with a thick layer of myth and misinformation? It's unbelievable---even for a mostly "CT" forum.

If I were Kathy Becket or James Gordon, I'd be embarrassed by the provably wrong nonsense that somehow passes for intellectual discourse at this forum.

A bullet hole in the windshield (that got there BY THE DESIGN of the assassination plan)? (Too hilarious for words.)

Ken Drew thinks there's no evidence at all that JFK was shot with "a rifle".

Ken also thinks there's no evidence whatsoever of any shots coming from the Sniper's Nest.

Multiple Oswalds running around? And a "Frankenstein Oswald"?

All of the above are things that are downright laughable.

Thank goodness somebody named DVP (that's me) is here to provide at least some semblance of sanity to these absurd forum proceedings once in a while, huh?


David - you remain the only person posting on this forum who has that "thick layer of myth and misinformation" you speak of....

Continually referring to outdated and debunked government investigations and conclusions as if they are the tablets from Sinai continually makes you sound like a grazing sheep willing to be happily led to slaughter.

I applaud your persistence though... for someone to remain as wrong about everything as you are and keep going back to the well as if the water wasn't poisoned is, well, the role of the WCR/HSCA defender.

The real problem is that discussing the case with you is akin to having a conversation with a parrot - you only have one channel and you present it as if you haven't given the topics a single thought since it was put on paper in 1964.


You're funny, David. Only in the world of JFK CTers could someone consider the huge pile of evidence against Oswald as being "outdated and debunked". I wonder how the facts and the physical evidence suddenly become "outdated". And none of that evidence has been "debunked", despite the CTer efforts to capsize the LN ship.

Nothing has come along to supplant the conclusions reached by the Dallas Police on 11/22/63 and by the Warren Commission in 1964. Certainly nothing you CTers believe happened can replace the hard evidence put forth by the DPD and the WC. That's not even a close call. You don't have a single piece of physical evidence to back up your claim of conspiracy. Not one. And you never did. And you never will. Because no such evidence exists. Nor did it ever exist.

To show just how pathetic and miserable the case for conspiracy is at The Education Forum, Ken Drew is running around trying to pretend that just maybe JFK was killed by a pistol shot--or a handgun of some type. Even with CE567/569 staring him in the face (assuming he even knows what those are). The case for "denying the evidence" doesn't get much stronger than that.

In short -- LNers possess all the physical evidence. CTers have Prayer Man, Umbrella Man, and their overactive imaginations.

That's the way it's always been and always will be. Because Oswald killed Kennedy and Tippit. And LNers don't even need the Warren Commission to prove Oswald's guilt. The DPD already did that on Day 1.


I know nothing about guns, but I assume the empty shells could possibly be matched to the bullets that killed Tippit. If so, the only reason I can think of for emptying the shells from the gun would be so they wouldn't be found in his gun if he was captured. But unless the shooting was planned, would such a thing really occur to someone in a moment of flight? I guess it might if he was used to shooting a lot of people.


How about this reason? ....

Lee Oswald needed to dump the shells from his revolver so that he could then re-load the gun with more unfired bullets in case he needs to shoot more cops later on.

Seems reasonable to me.

And, of course, this topic about Oswald dumping the shells on the ground (manually!) totally defeats another common conspiracy argument---the one about Officer Tippit being shot with an automatic weapon.

If Tippit was killed with an automatic, can somebody explain to me WHY the empty shells were found up near the corner of 10th & Patton? And two of the shells were actually found by the Davis girls in their SIDE YARD--around the corner! (See Page 266 of Dale Myers' "With Malice".)

Which means that if a gunman had shot Tippit at the place where those shells were found, he would have been shooting right through the Davises' apartment house.

Plus, there is no witness who said the gunman was firing at Tippit from right AT the corner of Tenth & Patton. The gunman was located next to Tippit's police car up the street. So if the gunman had used an automatic, the shells would have been found right there next to the patrol car, not way up the street at the corner.

The only possible way for the conspiracy theorists to have a prayer at being right when it comes to their argument about an automatic gun being used in the Tippit shooting is for those CTers to totally disregard the uniform testimony of multiple witnesses (Barbara Davis, Virginia Davis, and Domingo Benavides), who all said they saw--with their own eyes--the gunman physically dumping bullet shells from the gun just after the shooting.

And all three of those witnesses positively identified the gunman as Lee Harvey Oswald. The two Davis girls IDed Oswald right away, on the weekend of the assassination. Benavides later (in 1967) positively IDed the gunman he saw dumping shells in the bushes as Oswald. So if CTers want to toss aside Benavides' IDing of LHO, that's fine. But they've still got Davis and Davis to try and discredit.


Seriously, Dave, both brother and sister [Buell Wesley Frazier and Linnie Mae Randle] make separate and independent estimations of the length of the bag, both are mistaken and, incredibly, both estimate the length to be 24-27" inches?


Linnie Mae Randle wasn't always saying the package was 24-27 inches long. On the day of the assassination, in fact, Linnie Mae told FBI agent James Bookhout that the length of Oswald's package was "approximately 3 feet".

And for David Wolper's "Four Days In November" film crew in 1964, she said the package was "approximately 2-and-a-half feet long" [see the video below].

Now, yes, it's true that both of those longer estimates supplied by Mrs. Randle are still wrong, because the package was, in reality, 38 inches long. But I don't expect every witness to nail things right on the money. Why would ANYBODY expect such pinpoint accuracy?

The fact remains, however, that both Frazier and Randle observed Lee Oswald with a large-ish (long-ish) brown bag on the day of the assassination.....and, subsequently, a long-ish EMPTY brown bag (with LHO's prints on it) turned up in the same place where a gunman fired shots at JFK.

Now, shouldn't those things make even the most stubborn "Anybody But Oswald" CTer stop and pause for a moment or two? And if not....why the heck not?


Time Out for a Fact Break!

Sorry to interrupt all of the fantasy talk going on, but.....

There was no hole in the windshield.


Tell us again DVP why the limo was flown to Detroit and the windshield replaced.


It wasn't. That's merely Unproven Conspiracy Myth #4,106.

But I get a big kick out of the theory that has a group of assassins planning IN ADVANCE for a shot through the windshield. That's funnier than all these Jack Benny shows combined.

JFK is riding in an OPEN car. His whole upper body and head are exposed to the assassins. So what do these brilliant plotters want to do? They want to arrange a shooting that REQUIRES them to shoot through the windshield glass!

What's not to love about such idiotic assassination planning?


Or do you mean there was no hole in the windshield before the first shot was fired?


There was no hole in the windshield at ANY time---period. Only this crack. No hole. Just like Robert Frazier said in his testimony. (Another rotten liar, Ken?)



If there was a conspiracy to kill JFK (that's just an assumption I ask you to make for discussion purposes), do you believe the conspirators would be sophisticated individuals?

I know you don't believe in a conspiracy. That's fine by me. I'm just asking your opinion based on a given assumption.


In such a situation, I would lean toward the conspirators having at least a fairly decent amount of "sophistication".

And if that had been the case, I certainly cannot envision (for even a moment) a group of plotters planning the assassination the way most Internet CTers think it was planned (and the way Oliver Stone thinks it was planned too) --- i.e., a plot that requires three gunmen to fire up to six shots at JFK while also attempting to frame a single patsy named Oswald in the TSBD. That type of pre-planning isn't something any sane plotter would have considered. It's suicide. Not to mention, just plain dumb (as well as wholly unnecessary overkill).


We all know that there is absolutely no evidence of any shot having been fired from the sniper's nest.


This is called "TOTAL DENIAL", folks. There simply is no other way to describe it.

Kenneth HAS to know (or he SHOULD know) about all of the various SEPARATE pieces of evidence AND witness testimony that all indicate someone WAS firing rifle bullets at President Kennedy from the southeast corner window on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building located at 411 Elm Street in Dallas, Texas, USA, on Friday, November 22nd, 1963 AD. Kenny HAS to know that.

And yet we're treated to this brilliant and Oscar-winning quote from Louisiana's own Kenneth Drew....

"We all know that there is absolutely no evidence of any shot having been fired from the sniper's nest."

After reading such claptrap, about the only thing a sensible person can do is just roll their eyes, smile a little half-smile, and then walk away in complete bewilderment by what they have just heard.

That's what I'm going to do now ....


We have no image that shows the scalp resting down the back of the head. Dr. McClelland says that is why you do not see the hole in the back of the head. Right or wrong, the point is we do not have access to that image. So to say that the Autopsy images do not corroborate the Parkland doctors is not correct. Some of the images do not support them - but we cannot say that all the images do not support them.



We KNOW that McClelland's crazy "scalped pulled up over the wound in the BOH" theory is not accurate, because if it were accurate, then this X-ray pictured below would show a big hole in the back of the head---and it shows no such thing. This X-ray is the #1 pictorial item that proves there was no massive hole in the rear of JFK's head. There is NO MISSING BONE at the back of the head. And McClelland (and Company) insist that the BACK of Kennedy's head was blown out....


Perhaps you should concentrate on improving your reasoning skills.


And by improving my "reasoning skills", you mean I should accept the notion that the JFK X-ray is nothing but a lie and a sham. Right, Glenn? Even though I also know what is written on page 41 of HSCA Volume 7?....

"The evidence indicates that the autopsy photographs and X-rays were taken of President Kennedy at the time of his autopsy and that they had not been altered in any manner."

Thanks, Glenn. But no thanks. I'll stick with my current batch of reasoning skills. Lest I end up in the "Everything's Fake" arena.


You do that. And keep relying on [the] HSCA while you're at it. That'll getcha far.


And you keep relying on Doug Horne, David Lifton, David Mantik, and Mark Lane. They'll lead you to the promised land, no doubt.

David Von Pein
June 1-2, 2015
June 3, 2015
June 5, 2015
June 6, 2015
June 7, 2015
June 8, 2015