(PART 984)


Ruth Paine IDs March 20 as the day Oswald ordered the rifle.

Except the order was sent March 12th.

Klein's deposit is March 13, and only on the Order Blank do we see the date March 20, 1963.

We have no idea what day the rifle was supposedly picked up and transported home.

Does anyone have any proof that the date MARCH 20, 1963 was broadcast related to the rifle purchase date? I can't imagine them broadcasting THAT date, this given the timeline and who had what info.

Only the FBI had access to that item of evidence until later in the afternoon on the 23rd when the SS arrives at Klein's.

I will continue looking, yet some of you are very intuned with what was broadcast - if you could help out, I think we can prove here that Ruth knows something on the 23rd that no one could know...

But I'm not sure.


The date "March 20th" was definitely announced on television on Saturday, 11/23/63. It was announced to the press by Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry during one of his many hallway interviews with reporters on November 23 [at 27:55 in the video below]....

And the March 20 date was also mentioned by Frank Reynolds on WBKB-TV in Chicago on the evening of November 23rd....

Plus, here's a third news report with the March 20 date being revealed. This one was broadcast by KLIF-Radio in Dallas shortly after 7:00 PM (CST) on November 23, 1963....


Thanks David. I knew if anyone had that info, it would be you.

Maybe you can help explain something then...

The FBI and SS both knew the order date was the 12th and that Klein's stamped the 13th at the top of the order blank.

March 20th is when they shipped the rifle. Was this just Curry's generality or do you think he was told the 20th by the FBI/SS?


I think that is an extremely minor and peripheral point. When the FBI examined the Klein's internal order blank for the rifle---Waldman Exhibit No. 7---they undoubtedly noticed the written-in date of "3/20/63" on the form, and they might have taken no notice at all of the smaller stamped date of "Mar-13-63" at the top of the order blank. Or perhaps the FBI just didn't know what the March 13th date really signified. So they just decided to go with the March 20 date as the "Order Date", even though that was really the "Shipping Date".

But I can't see that it makes much difference one way or the other regarding the dates. The most significant thing that was being revealed to the press and to the world on 11/23/63 was that the FBI was able to positively tie Lee Harvey Oswald to the ownership of the weapon that was used to kill President Kennedy, by way of the handwriting on the "order letter", as Chief Curry called it (CE773).


Thanks again for the assist - if nothing else you have one of the best collections of video and ability to recall what's on them around.

Now if I could only appeal to you to use them for good instead of evil. :-)


You've got things backwards, David. You're the one on the "dark side". Not me. :)

And I have, for years, been using my video and audio archive for "good instead of evil". The original first-day and second-day TV and radio broadcasts can be very useful in debunking any number of conspiracy myths. Such as the persistent myth that still exists in some quarters even today about how Jack Ruby must have personally been acquainted with Lee Harvey Oswald due to the fact that Ruby was one of the people who shouted out the name "Fair Play For Cuba" during Henry Wade's late-night press conference at City Hall on the night of November 22nd. (The conspiracy theorists, of course, completely ignore the fact that one or two OTHER people, besides just Ruby, shouted out the "Fair Play For Cuba" name at the exact same time Ruby did. But I don't hear the CTers accusing those OTHER people of knowing Oswald prior to the assassination. Go figure.)

Anyway, the early live TV reports can come in handy when various unwarranted allegations surface, such as the aforementioned "How Could Ruby Have Known About The FPCC?" conspiracy theory, which I debunk here.

I've been searching my video files trying to unearth the "Smoking Gun" news broadcast in which a witness goes on live television a few hours after the assassination and boldly declares, "I saw Jimmy Files firing a Fireball pistol at the President from behind the fence atop the Grassy Knoll!"

But, unfortunately, I haven't been able to locate that broadcast as yet.


Sorry, but I am posting a link to an FBI report page. It contains details counter to [David Josephs'] analysis, so I can presume it is fake, fabricated, unreliable?

The search results yielded on my first attempt, prompted by reading the opening post of this thread, displayed a link to a Weisberg file that included this:

http://maryferrell.org/Commission Document 735

(Update: Now, I see you've posted the same elsewhere and Von Paine [sic] has already shared the details displayed [above] with you.)


David Von Pein had the info and the video and the spot it was broadcast - wanted to say thanks to him for that.

We argue a bit, he and I, yet he still has the class to help me out... albeit just to prove me wrong...


[Quoting DVP]: "I think that is an extremely minor and peripheral point."

LOL, oh really Davey? Who cares when the rifle was ordered? Who cares who picked it up. Who cares how Oswald sent the order in.

Don't go near the mysteries of Ruth Paine's calendar.


Once again, Jim DiEugenio sees "mysteries" and sinister activity and evil wickedness everywhere he looks --- even in the ordinary and innocuous calendar owned by Mrs. Ruth Paine [Commission Exhibit 401].

Jimmy and I thrashed this out a year or two ago. Here are some excerpts highlighting Jim's ravenous appetite for believing in absurd things that never happened....

[DVP Quotes On:]

"Does Jimbo think "Ruthy" was leaving a little bread crumb of conspiratorial proof for future researchers to find, so that those researchers can scream these words with delight -- "Aha! I told you Ruth Paine was a liar!"?

Can anyone (even conspiracy mongers like Jim D.) REALLY believe Ruth would do something so utterly stupid?

Evidently Jimbo CAN believe that Mrs. Paine would be so foolish -- because it's obvious that DiEugenio DOES believe that Ruth Paine wrote the words "LHO purchase of rifle" on her calendar BEFORE the assassination ever took place.

Which, therefore, must also mean that DiEugenio believes that Ruth was privy to the "March 20th" date of Oswald's rifle purchase PRIOR to the time when Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry made that date of 3/20/63 known to the public on national television on November 23, 1963.

So, Jimbo, tell us how Ruth became aware of that "March 20" information prior to 11/23/63? Was she in cahoots with Klein's Sporting Goods too? Or did the evil FBI furnish her with that exact date? Or could it be that it was Ruth Paine HERSELF who faked and manufactured Waldman Exhibit No. 7? Maybe it was Ruth herself who wrote "3/20/63" on that Klein's document. Is that how she knew the date prior to November 23rd, Jimbo?

But, then too, James DiEugenio actually thinks Lee Harvey Oswald had NO LARGE PAPER BAG WITH HIM AT ALL when he entered Buell Wesley Frazier's car on November 22nd. So, given such absurd notions, it should be fairly obvious that this previous statement of mine concerning Jimmy's conspiratorial beliefs in the JFK case is 100% accurate:

"No theory is too outrageous or preposterous for Mr. DiEugenio's gullible palate." -- DVP; January 4, 2013


I'll tell you one piece of physical evidence that points AWAY from the direction of Ruth's involvement in a conspiracy plot: And that's the entry that Ruth made on her March 1963 calendar (talked about earlier), where she wrote the words "LHO purchase of rifle".

In a situation where Ruth Paine would surely have every reason to believe she would be thoroughly questioned by the authorities (or at Oswald's trial, had he lived to see one), can you think of a single reasonable explanation for why Mrs. Paine, if she had been a conspirator trying to frame Oswald in the weeks and months prior to November 22, would have wanted to write that "purchase of rifle" entry on her calendar at a time (October 23, not November 23) when she has stated she had no idea that Oswald even owned a rifle? (And it's fairly obvious that DiEugenio DOES think Ruth wrote those words PRIOR to November 22; otherwise, there would be no need for him to bring up that particular item at all.)

Plus: Via such a pre-11/22 theory, WHERE did Ruth get the information about the rifle purchase in the first place? How could she have possibly known--PRIOR to 11/22--that Lee Oswald had bought a rifle on March 20th? (Which, of course, was merely the Klein's shipping date for the rifle; it wasn't the actual "purchase" date, nor was it the date he actually took possession of the rifle, which also makes it pretty clear WHEN Ruth heard about that March 20 date. She heard about it when Jesse Curry mentioned that exact date on live TV on 11/23/63.)

That "purchase of rifle" thing is just one small example of how CTers will twist the evidence in this case to suit their needs. In this instance, DiEugenio labels the calendar entry as being "the most bizarre point of all" when it comes to the topic of Ruth Paine. But he will completely disregard Ruth's own testimony about that calendar entry.

In other words, Jimbo's eager to disbelieve ANYTHING uttered by Mrs. Ruth Paine. Even though, as mentioned, placing such an entry on her calendar PRIOR to the assassination really doesn't make much sense either. In fact, it would have been utterly stupid for Mrs. Paine to have done that, because it, in effect, would expose a part of the plot -- i.e., her pre-November knowledge about a specific date--March 20th--which was not generally revealed to the public until November 23rd."
-- DVP; circa 2013—2014

More here ----> DVP-vs-DiEugenio-Part-87/Ruth Paine's Calendar


Someone called Curry to tell him this date. Who, when and why did they get it wrong? Or did Curry?


Why do you insist upon nitpicking the Klein's dates to death?

When looking at the dates that were available to the FBI on 11/23/63 via the Klein's microfilm records, and given a choice of which date to choose for a press release to Chief Curry and to the world (if I had to pick only ONE date, that is) -- I think I, too, might very well have told America (and Jesse Curry) that the rifle transaction had taken place on March 20, 1963. Because from the available information supplied by Klein's Sporting Goods on November 23rd, the March 20 date is the date that confirms that the sale of the rifle to Oswald/Hidell had been completed (i.e., shipped by Klein's to Oswald/Hidell). So what's wrong with using the shipping date in the press releases?

Yes, Chief Curry told reporters that "This purchase was made on March 20th", which technically is not quite 100% accurate, since Oswald had actually dropped his order form for the rifle in the mailbox on March 12th, but we're really only talking about a very tiny difference in terms here -- with the "ordering" of the gun by Oswald occurring on March 12th, and the "shipping" of the gun taking place on March 20th.

But why on Earth would anyone, even a conspiracy theorist, make a big deal out of this "March 12 vs. March 20" date thing? You think that by saying the rifle was "purchased" on March 20, this somehow means the rifle transaction between Oswald and Klein's is all shot to hell -- even though that exact date (March 20) is on the Klein's internal order blank?

This entire argument about the March 20 date is just another example of a totally frivolous argument being made by CTers in a feeble attempt to cast doubt (somehow) on a piece of evidence connected to JFK's assassination. And this particular frivolous argument concerning the March 20 date is even more useless and nonsensical than most other arguments put forth by CTers. (And that's really saying something.)


The conversation has to change.... CTs don't need to prove his innocence and shouldn't try. LNers need to prove guilt.

Anything else is tap dancing around the issues and denying the core fundementals of the law - innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around.


This is the point that is so frequently and conveniently forgotten, it seems. The zealots have forgotten that THEY are the ones who have leveled the charge and are therefore obligated to provide the proof.

Instead, they continually berate the populace and demand that his innocence be proven when he is, in fact and in spirit, already and STILL innocent. This basic practice has been in place since the beginning of the written language.

For a reason.



The only way a person can believe in Lee Harvey Oswald's "innocence" is for that person to just completely ignore (or misrepresent) the dozens of pieces of evidence (and Oswald's own actions) which point unwaveringly to Oswald's guilt in the two murders he was officially charged with in November of 1963.

Do you, Glenn, wish to ignore all of that evidence? And if so---why?


As predicted, your overuse of inconsequential adjectives and adverbs weakens your argument even more than its clear lack of any factual basis.


Great response there, Glenn. Your useless reply has most certainly convinced me that all the evidence against Oswald was faked.

David Von Pein
July 28-29, 2015