JIM DiEUGENIO SAID:
Why, in 2,700 pages, did VB [Vincent Bugliosi] not include any of the rather sordid background on the DPD in his book? Why did he rely on compromised sources like Alexander and Bowles?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
This question of Jim's, of course, goes directly to the physical evidence in the case against Oswald. (At least I assume that is where this question most generally would end up--back to the PHYSICAL EVIDENCE that was collected and handled by the DPD, which is evidence that Jim DiEugenio thinks was ALL PLANTED OR COMPROMISED OR MANUFACTURED by the Dallas Police Department in order to frame that hapless sap named Lee Harvey Oswald.)
Well, Jim, I'm sure that Vince Bugliosi realizes that the DPD was not filled with saints and angels when it came to SOME cases they investigated. I doubt that any police agency is totally free from SOME corrupt members.
But in THIS case (particularly the Tippit murder), to believe that the Dallas Police Department was manufacturing evidence and/or hiding evidence in order to convict an INNOCENT person (Lee Oswald) is something I wouldn't believe in a million years! And I don't care HOW corrupt the DPD may or may not have been regarding OTHER cases.
Many of those DPD officers were friends of the slain policeman, but Jim DiEugenio apparently thinks that the DPD (as a whole) had the following attitude when it came to J.D. Tippit's murder:
We don't give a damn who the real killer of our slain friend is. We'll just let the real killer get away scot-free. We don't care about that. All we care about is planting as much evidence as humanly possible in order to frame this guy named Oswald for the murder of Officer Tippit.
See how utterly stupid it is to actually believe the DALLAS POLICE were framing an innocent Lee Oswald for the murder of a DALLAS POLICE OFFICER? I sure can see the stupidity of such a ridiculous belief, even if none of the Anybody-But-Oswald conspiracy theorists can see it themselves.
Also, let's face some additional reality in THIS case (the JFK case, that is):
Not ALL of the physical evidence in this case was collected (or handled) by the DPD. And this is one of the things I've pointed out to DiEugenio (and other conspiracy theorists) in the past too--and that's the fact that the physical evidence in this case was actually found at THREE separate "crime scenes" (so to speak):
1.) The Texas School Book Depository.
2.) The Presidential limousine.
3.) Parkland Memorial Hospital.
And it's actually FOUR different crime scenes when the murder of Officer J.D. Tippit is factored into the mix.
And while it's certainly true that the DPD (and Dallas County Sheriff's Department) collected a goodly amount of the physical evidence (such as all the evidence inside the TSBD and the evidence discovered at the Tippit murder scene), the DPD did NOT collect all of the evidence that proves Lee Oswald's guilt.
It was the Secret Service who initially collected Stretcher Bullet CE399 and the two large fragments of a bullet in the front seat of the limousine. The Dallas Police Department had nothing whatsoever to do with the initial handling and processing of that very important ballistics evidence (CE399, CE567, and CE569).
Plus, the FBI was deeply involved in combing the limo for evidence at the White House garage on the morning of Saturday, November 23rd....and NOT the Dallas Police Department.
What I'm driving at is this:
People like James DiEugenio want to believe that ALL of the physical evidence that points to Lee Oswald as the murderer of BOTH John Kennedy and J.D. Tippit has been tainted in some fashion and cannot be trusted. But in order for that to be true (as Jim seems to fervently believe), then we'd have to have the Secret Service and (almost assuredly) the FBI being a party to this huge task of "faking" all of the evidence in this case too.
And it would be a simultaneous LIKE-MINDEDNESS (or "meeting of the minds", if you prefer) among multiple law enforcement agencies who would have had just one goal in sight -- Framing an INNOCENT Lee Harvey Oswald for two murders.
And I ask all reasonable-minded people -- Is that truly a reasonable thing to believe regarding the wealth of evidence (found at FOUR DIFFERENT CRIME SCENES) relating to the murders of JFK and J.D. Tippit?
If believing that ALL of the evidence against Oswald has been tampered with or planted truly IS a reasonable position to endorse, then please excuse me while I go hide in the corner with the UNreasonable people of the Earth.
Allow me to also interject a great quote from Larry Sturdivan here (which is one of my all-time favorite quotes connected to the JFK assassination; and, incredibly, it WASN'T penned by Vincent T. Bugliosi; anybody need smelling salts?):
"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." -- Larry M. Sturdivan; Page 246 of "The JFK Myths" (c.2005)
JIM DiEUGENIO SAID:
Did he [Vince Bugliosi] not violate his pledge to present the critics' case as they wanted it presented? After all, this is an important element of the case against Oswald.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Quite obviously, Jim, all of the stuff you've mentioned concerning the rotten and evil Dallas Police Department was not considered by Mr. Bugliosi to be "an important element of the case against Oswald".
In short, the physical evidence really speaks for itself. And that physical evidence is telling any sensible person that Lee Harvey Oswald was guilty of killing JFK and J.D. Tippit on 11/22/63. (And also take another look at that Larry Sturdivan quote above. It fits in here nicely--yet again.)
JIM DiEUGENIO SAID:
Did you criticize him [Bugliosi] for leaving this important material out?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
No. But see my last answer.
JIM DiEUGENIO SAID:
[Jean] Davison is such a lousy researcher...
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
You're an idiot, Jimbo.
Anybody who can possibly write the above comment about Jean Davison can't be anything but a complete idiot.
Jean Davison can run circles around Jimbo AND me (combined) when it comes to researching the JFK assassination.
And, even more importantly, Jean Davison puts people like James DiEugenio to shame when it comes to REASONABLY AND RATIONALLY evaluating the evidence associated with John F. Kennedy's murder.
The above quote by DiEugenio about Ms. Davison is positively the most ludicrous and stupid DiEugenio quotation I've ever had the (dis)pleasure of reading (and vomiting over).
JIM DiEUGENIO SAID:
Davey, why don't you stop breaking the rules of this forum [The Education Forum] by insulting me and instead address the many holes I put in RH [Reclaiming History] concerning Odio?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
You'd think a CTer like DiEugenio would be patting Vincent Bugliosi on the back with respect to the Odio incident. Heck, Vince even says Oswald probably WAS at Odio's door. Instead, Jimbo wants to bash Vince some more. That's curious, IMO.
I guess the fact that VB doesn't equate "OSWALD WAS AT ODIO'S DOOR" with "IT WAS A CONSPIRACY" is the thing Jimbo is disturbed about here.
JIM DiEUGENIO SAID:
How did Oswald get from Dallas to Houston on the 25th [of September 1963]?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
It's one of those "forever unknowns", isn't it Jim?
JIM DiEUGENIO SAID:
Why did VB denounce the evidence he previously supported?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Refresh my memory on this. There's way too much Anybody-But-Oswald junk in your last 25 posts to read all in one sitting (without yakking violently).
JIM DiEUGENIO SAID:
Why did Liebeler try to seduce Odio instead of tracking down her story? And why did VB leave that out of his book?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Probably because it never happened.
JIM DiEUGENIO SAID:
Why did LHO go to the NO [New Orleans] bus station but then go back and cash his check and file his change of address?....
How did LHO get from NO to Houston if that is what he did?....
Who was doing all those activities in Austin, Dallas, and Houston on the 25th?....
Why did VB leave out the Liebeler confession to Odio about Warren?....
Unless you stop hiding behind Davison's crummy book and address these facts, we will all know who the idiot is.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
None of the above stuff that you're talking about is proof of a conspiracy in JFK's assassination. You, as usual, are latching onto some undefined, hazy, and unclear occurrences (or possible occurrences) regarding the Odio incident and then implying that these unclear things are proof that Lee Oswald couldn't have acted alone in Dallas two months later.
Jean Davison said it quite well in her "crummy" book (which is actually just about the best book on Oswald's life you'll ever run across [DiEugenio is a moron]):
"In every conspiracy book, Oswald is a piece of chaff blown about by powerful, unseen forces -- he's a dumb and compliant puppet with no volition of his own. If the man Odio saw was an impostor, how could the plotters be certain no witnesses would be able to establish Oswald's presence somewhere else that evening -- unless they ordered the unsuspecting patsy to stay out of sight? And if the real Oswald was used, how did the anti-Castro plotters get their Marxist enemy to stand at Odio's door to be introduced as a friend of the Cuban exiles? No one has come up with a plausible scenario that can answer those questions. ... The point to be stressed is this: Sylvia Odio gave testimony of obvious, even crucial importance, and no one could explain what it meant." -- Jean Davison; Pages 193-195 of "Oswald's Game"
David Von Pein
August 23, 2010
August 23, 2010
