(PART 1283)


Some Kennedy-Related Photos (From DVP's Collection)....

[Clicking on the pictures in this post will enlarge them]....

Lee Harvey Oswald's "Sniper's Nest" on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building in Dallas, Texas:

More Sniper's Nest pictures HERE.


The Secret Service follow-up car, sans Clint Hill on the left runningboard, is seen here speeding toward Stemmons Freeway on 11/22/63:


Speeding to the hospital:


Dozens of photos (1930—2015):



Notice how Dan Rather is not in the photo of the Queen Mary driving toward Stemmons Freeway, despite his claim that he was standing in that area and ran over the hill to see the commotion after the shooting. (Rather has also claimed to have been in other locations at the time of the shooting. A colleague said Rather was actually at the Trade Mart.)

I have often wondered what it was like for the men on the running board to hold on all the way to Parkland. JFK's limousine was going 70 mph -- "fast but safe" was the order. I have driven that route at 70 mph many times. It takes four minutes to get to Parkland at that speed. The shooting took place at 12:30, so the limo probably arrived about 12:34, and estimates of a later arrival are probably wrong. The hospital was not ready for the arrival.


But just because we can't see (or identify) Dan Rather in the two McIntire photos (including the more famous one below), that doesn't mean that he wasn't near that location west of the Triple Underpass at that time. (If he was going to lie about it afterwards, why wouldn't he have placed himself right IN the Plaza itself---i.e., east of the Underpass, where the shooting actually occurred?)

Let me ask Mr. McBride a related question....

Since I've never seen a photo or film showing Hugh Aynesworth in Dealey Plaza (or at the scene of the crime when Ruby shot Oswald at City Hall either), does that mean you think Mr. Aynesworth was telling tall tales about HIS whereabouts on those two occasions too?

And the same "WHY ISN'T HE SEEN IN ANY OF THE PHOTOS OR FILMS?" question can really be asked about Lee Harvey Oswald as well (albeit for a much shorter period of time), because we know Oswald was leaving the TSBD Building within minutes of the assassination, and yet there's not a single photo (or film) showing LHO exiting the building and heading east on Elm Street, despite a flurry of photos (and films) being taken at just exactly that point in time.


I haven't looked for Aynesworth in the photos, so I don't know if he can be seen or not. What do you think? Thanks for making these photos (and your video collection) available. There is a fascinating unpublished [manuscript] called THE RATHER NARRATIVE that goes into Rather's behavior in the case in detail. I also deal with it in my 50 REASONS...FOR 50 YEARS video...currently available on Vimeo.


I guess Donald Rumsfeld may have had something of a point when he remarked that "the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." But in Rather's case, he gave specific (conflicting) locations for his whereabouts at the time of the assassination, and there is no evidence of him being in those locations either, and though he did not admit to being at the Trade Mart, a colleague said he was there at the time. Eddie Barker was there doing the live hookup -- as I mention in my video, Rather had arranged for CBS-TV to have five complete camera crews in Dallas that day (including the only live coverage), when ABC and NBC each had the usual one. The photo of the station wagon leaving Dealey Plaza at 12:40 p.m. comports with Roger Craig's precise description of Oswald leaving in a station wagon at that time.


Huh? You suddenly decided to switch to Craig and the Rambler. ???? I don't get the connection. What's the Craig/Rambler story got to do with where Dan Rather was located? What did I miss?

Or were you responding to my post about Oswald above --- in that you are inferring that Roger Craig's story (with Lee Oswald as a passenger) is somehow the same thing as having a PHOTO or FILM of OSWALD leaving the Depository (and not just a picture of a station wagon)?



If you know of any other photos that you think would be good additions to my Kennedy Gallery, let me know.

Also --- If you ever run across some "Lost" TV or Radio coverage of JFK's assassination that you think I might not already have in my audio/video archive, please drop me a line. I haven't been able to find any "new" coverage for a little while now. In 2013, for the 50th anniversary, I was able to acquire several new items that surfaced only that year (WTIC, WHBC, and others).

I still can't help but think that there is a vast ocean of untapped assassination footage out there in many radio and TV stations' vaults somewhere. The amount of stuff that is available can really only be a drop in the bucket when compared to all those hundreds of television and radio stations around the country that were surely also recording their 11/22/63 coverage as well. It's just never been unearthed. But I'll bet it's out there in some vault or attic---someplace.


Off topic, not being photo-related, but just wanted to say that I enjoyed this one [linked below] particularly, being in good quality....

Thanks for sharing that one. And for the photo links of course.

Let's hope there is still footage out there, in shoeboxes in dusty attics, or similar, which eventually will surface. There must be some. And that there is some in tv/radio vaults, as you say, is even more certain I think. They can't just let them dust away forever. It is history.

Sidenote --- I found the CriticalPast site interesting, but if anything there is of interest, I wouldn't know. Perhaps, or perhaps not.


Thanks, Trygve.

Yes, I've been to the "Critical Past" site before. There are some good things there too. But all of their videos are watermarked with their own logo (which probably means they guard their copyright with an iron fist), so I wouldn't want to use those videos on my YouTube channel anyway. Plus, there's always that ugly "Critical Past" watermark on the screen every second you're watching it, which is kind of annoying.


JFK's SS-100-X limousine on the day it was delivered to the White House (June 15, 1961) [More here]:


It's amazing how almost entirely wrong Bill Ryan [of NBC News] was that day [11/22/63].


Which means you obviously think ALL of the other news anchors on TV and Radio were also "entirely wrong" too, correct? (Because all the networks were working basically from the same UPI and AP wire reports.)

But what amazes me is that anyone can actually believe that everybody in the news media COULD have been so "entirely wrong" about nearly everything that was reported on television and radio on 11/22/63. Such an "entirely wrong" belief, to me, indicates there's something "wrong" with a CTer's evaluation of the evidence. Much the same way the convenient "All The Evidence Has Been Faked" mindset of many conspiracy theorists sends up a big red flag for me as well.


Here are hundreds of screen captures taken from the television coverage of President Kennedy's assassination (click each network logo):


Excerpt from the January 25, 1964, issue of TV Guide Magazine:

"From the moment the first TV news bulletin cut through the sticky story line of a soap opera called "As the World Turns", at exactly 1:40 (EST) on Friday afternoon, the world of communications, if not the world, was to be a vastly different sort of place, never to be quite the same again. It was not just the sudden, senseless cutting down of a young, vigorous President that made the experience cut so deep, but the fact that no one had ever lived a national tragedy in quite these terms before. When Lincoln was assassinated by a frenzied actor at Ford's Theater in 1865, Americans had time to assimilate the tragedy. Most people in the big cities knew within 24 hours, but there were some in outlying areas for whom it took days.

In the new world of communications there was no time for any such babying of the emotions, no time to collect oneself, no time for anything except to sit transfixed before the set and try to bring into reality this monstrous, unthinkable thing. Because the word was not only instantaneous but visual, and because at no time did the television reporters know any more than the viewers did, 180,000,000 were forced to live the experience not just hour to hour, or minute to minute, but quite literally from second to second, even as the reporters themselves did. According to Nielsen statistics, a point was reached during the funeral on Monday afternoon when 41,553,000 sets were in use, believed to be an all-time high. For four days the American people were virtual prisoners of an electronic box. ..."

[Complete article linked below....]


Most of the anchors and TV reporters put out a lot of false information that day, but Bill Ryan seemed to be ahead of the curve with his reckless and repeated jumping to conclusions based on skimpy or erroneous information. I learned that day to get to a radio as fast as possible when something major happens, because the news often changes to fit the official line.

From 12:40 to 1 p.m., I was hearing on network radio that the shots came from the hill overlooking Elm Street or the area of the railroad bridge. Then by 1 p.m. the reports changed to all the shots coming from behind, from a building called the Texas School Book Depository, without any explanation being offered on what happened to the shots from the front, and my antennae went up. By the end of the day I wasn't believing the official story that was already solidifying to try, convict, and execute Oswald on television.

Over the years, the coverage of the first twenty minutes has been proven far more accurate, with witness reports, photographs, and other evidence. And the brief statements Oswald was allowed to give on TV that first night helped convince me he was innocent of killing the president. Little was said on the news about the Tippit killing, but he was accused of that and denied it as well. An FBI document I found showed that he was never even arraigned for the JFK murder, only for the Tippit murder, although he was charged with both.

Jim Leavelle told me Oswald was telling the truth at his midnight press conference when he said he had not been told by the police that he was being charged with the president's murder.

As I write in INTO THE NIGHTMARE, Leavelle told me Captain Fritz directed him to nail Oswald for the Tippit killing since they didn't have the goods on him for the JFK killing.

I asked Leavelle what he thought he had on Oswald for the Tippit murder, and he said he had witnesses, unlike in the president's assassination, but we now know the Tippit witnesses offered highly differing accounts, and some had dubious credibility, particularly their star witness, Helen Markham. And the Warren Commission denied the existence of Acquilla Clemmons, though Leavelle said he knew about her. She was threatened by the police to keep silent; she did not, and she was never seen again after her interview with Mark Lane and Emile de Antonio for the film RUSH TO JUDGMENT.

If we had known on the evening of November 22 what we know now, history would have been very different.



I agree with you that the TV reporters (and the radio reporters too), as you said, "put out a lot of false information that day" (see my "Media Errors" video below)....

....But on the whole, I've always held the opinion that the assassination media coverage on 11/22/63 was quite good and was mostly accurate (on both radio and television). Some mistakes were inevitable in a big "breaking news" story like this one, especially in the early hours just after the story broke. But most of the early errors were corrected on the air in a short amount of time.

And the very early erroneous report that was aired on all of the networks about the shooters possibly being "a man and woman who were scrambling on a walkway overlooking an underpass" is a very understandable error when we factor in what some of the witnesses were doing on the Grassy Knoll at the time the "man and woman" were being observed. The "man and woman" in that erroneous story were almost certainly the Hesters, who can be seen in this film taken by NBC cameraman Dave Wiegman, and the term "scrambling" would certainly be an accurate term for what we can see the Hesters doing in the Wiegman film, as they run for cover and duck down on the grass at the very top of the Grassy Knoll.

As for Oswald allegedly not be arraigned for JFK's murder, that's utter nonsense—and provably so—as I discuss here.

And as for the conspiracy theorists' favorite Tippit murder witness—Acquilla Clemons—CLICK HERE.

Also See....


The Dallas motorcade on November 22, 1963:

1967 photo taken from the sixth floor of the Book Depository:


11/22/63 AUDIO CLIP:


On the police radio on 11-22-63, you can still hear the Texas School Book Depository called "the Sexton Building."


The sixth floor was being refurbished by outsiders that November, which enabled access to the building by unknown people.


That's not true at all. The plywood flooring on the sixth floor was being worked on by regular TSBD employees, not by "outsiders" or "unknown people". The workers who were fixing the wooden floor up on the sixth floor on 11/22/63 were Charles Givens, Bonnie Ray Williams, Danny Arce, and Billy Lovelady—all of whom were employees of the Texas School Book Depository Company. (Williams had been transferred from the Houston Street TSBD warehouse building, where he normally worked, to the building at 411 Elm to help with the floor-laying project in late October or early November. But he was still an employee of the Depository Company when he was temporarily assigned to the Elm Street building.)

Where, Joseph, did you get the information that the floor was being "refurbished by outsiders that November"?

Also see the signed statements of 73 TSBD workers in Commission Document No. 706, which pretty much prove that there were no "strangers" seen in the TSBD Building on November 22nd (except one old man who went into the building to use a restroom on the first floor and was then seen leaving in a car immediately afterward).

I'll also refer to what Vince Bugliosi had to say about this topic in his book:

"Some of the stock boys in the Texas School Book Depository Building are laying new flooring up on the sixth floor. The schoolbook business is a little slow this late in the year, and rather than lay the boys off entirely, Bill Shelley, a Depository manager, put them to work resurfacing the upper floors, where most of the books are stored.* Half a dozen of them are at it—Bill Shelley himself, Bonnie Ray Williams, Charles Givens, Danny Arce , Billy Lovelady, and occasionally Harold Norman, when he has time to give them a hand.

The work is pretty straightforward. They have to move the heavy cartons of books from one side of the floor to the other, then back, as they lay new flooring over the old planks. It took them about three weeks to do the fifth floor, and they're just starting in on the sixth, moving as many cartons as they can from the west side of the open floor over to the east. Given the number of books they have to move, they aren't very far along. They're still working on the first section, on the westernmost portion of the sixth floor.

* The Depository had previously been occupied by a wholesale grocery company engaged in supplying restaurants and institutions, and during the time it occupied the building, the floors became oil-soaked and this oil was damaging the books that were now being stacked on the floor (CD 205, p.135)."

-- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 26 of "Reclaiming History"


In addition to the TSBD workers involved in the refurbishing work, at least two strangers, if not more, were seen on the upper floors by witnesses. They might have taken advantage of the construction work to blend in.



It looks to me like you're now attempting to backtrack (or walk back) this statement you made a short time ago:

"The sixth floor was being refurbished by outsiders that November, which enabled access to the building by unknown people." -- J. McBride

But you're now saying that two "strangers" were seen on the "upper floors" (not necessarily the SIXTH floor, which is where we know the floor-fixing project was taking place on November 22nd), and you imply that those strangers "might have taken advantage of the construction work to blend in". That, IMO, is a whole lot different from your earlier definitive "was being refurbished by outsiders" comment. Now you've gone all wishy-washy on us regarding the "strangers" who "might" have been involved in the construction work.

Plus, how did those "two strangers, if not more" manage to not be seen or noticed by any of the four or five TSBD workers (including boss William Shelley, who was up on the sixth floor multiple times on 11/22) who were laying the new plywood on the 6th floor that day? Did the "strangers" just get really lucky when nobody saw them as they attempted to "blend in"?


The following link blows up everything he [DVP] is trying to say about the sixth floor. But anyone who knows [Marrion] Baker's first day statement will know that that document itself blows up No. 706, as does [James] Worrell's testimony of seeing a man running out the back. DVP knows about both of these of course. He just tries to make like he does not.

Allan Eaglesham is a low profile researcher who just happens to do careful and important work. I just wish he would do more of it, but what he does do is quite good.

Go to this link and you will learn more truth about the JFK case than you will in all of Von Pein's web site and his unpaid for infomercials. There was no "sniper's nest".

Allan also proved that the Dallas Police rearranged the formation of the shells found there. They were originally in a diameter of about the width of a hand towel, as [Roger] Craig said they were.

And before DVP jumps on with his "everything is fake" charge, this is not forgery, it's rearranging things. Which is easy as heck and the cops do it all the time.


Oh, good Lord! What a fantasy world these conspiracy theorists reside in!

Let me guess --- CTers think the Sniper's Nest was merely a "smoker's nook" for employees who wanted to goof off in private? I've encountered multiple fringe CTers who, incredibly, do believe that very thing. They'll just disregard the bullet shells that littered the "nook", and they'll disregard the several witnesses who saw a man with a RIFLE in that very window.

"There was no sniper's nest"???? A person writing such claptrap should not even be looking into the JFK assassination at all. It's pathetic.


This is another Bugliosian ploy DVP uses: invective.

But both Allan and the HSCA showed the boxes had been moved after the fact. Just read the article, as it's illustrated with photos. Allan did a very nice job on this. BTW, the late Richard Sprague also proved this with his photo collection.


There was nobody in the window moving boxes around a few minutes after the last shot was fired at the President. It's a ridiculous theory to begin with. Why on Earth would anyone have felt any need to move boxes around right after the shooting? It's dumb.

John Mytton has created a really nice gif clip which merges the Powell and Dillard pictures together, and the merged montage indicates that no boxes were moved at all. It's all a matter of perspective. Here's Mytton's montage gif:


I encourage everyone to go to page 3 of Allan's essay and you will see how full of utter malarkey Von Pein and John Mytton really are.

There is no way in Hades that is a matter of perspective.

Someone rearranged the boxes just as someone rearranged the shells.

The sniper's nest was created after the fact.


DiEugenio said: "There is no way in Hades that is a matter of perspective."

Despite this montage which pretty much proves that no boxes were moved in the minutes just after the assassination:

We know, of course, that at some point on the afternoon of 11/22/63 the Dallas police did move some of the boxes around in Oswald's Sniper's Nest, in order to dust them for fingerprints. Detective Robert L. Studebaker of the DPD testified extensively about the boxes being moved in his Warren Commission testimony.

So it's certainly no secret that the DPD did move some boxes around before they took some of the pictures of those boxes (like Studebaker Exhibit J and Commission Exhibit No. 509). And the Dallas Police Department wasn't hiding that fact either (as the WC testimony of Studebaker certainly proves). Therefore, how can any sinister type of inference be derived from the fact that the DPD moved the boxes? I don't think it can.

Also See:
http://jfk-archives/Were The Sniper's Nest Boxes Moved?


One more "SN Boxes" thought....

"In the final analysis, this whole topic of the boxes is just another in a series of futile exercises engaged in by conspiracy theorists. It's an exercise that should be filed in the drawer marked "IT GOES NOWHERE". Because a slightly different stacking of the boxes will not (and cannot) eliminate the physical evidence against Lee Harvey Oswald in John F. Kennedy's murder. Even if the DPD had taken no pictures of the Nest at all and had thrown all the boxes away after the shooting, Oswald would still be guilty. .... Because it's not the box configuration in the Sniper's Nest that hangs Mr. Oswald --- it's all of that other stuff that [many conspiracy theorists] also think is fake. E.G., the bullets, the shells, the rifle, the prints, the fibers, and Oswald's pre- and post-assassination actions."
-- DVP; February 23, 2012

David Von Pein
May 13-18, 2018