DEREK THIBEAULT SAID:
On the Fair Play for JFK site on FB [Facebook], a person asked if us CT'ers all believe Oswald is a patsy (which not all CT'ers do) then how do we explain Oswald going to the Paine's house on Thursday instead of his norm. To set him up they would have to make sure he goes home Thursday. So I am curious how we would explain that.
I could think of some possible reasons, but I don't have any evidence. There are a lot smarter people here that could help me to figure this inconsistency out. I don't buy the curtain rods story. I do think [Buell Wesley] Frazier is untrustworthy in a lot of his story along with his sister.
So how do we get Oswald home so we can get him "bringing his rifle to work"?
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
Because he had an argument with Marina and wanted to straighten it out with her.
That is in the WCR.
DEREK THIBEAULT SAID:
So it just happened to be a random reason. So, say he just goes back to his apartment instead. They still set him up but they don't have him bringing the rifle to work. Was that just lucky added evidence that he went there? Does Marina force him there? That's pretty lucky for the conspirators that he had an argument with her and had to go back there.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Indeed, Derek. It's refreshing to see this kind of thinking on this forum. It's very rare. You're one of the very few here who actually thinks in a reasonable way regarding Oswald's out-of-the-ordinary behavior on Nov. 21 and 22.
Here's what I said to a CTer a few years ago....
"Don't you think it would be wise to evaluate Oswald's odd behavior on November 21 and 22 in connection with the physical evidence in the case, which all screams "Oswald"? Or would you prefer to isolate everything in a bubble and never be forced to assess Oswald's actions and movements in conjunction with all that physical evidence that came out of a gun owned by Lee Oswald? In my opinion, it's a package deal that fits together perfectly --- Oswald's actions + the physical evidence = Oswald's undeniable guilt in two murders in Dallas, Texas, on 11/22/63." -- DVP; June 2015
More HERE.
DEREK THIBEAULT SAID:
I am a CT'er, but we can still believe Oswald did it or was involved, just not alone. I personally believe he wasn't involved in either murder, but that doesn't mean there aren't things that need to be reconciled.
I think it was a good question from a Facebook group that has a louder LN contingent. No matter what stance you take, there are unreconciled things that can't fully be explained without some leaps.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Then how can you reconcile all the witnesses at the Tippit scene? Why did so many identify OSWALD as the person they saw (if it really wasn't him)?
And how can you reconcile the fact that the bullet shells at the Tippit murder scene were tied conclusively to the same gun that Oswald had on him when he was arrested?
DEREK THIBEAULT SAID:
You turned on me fast. LOL!
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
I didn't turn on you. Why do you say that? I was merely asking two logical questions about the Tippit murder.
DENNY ZARTMAN SAID:
I don't see what is so incriminating about Thursday instead of Friday. I thought the incriminating aspect of the Thursday visit was the allegation that Oswald picked up a rifle there and we have Ruth and Marina as witnesses even though they didn't see a rifle or Oswald with a rifle.
If LHO hadn't gone to the Paine's house that Thursday night, what would have prevented the official explanation from being "Oswald was keeping his rifle at his rooming house"? The only things that are lost are Oswald's change in usual schedule (hardly proof that he fired a rifle) and two questionable "witnesses."
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
There was never any rifle at the Paine household.
Which would not mean they could not have framed Oswald through the Paines anyway.
They could have just said that he picked it up previously and gone through with that whole blanket act.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
And Jim can utter the above junk even though Marina said she saw the butt end of a rifle sticking out of the blanket in Ruth Paine's garage.
But I'm supposed to think Marina did nothing but tell one lie after another after the assassination, right James?
I guess she wanted to frame her own husband, so she told the story about seeing the rifle in the garage.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
Oh puhlease.
As attorney Larry Schnapf said, Marina Oswald would be utterly shredded upon any real cross examination. Even the junior lawyers on the WC did not want to use her as a witness, and in a real trial it is highly unlikely she would have been allowed to testify.
But I would have preferred she would have since she would have been reduced to rubble.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Jim,
Do you really and truly (deep down) believe that Marina Oswald was lying when she said these things in her Warren Commission testimony?....
MARINA OSWALD -- After we arrived, I tried to put the bed, the child's crib together, the metallic parts, and I looked for a certain part, and I came upon something wrapped in a blanket. I thought that was part of the bed, but it turned out to be the rifle.
[...]
J. LEE RANKIN -- After your husband returned from Mexico, did you examine the rifle in the garage at any time?
MRS. OSWALD -- I had never examined the rifle in the garage. It was wrapped in a blanket and was lying on the floor.
MR. RANKIN -- Did you ever check to see whether the rifle was in the blanket?
MRS. OSWALD -- I never checked to see that. There was only once that I was interested in finding out what was in that blanket, and I saw that it was a rifle.
MR. RANKIN -- When was that?
MRS. OSWALD -- About a week after I came from New Orleans.
MR. RANKIN -- And then you found that the rifle was in the blanket, did you?
MRS. OSWALD -- Yes, I saw the wooden part of it, the wooden stock.
Replay:
"I saw that it was a rifle. .... I saw the wooden part of it, the wooden stock." -- Marina Oswald
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
Davey just doesn't know when to quit.
I don't know if DVP has ever heard of a guy named Stombaugh. But he was the FBI agent who was called as an expert for hair and fiber evidence. His testimony is in volume 4, and it is the epitome of just how bad the WC really was. The WC desperately wanted him to link the blanket to the rifle in any possible way that he could. He could not. He had to resort to the shirt and that got rather sticky.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
I ask Jim a straightforward question --- Do you really and truly (deep down) believe that Marina Oswald was lying when she said these things in her WC testimony? --- and Jim starts talking about fiber expert Paul Stombaugh. As if Stombaugh's testimony has anything at all to do with Marina's testimony concerning whether she ever SAW A RIFLE in the Paine garage.
REPLAY....
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
The WC desperately wanted him [Paul Stombaugh] to link the blanket to the rifle in any possible way that he could. He could not.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Actually, he did (although indirectly). It was a linkage between the paper bag (CE142) and the blanket---via some fibers found in the bag that generally were consistent with fibers from the blanket.
And since all reasonable people know that a RIFLE was stored in that blanket....and if the bag had fibers from that blanket in it....well, then, the math is pretty easy to do after that. (Although, I'll admit, the fiber connection is certainly not definitive. But the fibers in the bag were consistent with the blanket fibers.)
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
Davey now has to make like he does not understand that Stombaugh's failure to do anything at all to connect the rifle to the blanket was a big problem for the WC. Because, to any normal thinking person--automatically excluding Davey--it indicated the rifle was not in the blanket. That is why they had Marina do what she did.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
You don't care how many people you call liars, do you?
Pathetic. As always.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
Davey also ignores the fact that [Pat] Speer also showed how they were so desperate to connect that rifle to LHO that it looks like the DPD stuffed some shirt fibers in the butt plate.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Good! More liars! More planted stuff!
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
But it is actually even worse than that. Why? Because it probably was the wrong shirt. This brings in the utterly risible testimony of none other than Mary Bledsoe, who may be worse than Marina.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Good! Another liar!
(What's one more worthless liar, right Jim?)
The last count of the number of liars in Jim's JFK World --- Way too numerous to tally.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
The paper bag to the blanket. This makes your argument even worse.
First, you ignore the evidence of the fibers the DPD most likely put in the butt plate because they did not have anything else...
But to resort to the the bag? HA HA HA HA ROTF
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Good! More liars! And MORE fake evidence!
Keep 'em comin', Jimmy.
I'm waiting for the "Jackie's Fake Pillbox Hat" theory.
Re: The Bag ----> Go Here.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
Bledsoe has the credibility of Brennan.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Oh good! The non-stop parade of worthless scumbag witnesses continues (via Jim's Fantasy World Of Conspiracy & Covering Up).
OK, Jim, let's keep it going....
What about Linnie Mae?
REPLAY....
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
But to resort to the the bag? HA HA HA
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Just citing the actual evidence, Jim. Look it up. In Stombaugh's testimony.
LAWRENCE SCHNAPF SAID:
If he didn't go to the Paines house Thursday night, then the false narrative would have changed and they would have said he brought the rifle at a different date. The cover story is done looking backwards. What "facts" can be manufactured to support the situation as confronted.
The bag is not reliable evidence. Would not likely have been admissible in court for a variety of reasons. Many witnesses have said their unsworn and unsigned statements produced by the DPD and FBI were changed. We have other numerous examples of how witness testimony and other parts of the historic record was "manufactured". I'm working on a piece that focus on this part of the "historic record". As a result of the Innocence Project, we have learned that manufacturing of evidence is unfortunately common in our criminal justice system.
REPLAY....
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
Because he had an argument with Marina and wanted to straighten it out with her.
That is in the WCR.
FRANCOIS CARLIER SAID:
Don't tell me that you believe what's in the Warren report...
DAVID JOSEPHS SAID:
I wrote a piece assuming Oswald must have had a plan.... not so much...
http://KennedysAndKing.com/Oswald On November 22, 1963
DEREK THIBEAULT SAID:
Thanks. Great article. It all makes sense...a lot of it's common sense, i.e. Oswald not knowing the parade route ahead of time so he could get a job at TSBD.
Curious how the lone nut crew would debate your article. It sounds like it was random that Oswald went home that night and perhaps Frazier and his sister may have been used to show potential guilt.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
My $0.02....
[Quoting from a May 2018 Internet post....]
I really don't think Lee Oswald thought---deep down---that he would actually have a chance to use his Mannlicher-Carcano on the President that day. Yes, he took his rifle to work with the hope in his mind of somehow being able to secrete himself somewhere within the Depository at the precise moment when Kennedy drove past the building. But he probably also realized as he was driving to work that morning with Buell Frazier that the odds of being able to successfully conceal himself from the view of everyone else in the building (i.e., being able to have an entire warehouse floor of the TSBD all to himself at just exactly the appropriate minutes before, during, and just after the President drove by the building) were very small odds indeed.
But, as Oswald's incredible luck would have it (and even though he picked a floor--the sixth--that had MORE than the usual number of employees working on it throughout the entire morning that day, due to the floor-laying project that was occurring on that floor), Lee had the good fortune of having the entire sixth floor all to himself at precisely the time he desperately needed to have it all to himself---between 12:20 and 12:31 PM.
It's always been my opinion that if Bonnie Ray Williams had decided to stay on the sixth floor, instead of moving down to the 5th floor at about 12:20, then JFK would not have been shot at all....because (IMO) Oswald wouldn't risk firing at the President if he knew for certain that somebody else was on that same sixth floor just a few feet away.
And if somehow he was able to pull off the shooting in total secrecy (which he was), I doubt if Lee thought he would live very long beyond 12:30. Hence, I don't think he cared too much about having a lot of money on him when he departed Ruth Paine's house on November 22.*
* Yes, I know that that last part about Lee thinking he wouldn't be long for this world if he shot the President is likely to be considered inconsistent with the portion of my theory which has Oswald not taking the risk of shooting if Bonnie Ray remained on the sixth floor. CTers can fire back with:
But, David, if he didn't think he'd get away alive, then why would he care if anyone else was up there with him to finger him for the crime?
Fair point (if someone wants to make it). But I think it's quite clear that Oswald did have a desire to continue living beyond 11/22/63. That fact is very clear to me when looking at Oswald's actions after 12:30 PM on November 22 --- e.g., fleeing the building within minutes of the assassination, taking a cab to get back to his roominghouse (a very out-of-the-ordinary mode of transportation for Oswald), arming himself with a pistol and at least 15 rounds of ammunition within 30 minutes of JFK being shot, and then committing a second murder a few minutes later when he encountered Officer Tippit.
Having a desire to survive the aftermath of the assassination, vs. thinking he will survive, are two different things entirely. I would guess that Lee Harvey Oswald was probably very surprised that he was afforded the ideal opportunity to shoot at President Kennedy from a totally vacant sixth floor of his workplace and still live to see another sunrise.
IMHO. YMMV.
More....
http://jfk-archives/Oswald's Decision To Shoot President Kennedy
CORY SANTOS SAID:
I hear your points. However, assuming he did it, one problem is that he had to hide the weapon and bullets on the drive to work, walk into work with no one noticing the weapon and/or bullets, go up several floors to work without anyone noticing the weapon and/or bullets, work for several hours and hope no one sees the gun and/or bullets, or hear the bullets if he had them on him in a pocket, and finally hide the weapon and/or bullets while he was on the first and second floor which we know by testimony he was seen before 12:30.
That is a lot of wishful thinking on his part.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
I agree. It was. But....
The wishing paid off ..... because Bonnie Ray vacated the 6th floor just in time for Oswald to do his dirty deed.
Oswald was one lucky SOB on 11/22/63. No doubt about it. But LUCK can certainly play a part in big events like the JFK assassination. Such as LHO's additional "good luck" with the weather on that Friday too. If it had continued to rain....who knows what might have happened. Perhaps a bullet would have been deflected. Or, perhaps, Oswald doesn't even attempt to fire any shots at the enclosed bubbletop at all.
CORY SANTOS SAID:
I think that is all fair to say.
JOE BAUER SAID:
Oswald reportedly immediately took off on his own after arriving at the TSBD that day, leaving Buell Frazier behind and alone to do whatever he did to his car such as revving his engine to give his battery a little extra charge for later starting. Could it be that Oswald wanted to get up to that 6th floor quickly before punching in on the lower floors just minutes later? Leaving Frazier behind as soon as possible would have been imperative.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Yes, I think that's quite possible.
But I think it's also possible that Oswald stashed his rifle temporarily out on the loading dock before he entered the building to be seen by Jack Dougherty (and this could be the reason Dougherty didn't notice anything in Oswald's hands at that time). And at some later time, Oswald retrieved the rifle from the loading dock area and took it upstairs.
All of this kind of talk is, of course, 100% guesswork on the part of anyone choosing to do the speculating. But, I'll admit, it is fun to guess about these things once in a while.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
What is fair to say, Cory?
Did you see those Trade Mart invitations in David Josephs' essay? And he had to ask someone why there was a crowd below.
Oswald was not even on the sixth floor at that time, let alone later. And the WC knew this and that is why they had Givens lie his head off.
What luck? The luck of having Ruth Paine lie about not telling him about that other job he could have had that paid more money, thus making sure he was at the TSBD?
Some luck.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
You see, this is one of the big differences between conspiracy theorists like Jim DiEugenio and "LNers" like myself --- Jim sees everything through the darkened prism of "conspiracy" and "cover up". While I, on the other hand, don't possess such a mindset. I don't automatically jump to a "conspiratorial" conclusion about every single thing connected to the JFK case. Jim almost always does.
Jim never allows for even a possible non-conspiratorial answer to any of the things he mentioned in his last post. For example, the fact that Oswald asked some of his TSBD co-workers why there were crowds gathering at Elm and Houston Streets prior to the motorcade arriving in Dealey Plaza. This action taken by Oswald, in DiEugenio's mind, must indicate that Oswald really and truly wasn't even aware that President Kennedy was going to be driving by the Depository that day.
In Jim's conspiracy-infested brain, Oswald couldn't possibly have only been feigning his ignorance when he asked his fellow workers why the crowds were forming outside the building. But the overall weight of the evidence, which unquestionably favors Oswald's guilt in the murder of JFK, is telling me that Lee Oswald certainly was feigning his ignorance.
And Jim thinks the Warren Commission needed to have Charles Givens "lie his head off", just so the WC could have Oswald in almost exactly the same place he was when Givens and the other TSBD employees heard Oswald shout down the elevator shaft just a few minutes before Givens' encounter with Oswald on the sixth floor at about 11:55.
Were Lovelady, Williams, and Arce also lying when they each placed Oswald on an UPPER FLOOR of the Depository (either the fifth or sixth floor) at about 11:45 AM? If not, what was really gained by having Givens "lie his head off"? I don't see much of any "gain" at all. But I guess Jim does, therefore Givens gets to be labelled as yet another liar in Jim's excruciatingly long list of liars connected to this murder case.
After a short while, it should become embarrassing for DiEugenio to call so many different people "liars". Just look at how many people he has called outright liars in just this discussion alone. It's pathetic.
More on Charles Givens here.
Re: The higher-paying job that James DiEugenio is convinced that Ruth Paine deliberately kept Oswald from getting, Click Here.
DAVID VON PEIN LATER SAID:
Some of my additional thoughts regarding Lee Oswald's "curtain rod" story and his visit to Ruth Paine's house on Nov. 21....
From an Internet post I wrote on January 8, 2010....
Another question that no conspiracy theorist ever bothers asking regarding the "curtain rod" issue is this one:
Since we know that Lee Oswald had no intention of living in his shoebox-sized room on Beckley Avenue for very much longer, then why in the world would he want to put up some new curtains and curtain rods in the Beckley room? It makes no sense.
And we can know that Oswald certainly had it in his mind to vacate the Beckley roominghouse fairly soon after November 22, 1963, because of his behavior on 11/21/63 at Ruth Paine's house when he pleaded with Marina to come back to Dallas with him. LHO also told Marina on November 21st that he would rent an apartment "tomorrow".
And I somehow doubt that Lee had it in his mind to take his wife and two children back to the walk-in closet he called home on Beckley Avenue in Oak Cliff. Per Marina, Lee had every intention and desire to LEAVE HIS BECKLEY ROOM AS EARLY AS NOVEMBER 22! That's an important point that shouldn't be overlooked or ignored when the subject of Lee Oswald's "curtain rod" fairy tale is discussed.
In short -- Oswald invented the curtain rod story. He lied to Buell Wesley Frazier about the curtain rods to cover up the fact he was going to Irving to get his rifle on November 21st. And he lied again to Frazier about the curtain rods on November 22nd to conceal the fact that he was carrying his rifle to work. It's as simple as that.
Anyone who actually believes that Lee Harvey Oswald had any curtain rods with him on the morning of President Kennedy's assassination is a person who probably also believes that a political fanatic (Oswald) had absolutely no motive whatsoever for murdering a President (Kennedy) who was the chief representative of a country that the political fanatic (Oswald) had grown to despise.
Also.....
Another thought occurred to me recently with respect to Lee Harvey Oswald's unusual Thursday-night trip to Ruth Paine's house in Irving on November 21:
Oswald's visit to Irving on 11/21/63 was the only time that LHO had failed to call Paine's house to let either Ruth or Marina know he was coming. And this could be another key point when reflecting upon Oswald's actions that day.
In Lee Oswald's mind, a call to the Paine house prior to his November 21st visit could have been a bit risky. Because: what if Ruth or Marina, for some unknown reason, had told Lee not to come to Irving that evening? What would Lee have done then? Would he have obeyed Ruth/Marina and stayed in Oak Cliff, thereby eliminating any chance he had of fetching his rifle from the Paine garage before JFK's Friday arrival in Dallas? That's not very likely, granted. But Oswald would have had an additional layer of explaining to do if he had called Ruth's house and was told not to come, but went there anyway.
But the way Oswald planned it (with no call being made to Irving), he doesn't run the risk of being told to stay home. So he simply went to the Paine house unannounced, which gave him easy access to his rifle. And once he arrived in Irving, what were Marina and/or Ruth going to do--throw him out in the streets or tell him to turn around and go back home? Not likely, especially since Lee has no car.
And while it's likely that Lee would have gone out to Irving with Wesley Frazier on Thursday night even if he HAD called Ruth or Marina and had been told NOT to come, it was still a wiser decision by Lee to NOT call the Paine house prior to his Thursday arrival.
And if Oswald had REALLY only been wanting to retrieve some curtain rods from Ruth Paine's home, then the fact that he did not call Ruth or Marina prior to his Thursday visit is even more bizarre and unexplainable, especially considering the fact that he had ALWAYS called Ruth's house prior to all of his other weekend visits.
And THIS particular November 21 visit in question, via such an innocuous and innocent reason for going there on a Thursday (to get some curtain rods), should have certainly elicited an advance telephone call from Lee -- BECAUSE HE WOULD BE COMING TO IRVING ON A THURSDAY, SOMETHING HE HAD NEVER DONE BEFORE.
More food for thought regarding Lee Oswald's unusual trip to Irving on 11/21/63, isn't it?
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
The above is more of Davey's Kreskin type of mind reading.
Yawn.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Just keep on ignoring the obvious, Jimmy. After all, it's the only way you can convince yourself that Oswald was nothing but a patsy.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
Davey Boy is shameless.
Don't bother clicking through to his latest "obviousness".
Why? Because they are anything but.
First, Oswald never ordered that rifle, Davey. You can moan and groan and think up any silly and stupid excuse you want to. But one of the more convincing witnesses at the Houston mock trial was Brian Edwards. When he testified that the rifle in evidence is not the rifle the WC said it was, that was a turning point. It's the first time that got on any kind of a jury record. It will not go away.
Second, funny about that so-called sack. How come no one else saw it? Why did Shields tell the HSCA that Oswald was not even with Frazier when he parked his car that morning? Why did the DPD not photograph it in situ? They got the whole sixth floor except that. Why did Studebaker say the bag was twice as long as the one Frazier testified to? Why did Cadigan say there was no oil or grease found on the inside of the sack he got from the DPD? Yet the rifle was supposed to be soaked in Cosomoline. (Jim DiEugenio, The JFK Assassination: The Evidence Today, pp. 199-209. I had a lot of fun with this whole gun sack story.)
DEREK THIBEAULT SAID:
Frazier dropped Oswald off in the front with his sack lunch, then he parked the car. No rifle. No walk in together with Oswald way out in front.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
You just made that up. Nothing you just said is true.
It's funny how many people are said to be liars in this case by CTers---EXCEPT Lee Harvey Oswald. He's a beacon of truth and honesty, per many CTers.
It's ridiculous.
DEREK THIBEAULT SAID:
It's my opinion based on what I have read. Most of the evidence comes from 2 sources, Frazier and Randle. I don't believe them. No one else saw Oswald with the bag.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
Davey likes to say things like this and he does it by ignoring evidence.
Derek did not just make that up.
Shields told the HSCA that Frazier arrived at the parking lot without Oswald. I have that in my book and it's sourced there. Davey wants to call him a liar.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Nope. I've never once called Edward Shields a liar. But Shields' testimony does not (and cannot, IMO) trump the words of Buell Wesley Frazier. No way.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
Now, there has never been anyone else at the TSBD who said they saw Oswald with that gun sack. Dougherty specifically said he did not see it. Therefore he is a liar according to DVP. (Unless you want to use the whole "fishing pole" story that Lifton is going to use in his book. That did not get a good reception when Lifton tried to use it here [Click Here].)
The point is that no one is ever going to know for sure since the WC was such a debacle of investigatory technique. One would think they would at least have gotten to the bottom of why there was no picture of the so-called gun sack in situ. To my knowledge they did not.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
And Dougherty also said he only saw Oswald "out of the corner of my eye" --- which means Dougherty wasn't even looking at Oswald directly when LHO came in the door. Yet CTers use Dougherty like he was the Holy Grail of witnesses. Hardly.
Plus, as I've pointed out before, it's quite conceivable that Oswald left the rifle out on the loading dock somewhere and didn't bring it inside the building until a little later. We'll never know, of course, but it is possible.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
What Davey does not say is that the corner of the eye thing is in the FBI report.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
No it's not. The "corner of my eye" verbiage is in Dougherty's Warren Commission testimony. [at 6 H 376-377] ....
JOSEPH BALL -- The [FBI] statement says, "I recall vaguely having seen Lee Oswald, when he came to work at about 8 a.m. today."
JACK DOUGHERTY -- That's right.
MR. BALL -- Now, is that a very definite impression that you saw him that morning when he came to work?
MR. DOUGHERTY -- Well, oh--it's like this--I'll try to explain it to you this way---you see, I was sitting on the wrapping table and when he came in the door, I just caught him out of the corner of my eye---that's the reason why I said it that way.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
What a card shark Davey is.
It would have never come up if Ball had not read the FBI report.
Can you be honest and give me a yes or no to that Davey?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
How the heck do I know if it would have come up or not?
But that's not the point. I wrote my last post merely to point out your error when you said this --- "the corner of the eye thing is in the FBI report" --- which is an inaccurate statement on your part.
The bottom line regarding Jack Dougherty's testimony is....
He "vaguely" recalls having seen Oswald "out of the corner of my eye" as Oswald entered the Book Depository on 11/22/63.
And even though Dougherty did say he was sure Oswald had nothing in his hands, I think a reasonable person would look at Dougherty's "I recall vaguely having seen Lee Oswald" and "I just caught him out of the corner of my eye" statements and conclude that Dougherty wasn't really looking at (or paying any attention to) Oswald when Lee walked in the back door of the TSBD on November 22nd, 1963.
CORY SANTOS SAID:
David, I read your post. For you to rely on Brennan's identification to prove beyond a reasonable doubt LHO did it is impossible for me. I really find it hard to believe that it would survive in court. The show-up was ridiculous. As a lawyer, to me that point is worthless, the wedding ring carries more weight as evidence against him.
Don't you think you should mention how many times it took him to id LHO and mention the other people in the line up?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Howard Brennan, IMO, comes across as an honest witness. He provided a reasonable explanation for why he failed to I.D. Oswald on Day 1. And I believe him. A lot of CTers do not. So be it.
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/howard-brennan.html
http://drive.google.com/1964 Interview With Howard Brennan
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
Now, as Sylvia Meagher noted in her book, there is not any other witness in the volumes that can place a gun sack in Oswald's hands prior to the shooting or after he got in Frazier's car.
I ask, does that sound possible? Does it sound probable?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Yes and yes. Here's why.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:
Let me bring up the key name of Troy West. West was the paper dispenser at the TSBD. When asked if Oswald ever came to him to get some paper in the weeks leading up to the assassination, he said no. When asked if he ever left his station, he said nope. When asked if he ate lunch there, he said yes.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Here are my thoughts on the topic of Troy West.
David Von Pein
January 16-22, 2019
