DVP's MONTHLY DIGESTS FOR 2024

🡻 🡻 🡻 🡻 🡻 🡻

JANUARY 2024


FEBRUARY 2024


MARCH 2024


APRIL 2024


MAY 2024


JUNE 2024


JULY 2024


AUGUST 2024


SEPTEMBER 2024


OCTOBER 2024


NOVEMBER 2024


DECEMBER 2024


================================


ALSO SEE:

JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS (PART 1383)

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Part 1383 of my "JFK Assassination Arguments" series includes a variety of my posts and comments covering the period of December 1—31, 2024. To read the entire forum discussion from which my own comments have been extracted, click on the "Full Discussion" logo at the bottom of each individual segment.


================================

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

The video linked below is a revised version of a CBS-TV interview with Gladys Johnson, the landlady at the Beckley Avenue roominghouse where Lee Harvey Oswald was renting a room in November of 1963.

The first version of this video that I originally created and saved to my computer back in 2011 has a "November 23" date attached to it, which I now realize is incorrect. The interview with Mrs. Johnson actually occurred on the day of JFK's assassination itself (November 22, 1963), not the 23rd.

Hence, my desire to correct my mistake and create a new and accurate version of the interview for my video archives. Plus, I've also been able to locate 20 seconds of additional footage from the interview with Mrs. Johnson, which I've placed at the end of this new video:



David Von Pein
December 1, 2024





================================


CORY SANTOS SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Yes, those things mentioned by Cory above are most certainly "circumstantial evidence" of Lee Oswald's guilt. And I don't see how anyone who knows anything at all about Oswald's movements on 11/22/63 could reasonably argue otherwise.

Oh yes, I know that many devoted conspiracy theorists will continue to argue in favor of Oswald's innocence in both the JFK and J.D. Tippit murders. But are such "LHO Didn't Do It" arguments truly reasonable and sensible and realistic arguments based on the sum total of evidence that exists in the Kennedy/Tippit cases? I think not. Such a belief in Lee Oswald's innocence is not even close to being reasonable....or realistic.

Speaking of "circumstantial evidence", it's kind of interesting to see that in Vincent Bugliosi's massive 2007 book on the JFK assassination ("Reclaiming History"), Vince utilized a large number of circumstantial facts and occurrences in an effort to piece together, as Vince would say, a strong "mosaic" of guilt surrounding Lee Harvey Oswald.

In Chapter 15 of Bugliosi's book, "Summary Of Oswald's Guilt", Vince lists 53 things that point in the direction of Lee Oswald's guilt, the vast majority of which are most certainly "circumstantial" in nature (see link below). So, as we can see, a good, strong case for Oswald's guilt can definitely be made when using an abundance of "circumstantial evidence".



FWIW, when it comes to evaluating the worthiness of each of the items on Vincent Bugliosi's list linked above, the only two things that Vince has on his list that I strongly disagree with are #23 and #41. I don't think those two things should have been included at all in Mr. Bugliosi's "Summary" chapter.

----------------------------------------------------------------

Related Discussions:

Everything Lee Harvey Oswald Did Indicates His Guilt

Circumstantial Evidence In The JFK Case

----------------------------------------------------------------

David Von Pein
December 4, 2024





================================


SANDY LARSEN SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Wrong! Jackie's collar is most certainly not black. It's navy blue. (See the Love Field photo below.)

Geez, Sandy Larsen can't even get the basic color of Jackie Kennedy's jacket collar right. So why on Earth would anyone think he's got actual "proof" regarding the ridiculous subject of the alleged "black patch"? This is hilarious make-believe stuff. Always has been.




SANDY LARSEN SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Sandy,

Do you think a "black patch" has been added to the autopsy photo below too, even though we can clearly see the individual hairs on JFK's head in this
picture? ....




PAT SPEER SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

And then, on top of those 2 pieces of fakery [Z-Film forgery + autopsy photo fakery], we'd have to also believe that all 3 autopsy doctors lied through their collective teeth in their autopsy report AND those same doctors also lied in their official testimony and in private interviews over the years. And then we'd have to also believe that the HSCA lied through their teeth too when they said this:



In short:

How much of this nonsense about "Faked This & Altered That" is a reasonable person supposed to swallow before finally rejecting such unproven dreck?

Just wondering what the limit might be regarding unsupportable and speculative fakery in the Kennedy case? Five things? Six maybe? Or sixty?


DAVID VON PEIN LATER SAID:

Sandy Larsen said this in one of his previous posts in this discussion:

[quote]

"Jackie's hair was darker than [JFK's], and always appears that way in photos."

[/unquote]

But such a determination depends on a lot of photographic factors, such as lighting, shadows, camera settings, angles, film type, etc.

There are photos of the President and Jackie Kennedy in which JFK's hair looks every bit as dark (or even darker) than Jackie's. It just depends a great deal on those photographic factors I mentioned.

So for someone to claim that Jacqueline Kennedy's hair "always appears" darker than JFK's hair in all photos and films is misleading and overstates the matter by a mile, because such a statement is just flat-out wrong.

See the six examples provided below (a mixture of both color and black-and-white photographs and film frames)....



















PAUL BACON SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

That's incorrect. The darkness at the right-rear of President Kennedy's head is most certainly also there and easily visible in the Zapruder Film prior to the fatal bullet striking his head.

The two-frame gif image below is a clip I got at this forum from Robin Unger in May of 2015. It shows Zapruder frames 312 and 317 on a repeating loop, and the area of Kennedy's head containing the alleged "black patch" looks identical in both of these Z-frames:



And the frames that precede Z312 exhibit the exact same level of blackness on JFK's head as well --- e.g., Z311 .... Z310 .... Z309 .... More frames here.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Related Link:

Was The Back Of JFK's Head Blacked Out?

--------------------------------------------------------------

David Von Pein
December 5-6, 2024





================================


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

In a continuation of this November 2024 post, I have located another 11/30/63 newspaper which includes still frames from the Zapruder Film. This Detroit paper also includes, as the headline suggests, some "Hospital Details" concerning JFK's last moments while in the Parkland emergency room. Click to enlarge:



David Von Pein
December 9, 2024





================================


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Happy 10th Birthday,
"BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT" !!





"For readers who are looking for a no-nonsense introduction to a case that has been mangled and misrepresented by legions of cynics and paranoiacs for half-a-century, 'Beyond Reasonable Doubt' is an ideal starting point." — Barry Ryder; May 2015

~~~~~~~~~~~

"David Von Pein has long been one of the voices of sanity regarding the JFK Assassination and it's great to see him put his efforts forward along with Mel Ayton. Well done." — Eric Paddon; September 2019





DAVID VON PEIN ALSO SAID THIS.


W. NIEDERHUT SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

But the things you keep insisting on labeling as "disinformation" aren't really disinfo at all.

People can have different opinions on what constitutes "disinformation", you know. In your opinion, the "Lone Nut narrative" is full of "disinformation". In my opinion, the LN narrative is full of facts (LIKE THESE).

David Von Pein
December 20-21, 2024





================================


PAT SPEER SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

He [W. Niederhut] certainly wouldn't be the first person to pretty much ignore the obvious initial forward movement of JFK's cranium in the Zapruder Film.

I believe the "in vogue" excuse (aka cop-out) for some people nowadays is the David Wimp/"Smear"/"Blur" crappola.

-------------

Related Discussion From May 2018....


JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:

The whole thing about the 1-2 frame forward movement was misrepresented by DVP and Ayton in their book.

[Josiah] Thompson was the first guy to write about it. But he was not the first guy to point it out. That was Ray Marcus, and Thompson would admit that as the case. In other words, it was the critics who first pointed out that almost undetectable forward bob.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

DiEugenio is, as usual, dead wrong here. This topic was not "misrepresented" by Mel Ayton or myself in our book at all. Jimmy just doesn't want to believe the ITEK Corporation's findings, that's all.

And to think that the forward motion of JFK's head at Z313 is only being caused by the "blur" in the film is another example of "Ultimate CTer Denial In Action" --- especially since we know (and can SEE) that the President is being hit in the head WITH A BULLET at that exact moment in time on the Zapruder Film.

And yet, even though we know a high-speed bullet is definitely crashing into his skull at that EXACT instant, I'm supposed to believe that the ONLY thing that is causing the apparent "forward movement" of Kennedy's head is the "blur"???

Jim and Josiah are too funny for words!


JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:

Von Pein and Ayton misrepresented this issue in two ways.

First, they tried to insinuate that this bob forward was somehow ignored by the critical community. What a bunch of malarkey. Thompson's book was on the cover of the Saturday Evening Post. It had a large impact and sold well. Second, they ignored Thompson's later discoveries with physicist Art Snyder about the smear on the film. I don't know if Davey is deliberately ignoring this, or if he just does not understand it. I actually think it's both.


DVP SAID:

Jim,

Just keep looking at this super-slo-mo clip over and over a few times. And then try to convince yourself that the obvious forward motion of President Kennedy's head that you are seeing is being caused ONLY by a "smear" in the film. Good luck in convincing yourself of that fairy tale.



[End 2018 Excerpts.]

David Von Pein
December 21, 2024





================================


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

The pro-conspiracy video linked HERE is, of course, filled to the brim with nothing but total nonsense, including massive amounts of speculation and disinformation concerning Mrs. Ruth Hyde Paine.

And how in the world #29 on the YouTuber's list (Ruth and Michael Paine's reconciliation) somehow points to Ruth's involvement in setting up Lee Oswald as a patsy in JFK's assassination, I'll never understand. ~big shrug~

And there are many other things on the CTer's 32-item list that are equally as useless as well, in that they too are totally unconnected to the Dallas assassination.

I sure wish that one day in the near future I would see this headline, in big bold letters, adorning the front page of CNN.com:

MRS. RUTH PAINE FILES $15-MILLION DEFAMATION LAWSUIT AGAINST BAND OF JFK CONSPIRACY THEORISTS!!

Oh, how sweet that would be!



David Von Pein
December 22, 2024





================================


GERRY DOWN SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN ALSO SAID:

I'll add a few more quotes to Gerry's JFK Assassination Quiz....

Who said these things?....

13. "I think this is the man that killed the President."

14. "This is a guilt that doesn't belong to a few. This is a guilt of the nation. We're all responsible for this."

15. "And blood started gushing out."

16. "To me it appeared there was some lunacy or something."

17. "Lee was a very ordinary person; ...people can kill a President without that being something that shows on them in advance."

18. "The President was whisked from the scene of the assassination by bus to Parkland Hospital." [LOL]

19. "The exit wound was a large, irregular wound to the front and right side of the President's head."

20. "There is certainly between 12 and 15 shots fired."


DAVID VON PEIN LATER SAID:

Answers to my last post above:

13. Jesse Curry.

14. Earle Cabell.

15. Gayle Newman.

16. Aubrey Rike.

17. Ruth Paine.

18. Eddie Barker.

19. Dr. James Humes.

20. Robert Groden.


DAVID VON PEIN LATER SAID:

The answer [to #18 listed above] --- Eddie Barker of KRLD-TV in Dallas (CBS affiliate). The "bus" clip is cued up HERE.

I can't imagine where on Earth Mr. Barker got the erroneous idea that President Kennedy, after being shot while sitting in his high-horsepower limousine, was then transferred to one of the slowest-moving modes of transportation imaginable (a bus) in order to get the President to the hospital. It's a very silly and humorous notion altogether.

But, Barker must have heard the "by bus" rumor from somebody. I've always wondered who it was? (Maybe Cecil McWatters wanted a bit more publicity that day.) 😀


TOM GRAM SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Yes. In fact, Dan Rather of CBS was one of the people who made such a false "ambulance" report. And that "transferred to an ambulance" topic is one that the late David Lifton brought up in an e-mail he sent me in 2015. [E-mail archived on this webpage.]

I realize now, after watching this 2013 video series (which was made available at YouTube in October 2022), why Lifton was so interested in the Dan Rather "ambulance" subject. It's because Lifton's ever-expanding cloak-and-dagger theories included an ambulance as part of the plot. Lifton believed that the original plan was to have the plotters transfer JFK to an ambulance after the shooting (somewhere on Stemmons Freeway, I guess).

The reason for the ambulance transfer, per Lifton, was to get the dying JFK away from Jackie Kennedy, so that Jackie couldn't witness any part of the body-alteration plot that was supposed to be coming up in the operating room at Parkland Hospital.

But the original "ambulance" and "Parkland body altering" portions of the plot didn't work out as the conspirators planned. (See the linked video series above for more details regarding Mr. Lifton's incredible make-believe fantasies.)

David Von Pein
December 24-28, 2024





================================


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

As the year 2024 draws to a close, I'm reminded of what was (for me anyway) by far the most memorable moment of the year --- the total solar eclipse on April 8, 2024, which plunged much of the United States into total darkness for about four minutes in the middle of the afternoon. It was an incredible and rare sight to behold.

Here's what the eclipse looked like from my front yard in central Indiana:

DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/The Total Solar Eclipse On April 8,2024

And on that day in Dallas, Texas, many people gathered to watch the eclipse in Dealey Plaza. I grabbed the images below by way of the Sixth Floor Museum's Dealey Plaza Earth Cam. Click to enlarge:









--------------------

As for Kennedy-related stuff in 2024....



David Von Pein
December 30, 2024





================================

JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS (PART 1382)

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Part 1382 of my "JFK Assassination Arguments" series includes a variety of my posts and comments covering the period of November 1—30, 2024. To read the entire forum discussion from which my own comments have been extracted, click on the "Full Discussion" logo at the bottom of each individual segment.


================================

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Linked below is a "Mini-Marathon" video I recently put together, which includes interviews with more than 20 people who were associated in some way with the events surrounding President Kennedy's assassination.

Witnesses included in the video:

Bill Newman, Gayle Newman, Abraham Zapruder, Marrion Baker, Roy Truly, Earlene Roberts, Jean Hill, Mary Moorman, Aubrey Rike, Dennis McGuire, Helen Markham, Ted Callaway, Pierce Allman, Paul Bentley, M.N. McDonald, Mal Couch, David Johnston, H. Louis Nichols, Gladys Johnson, Henry Wade, James Leavelle, and Ruth Paine.



David Von Pein
November 1, 2024





================================


FRED LITWIN SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Here are three excerpts from Vincent Bugliosi's book, "Reclaiming History"....


Topic --- Clay Shaw and the CIA:




Topic --- Sylvia Odio:




Topic --- Richard Case Nagell:



David Von Pein
November 9-11, 2024





================================


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I just added this collection of more than 30 Fort Worth Star-Telegram pages to my newspaper archive:




On November 13, 2024, I came across this 11/29/63 Fort Worth front page. Until then, I hadn't realized that frames from the Zapruder Film had been published in U.S. newspapers as early as November 29th. Click to enlarge:




Here are the same six Zapruder Film frames as they appeared in my hometown newspaper the following day (November 30, 1963). This page also includes an interesting "Deployment Of U.S. Troops" chart in the upper-right corner. Click for a bigger view:




And, for good measure, here's one more 11/30/63 paper—the Chicago Tribune—which published five of the Zapruder frames:



David Von Pein
November 13-14, 2024





================================


SANDY LARSEN SAID THIS AND THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Definitive evidence that a conspiracy existed on November 22, 1963, only exists in the minds of conspiracy theorists who seem to think that "LNers have been proven wrong" (to use Sandy Larsen's own words), even though no CTer has come close to "proving" any such thing.

An important very basic (but true) fact that most conspiracy believers wish to ignore or sidestep is this one....

The evidence that exists in the JFK assassination (including the evidence connected with the murders of J.D. Tippit and Lee Harvey Oswald) can very easily exist (and does exist, in my opinion) without any kind of "conspiracy" entering into the picture at any point when evaluating all three of those crimes.

In other words, no conspiracy whatsoever is required in order to reasonably explain the evidence that's on the table in the John Kennedy murder case. (And I'm including Lee Oswald's very important guilty-like actions and movements on both November 21st and 22nd when referring to "the evidence" in the Kennedy and Tippit murders.)

Also....

Sandy,

Let's say you believe very strongly in the existence of God, and you decide to start up your own forum promoting that belief. Would you feel compelled to prohibit all atheists from joining your forum?


SANDY LARSEN SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Thanks, Sandy, for confirming what I thought would be your heavy-handed answer.


PAT SPEER SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Oh please, Pat. The exact opposite is true (of course). Via the technological advances that have been made, the case for Oswald's lone guilt has grown stronger and stronger since 1963-1964.


W. NIEDERHUT SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

In reality, of course, the Lone Assassin scenario has not been "debunked" by anyone. Not even close. Many conspiracy theorists just want to BELIEVE it's been debunked.

And those CTers want to also believe that the things they like to call Lone Nut-debunking "facts" are truly "facts". But there are millions of people who would disagree with those so-called "facts". (For example: Mr. Niederhut's continued assertion that JFK had a "blow-out occipital skull exit wound", which has been proven to be 100% wrong via a variety of means.)

But W. Niederhut seems to have no interest in "reality". We therefore must tolerate his inaccurate ramblings. Just as he must tolerate the things posted by the "WCR/Lone Nut" members of The Education Forum. (Unless he chooses the most obvious recourse that's available to him---that handy "Ignore" button. But since he's a Moderator at that forum, I suppose "ignoring" members of any stripe would not be an option he could properly choose.)

David Von Pein
November 15, 2024





================================


CLIFF VARNELL SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Cliff Varnell, for some crazy reason, likes to think he has actually proven that "the bullet holes in JFK's clothes are too low to associate with his throat wound".

But all reasonable and sensible people know, of course, that he hasn't come close to "proving" any such thing regarding the holes in John Kennedy's clothes.

And, for some additional crazy reason all his own, Cliff seems to think he actually has enough information from the Dealey Plaza photos to declare that the Single-Bullet Theory is wrong.

As I said ..... crazy.


DAVID VON PEIN LATER SAID THIS.


CLIFF VARNELL SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

The SBT merely requires that JFK's shirt and jacket be "bunched up" to the same degree and to the same location which lines up with where the one and only bullet hole in the skin of his upper back was located (which is 14 cm. below the tip of the right mastoid process).

For some reason, many CTers think that it would have been totally impossible for JFK's shirt and suit jacket to have been bunched-up to the same degree (i.e., in unison and in tandem with one another). But that is obviously what MUST have occurred. Otherwise we wouldn't have exactly THREE bullet holes in THREE different things on the back side of John K. Kennedy:

1. ONE bullet hole in the back of the shirt.

2. ONE bullet hole in the back of the jacket.

3. ONE bullet hole in the upper back of JFK's body.

I'm still wondering, after all these years, why more conspiracy theorists can't seem to figure out that the SBT is really the ONLY possible (logical) way that the double-man wounding of JFK and Governor Connally could have occurred (based on the sum total of all the evidence in the case---including the fact that NO BULLETS at all were found in JFK's upper back or neck at his autopsy).


PAT SPEER SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Correct. I am strongly disagreeing with the HSCA on this wound location topic. Which I've admitted in the past too. But what else can I do when confronted with such an obviously incorrect conclusion as was reached by the HSCA in 1978?

And I rely (at least a little) on the Clark Panel's conclusion too, right?

So it's a simple case of: Somebody's right and somebody else definitely has it wrong.

And since I have the ability to place the autopsy pictures side-by-side and compare the wound levels myself, why on Earth would I support the HSCA in this matter when I can certainly see for myself they were incorrect on this "higher/lower" topic?

----------------------

"Perhaps the clearest visual evidence of the fact that the entrance wound in the [President's] back was definitely above the exit wound in the throat appears in one of [the autopsy] photos taken of the left side of the president's head as he is lying on his back, his head on a metal headrest. Only the wound to the throat is visible, not the wound to his upper right back. However, it couldn't be clearer from this photo that the wound to the back was definitely above the exit wound in the throat."
-- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 424 of "Reclaiming History" *

----------------------

* Yes, I know that Bugliosi was all over the map regarding this higher/lower thing (as I discuss HERE), but the above observation by Vince is still in his book, and it seems to be his final word on the subject.


CORY SANTOS SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I think the key is comparing the NECK CRIMPS. Even with JFK's head tilted back some in the right-hand photo, the creases in the neck aren't going to suddenly change (in a "north/south" direction). The crimps are fixed at the base of his neck.



So, do you think the wound in the back could possibly be located near the BOTTOM of the pic on the left, which is where it needs to be (or close to it) in order for the wound to be LOWER than the throat wound? No way (IMO), even when accounting for some photo distortion or angle discrepancy that might enter into the equation. There can't possibly be that much distortion.

BTW / FYI / FWIW -- I am not the one who drew in the angled line in the photo on the left. Somebody else did that. I merely downloaded the picture years ago in order to create the montage seen above. The angle of that line does seem about right for the SBT shot, however.


KEVEN HOFELING SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

The exact opposite, of course, is true. The Single-Bullet Conclusion is easily supported by way of properly evaluating what we're seeing in Mr. Zapruder's film. The anti-SBT CTers just refuse to believe their own eyes....as vividly demonstrated HERE.










PAT SPEER SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

What kind of weapon was being used by the (presumably) professional assassins that caused such a virtually non-existent wound in JFK's upper back? A slingshot perhaps? Or was the assassin merely blowing the bullet through a plastic drinking straw?


KEVEN HOFELING SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Which must mean that you actually think Governor Connally wasn't struck by a bullet until after the head shot to JFK (or thereabouts), because after turning to stare at the President, Connally hasn't turned back around to his left to face forward again until well after Z300 or so.

Not even John Connally thought he was shot that late. After viewing the Zapruder film for himself, Connally thought he was hit between frames 231 and 234, which was well before he ever even started his sharp right turn to look into the back seat.

So Mr. Connally obviously was of the opinion that he did, indeed, turn around in his seat after he was struck by a rifle bullet.

In short, Keven Hofeling's timeline for when Connally was hit is preposterous.

David Von Pein
November 17-20, 2024





================================


W. NIEDERHUT SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I think Mr. Niederhut has been watching too many Western movies on TV. He actually doesn't know that it's been proven that the force of a bullet (by itself) will NOT cause a human being to be thrown around in any direction. That's a myth created by Hollywood filmmakers and television producers.

But most conspiracy theorists seem to enjoy a good myth (as illustrated at the links below):

The "5.6 Seconds" Myth

The "Oswald Never Ordered The Rifle" Myth

The Conspiracy Myths Continue

David Von Pein
November 19, 2024





================================


W. NIEDERHUT SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

The truth is (of course) that neither of those things exists at all.

There was certainly NOT any entry wound in President Kennedy's "forehead". And there was certainly NOT any kind of an exit wound located anywhere in the "occipital" portions of JFK's cranium.

What I just said is proven via the authenticated autopsy X-rays and photos, plus the autopsy report itself, plus the testimony and statements made since 1963 by the three Bethesda autopsy doctors.

In short, W. Niederhut doesn't know what he's talking about.




BENJAMIN COLE SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

It surely doesn't surprise you that pieces of JFK's skull were missing on the X-rays, does it Ben?

The key is where on the head were they missing? And the X-ray which can be seen above (and also here) provides the vivid answer. The pieces that were "missing" didn't come from anywhere on the BACK of JFK's head. They came from the RIGHT-FRONT-TOP part of the head (mostly the right-frontal parietal region).

The number of people who have decided to just ignore the X-rays and the photos is staggering. (Or those people have decided, without having a bit of proof, that all of the autopsy pictures and X-rays are fake.)


BENJAMIN COLE SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

It doesn't surprise me at all that some of JFK's blown-out skull was never recovered. Just as it's not really surprising that more than 50% of the Carcano bullet that caused the head wound was never recovered either.

I would think such unrecovered evidence in a case like this would be quite normal.

David Von Pein
November 21, 2024





================================


PAT SPEER SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Pat Speer says that people have "forgotten the weakness of the basic case". I would counter that claim by suggesting that people have forgotten (or just simply ignored or misrepresented) the out-of-the-ordinary and highly incriminating things that Lee Harvey Oswald did on both November 21st and 22nd, 1963. Things such as:

1. Going out to Irving on Thursday night (instead of his usual Friday).

2. Telling what amounted to a provable lie to Buell Frazier about the contents of the package he (Oswald) took into the Book Depository on the morning of the assassination.*

* And we can be reasonably certain that Oswald's "curtain rods" story that he told Frazier was, indeed, a lie, because if Oswald really did take curtain rods to work in his package on 11/22/63, he most certainly would have been eager and anxious to admit that fact when he was specifically asked about the "curtain rods" by Captain Will Fritz of the Dallas Police after his arrest. Instead, Lee denied saying anything at all about curtain rods to Frazier.

This false "curtain rod" tale, therefore, would become a huge part of any prosecutor's case against Lee Oswald at his trial (had there been one), with the prosecuting attorney forcefully emphasizing the following very incriminating point to the jury (which is something that Oswald's defense team would not have been able to overcome, in my opinion):

If Lee Harvey Oswald didn't carry his own rifle to work with him on 11/22/63, and if that package he had in his possession that morning had really contained nothing more than an innocuous item like curtain rods, then what possible reason could Oswald have had for denying the existence of any such curtain rods when he was specifically asked about them by the Dallas Police? And why were no curtain rods found inside the Depository after the assassination? It's quite obvious, therefore, that Oswald simply invented his "curtain rods" tale so that he wouldn't have to tell Buell Wesley Frazier what really occupied space in that brown paper bag he took to work on Nov. 22.

3. Shortly before noon on 11/22, Oswald asks a fellow worker to send an elevator back up to him on the sixth floor of the Depository. (This request by LHO can certainly be considered odd and incriminating, in light of the fact that Oswald's own rifle, plus bullet shells from Oswald's own rifle, plus a brown paper bag with Oswald's own prints on it were found after the shooting on the sixth floor of the building.)

4. Oswald leaves the TSBD within about three minutes of the assassination of JFK.

5. LHO takes a bus and then a cab to the area of his roominghouse in Oak Cliff, telling the cab driver to drop him off three blocks past his roominghouse on Beckley. And why in the world would he want to do such a strange thing, do you think?

6. Lee then rushes into his room and grabs his Smith & Wesson revolver and many extra bullets. If he's innocent of the crime that had just occurred in Dealey Plaza, why does he feel the need to arm himself with a gun right after the President had been shot?

7. A few minutes after Lee Harvey Oswald leaves his roominghouse, Police Officer J.D. Tippit is murdered with Lee Harvey Oswald's very own revolver.

8. A short time after Tippit is killed, Oswald is seen lurking near the front entrance of Johnny Brewer's shoe store on Jefferson Boulevard. Brewer noticed Oswald standing with his back to the street as police cars, with sirens blaring, drove down Jefferson. Brewer thought Oswald was acting "funny" and "scared".

9. Oswald then enters the Texas Theater without paying for the cheap ticket. (A darkened theater would be a good place for somebody to hide from the police for a little while, wouldn't it? I certainly think so.)

10. Lee is then apprehended by the police inside the theater. According to the arresting officers, Oswald said "This is it" and/or "It's all over now" at the time of his arrest, which (IMO) are things that most certainly would not have been uttered by an innocent person who had not just recently committed some kind of a criminal act. In other words, "This is it" and "It's all over now" reek of a guilty state of mind.

In short, Lee Harvey Oswald's very own actions on 11/21/63 and 11/22/63 are telling the whole world who murdered President John F. Kennedy.

Plus, let's not forget that there's not a single person on this Earth who has ever proven that any of the evidence connected to the JFK and Tippit murders has been faked or forged or manufactured in order to frame Lee Oswald.

So, with the above facts in mind, I would argue that the "basic case" doesn't really show very much "weakness" at all. To the contrary, I think the "basic case" still displays, to this very day, a tremendous amount of strength and durability.

Conspiracy theorists will vehemently disagree with me (of course). And so, the debate continues....and no doubt always shall.




GIL JESUS SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Oh for Pete sake! You can't be serious, Gil!

The people who were warning JFK not to visit Dallas had no advanced knowledge that Lee Harvey Oswald (specifically) was going to shoot at Kennedy. Those people were merely concerned due to the angry political climate that seemed to exist among many people in Dallas at the time when the President was scheduled to make his trip to Texas, which was just a few weeks after the Adlai Stevenson incident on October 24.

You, Gil, have added an extra layer of assumed knowledge about "Oswald" that, of course, doesn't exist and never did.


CORY SANTOS SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Yes. That's correct. Oswald did leave his wedding ring behind at Ruth Paine's house when he left for work on November 22nd. That's a good additional point that could be added to my previous "out of the ordinary" list.

And here's another one for that list:

LHO didn't take any lunch with him to work on Nov. 22. And, according to Buell Wesley Frazier's Warren Commission testimony (below), 11/22/63 was the one and only time that Oswald didn't bring his lunch with him during the five-week period when Oswald rode with Frazier from Irving to the Depository:

-----------------------

JOSEPH BALL -- "Do you remember whether or not when Oswald came back with you on any Monday morning or any weekend, did he pack his lunch?"

BUELL WESLEY FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir; he did."

MR. BALL -- "He did?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes, sir. When he rode with me, I say he always brought lunch except that one day on November 22; he didn't bring his lunch that day."

MR. BALL -- "But every other day he brought a lunch?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Right, when he rode with me."

[2 H 220]

-----------------------

In his more recent interviews, however, Buell Frazier seems to have completely forgotten about his 1964 testimony in which he said that Oswald "always brought lunch". Buell's memory concerning that subject (along with some other topics as well) now seems to be quite different than it was back in '64.

CLICK HERE for a cued-up 2002 audio clip with Frazier talking about Oswald's Depository lunch habits.

David Von Pein
November 23-25, 2024





================================


GREG DOUDNA SAID THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Of course Bill Brown was the winner of his debate regarding the Tippit murder. And definitively so, based on the overwhelming evidence that proves beyond all reasonable doubt that Lee Harvey Oswald killed Officer J.D. Tippit.

Anyone who argues otherwise is either merely ignoring all the evidence that indicates Oswald's guilt in the Tippit slaying....or they want to pretend that the evidence in the Tippit case was tainted/planted and that all of the various witnesses who identified LHO at or near the murder scene were either mistaken or were liars. And those are most certainly not reasonable (or sensible) positions to take.



David Von Pein
November 29, 2024





================================