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
