JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS (PART 1327)

BORIS SAID:

Why don't you go with the new excuse that "occipital" was placed in the AR [Autopsy Report] by mistake?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Actually, given the photographic evidence in this case, such a "mistake" is quite possible, IMO, as I discussed at various forums four years ago (below)....

jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1045.html#Occipital-Vs-Frontal


BORIS SAID:

And tell us, how many times did "occipital" or "occiput" appear in the AR? Each one a mistake, was it?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

As it relates to the point being discussed here (i.e., the location of the EXIT WOUND in President Kennedy's head), the word "Occipital" appears a grand total of ONE time in the Official Autopsy Report (on Page 3 of that report, which is the controversial "somewhat into the occipital" passage).

And given the obvious fact that the autopsy photos and X-rays show that the "Frontal" portion of JFK's head most certainly WAS affected by the fatal bullet....coupled with the fact that (incredibly) the words "Frontal" and/or "Frontal Bone" do not appear even ONE time in said autopsy report....it's not a wild theory at all (IMO) to conclude that—just perhaps—that ONE single reference to "Occipital" (as it relates specifically to just the large exit wound in JFK's cranium) could very well be an unintentional error made by the autopsy surgeons—despite the fact that all three of those doctors (Humes, Finck, and Boswell) each affixed their individual signatures to said AR document.




BORIS SAID:

Asshole, it's "controversial" only to you and your moron McAdams friends. It's perfectly explicable to the rest of us, and to every single witness who testified to seeing the back of his head.

LN imbeciles like to speak of "occipital" like it was a typo or something. As if it appeared in the middle of a sentence without any context at all.

Is this the new tactic?

And **every** instance of its utterance is relevant.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

But, as I just said above, we're only talking in THIS discussion about ONE single reference to the word "Occipital" --- only as it relates to Kennedy's large exit wound.

Do I need to emphasize that fact for a third time?

Read this AR paragraph....

"There is a large irregular defect of the scalp and skull on the right involving chiefly the parietal bone but extending somewhat into the temporal and occipital regions."

....and then watch this video (at 4:50)....



....and then gaze upon these photos....



....and then try to explain to me how it was possible for Dr. Humes to NOT conclude in the AR that the blown-out area of Kennedy's head had also affected the FRONTAL region of his head?

In a word---Impossible.


BORIS SAID:

Careful, you almost used "occipital" and "exit wound" in the same sentence.

Dipshit, do you think I haven't seen the BOH photo and lead snowstorm X-ray before? The latter is literally a smoking gun.

The former is what you build your argument around, rather than building an argument first and then using it to fortify your position.

You can try to explain to us why the BOH photo matches what *none* of the witnesses saw. Or you can try to explain why that photo has been disclaimed by John Stringer and Floyd Riebe. Or you can do the chickenshit shuffle and demand I produce all the explanations instead, just like the other lowly skidmarks in this forum.

Von Pissant continues to treat "occipital" as a throwaway word with no meaning, much like he does with "parietal" and "falx cerebri". And he continues to pursue the fallacious logic that "if a wound in the front, therefore none in the back."

Much like your cut-rate website with its '90s flash, your faith needs a serious update.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

CTers are nothing but hypocrites when it comes to any discussion about JFK's autopsy report. Most Internet conspiracy theorists just love the "Somewhat into the occipital" reference, but they can't stand these conclusions from the VERY SAME autopsy report....

"It is our opinion that the deceased died as a result of two perforating gunshot wounds inflicted by high velocity projectiles fired by a person or persons unknown. The projectiles were fired from a point behind and somewhat above the level of the deceased."

and....

"The fatal missile entered the skull above and to the right of the external occipital protuberance."

and....

"The other missile...made its exit through the anterior surface of the neck."

CTers think that all three of the above conclusions are nothing but total lies invented by the autopsy physicians.

CTers = Hypocrites Of The First Order.

Bask in it.


BORIS SAID:

I bask in the fire Humes built in his living room, scumbag.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

And you know perfectly well WHY Humes started that fire, but, like all scumbag CTers, you'll totally ignore Humes' perfectly reasonable (and proper) reason for doing it.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

As the original poster of this thread, I can assure you that you're telling an intentional lie.

The topic is the blatant lie told about the *LARGE* wound in JFK's head... and its proper location.

It's now **YOU** who've characterized it as an "exit" wound.

That was a rather stupid mistake... because you cannot maintain or prove that the **EXIT** wound was not in the occipital/parietal ... which is in the BACK of JFK's head.

And the fact that an *EXIT* wound was located in the BACK of JFK's head will lead honest people to either agree with Dr. Humes' claim that "Scientifically, sir, it is impossible for it to have been fired from other than behind. Or to have exited from other than behind." ... or to draw the reasonable conclusion that JFK was hit from the front.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Even a top-flight idiot like Benjamin Holmes should be able to figure out what Humes meant by his double "From Behind" remark. But Ben apparently can't do it---so I'll give him the answer (and don't forget about the "Addendum" on this subject I just added today, which is the most important part of all)....



Here's the "Addendum" I referred to above:

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

It's also very important to evaluate Dr. Humes' "From Behind" remarks based on the context of the question he was being asked to answer at the time, which was this question put to Dr. Humes by Allen Dulles of the Warren Commission:

"Am I correct in assuming from what you have said that this wound is entirely inconsistent with a wound that might have been administered if the shot were fired from in front or the side of the President? It had to be fired from behind the President?"

The above question by Dulles was immediately followed by this response by Dr. James Humes:

"Scientifically, sir, it is impossible for it to have been fired from other than behind. Or to have exited from other than behind."

Therefore, as everyone can easily see, the context of Humes' "From Behind" answer makes it perfectly clear that Humes' response to Dulles' question was an effort on Humes' part to convey the fact that—in Dr. Humes' professional medical opinion—President Kennedy's assassin could only have been located "behind" the President when he was shot on November 22, 1963.


DAVID G. HEALY SAID:

Quoting yourself again Davey?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

When I feel it's appropriate, yes.


DAVID G. HEALY SAID:

What a wimp.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Have you had the pleasure of being tased on "Live PD" yet, Mr. Junkie? I'll be lookin' for ya on the next episode.


BORIS SAID:

This is what a "researcher" has been reduced to.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Well, sometimes that slow pitch right down the middle is just too difficult to resist. (I'm sure Healy understands my position on this after so many years of being the type of vile and disgusting online person he's been since at least 2006.)

Would you like me to list the recent insults and vulgar remarks uttered by somebody calling himself "Boris"? (It'll take a while to catalog all of them, though, since they are abundant in quantity.)

So, like I said, CTers = Hypocrites.

BTW, I've never once claimed to be a "researcher", and I never will.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

The *ALLEGED* reason [Dr. Humes burned his notes] was blood.

Did he burn everything that had blood on it?

And [were] his hands still bloody the following day when he wrote his first draft? (which was also burned.)

Watch as David runs from these facts.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Super Stump strikes again!


BORIS SAID:

Someone "schooled" enough to write a book on the subject has been reduced to this worthless shit of an answer, and it took nothing but a couple of short posts by Ben, and a half-assed effort by me yesterday, as I minimized this forum screen in the background while I worked. You had less than HALF my attention. And barely any at all of Ben's.

And that's all it took to reduce a JFK "scholar" to nothing.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I kept that post short & sweet, and also did Benji a favor by trying to save him the embarrassment of having to explain WHY James Humes decided to TELL THE WORLD that he had burned some autopsy materials in his home fireplace when the good doctor most certainly didn't HAVE to do that (and, quite obviously, wouldn't have done that if he had been the worthless lying SOB that Benjamin Stump thinks he was in 1963).

Go back to giving me half of your glorious attention, Mr. Boris Clown. (Or, hopefully, much less than half.)

David Von Pein
July 23-24, 2019

JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS (PART 1326)

RON BULMAN SAID:

Two Oswalds in the Texas Theater....

James Douglass in "JFK and The Unspeakable" presented a pretty compelling case for such.

Butch Burroughs, the concession stand operator, and person left in charge of operations at the time, "startled me in his interview by saying he saw a second arrest occur in the Texas Theater, only three or four minutes later. Burroughs said the second man looked almost like Oswald, like they were brothers or something." [Pg. 292.]

Burroughs saw the second Oswald placed under arrest and handcuffed...taken out the back of the theater.

Bernie Haire of Bernie's Hobby House, two doors east of the theater, went outside when he saw police cars congregating. When he couldn't see what was happening because of the crowd, he went to the alley out back. It too was full of police cars "stopped outside the rear door and witnessed what he thought for decades was the arrest of Oswald" .... "brought a young white man out...put him in a police car and drove off."

Told in 1987 Oswald had been taken out the front entrance, he was shocked.

[...]

Some members of the Dallas Police Department knew two Oswalds were arrested, they participated in the second arrest. They knew and participated in a conspiracy to cover it up with their silence.


JOHN KOZLOWSKI SAID:

I’m glad you brought this up. The arrest out of the back door is one of the parts of the Oswald tale that really interests me. Hoping some of the experts here can explain what they know about the arrest around back.


CORY SANTOS SAID:

Yes, interesting. I know DVP wants to explain his theory?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I think it's possible that some of the confusion about the alleged "two arrests" could have been initially sparked by the fact that Johnny Brewer was briefly held at gunpoint as a suspect by the police at the back of the theater. And Brewer, like Oswald, was a slender white male in his 20s.

I can't find anything in the records that indicates whether or not Brewer was actually dragged outside into the alley behind the theater when he was held at gunpoint....and, of course, Brewer wasn't actually placed into a police car....but if someone did see the incident between the police and Johnny Brewer at the back of the theater, this could certainly have elevated the confusion of any witnesses as to how many people were being detained by the police at the theater.


JOHNNY BREWER (Warren Commission Testimony) -- "I heard a noise outside, and I opened the door, and the alley, I guess it was filled with police cars and policemen were on the fire exits and stacked around the alley, and they grabbed me, a couple of them, and held and searched me and asked me what I was doing there, and I told them that there was a guy in the theatre that I was suspicious of, and he asked me if he was still there."

JOHNNY BREWER (1986 Mock Trial Testimony) --
"...a gun was held on me."


DENIS MORISSETTE SAID:

Excellent!


JIM HARGROVE SAID THIS.


JIM HARGROVE ALSO SAID:

You guys forgot to finish the relevant part of Brewer's 1964 testimony! He didn't go out into the alley, he wasn't taken into the alley and a squad car by police. Let's see exactly what he did do. I'll put in boldface the part you forgot:

Mr. BREWER - I heard a noise outside, and I opened the door, and the alley, I guess it was filled with police cars and policemen were on the fire exits and stacked around the alley, and they grabbed me, a couple of them and held and searched me and asked me what I was doing there, and I told them that there was a guy in the theatre that I was suspicious of, and he asked me if he was still there. And I said, yes, I just seen him. And he asked me if I would point him out. And I and two or three other officers walked out on the stage and I pointed him out, and there were officers coming in from the front of the show, I guess, coming toward that way, and officers going from the back.

Then, of course, Brewer went on for a lengthy discussion of "Lee Harvey Oswald's" arrest, which he says he witnessed in its entirety from inside the theater. You guys forgot to mention that.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Jim H.,

The portion of Johnny Brewer's testimony you just highlighted doesn't eliminate the possibility that Brewer could have been very briefly pulled out into the alley by the police officers who grabbed him. I don't know if they did pull him out in the alley or not*, but we do know that Brewer did open the back door (next to the alley), and a gun was held on Brewer and he was grabbed by the cops.

And even if Brewer wasn't actually physically in the alley, it's possible that a witness who was in that alley could have still gotten a view of the cops grabbing Brewer at gunpoint just inside the back door of the Texas Theater.

[* JULY 2021 EDIT -- I've confirmed, via Johnny Brewer's own words in this 1996 interview, that Brewer was, indeed, pulled out into the alley by the police after Brewer opened the back door to the theater. Brewer said this in that '96 interview: "When I opened the door they grabbed me and pulled me out into the alley."]

DENIS MORISSETTE SAID:

Probably an innocent man who for some reason attracted police’s attention. At the wrong place at the wrong time. The same happened to a friend of mine after a shooting in a mall. Because he looked like one of the suspects he was handcuffed and put in a police car just in case. That’s good police practice. Nobody at DPD bothered writing a detailed report with the name of this second arrest.


PAUL BACON SAID:

Sure, an innocent man who looked exactly like Lee Harvey Oswald.


DENIS MORISSETTE SAID:

My friend just happened to look like a suspect! You don’t think it’s strange??? 🤣 Michael Paine looked like Lee. Bill Lovelady looked like Lee.


PAUL BACON SAID:

And so did someone who was roaming around Dallas for a couple of months pretending to be LHO.


DENIS MORISSETTE SAID:

So you really believe there was an arrest of someone with connections with Lee or/and the plotters?


PAUL BACON SAID:

Yes, I do. Definitely with the plotters. There's too much credible research that indicates it.


DENIS MORISSETTE SAID:

So the plotters sent this look-alike to do what...?


PAUL BACON SAID:

Ahhh, the million dollar question. If I could answer that, I'd be writing a book.


JIM HARGROVE SAID:

The plotters sent the look-alike (let's call him "Lee") to 10th and Patton to murder J.D. Tippit, and then, after giving his gun, jacket, and wallet containing Oswald and Hidell ID's to Captain Westbrook, Lee went to the Texas Theater, was told to make a scene entering it to lead police there, where the other Oswald (let's call him "Harvey") had already been inside for 10 minutes or so.


DENIS MORISSETTE SAID:

Good stuff for novels. I could create dozens of theories contradicting each other but making enough sense on their own. CTers' life is the easy life! CTers can create their own scenarios and change the details as much as they want.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Amen!

"That's what is so terribly nice about being a conspiracy theorist, isn't it? You can just start spitting out theories and fall back on CTer Rule #4A: "If All Else Fails, Just Say That Something Is Fake". LNers, thankfully, don't have such freedom with the evidence. And therein lies one of the major differences between a "CT" mindset and the "LN" mindset.....not every single thing has to be "suspicious" or "phony" to an "LNer" in order to arrive at the truth."
-- DVP; October 28, 2007


DAVID VON PEIN ALSO SAID:

FYI / FWIW....

Here's an excerpt from Vincent Bugliosi's JFK book concerning some of the things Johnny Brewer did while at the Texas Theater on 11/22/63 (emphasis added by DVP):

"Behind the stage Johnny Brewer is standing near the curtains that separate the audience and the exit door on the left side of the screen. When the house lights come up, he steps to the curtain and scans the astonished audience. There he is—the man he saw slip into the theater. He's sitting in the center section, six or seven rows from the back of the theater. No sooner do the lights come up than the man stands up, and scoots to the aisle to his right. Police are pouring into the lobby. The suspect turns around and sits back down, this time in the third row from the back.

Suddenly, Brewer hears someone rattling the exit door from the outside. The shoe store manager pushes the door open and is immediately grabbed by two officers as he is exiting. The alley is crawling with cops, some up on the theater's fire escape. Officer Thomas A. Hutson puts a gun into Brewer's stomach. "Put your hands up and don't make a move." Brewer is shaking. "I'm not the one," he stammers. "I just came back to open the door for you. I work up the street. There's a guy inside that I was suspicious of."

The officer can see that Brewer's clothing—sport coat and tie—is different from the description of the suspect. "Is he still there?" Hutson asks. "Yes. I just seen him," Brewer tells him, and leads the lawmen into the theater." -- Page 104 of "Reclaiming History" by Vincent T. Bugliosi

Bugliosi's source for the words I put in bold text above is 7 H 30, which is Warren Commission testimony from Dallas police officer Thomas A. Hutson. In that WC testimony, Hutson said this about Brewer:

OFFICER HUTSON -- "We pulled up to this location [the Texas Theater] and I was the first out of the car to hit the ground. As I walked up to the fire exit doors, Officer Hawkins and Baggett were getting out of the car, and the door to the theatre opened, and this unknown white male was exiting. I drew my pistol and put it on him and told him to put up his hands and not to make a move, and he was real nervous and scared and said: "I am not the one. I just came back to open the door. I work up the street at the shoestore, and Julia sent me back to open the door so you could get in." I walked up and searched him briefly and I could see by the description and his clothes that he wasn't the person we were looking for. Then I entered the theatre from this door."


JOHN ARMSTRONG SAID:

We now know that Westbrook, Croy, and LEE Oswald conspired to murder Officer Tippit, and frame HARVEY Oswald for the crime.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Despicable allegations there against DPD officers Croy and Westbrook. But it's par for the course for many conspiracy theorists. They couldn't care less how many people they accuse of being murderers and liars on the flimiest of evidence (which amounts, really, to no "evidence" at all --- a gut feeling is more than enough "evidence" for the John Armstrongs of the world).


RON BULMAN SAID:

If you need DVP to help you understand this, you have my sympathy. I don't pretend to fully, but if you're going to lean on the Warren Omission theories, they were proven long ago to be a house of cards.

One Oswald came in between 1:00 and 1:07, per Burroughs.


CORY SANTOS SAID:

So the only witness to this alleged Oswald at 1 was Burroughs, who did not actually see him per your above statement?

That is not how things work.

If he could not identify the man who entered around 1, then his later, as you called it, conclusion, that it was LHO is nothing more than speculation.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

FWIW #2....

CLICK TO ENLARGE:


RAY MITCHAM SAID:

Typical Bugliosi bull poop. Burroughs was being asked about the second Oswald, not the first. He wasn't asked about the first one.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

So, you don't think Butch Burroughs had any obligation at all to tell Joe Ball of the Warren Commission about having sold popcorn to Lee Oswald at about 1:15 PM on 11/22/63, right? Even though Burroughs had to know that such information would be extremely important to the Commission's pending investigation, correct?

Or, as Vincent Bugliosi put it in 1986 when questioning Paul O'Connor at the Oswald Mock Trial....

"So, in other words, [Mr. Burroughs]...if those investigators for the [Warren Commission] didn't ask you the magic question, by golly you're not about to tell 'em!! Is that correct?"


HANK SIENZANT SAID ALL THIS.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Good post, Hank. Thanks very much.


CORY SANTOS SAID:

Can DVP explain the arrest in the balcony? Was it simply a mistake?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

From a 2014 discussion....

MARTIN WEIDMANN SAID -- "What made several police officers say in their reports that Oswald was arrested on the balcony of the TT?"

DVP SAID -- "A very minor mistake really. Not important. He was arrested IN the theater. Just not "in the balcony". But we know the initial DPD radio call said they thought the suspect was "hiding in the balcony". This early erroneous speculation could have been repeated by some of the officers. Some errors get repeated from one person to the next."


JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:

Just for the record, on the 23rd, the DPD was still writing reports saying Oswald was arrested in the balcony. (Harvey and Lee, p. 871)


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

And for several hours on November 22nd, the media was still giving the public the erroneous idea that Officer Tippit had been killed in a gun battle right there inside the Texas Theater.

So there was quite a bit of bad information being put out (unintentionally) on television and radio in those early hours after the assassination (as I chronicle in the 27-minute video below). Such things always happen in a Mega News Event like this one.




RICK McTAGUE SAID:

The narrator [in this video] says that the gun the officer is holding (a revolver) was the gun used to murder Tippit.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

That was one of several mistakes made by Ron Reiland when he narrated his news film on WFAA-TV on 11/22/63. The pistol being shown is J.D. Tippit's own service revolver, not the Tippit murder weapon.




BART KAMP SAID THIS.


DAVID JOSEPHS SAID:

“Searched him good and found nothing.”

2.5 hrs later, 5 bullets and a bus transfer are supposedly found in his pants pocket and shirt pocket, respectively.

Thx Bart, that about blows those items of evidence out the window.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

It does no such thing.

Officer C.T. Walker obviously meant that he found no weapons on Oswald when Walker searched him at City Hall. Walker, at that point, wasn't concerned about a bus transfer being in LHO's pocket, nor was he concerned about the five loose bullets. Walker was concerned with WEAPONS still being on Oswald's person.



It's nearly impossible for me to believe, however, that somebody from the DPD, prior to Walker, hadn't already patted down LHO for additional weapons while they still had Oswald in the theater. And some police officer probably did that very thing in the theater itself. That's almost always the very first thing you see cops doing after they arrest a suspect---they pat him down for weapons. And I doubt that that standard routine was any different with U.S. police departments in circa 1963.

More Bullet Talk:

http://jfk-archives/The Bullets In Lee Harvey Oswald's Pocket

Also See:

http://jfk-archives/"Well, They Say It Just Takes A Second To Die"

David Von Pein
July 22-27, 2019
July 23-26, 2019

JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS (PART 1325)

PAUL JOLLIFFE SAID:

Marina lied her eyes out about the rifle.

"Oswald" neither owned nor possessed any rifle.

He never ordered one, he never bought one, he never paid for one, he never handled one after the Marine Corps and he never had one of his own.

He was framed.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

And that would mean that Jeanne DeMohrenschildt lied her eyes out too (at
9 H 315)....

JEANNE DeMOHRENSCHILDT -- "And I believe from what I remember George sat down on the sofa and started talking to Lee, and Marina was showing me the house that is why I said it looks like it was the first time, because why would she show me the house if I had been there before? Then we went to another room, and she opens the closet, and I see the gun standing there. I said, what is the gun doing over there?"

MR. JENNER -- "You say..."

MRS. DeMOHRENSCHILDT -- "A rifle."

MR. JENNER -- "A rifle, in the closet?"

MRS. DeMOHRENSCHILDT -- "In the closet, right in the beginning. It wasn't hidden or anything."

MR. JENNER -- "Standing up on its butt?"

MRS. DeMOHRENSCHILDT -- "Yes."

MR. JENNER -- "I show you Commission Exhibit 139. Is that the rifle that you saw?"

MRS. DeMOHRENSCHILDT -- "It looks very much like it."




PAUL JOLLIFFE SAID:

We agree!

Jeanne DeMohrenschildt lied!


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

That'll be the day.

It couldn't be more obvious that Lee Oswald purchased (and possessed) Mannlicher-Carcano Rifle #C2766 in 1963. In order for him to have NOT purchased and possessed that rifle, we'd actually have to be silly enough to believe a whole bunch of people "lied their eyes out" in 1963 (and continued to lie about it for the rest of their lives).

But to CTers, of course, the more people they can accuse of being bald-faced liars in this case, the better.

Right, Paul?


PAUL JOLLIFFE SAID:

It was not until late Friday night/early Saturday morning that the rifle was identified as a 6.5 Mannlicher-Carcano - not until it was in the hands of the FBI, secure in Washington, D.C., far away from anyone who could look at it.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

You're wrong about that, Paul. The rifle was identified at 6:16 PM CST Nov. 22 by J.C. Day of the Dallas Police Department as being "6.5, apparently made in Italy, in 1940" (in the famous video clip of Lt. Day holding the rifle above his head as he walked down the DPD corridor). And that was 5 hours before the DPD handed the rifle over to the FBI. (See the video proof at THIS LINK.)


PAUL JOLLIFFE SAID:

David, what in the world motivates you to write what you write?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Simple --- The actual evidence in the JFK and J.D. Tippit murder cases, that's what.

And that evidence most definitely proves (beyond the proverbial reasonable doubt) that Lee Harvey Oswald killed President Kennedy and Officer Tippit on 11/22/63. No other conclusion is even possible, IMO.

That's adequate motivation to write what I write, I would say.


JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:

Paul:

I don't know if you understand DVP's psychology.

I most recently swore him off when he said M. Baker's first day affidavit was fine except for the floor: everything else was consistent with the second floor lunch room.

No honest, objective, normal person could say something like that.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

And any honest and objective person who wasn't hellbent on accusing many, many people of lying about the evidence in this case would easily come to the conclusion that the Lunchroom Encounter definitely DID happen—in the lunchroom on the 2nd floor—just as Roy Truly verified.

I'll let the "honest and objective and normal" people decide if I make a good case here (and please note the utter desperation of CTers like DiEugenio in this discussion):

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-121

David Von Pein
July 16, 2019

JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS (PART 1324)

LEE HARVEY OSWALD'S
CAB RIDE ON 11/22/63....

RON BULMAN SAID:

I'd never read Whaley dropped Oswald off several blocks past his rooming house. .... I thought it was a block past his rooming house. This would mean Oswald changing clothes, picking up his pistol, and Earlene Roberts' story were all hooey. Not time to walk several blocks back for this to happen, then walk to where Tippit was shot (which can't be done by itself, it's been attempted to be duplicated by more than one researcher, unsuccessfully), much less walk on to the Texas Theater.


PAUL JOLLIFFE SAID:

Well, "several blocks" is really about three long blocks. "Oswald" was dropped off (according to Whaley) at the intersection of Beckley and Neely. It appears to be about a 7-8 minute fast walk south of 1026 N. Beckley. We don't know exactly what time Whaley dropped "Oswald" off because Whaley only recorded his fares in 15 minute intervals. (He logged his pick-up of "Oswald" as 12:30!)


JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:

I thought it was four blocks from the rooming house?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

It was, as Paul J. noted, about three long blocks from the intersection of Beckley & Neely to Oswald's room at 1026 Beckley.

When Oswald (no quotation marks needed) got into William Whaley's cab, Oswald told Whaley to take him to the 500 block of North Beckley. But when they were getting close to the 500 block, Oswald told Whaley to drop him off at the Neely Street intersection, which is at the 700 block of Beckley. So LHO had to backtrack from the 700 block to the 1000 block (three total blocks, which apparently are fairly long blocks).

See Whaley's reconstruction videos here....




RON BULMAN SAID:

Whaley reported Oswald's destination as the 500 block of N. Beckley. His rooming house address is 1026 N. Beckley. That's Five blocks. At a block a minute, that adds 5 minutes to the time line.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

But we know he didn't go all the way to 500 Beckley. He only went to the 700 block. Watch the Whaley videos.

And anyway, the Warren Commission actually added SIX full minutes to the timeline to account for Oswald's backtracking from Neely Street to his roominghouse (from 12:54 PM to 1:00 PM; see CE1119-A). So there's certainly no underhanded deception by the WC here when it comes to Oswald's timeline....




RON BULMAN SAID:

Oswald never ordered a rifle.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

~sigh~ ....




RON BULMAN SAID:

Show me the properly stamped money order.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

~double sigh~ ....




PAUL JOLLIFFE SAID:

No one has ever come up with a coherent explanation for why Fritz reported that "Oswald" strenuously denied ever living at 214 W. Neely.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

That's an easy one to figure out---

Oswald denied living at 214 Neely because he knew that the Backyard Photos were taken there (at his direction), and he knew that those photos were taken at a time when he himself was living there. And the Backyard Photos, of course, show Oswald with the Kennedy murder weapon. Hence, Lee felt compelled to distance himself (again) from any and all "connections" to the murder rifle.


JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:

Whaley did not say anything about the 700 block in his original statements.

They got him to change his story. See WR, pp. 160-61.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Why did you only cite pages 160 and 161? You should have cited WCR Pages 161-163. (Or didn't you read past page 161?) On Page 162 and Page 163 of the Warren Report, we find this information:

--- WCR Quote On: ---

"Whaley was somewhat imprecise as to where he unloaded his passenger. He marked what he thought was the intersection of Neches and Beckley on a map of Dallas with a large X. He said, "Yes, sir; that is right, because that is the 500 block of North Beckley." However, Neches and Beckley do not intersect. Neches is within one-half block of the rooming house at 1026 North Beckley where Oswald was living. The 500 block of North Beckley is five blocks south of the rooming house.

After a review of these inconsistencies in his testimony before the Commission, Whaley was interviewed again in Dallas. The route of the taxicab was retraced under the direction of Whaley. He directed the driver of the car to a point 20 feet north of the northwest corner of the intersection of Beckley and Neely, the point at which he said his passenger alighted. This was the 700 block of North Beckley. The elapsed time of the reconstructed run from the Greyhound Bus Station to Neely and Beckley was 5 minutes and 30 seconds by stopwatch. The walk from Beckley and Neely to 1026 North Beckley was timed by Commission counsel at 5 minutes and 45 seconds."

--- End WC Quotes ---

Nothing but more WC lies, right Jim?

It never ends, does it?


DAVID VON PEIN ALSO SAID:

A Whaley Addendum....

Based on William Whaley's 11/23/63 FBI interview, I think it's pretty clear that Whaley originally did think he had taken Oswald all the way to the 500 block of North Beckley Avenue in Oak Cliff on 11/22/63. Whaley told the FBI on November 23rd that he "took the young man to the 500 block of Beckley Street".

But I think the key to knowing that Whaley was mistaken about the "500 block" is the fact that he always maintained—even in his first FBI interview the day after Oswald rode in his taxicab—that the fare for Oswald's cab ride was exactly "95 cents".

And Whaley's 11/22/63 manifest (or trip sheet) also confirms the fare for the Greyhound-to-Beckley trip as being 95 cents.

And in his 11/23/63 affidavit, Whaley also confirms the 95-cent taxi trip --- "The fare was 95 cents and he gave me a dollar and told me to keep the change."

And we can see from the reconstructed cab rides that a trip in Whaley's cab that starts at the Greyhound bus station and ends at the intersection of Neely & Beckley would, in fact, be 95 cents.



So if Whaley had actually driven Oswald an additional two full blocks on Beckley, the fare would surely have clicked over to $1.00 (or higher) by the time the cab reached the 500 block. But we know it didn't—based on Whaley's November 23rd FBI interview and his trip sheet.



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

From Whaley's 1964 Warren Commission testimony....

WILLIAM WHALEY -- "When I got to Beckley almost to the intersection of Beckley and Neely, he said, "This will do right here," and I pulled up to the curb."

DAVID BELIN -- "Was that the 500 block of North Beckley?"

MR. WHALEY -- "No, sir; that was the 700 block."

MR. BELIN -- "You let him out not at the 500 block but the 700 block of North Beckley?"

MR. WHALEY -- "Yes, sir."

[...]

MR. BELIN -- "Did you ever tell anyone it was the 700 block of North Beckley?"

MR. WHALEY -- "No, sir. I left it said just like I had it on my trip sheet. Nobody else asked me about it."




RON BULMAN SAID:

Whaley in his own handwriting and the signed affidavit [said] "500 block", the day after the assassination. While it was fresh in his mind. Not months later after he may have been "coached" like many others were.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

But, as I mentioned earlier, a trip in Whaley's taxicab to the 500 block of Beckley is almost certainly going to register more than 95 cents on the meter.

Or do you want to pretend that Whaley rigged the meter of his cab during the two 1964 re-enactments so that it would show "95 cents" exactly when the trip ended at the 700 block of Beckley?


JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:

Almost everywhere you look in this case, the minute you press any issue the questions begin to manifest themselves until they grow larger and larger. And it gets to the point that the questions outweigh the answers.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

That type of micro-analyzing can be done with any murder case, Jim. And when it's JFK conspiracy theorists who are doing the "micro-analyzing" and searching for things that just don't seem "right", you can bet the ranch that those CTers WILL find something that they consider to be "fishy". They always do. Just ask any 9/11 Truther.


DENNY ZARTMAN SAID:

Oswald's very best getaway plan was to go to the movies?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I don't think Oswald had any kind of pre-arranged "getaway plan" at all. He wasn't PLANNING to duck into the movie theater when he shot JFK. The killing of Tippit in Oak Cliff made it necessary for him to get off the Oak Cliff streets quickly. And what better place than a dark theater (which was right nearby)? Makes perfect sense to me (from Oswald's flying-by-the-seat-of-his-pants POV on 11/22).


DAVID JOSEPHS SAID:

Dave... show us the intersection of Beckley/Neches at the 500 block of Beckley please.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

It doesn't exist. (See map below.) Whaley simply made a mistake. He meant to say NEELY instead of NECHES.

http://google.com/maps/Neches Street; Dallas, Texas 75208

And please remember the "95 cent" cab ride. That gets Oswald to NEELY, not to the "500 block" of Beckley.


CORY SANTOS SAID:

David, why did LHO not get dropped off right at the boarding house?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

We would need to dig up Lee Oswald and ask him directly---because he's the only one who can answer that now-unanswerable question. But I've given my opinion on this subject in the past, such as this answer I gave to Bill Kelly when he asked me that same question at The Education Forum in 2013:

"As to why Oswald took the cab three blocks beyond his roominghouse (it wasn't five blocks beyond, because Oswald was dropped off at the corner of Beckley & Neely, which is the 700 block of Beckley), I think the answer to that is two-fold:

He didn't want cab driver Whaley to be able to tell anybody later exactly where he lived. And, probably of more critical importance to Oswald at the time, he wanted to check the area of his roominghouse for police activity. Oswald would have had no way of knowing how quickly the police would be on his trail, and he certainly didn't want to walk right into the arms of a waiting policeman on his Beckley doorstep.

Yes, it's true that Oswald wouldn't have to have driven three whole blocks beyond his room in order to see if some police were at 1026 N. Beckley, but he might have been thinking that anybody who wanted to surprise the Presidential assassin probably wouldn't be advertising himself by parking his marked police car right in front of 1026 Beckley. Therefore, he wanted to "case" the neighborhood a few blocks away from his room. (IMO, that's what he did.)

I'll once again reverse the tables regarding this question:

If Lee Oswald didn't have anything to hide and wasn't worried about being picked up by the authorities on 11/22/63, then why indeed did he tell William Whaley to drive a few blocks beyond his roominghouse that day?

In the final analysis, doesn't this type of strange behavior on the part of Lee Harvey Oswald on the day the President was shot from Oswald's own workplace lead much more toward Oswald's GUILT than it does his INNOCENCE?" -- DVP; September 2013


JIM HARGROVE SAID:

There is every reason on earth to put "Oswald" in quotes.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Let me guess ---- You, Jim Hargrove, are one of those CTers who doesn't even believe Lee H. Oswald got into William Whaley's taxicab on November 22, 1963, despite Whaley confirming via a positive identification that his passenger was, indeed, the "real" Lee Harvey Oswald? Is that about the size of the situation?

IOW --- The "Nothing Is Ever What It Seems To Be In The JFK Case" syndrome surfaces yet again.

(And Oswald was never on McWatters' bus either, was he Jim?)

(And Oswald was never in Mexico City either, was he Jim?)

(And the Lunchroom Encounter never even happened, did it Jim?)

(And Oswald never even owned a rifle [or pistol] in the year 1963, did he Jim?)

(And Oswald never posed for the Backyard Photos, did he Jim?)

(And Oswald never fired that shot at Edwin Walker either, did he James?)

I wonder how many more verifiable happenings the Jim Hargroves of the world have rewritten and distorted to suit their fantasy version of events? (Too many to mention here, that's for sure.)


JIM HARGROVE SAID:

A question for the honest members of this forum: Should we bother debating Mr. Von Pein?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Doesn't really matter, of course. Because conspiracy fantasists like you are going to continue to believe the most outrageous and fantastic CT scenarios imaginable....regardless of anything I have to say.

But for truly reasonable and sensible and "honest" people....




MICAH MILETO SAID:

Lone nutters accuse way more witnesses of lying than conspiracy theorists do.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Oh, for Pete sake. You're being ridiculous. It's not even close. Almost everybody in the case is a liar, according to most Internet CTers. [Partial List.]


JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:

Originally, he [William Whaley] said that Oswald walked at a south angle after exiting [the taxicab]. The rooming house was north. No problem, Presto!

To the WC, he said he did not recall whether he walked north or south.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Well, since we know for a fact that the real Oswald rushed into his roominghouse at about 1:00 PM....and we also know that the same real Oswald was in Whaley's cab (at Neely & Beckley) in the minutes prior to 1:00 PM....then it's pretty clear that LHO must have walked north fairly soon after parting company with Whaley.

CTers will, of course, arrive at their own (fantastic) conclusions instead.


JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID:

If you look at his [Whaley's] first day evidence, it's pretty clear what happened and where he dropped him off.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

How long will CTers continue to ignore the "95 cents" proof that I've mentioned multiple times in this discussion? "95 cents" was the taxi fare for Oswald's November 22nd cab ride (revealed early on by Whaley—in his 11/23 affidavit and again in his 11/23 FBI interview), and it's a figure that pretty much PROVES that Whaley dropped Oswald off at Neely Street and not the "500 block". If Oswald had gone all the way to the 500 block of Beckley, does anybody think the fare would STILL have been exactly 95 cents?

David Von Pein
July 12-15, 2019

JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS (PART 1323)

CHUCK SCHUYLER SAID:

The experts say Oswald took a shot at Walker.


BORIS SAID:

There is no "expert" who said Oswald took a shot at Walker. You're just an asshole liar. Big surprise. All you have is "what Marina said". Don't feel bad. That's all anyone had on the Walker incident. That's why you like her so much.


CHUCK SCHUYLER SAID:

Marina's words on the Walker attempt are damning, and they are extensive, and she's never wavered from her belief that your hero Oswald tried to kill Walker. Couple that with the note, and a bullet found from the Walker scene that cannot be excluded as being from Oswald's rifle, and that's what makes the most sense. Oswald is historically guilty of taking a shot at Walker.


BORIS SAID:

A note!

That said what?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

It's a note that was positively proven to have been written (in Russian) by Lee Harvey Oswald. And it proves that Lee was about to go out and do something pretty bad on April 10, 1963, that might land him in jail or the morgue. (What could that have been, do you suppose?)

Do you, Boris, think this note left by LHO (Warren Commission Exhibit No. 1) is referring to some OTHER (non-Walker) terrible thing that Oswald was planning on doing on 4/10/63?

If the note isn't referring to the shooting of General Edwin Walker, then what could that terrible and illegal thing have been that Oswald thinks might get him killed (or arrested) on April 10th?

Please enlighten us, Mr. CTer. Or would you rather stick to the usual wishy-washy cop-out answer that most CTers like to use---i.e., "It's Fake"?


BORIS SAID:

Begging the question. And frankly ASTOUNDING that you are able to glean **that much information** from such an innocuous note, and yet NO INFORMATION AT ALL from the Katzenbach memo. This shows your bias in triplicate.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

Actually, and David is too dishonest to mention this - but only one of the three handwriting experts of the HSCA considered this authentic.

It's undated, and had neither Marina nor Oswald's fingerprints on it, even though it had seven latent prints found on it.


BUD SAID:

As Ben ignores the information that gives insight to put all his focus on something that can take him nowhere.

[...]

"It's the evidence", the idiots cry. Meanwhile, they ignore the evidence.

[...]

This is why idiots are not tapped to conduct investigations.


BEN HOLMES SAID:

Tell us David - why do you think lying will advance your cause?

Since the note is undated, where did you come up with a date for the note?

Could it be that you're simply lying again?


BUD SAID:

He didn't say the letter was written on the 10th, stupid.


BORIS SAID:

~snicker~ The retard has come to chew bubble gum and split hairs. And he's all out of bubble gum.


BUD SAID:

Interesting that you see it as "splitting hairs" when Ben misrepresents what DVP said. Ben claimed I was "parsing" when I pointed out Lane's outright lie about Clemmons witnessing the slaying of Officer Tippit. All these weasel word excuses when you get caught lying.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

It's just like a conspiracy clown (such as Benjamin Holmes) to totally ignore the main thrust of my comments regarding the "Walker" letter and focus only on a side issue of exactly WHEN Oswald wrote the note. A typical diversion by a typical Anybody-But-Oswald fantasist.

And I'm sure Holmes is willing to totally ignore Oswald's photos of Walker's backyard too. Right, Benny?


BORIS SAID:

Supposing Oswald did it with the aid of his Camp Street comrades? One shooter, one lookout guy, one getaway driver. You can speculate all you want about the note alluding to April 10th, but you could never speculate in any way about Oswald having any confederates, could you? Antithetical to your religion, isn't it? Deadly sin number 3, I believe?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Why does he need to bury the rifle if he's got a "getaway driver"?

Let me guess---Marina lied about that too, right?


BORIS SAID:

This is your problem, David. You operate from a point of assumption, then beg the question backwards. What rifle did he bury? How do you know he buried it? Because someone said so? Did it without a shovel too, I guess?

Here's a "gotcha": how does Santa Claus get into houses that don't have chimneys? I know that's how he gets in, because that's what I've been told. I have sources that told me, so I don't need evidence of any kind.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

But you somehow aren't engaging in a "point of assumption" when you imply that LHO's "Camp Street comrades" were involved with Oswald in the Walker shooting, is that it?

Looks to me like standards have just been doubled.


BORIS SAID:

No, that was a hypothetical.

You, as always, are being literal.

Just like it's not a "theory" that Oswald was alone and buried his gun, I guess using his fingers to dig a two-foot-long hole. For you, this is fact. Just like even though two people were seen running from the scene towards a car, you've simply decided it's fact they weren't involved and it's completely unrelated. No hypothetical from you. Not even the option of the possibility that they could be linked. You've just gone straight for the "nah" with no evidence whatsoever supporting your theory, or denying the alternative.

Yours is the dictionary definition of faith, and faith-based persecution. And this is just me in casual observation mode, since to me there is no skin in the game as to whether or not he shot Walker, because it has nothing to do with the JFK assassination other than the WC arbitrarily mentioned the former, and so you are forced to believe it.

Now try saying something factual (as in backed by EVIDENCE, and not the hearsay of 'wut Marina sed') without your dipshit shrugs and moronic "orb-rolls", you sellout wasteland.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Why not try PUTTING THINGS TOGETHER, Boris? (Can't hurt, can it?)

....Oswald receives a rifle via mail order in late March.

....Oswald takes pictures of Walker's house.

....Oswald comes home very late on April 10th. (Was Marina lying about that too? Why of course you think she was. Per CT Fantasists the world over, Marina Oswald was trying to frame her husband for yet another murder attempt that she really has no reason to want to frame him for at all--the Walker shooting. But she did it nonetheless, per the ABO Brigade.)

....The Oswalds move to New Orleans very shortly after the Walker incident.

And the above doesn't even include Lee Oswald's confession to his wife about the Walker murder attempt and the fact that the Walker bullet (CE573) looks exactly like CE399 in many physical respects.

And isn't the TIMING of Oswald's rifle purchase just a tad bit interesting to even an ABO clown like yourself, "Boris"? Or do you want to pretend that all of the rifle-purchase documents are fakes too?


BORIS SAID:

Right, despite mail interception. Okay, I see where you're going with this:

A.) Ignore the points I made.


BUD SAID:

It comes down to you making demands that everything be explained to you or you will believe stupid things. You are going to believe stupid [things] regardless.


BORIS SAID:

B.) Pass off assumptions as if they are facts.


BUD SAID:

Pretty ironic. When you say Marina lied about the Walker attempt, you just assume she did, right? I mean you don't know it for a fact.


BORIS SAID:

C.) Silently ignore the money order discrepancies.


BUD SAID:

He addresses it at length on his blog, stupid. ....




BORIS SAID:

Since [Marina Oswald] is as big a compulsive liar as you are, there is no way to know if what she's saying is true or not. We *know* she's a compromised witness. We know it for a fact.


BUD SAID:

We know you are an idiot. And we know this for a fact.


BORIS SAID:

Receiving donations and threats of deportation. Kids to protect. And beyond that, presuming that because Oswald was out late, that it means he shot Walker. Because everyone who stays out late shoots at Walker.


BUD SAID:

Everyone comes home to their wife and admits they've taken a shot at a political figure?


BORIS SAID:

~snicker~ Literally your [Bud's] only function is to exist as a springboard for critics to segue into their ideas and evidence in any given conversation. You provide nothing else here, nor anything in your personal life.


BUD SAID:

Your greatest achievement in life is waking up to dry sheets. And you don't achieve that very often.


BORIS SAID:

Your [DVP's] allegiance to the official narrative is so blind that you wouldn't pause for a second to ask even the most basic things, or question anything. You are, of course, a zealot...and one with monetary interest in the LN narrative.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

The LN narrative is the only one that makes any sense at all. And it's a narrative that DOES fit the evidence --- CTer protests notwithstanding.

Conspiracy theorists have pretty much nothing but debunked myths and wishful thinking. But the physical evidence belongs in the "Lone Assassin Named Oswald" camp. And it always has.


BORIS SAID:

They [bullets CE573 and CE399] look nothing alike. One is mashed to shit, as if it had actually been shot at something and made contact. The other is so neatly shaped it would slide nicely up a baby's ass without the least bit discomfort, and come out looking the same.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

You're an idiot....



And....

"On June 12, 1964, [FBI] Exhibit C148 [aka CE573], a mutilated rifle slug, was shown to Billy Gene Norvell, former Dallas police officer, 1603 Darr Street, Apartment 147, Irving, Texas, by Special Agent Bardwell D. Odum, Federal Bureau of Investigation. He identified this exhibit as the same one which he had found at the residence of Major General Edwin A. Walker, Dallas, Texas, on April 10, 1963, and identified his marking on this slug." -- Warren Commission Exhibit No. 2011 (Page 6)


DAVID VON PEIN ALSO SAID:

BTW, the term "bury" doesn't have to mean that Oswald needed to dig to China to hide his rifle from the view of others. "Bury", in this case, could merely mean "placed in a ditch and covered over with leaves and debris". Lee didn't necessarily need a shovel to keep his rifle out of the sight of others.


BORIS SAID:

Not interested in your "coulds" or "maybes". Not interested in your speculation.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bury

Not interested in your hypotheticals, because you ALWAYS and ONLY speak facts, otherwise you'd be the kook, not me. So what **did** "bury" mean? Not the dictionary definition, as we see.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

You're an idiot (again). Definition 2B fits my needs just fine....

BURY --- "To cover from view".


BORIS SAID:

Lee didn't need lots of things.

He didn't need a shovel to dig a hole.

He didn't need a means to conceal his weapon on a bus.

He didn't need to bring with him more bullets than he intended to use in DP [Dealey Plaza].

He didn't need to show Albert Bogard the license he never had in order to test-drive the car he wasn't able to drive from the dealership.

He didn't need to mail-order a rifle from a store a thousand miles away.

He didn't need cleaning equipment for his rifle.

He didn't need the better-paying job at the airport once he was in the TSBD.

He didn't need more than three wallets.

He didn't need fingerprints to write his letter to Marina.

This list could go on forever. You're a fool.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Nothing there but a pile of red herrings being put forth by an ABO conspiracy clown who will continue to totally ignore something known as "The Sum Total" of evidence in the JFK and J.D. Tippit murder cases, with that Sum Total clearly indicating the fact that Lee Harvey Oswald was a double-murderer in 1963.


BORIS SAID:

No, asshole. Not red herrings.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Yes. They are red herrings. Every single one of them.

But continue to ignore all the evidence that points to OSWALD ALONE as Kennedy's and Tippit's killer. After all, ignoring the evidence (or pretending it's all fake) is what conspiracy-happy zealots do best, 24/7.

David Von Pein
July 11, 2019
July 11, 2019
July 11, 2019


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

ALSO SEE:




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

JFK ASSASSINATION ARGUMENTS (PART 1322)

JOHN CORBETT SAID:

It seems to me that after JFK was pronounced dead and the ER team had left the room, it would have taken quite a while for the body to be cleaned up and a casket to arrive before the body could be taken off the gurney and placed in the casket. So even if Tomlinson's estimate is off, the bullet he found could not have come from JFK's body. There will still be those who argue CE399 was planted, but this fact pretty much is the death knell for the theory that the bullet fell out of JFK's back.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

From 2007....

"JFK's stretcher was never located in the area of Parkland Hospital where the bullet was found by [Darrell] Tomlinson. Never. Nor was JFK's body ever in that area down the hall from Trauma Room 1.

Kennedy remained in ER-1 the whole time he was in Parkland. So it is physically impossible for any bullet from Kennedy's stretcher to magically appear down the hall.

And if you think the bullet was picked up in Trauma Room No. 1 and then deposited on a stretcher down the hall...ask yourself: What the [heck] for??!!

Why on Earth would anyone even have the slightest desire to do something stupid like that? If there was actually a REAL bullet from LHO's gun that fell out of Kennedy's back (which there wasn't of course, I'm merely playing the silly "conspiracy theory" game for a moment here), then why would anybody bent on framing Oswald want to tamper with such great evidence that was already right THERE near Kennedy's own body and on HIS stretcher, in order to place it on a different stretcher down the hall? That's just nuts all around.

Plus: Even if some moron plotter thought it was a good idea to move the bullet, why plant it on the WRONG stretcher down the hall...or even on Connally's own stretcher? Why not plant it IN THE LIMO WHERE JFK WAS SHOT (which would nicely accompany CE567 and CE569, the fragments also from Rifle #C2766)?

Did any of the so-called "plotters" have a working brain on November 22nd?"

-- David Von Pein; December 4, 2007




JOHN CORBETT SAID:

David, you're being far too logical.


STEVE M. GALBRAITH SAID:

David: I agree with nearly all of this except for this part:

"If there was actually a REAL bullet from LHO's gun that fell out of Kennedy's back (which there wasn't of course, I'm merely playing the silly "conspiracy theory" game for a moment here), then why would anybody bent on framing Oswald want to tamper with such great evidence that was already right THERE near Kennedy's own body and on HIS stretcher, in order to place it on a different stretcher down the hall? That's just nuts all around."

If the bullet that hit JFK in the back did fall out (it didn't but let's go with this) then JFK's throat/neck wound was caused by a separate bullet. I.e., another shooter. That indicates conspiracy.

So the conspiracists [sic; conspirators] would want to hide that "fallen out" bullet to prevent exposure of another shooter. Or have him placed with JC's [John Connally's] stretcher to point to a single bullet causing both JFK's and JC's wounds.

Shorter: there would be an incentive to hide that bullet from being traced to JFK. Since it could only be traced to him and not also to JC.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Which would mean that the person who (allegedly) transported the bullet down the hall must have had knowledge of the bullet hole in JFK's throat before the bullet was moved. And that bullet hole in the throat was almost immediately obliterated via the tracheotomy done by Dr. Perry.

So that means we would need to find out exactly who had access to Trauma Room No. 1 in the very first minutes after JFK was brought into the hospital. (And even most CTers don't think that one of Kennedy's doctors was trying to frame Oswald. So it must be a non-doctor who did the alleged transporting of the bullet in this make-believe scenario.)

But most CTers don't want to be bothered with the "Who Knew What--And When?" details. They just go right to "The Bullet Was Definitely Planted On The Stretcher".


ANTHONY MARSH SAID:

If not for CE 399 there would be nothing to link it to Oswald.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Not true. There are other ballistics items linking the shooting to Oswald --- e.g., the 3 bullet shells in the Sniper's Nest and the 2 large bullet fragments in the front seat of the limo.

But from the perspective of an alleged conspiracy and cover-up, we again need to ask --- WHO KNEW WHAT? AND WHEN DID THEY KNOW IT?


ANTHONY MARSH SAID:

I think that's kinda a tipoff that it's planted when it's found on the WRONG stretcher.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

You need to study Darrell Tomlinson's ever-changing statements regarding the stretchers again....




ANTHONY MARSH SAID:

OK, how would Ruby know it was the wrong stretcher? If you are a dedicated conspiracy kook, you could say that the bullet started on JFK's stretcher and got bumped onto Ronnie Fuller's stretcher when the two stretchers were next to each other in the elevator.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Not even the most dedicated CTer could use such an argument.

Why not?

Because JFK's stretcher was never in an elevator prior to the time when the bullet was first discovered by Tomlinson. Kennedy's stretcher was always on the first floor during that critical time period.

David Von Pein
July 2-3, 2019