DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Part 1357 of my
"JFK Assassination Arguments" series includes a variety of my posts and comments covering the period of
October 1—31, 2022. 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.
================================
MATTHEW KOCH SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
The answer to your question (
"Why don't you believe that the bullet in Parkland is from Kennedy's back wound?") is:
It would be impossible for the stretcher bullet (CE399) to have come from JFK's back wound because neither President Kennedy nor his stretcher was ever located in the area of Parkland Hospital where the bullet was found on November 22.
And regarding the large bullet fragments found in the limousine possibly being from a separate bullet that hit Governor Connally's wrist....
Some doctors have stated that Connally's wrist would have sustained more damage if that wrist had been struck by a separate bullet that had not gone through the neck of John Kennedy first.
Although I'm sure that conspiracists won't have any trouble finding some medical professionals of their own that will say something to the contrary. Because as everybody here knows, there are plenty of opinions to go around in this case.
BOB NESS SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
I'm not aware of any
THIRD attempt by Dr. Humes at writing the final autopsy report. I only know of two such efforts by Humes, which was due to the fact that the first draft of the autopsy report contained some errors or mistakes, which an irritated Dr. Humes attempted to clarify (at least in part) during his
ARRB testimony session in February of 1996:
DR. JAMES J. HUMES -- "Well, it [the first draft of the autopsy report] may have had errors in spelling or I don't know what was the matter with it, or whether I even ever did that. I don't know. I can't recall. I absolutely can't recall, and I apologize for that. But that's the way the cookie crumbles. I didn't want anything to remain that some squirrel would grab on and make whatever use that they might. Now, whether you felt that was reasonable or not, I don't know. But it doesn't make any difference because that was my decision and mine alone. Nobody else's."
------------------------
And as for any "confirmation" of the autopsy doctors physically searching for bullets inside President Kennedy's body, we have that confirmation in Dr. Humes' Warren Commission testimony (at
2 H 364):
DR. HUMES -- "Before the arrival of Colonel Finck, we had made X-rays of the head, neck and torso of the President, and the upper portions of his major extremities, or both his upper and lower extremities. At Colonel Finck's suggestion, we then completed the X-ray examination by X-raying the President's body in toto, and those X-rays are available."
ARLEN SPECTER -- "What did those X-rays disclose with respect to the possible presence of a missile in the President's body?"
DR. HUMES -- "They showed no evidence of a missile in the President's body at any point. And these were examined by ourselves and by the radiologist, who assisted us in this endeavor."
BOB NESS SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Yes, Dr. Humes did burn his original autopsy notes in his home fireplace on 11/24/63. And the reason why he burned those notes is a very logical and sensible reason, as Dr. Humes himself explained in his HSCA testimony on September 7, 1978 (at
1 HSCA 330):
DR. HUMES -- "The original notes which were stained with the blood of our late President, I felt, were inappropriate to retain to turn in to anyone in that condition. I felt that people with some peculiar ideas about the value of that type of material, they might fall into their hands. I sat down and word for word copied what I had on fresh paper."
MR. CORNWELL -- "And then destroyed them?"
DR. HUMES -- "Destroyed the ones that were stained with the President's blood."
------------------------
Related discussion from
September 2010:
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID -- "Autopsy report number one: Burned by Humes and testified to by him before the ARRB. He said it three times and it's in the transcript."
DAVID VON PEIN SAID -- "Dr. Humes admitted to the Warren Commission in 1964 that he burned the first draft of the autopsy report [2 H 373]. So we certainly didn't have to wait until Humes' 1996 ARRB testimony to learn about that particular burning episode. And the very fact that Dr. Humes admitted to burning a draft of the autopsy report is a very good sign that that burning was not done with CONSPIRATORIAL intent or with the thought of a COVER-UP in Dr. Humes' mind. For Pete sake, if Humes had been part of a cover-up and/or conspiracy, the last thing in the world he would have ADMITTED to the Warren Commission is that he was burning autopsy papers in his home fireplace. Get real, Jim."
DAVID VON PEIN ALSO SAID THIS.
David Von Pein
October 2, 2022
================================
CORY SANTOS SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Since you [Cory Santos] think Marilyn Monroe was murdered, I suppose you believe
Dorothy Kilgallen was murdered too, right?
CORY SANTOS SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
But when it comes to the topic of Marilyn Monroe's death, you think you've got enough "evidence" to boldly make this claim:
"Arguing Marilyn was murdered, and she was..." -- C. Santos
You, Mr. Santos, have said nothing in either of your previous two posts in this thread that comes even close to being "evidence" to show that Marilyn Monroe was murdered.
CORY SANTOS SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
WTF?! You're obviously just playing around now. Because nobody (especially an individual named Cory A. Santos, Sr.,
Esq.) could possibly think the death of Marilyn Monroe and the gunshot death of Robert Francis Kennedy are equal in the "evidence of murder" department.
You
seriously want to know what "evidence" exists to show that RFK was "murdered"?
Is such a silly discussion
really warranted?
DAVID VON PEIN ALSO SAID:
FYI / FWIW....
Here are a couple of newspaper front pages following Marilyn Monroe's death in early August of 1962....
Click to enlarge....
David Von Pein
October 7-8, 2022
================================
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
From an October 2022
Facebook discussion concerning Ruth Paine:
JOE ALESI SAID:
I saw Ruth yesterday [October 9, 2022] and informed her of the good work you [DVP] are doing to knock down the lies and misinformation people like DiEugenio are spreading. The best part: She doesn’t even know who DiEugenio is.
JOE ALESI LATER SAID:
Max Good has learned that Ruth has now seen
“The Assassination and Mrs. Paine”, and [Max] made a post on [
The Education Forum]. I’m pleased to announce that not only have I been appointed as Ruth Paine’s Ambassador to the JFK community but could also be her “handler”.
Ruth Paine, handler of Oswald, now has her own handler! I read this to Ruth yesterday and she burst out laughing.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Thank you, Joe, for telling Ruth Paine about my online posts supporting her.
And I think it's good that Ruth isn't very much aware of who Jim DiEugenio is. She's probably better off not knowing much about him.
If you see Ruth again, please give her my very best and let her know how much I admire and respect her.
And if you want to provide her with a good laugh, show her
this image (also seen below). Ruth might also get a kick out of our "Richmond, Indiana" connection (which, in part, is true; I
was born in Richmond and was living there when Ruth visited that town in September of 1963):
ALLEN LOWE SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
And—as usual—a conspiracy theorist (this time someone named Lowe) is more than happy to drag Mrs. Paine through the mud, despite a complete lack of something called "evidence" to support his ridiculous claim that Ruth Paine was an
"intelligence operative". And yet this despicable evidence-free hobby of character assassination against Ruth Paine continues—year after year. Pathetic.
David Von Pein
October 9-11, 2022
================================
MATT ALLISON SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Dorothy Garner only
"puts a giant dent in the WC version of LHO going from the 6th floor to the lunchroom" if a person wants to believe that Dorothy had her eyes fixed on the TSBD staircase every single second just after the assassination.
From a 2014 discussion:
"Why in the world would anyone think Dorothy Garner had her eyes transfixed on the STAIRS every single second immediately following the President's assassination? How silly would that be, considering what had just happened outside those fourth-floor, SOUTH-SIDE windows just moments earlier? Why would she (or anyone) have kept a vigil on the staircase? Therefore, since it makes no logical sense to think that Garner (or ANYBODY ELSE) had their eyes peeled on those stairs every second, Oswald could have easily been on that 4th-floor landing for a matter of--what?--five seconds and not been seen by anyone who was on the same floor. Or do conspiracy theorists REALLY want to contend that Dorothy Garner never took her eyes off those stairs between 12:30 and 12:32 PM? That's incredibly silly to believe that's the case (even if she DID catch a glimpse of Truly and Baker)." -- DVP; October 2014
PETE MELLOR SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
I never once questioned Garner's eyesight. I'm questioning the idea that Dorothy Garner kept a continuous second-by-second vigil on the back staircase just after the assassination. Such a notion is ridiculous.
Nobody can possibly prove that Dorothy Garner had her eyes on
this stairway in the northwest corner of the Book Depository Building (also pictured below) for
every moment of that (approx.) 120-second period (or however many minutes and seconds it actually was).
Also --- Take a look at the small area of the 4th floor that we're talking about here (i.e., the stairwell area in the upper-left corner of the floor plan I've presented below). How much time do you think it would have taken Lee Oswald (or anyone) to have navigated that corner stairway as he quickly came down from the fifth floor?
In other words, how long would Oswald have been in view of anyone on the 4th floor who happened to be looking toward the northwest corner during those few fleeting seconds? I'm guessing five seconds, tops. And after those few seconds on the corner "landing", he then would be totally out of sight of anyone on the fourth floor.
I can easily envision a scenario which has the sixth-floor assassin (namely: a Mr. Oswald) avoiding detection as he swiftly rounds that stairwell corner and flees down those stairs toward the third floor. And, realistically, all he needs in order to do that is
five measly seconds away from the gaze of any prying eyes (maybe even less than five seconds).
PAT SPEER SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Has Dorothy Garner ever been interviewed by anyone, Pat? (Beyond the very short
"Stroud document", that is.) Did she ever give any details about exactly where she was located (in relation to the stairs) at 12:30 to 12:32 PM CST on 11/22/63?
That would certainly be an important detail to know, don't you think?
The Stroud document is indeed interesting. But before declaring Oswald innocent, I think a little more info is needed beyond just this one single sentence regarding Miss Garner in this June 1964 letter:
PAT SPEER SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Thanks for that info, Pat. (And thanks to Barry Ernest too.)
Knowing the evidence that exists against Lee Oswald as I do, my opinion is (and has been for many years) that Oswald did use those back stairs to flee from his sixth-floor sniper's perch, and he did somehow manage to walk between the raindrops (so to speak) so as to avoid being seen by anyone on any of the TSBD floors that he had to traverse in order to make it to the second-floor lunchroom by approximately 12:32 PM.
And, IMO, the information supplied by Dorothy Garner does not and
cannot exonerate Lee Harvey Oswald for the assassination of the President, given the evidence that exists against him.
And if LHO wasn't the sixth-floor sniper, then the question needs to be asked ---
How, then, did the real 6th-floor assassin(s) manage to avoid being seen by Garner, et al, in the minutes following JFK's murder?
That is certainly a legitimate and valid question that has never been satisfactorily answered (IMO) by any conspiracy theorist.
JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Oh sure, Jim. A trial judge would have tossed the case against Oswald in the trash---despite the fact that every scrap of evidence up there on the 6th floor
* pointed in the direction of Lee Harvey Oswald being the assassin (e.g., Oswald's rifle, his prints on the boxes in the Sniper's Nest, the CE142 paper bag with Oswald's prints on it, and the shell casings from LHO's gun).
And yet Jim D. keeps assuring everyone that it's
me (and not the conspiracy theorists) who resides in a world of fantasy.
* Evidence which you, Jim, think is all fake, of course. But that's another fifty arguments/threads.
PAT SPEER SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
The question would then become: How did these two guys---
dressed like cops!---get
into the building and up to the sixth floor
prior to the assassination without a single person noticing
either one of these "cops"?
And remember: the sixth floor was well-populated that day, with extra workers up there laying the new floor (up until about 11:45 AM, that is).
SEAN COLEMAN SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
But the same question I asked previously still applies. Especially when considering the repeated
"I saw no strangers in the TSBD on Nov. 22" statements that exist within Commission Document No. 706 (aka
CE1381):
JEAN PAUL CEULEMANS SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Since you've touched on the subject of Bonnie Ray Williams and the fact that he decided (for whatever reason) to litter the sixth floor of the Book Depository with the remnants of his lunch on 11/22/63....I hope everyone here won't mind if I indulge in a little bit of comic relief on the topic of Bonnie Ray and his Nov. 22nd lunch feast....
My favorite part of Bonnie Ray Williams' Warren Commission session [
seen here] has always been his testimony about the
chicken-on-the-bone sandwich that he said he ate for lunch when he was up on the 6th floor on 11/22.
I can't help but chuckle whenever I run across that testimony. And so, just for fun, in the year 2010 (in
this Usenet newsgroup posting) and again in 2016 (in
this post at
The Education Forum), I decided to spread the mirth and merriment concerning Bonnie Ray's hard-to-swallow noontime meal in those two Internet messages linked above (and screen-captured below).
P.S. -- If Bonnie Ray Williams is still with us here on this Earth, I want him to know that I'm not making fun of
him. I'm only snickering at his choice of November 22 luncheon entrees, which should have made every dentist in Dallas County jump for joy due to the increased business Bonnie Ray's bone-riddled poultry delicacy surely supplied them.
.png)
.png)
PAT SPEER SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Except for the fact that sausage and bacon don't have any bones in them. So your examples are not really fair comparisons to a bone-in chicken "sandwich".
Putting a piece of bone-in chicken between two pieces of bread is ludicrous (in the south or anywhere else). What's the point of even doing that when nobody who isn't insane is going to pick it up and eat it as a "sandwich" anyway? It's just silly.
But, as they say, variety is the spice of life (and sandwiches). :)
BTW, Joseph Ball of the Warren Commission [at
3 H 169] also seemed to think it was a bit strange to eat a sandwich with bones in it.
LARRY HANCOCK SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
I love chicken sandwiches. In fact, when I operated my KFC restaurant here in the Hoosier State, I would regularly take one of our center-cut breast pieces (which we referred to as a "keel") and make a sandwich out of it for my lunch. But I'd make sure to debone the bird before putting
any of it between the bread. Which is what any sensible person would do, of course. (No offense to the south—or to Mr. Bonnie Ray Williams—intended.) :)
PAT SPEER SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Well, of course a "sandwich" consists of bread and meat, Pat. No argument there. The ridiculous thing that we've been talking about in this thread is having
BONES in a
SANDWICH. Because "Bones" and "Sandwich" do not mix. No way, no how.
DAVID VON PEIN ALSO SAID:
As a side note to all this "chicken" talk, I thought I'd post this newspaper ad that I found recently, which is something that really illustrates in no uncertain terms just how much times have changed since 1963 when it comes to the cost of fast food in North America.
Just take a gander at all the food you could get for only
$4.95 at the local KFC outlet in Windsor, Ontario, Canada, in July of 1963! This Picnic Pack seems like a steal of a deal---even for JFK's era. This amount of food would cost over $50 today. Oh, how I wish it were 1963 again! If only to see these prices one more time! ....
CLICK TO ENLARGE:
More shockingly low food prices from the 1950s and 1960s can be found amongst the various KFC ads I've collected and put on
this webpage. It's a time warp experience indeed.
DVP ALSO SAID THIS.
JOSEPH McBRIDE SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Nonsense. The widespread inaccurate reporting on radio and television on November 22nd about Oswald eating a chicken dinner while waiting for JFK to enter the kill zone was just another of the
innocent and
understandable mistakes made by the media in the immediate aftermath of the assassination. It wasn't designed to be "propaganda" at all.
At the time those erroneous "chicken dinner" reports were being broadcast, the media
really did think the President's killer was up there on the 6th floor munching on chicken while he waited for Kennedy to arrive in Dealey Plaza. And given the close proximity of the chicken scraps and the soft drink bottle to the assassin's Sniper's Nest in the Depository, a reasonable and understandable conclusion to reach was that JFK's murderer had, indeed, been the one who was dining on chicken just before pulling the trigger.
No intentional "propaganda" there at all. Merely a perfectly logical mistake made by media personnel who were merely trying their best to quickly report to the world all the details they could concerning one of the worst tragedies of the 20th century. Nothing more than that.
DAVID VON PEIN LATER SAID:
The key to
knowing with 100% certainty that the Baker/Oswald encounter occurred on the
second floor in the
lunchroom is
this affidavit filled out on 11/23/63 by Roy S. Truly. Truly, of course, knew Oswald on sight and Truly also knew the layout of the TSBD building by heart.
Truly affidavit excerpt (emphasis added by DVP):
"The officer and I went through the shipping department to the freight elevator. We then started up the stairway. We hit the second floor landing, the officer stuck his head into the lunch room area where there are Coke and candy machines. Lee Oswald was in there. The officer had his gun on Oswald and asked me if he was an employee. I answered yes." -- Roy Truly; 11/23/63
So, in order to believe there was
NO "lunchroom encounter" at all (which is the ridiculous theory being proposed by many Internet CTers nowadays), we'd have to believe that Roy Truly just flat-out lied about multiple things relating to that 2nd-floor encounter in his 11/23 statement.
Plus, Marrion Baker would have to be a liar as well....because in
later interviews and TV appearances, he also confirmed that the encounter took place on the
second floor and in the
lunchroom.
Why are so many conspiracists so willing and eager to call
both of those men rotten liars?
~shrug~
BILL FITE SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Yes, it would have been ideal if Officer Baker had detained Oswald instead of letting him go. And I'm guessing that Marrion Baker often had feelings of guilt himself for allowing the assassin to escape the building. If Baker had detained Oswald on the spot in the lunchroom, it would, of course, have saved the life of J.D. Tippit.
But, as they say, hindsight is very nearly always 20/20.
BILL FITE SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
In a perfect world—with unlimited manpower and resources—yes, I agree with you on this 100%, Bill.
Unfortunately, there is no such world. Never has been.
David Von Pein
October 15-21, 2022
================================
JOHN IACOLETTI SAID:
Nick McDonald was an attention seeker who fancied himself a hero. In reality he was guilty of egregious police misconduct:
....He searched Oswald and others in the theater without a warrant or probable cause.
....He participated in the arrest of Oswald for murder without a warrant or probable cause.
....He punched a suspect in the face.
....He mishandled evidence.
....He embellished his story every time he retold it.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
More crap from Iacoletti, as he pretends McDonald wasn't injured in the fray in the theater. Per Iacoletti, Nick McDonald was guiltier than Lee Oswald. Disgusting disinfo. I'll go vomit now.
David Von Pein
October 19, 2022
================================
ANDREW PRUTSOK SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
What you just said is not so "mind-boggling" when you realize that the autopsy photos almost totally contradict all of those Parkland witnesses with respect to the location of JFK's large head wound.
The
authenticated-as-genuine autopsy photographs and X-rays simply
must trump any and all eyewitnesses....no matter how many witnesses are saying something different.
But, of course, those Parkland witnesses
are believed by many, many people—such as yourself, Andrew, plus about 60%-70% of America, which is the approximate current number of people who say they believe a conspiracy existed on November 22, 1963.
| Related Link | | ———> | |  |
David Von Pein
October 21, 2022
================================
RON BULMAN SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
But then her very next words were...
"...because the motorcade was coming near us and no one was calling..."
...which implies that when she used the word "dead", she merely meant that there was no phone-call activity at that time. I don't think she meant the phones wouldn't work at all.
When evaluating Geneva Hine's entire statement (which is from her Warren Commission testimony, at
6 H 395), I think
Bill Brown has got it correct. Hine was talking
only about the lights on the
telephones and not about the lights or the electricity in the entire building when she said
"the lights all went out"....
"I was alone until the lights all went out and the phones became dead because the motorcade was coming near us and no one was calling so I got up and thought I could see it from the east window in our office." -- Geneva L. Hine
It's remarkable how something like Miss Hine's WC testimony above can get twisted and misinterpreted by conspiracy believers until it mushrooms into something conspiratorial and sinister, when in reality it's not the slightest bit sinister at all.
DAVID VON PEIN ALSO SAID:
We can be pretty sure the phones in the Book Depository did
not go "dead" right around the time of the assassination, because we have this additional Warren Commission testimony from Miss Geneva Hine, which is testimony at
6 H 396 which certainly implies that the TSBD telephones
were working within a very very short time of when the shooting occurred:
"And there was a girl in there [the office of Southwestern Publishing Co.] talking on the telephone and I could hear her but she didn't answer the door. .... I called and called and shook the door and she didn't answer me because she was talking on the telephone; I could hear her. They have a little curtain up and I could see her form through the curtains. I could see her talking and I knew that's what she was doing."
Plus....
We also know that the telephones inside the Depository were working just a few minutes after the assassination took place, because Robert MacNeil of NBC News used one of the TSBD phones to call the NBC Radio Network and was put on the air live with that network's first bulletin concerning the shooting. MacNeil's initial bulletin can be heard
here.
So, if the phones in the Texas School Book Depository went dead right around the time President Kennedy was being shot out on Elm Street, then they certainly didn't remain "dead" for very long at all.
BENJAMIN COLE SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
According to Robert MacNeil himself in
this November 18, 2000, interview (fast forward to
13:30), the telephone call he made from the Book Depository on 11/22/63 was made from one of the TSBD offices using
"one of those old black phones with four clear Lucite buttons":
"I went into an office. There was one of those old black phones with four clear Lucite buttons, and two of them were lit up and two of them weren't, and I dropped one down and I got through to NBC in about ten seconds." -- Robert MacNeil; 11/18/2000
David Von Pein
October 29-31, 2022
================================
REVISITING SOME POSTS FROM
NINE YEARS AGO...
ON AUGUST 17, 2013, DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
In
this forum thread, once again, we're treated to people using their vivid imaginations to stamp a specific identity on a fuzzy and very indistinct human being seen in a low-quality film/photo.
How in the world can anyone positively say
WHO "prayer man" is
here? It's impossible.
ROBERT PRUDHOMME SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
I think a better question might be:
Why would Oswald have a desire to follow a
policeman into the building and then race upstairs to buy a Coke at that exact moment in time?
The above question is a particularly valid one (even to most conspiracists), since almost all CTers acknowledge the fact that Oswald was most certainly "involved" in the assassination "plot" in some manner.
In that set of circumstances (with Oswald involved in some plan to kill the President), can anyone imagine LHO
wanting to go back inside the building from which shots had just been fired?
Given the make-believe fantasy scenario I just outlined, wouldn't Oswald be much better off just staying outside the building entirely?
In reality, of course, Oswald was inside the building when those Darnell and Wiegman images were taken. Lee Harvey, at that time, was in the process of hiding his rifle between boxes on the sixth floor and then hurrying down the back stairs after having just fired three shots at the President.
MARTIN HINRICHS SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
I had never really thought of it from that perspective before, Martin. Not a bad point. But, on the other hand, we must consider other things too -- the fact that [Malcolm] Couch was riding in a moving car as he filmed. I guess he could have jumped out of the camera car [as Wiegman did] and rush inside the TSBD to film in there or film the upper floors of the building where he saw the gun. But in the latter possibility, Couch knew the gun had already been pulled back inside, so he might have thought
"What's the point of filming an empty window?" (even Dillard wasn't fast enough with his camera to capture the gun or the assassin in the window, and he snapped his picture just seconds after Bob Jackson shouted
"There's the rifle!").
Plus, Couch could easily see that a lot of confusion was taking place near the Grassy Knoll (the direction his camera car was taking him anyway), so what was he supposed to do under those circumstances? He merely filmed what was handy to film at that chaotic moment, and he'd already passed the Depository.
And this quote of yours, Martin, is not an accurate (or fair) remark at all:
"This is a good example of guided testimonies of the WC." -- M. Hinrichs
How do I know it's not a fair statement? Because we don't need to rely ONLY on what Mal Couch told the Warren Commission months after the assassination. Fortunately for us, we've got the audio of Couch saying that he saw the rifle sticking out of the
"fifth or sixth floor" window of the TSBD. And he said that on live WFAA-Radio within just an hour or two of the shooting on November 22nd. Listen to him say it
HERE.
BTW, after Couch's camera car went under the Triple Underpass, he did jump out of the car and run back to the Depository. Here's what Couch said about that in his
Warren Commission testimony:
MALCOLM O. COUCH -- "As I recall, right after we made the turn on Elm, one or two of the fellows jumped out. But after we got all the way down underneath the three trestles we finally persuaded the driver--who wasn't too anxious to stop--to stop and we all jumped out. And I ran, I guess it was about 75 yards or a little more back up to the School Depository Building and took some sweeping pictures of the crowd standing around. I didn't stay there long."
DAVID VON PEIN LATER SAID:
Why do so many conspiracy believers totally ignore Oswald's own words concerning where he said he was located
at the time of the shooting?
WILLIAM KELLY SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Since you think Oswald wasn't on the sixth floor when the assassination was taking place, then how did
OSWALD'S rifle get on the sixth floor, Bill?
And why did Oswald lie about the
"curtain rods"? What possible reason would Oswald have had for telling such a false tale to Buell Frazier (twice)?
And you think it's just a coincidence that
OSWALD'S prints were all over the boxes in the Sniper's Nest--the same nest where Kennedy's killer was located at 12:30 PM?
My, what lucky patsy plotters.
WILLIAM KELLY SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Sure I know all of that stuff, Bill. Does that mean I have to swallow it like you have?
WILLIAM KELLY SAID THIS.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Buell Wesley Frazier, of course,
did drive the rifle from Irving to the TSBD on 11/22. That fact couldn't be more obvious. And it's also obvious that the bag found on the sixth floor could easily hold Oswald's disassembled rifle, as this side-by-side photo below amply illustrates (the caption of the FBI photo is slightly off when it says that the blanket was found in "Oswald's garage"; it should say Ruth Paine's garage, of course; that is one of several errors made by the FBI during its haste in preparing its
12/9/63 report):
Tell us, William Kelly, how did Oswald's prints get on that 38-inch paper bag (CE142) if he didn't handle it at some point prior to the assassination?
Also....
We have
OSWALD'S fingerprints and palmprints located on two of the boxes that were located
deep within the Sniper's Nest.
Stated another way -- Lee Harvey Oswald's fingers touched the same boxes that were utilized by the person who fired a rifle at President Kennedy.
Do the math. It isn't rocket science--or even 10th grade algebra. It's 1st grade 2+2 arithmetic. You're just looking for an excuse to throw away some very incriminating evidence that corroborates and solidifies all of the other "Oswald Was Here" stuff that is also on the table.
But go ahead and play defense attorney for Oswald if that's your desire. But I doubt a jury would buy it (especially when that same jury considers
whose gun deposited those three empty cartridge cases that were lying just a few inches away from Oswald's prints on those boxes).
--------------------------------------------------
Related Links:
http://jfk-archives/"Prayer Man" And Other Assorted Topics
http://jfk-archives/Oswald's Whereabouts At 12:30 PM On 11/22/63
--------------------------------------------------
David Von Pein
August 17—September 23, 2013
--------------------------------------------------
David Von Pein
October 4, 2022
================================
