JFK Assassination Forum Archives -- Misc. Topics Of Interest (Part 86)

You CTers always claim that so much stuff can never be trusted, so how
in the world can you "fact check" from a database of evidence and
testimony that's largely corrupted in some fashion (per the CTers,
that is)? How can you possibly know what "facts" are true, and which
ones are false "facts"? And how can you possibly know who to trust
amid such a pool of liars and apologists and con artists?

Quite a quandary for you conspiracists, ain't it, Tony? Kinda makes
you wish you'd taken up astronomy, huh? (Instead of engaging in this
lifelong and futile Anyone-But-Oswald racket.)

aeffects

unread,

Feb 20, 2009, 3:19:01 AM2/20/09

to

On Feb 19, 8:38 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:

get lost troll, your not cross posting to Anthony here, moron....

btw, no free advertising......

David Von Pein

unread,

Feb 20, 2009, 3:28:02 AM2/20/09

to

>>> "get [sic] lost troll, your [sic, per the Crackpipe's norm] not cross[-]posting to Anthony here, moron." <<<

Kinda looks like I just did anyway, dickhead.

(BTW, nice job on your last post, Mister Crackpipe -- only three
errors in a 15-word post. Way better than usual for you.)

aeffects

unread,

Feb 20, 2009, 4:07:06 PM2/20/09

to

there it is again, just so you can read it un-emcumbered:

David Von Pein

unread,

Feb 20, 2009, 4:41:07 PM2/20/09

to

So nice, I'll write it twice (for The Crackpipe):

aeffects

unread,

Feb 20, 2009, 5:05:01 PM2/20/09

to

dickhead? my your testy, no stipend check from Vin this month, eh?

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,

Mar 1, 2009, 10:36:46 PM3/1/09

to

DID HOWARD BRENNAN GIVE THE DESCRIPTION OF THE DEPOSITORY SNIPER TO
INSPECTOR SAWYER?:

www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/1b7ce2ca146422d3

DAVID MAGGS ASKED:

Where did the police get the description of Oswald? Inspector Sawyer
did not remember speaking to Brennan.

JOHN McADAMS SAID:

But he [Sawyer] didn't remember getting the description from anybody
*else,* did he? And we know what the description was. If there was
another witness who produced a description virtually identical to that
of Brennan, it hardly impeaches the case against Oswald.

DVP SAID:

You're quite correct there, John. ....

"Another theory that CTers seem to like quite a bit is the one
that claims it wasn't really Brennan who gave the first description of
the Depository sniper to the police just a few minutes after the
shooting. Conspiracists want to believe, evidently, that either the
police simply made up out of thin air the description of the assailant
in the TSBD .... or .... that it was some other (unknown and never
identified) person who gave DPD Inspector J. Herbert Sawyer the
description of the killer....which was a description that almost
perfectly matched the one Brennan gave in his 11/22 affidavit.

"I don't deny that there was/is some confusion regarding who
exactly it was who gave the first description of the assassin to the
police (which was the basis for the initial APB broadcast by the DPD
at 12:44 PM on 11/22/63). But to believe that it was someone other
than Brennan who gave Inspector Sawyer the description of the killer
is to also believe that two strange things occurred in relation to
this "other" witness (with #2 belonging in a separate "Very Odd And
Amazingly Coincidental"
category):

"1.) It was a witness who was never identified (and never
bothered to come forward to be identified), even though he is
providing some of the most important info in history.

"2.) This unknown witness' physical description of the assassin
just happens to perfectly coincide with the info that Brennan supplied
the police and the Secret Service and (later) the Warren Commission.

"Also -- If there WAS, in fact, yet ANOTHER witness who saw the
exact same thing that Brennan saw, this would tend to buttress (even
more) the notion that Oswald, or someone who looked very similar to
Oswald, was firing from just where Brennan said the man was firing
from in the Book Depository Building." -- DVP; 11/19/2006

www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/a83751f6ce319004

CLAVIGER SAID:

Oswald's supervisor at the TSBD, Roy Truly, gave a description to the
police, when Oswald failed to return to his department. Truly had seen
Oswald earlier in the lunchroom so LHO was conspicuous by his absence.

DVP SAID:

That was well after the initial 12:44 PM ABP DPD broadcast. Truly
could not possibly have been the source of the description of the
sixth-floor shooter at 12:44. Besides, Truly didn't see the 6th-Floor
gunman anyway.

CLAVIGER SAID:

David, Good point, but Truly knew LHO had reason to be on the 6th
floor where the rifle was found and he was the only one unaccounted
for. He had seen Oswald only a few minutes earlier in the lunchroom,
so Truly gave a description of LHO based on this suspicious behavior.
Does anyone know the description he gave the police and did they use
it? I'm wondering how close it matched Brennen's
description?

"THALIAC" SAID:

How the sniper's height was known is another mystery.

DVP SAID:

Why is that a "mystery"? That info was supplied by Howard Brennan too
(quite obviously). And Brennan estimated the gunman's height to be
5'10" from having observed the killer (Oswald, of course) in the SN
window before, during, and after the shooting.

Do you think the police just MADE UP the "5-feet-10" part of the 12:44
APB description? Or is your question more along these lines instead:

'How could Brennan (or anyone) have possibly known what the
height of the gunman was when the gunman was partially hidden behind a
dirty window?'

My answer to that last question would be:

Brennan merely guessed. (And he was off by just one inch.)

www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com

aeffects

unread,

Mar 2, 2009, 12:08:59 PM3/2/09

to

On Mar 1, 7:36 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> DID HOWARD BRENNAN GIVE THE DESCRIPTION OF THE DEPOSITORY SNIPER TO
> INSPECTOR SAWYER?:

[...]

>
> My answer to that last question would be:

you're answers are irrelevant as are your idol-ship Vincent Bugliosis'
--

> Brennan merely guessed. (And he was off by just one inch.)
>

quoting yourself seems a bit idiotic (but par for this nutters course)
and, btw, no free advertising, troll!