The Boxes, The Bag, And The Nest
David Von Pein
PART OF SOME NEFARIOUS "PLOT" TO FRAME LEE HARVEY OSWALD) MOVED THE
BOXES IN THE SIXTH-FLOOR SNIPER'S NEST PRIOR TO THE BOXES BEING
PHOTOGRAPHED.....
AND MANY CTers ALSO THINK THAT THE PAPER BAG FOUND IN THE NEST WAS
"MANUFACTURED" OR "FAKED" BY THE COPS IN SOME MANNER, TOO.....
BUT DOES ANY OF THE VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE BEAR OUT SUCH VILE
CONSPIRATORIAL ALLEGATIONS AIMED AT THE D.P.D.?.....
SIMPLY PUT -- NO, IT DOES NOT.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Multiple DPD and Sheriff officials provided evidence (via their Warren
Commission testimony and their official DPD photographs) that proves
the conspiracy theorists are wrong when they accuse the DPD and Dallas
Sheriff's Department of all kinds of lies and conspiracy-favoring
activity with respect to the "box" evidence found inside the "Sniper's
Nest" on the 6th Floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building
shortly after John F. Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963.
Luke Mooney, Carl Day, and Robert Studebaker all provided such
evidence and testimony. Are they all liars? And are BOTH sets of DPD
photos (taken by Day and Studebaker) to be considered "faked"?
Mooney testified (plain as day) that there was a box "tilted" (on the
windowsill) when he first saw the box arrangement in the Sniper's
Nest.
A portion of Mooney's Warren Commission testimony regarding this
matter is shown below. .....
~~~~~~~
JOE BALL -- "Is that the way the boxes looked?"
(Ball is referring to CE509, linked below....)
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/ce509.jpg
LUKE MOONEY -- "That is [sic] the three boxes, but one of them was
tilted off just a little, laying down on the edge, I believe, to my
knowledge."
BALL -- "Are they arranged as they were when you saw them?"
MOONEY -- "I am not positive. As I remember right, there was one box
tilted off."
BALL -- "Do I understand that you say that it appeared to you that the
top box was tilted?"
MOONEY -- "The end of it was laying this way."
BALL -- "Now, in this same picture, {CE} 511, you see a box in the
window. Does that seem to be about the angle?"
MOONEY -- "Yes; that box was tilted."
BALL -- "That was tilted in that way?"
MOONEY -- "Yes, sir."
~~~~~~~
Here is CE511 that Mooney was referring to:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0124b.htm
By the way, CE511 depicts the exact same thing that is also shown in
"Studebaker Exhibit B", and is also the same as CE715 (with 715
lacking the circles around the two bullet shells that are visible in
the photo shown in 511; the reason that all three shells aren't seen
is due to the angle of the picture; the third shell is out of sight in
that photograph)....
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0263a.htm
There's also this testimony from Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Luke
Mooney.....
MOONEY -- "So I stood guard to see that no one disturbed anything
until Captain Will Fritz approached with his group of officers."
~~~~~~~
Footnote -- Why on Earth Joe Ball didn't utilize either CE1301 or
Studebaker Exhibit J (the latter being a "re-creation" done by
Studebaker himself of the original box configuration in the SN window)
when questioning Luke Mooney is a mystery to me. .....
CE1301:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0255a.htm
Studebaker Exhibit J:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0337a.htm
Either one of those exhibits linked above would have been much better
to use than CE509 or CE511. CE509, btw, was verified by Robert
Studebaker as being a picture taken (by Studebaker) AFTER the boxes
had already been moved and dusted for prints by the DPD.
So using CE509 when questioning Mooney about the "original box
configuration" is just plain silly. It makes me wonder if Mr. Ball of
the WC was deliberately trying to "trip up" Mooney in some fashion
(i.e., trying to find out if a member of Dallas law enforcement would
be willing to lie under oath to the WC about some of the evidence).
A pretty good trick, I think, if that was what Ball had in mind. But,
of course, Mr. Mooney was not tripped up in any way when he was asked
if CE509 depicted the SN boxes before they had been moved.
I guess it's possible that Ball, himself, didn't realize that CE509
was not the true "Before The Boxes Were Moved" configuration. But it
seems mighty strange to me that Ball would not have known that fact
before questioning Mooney.
In any event, Mooney's answers were perfectly consistent with an
ABOVE-
BOARD AND TRUTHFUL Dallas Sheriff's Department with respect to the box
evidence found in the SN on 11/22/63.
~~~~~~~
There's also the evidence provided by the photo taken by news
photographer Tom Dillard within seconds of the last shot being fired
at President Kennedy (picture is linked below).
Dillard's photo verifies that there WAS, indeed, a box positioned in
the southeast 6th-Floor window in the general manner described by
Mooney, with a corner of the box clearly visible in Dillard's photo,
indicating that the box was angled in such a way during the shooting
as described by multiple DPD and Dallas Sheriff's officers (i.e.,
angled in a fashion where the box configuration would serve nicely as
a "rifle rest" for a gunman who was firing a weapon in a southwesterly
direction).
That 6th-Floor gunman was later positively identified as Lee Harvey
Oswald....with Oswald's very own Mannlicher-Carcano rifle being found
tucked between boxes on the northwest side of that very same sixth
floor of the Book Depository (and with bullet shells from that same
gun being found near the assassin's window as well).
The Dillard photo:
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/ce482.jpg
~~~~~~~
In addition, there is also the testimony given by Lt. J.C. Day of the
DPD (which is testimony that indicates the "tilted" box on the window
ledge was there ORIGINALLY...before any of the boxes inside the
Sniper's Nest were moved).
Day also acknowledges the fact, via his WC testimony, that the three
spent bullet shells ("hulls") discovered inside the Sniper's Nest were
photographed PRIOR to any of the shells being moved by any DPD
officer. .....
DAVID BELIN -- "Do you know whether or not Exhibit 716 and Exhibit 715
were taken before these hulls were moved?"
J.C. DAY -- "They were taken before anything was moved, to the best of
my knowledge."
BELIN -- "I notice boxes throughout the picture {referring to CE715},
including the box in the window. To the best of your knowledge, had
any of those boxes been moved prior to the time the picture, Exhibit
715, was taken?"
DAY -- "No, sir; they had not."
BELIN -- "Now, as you face the picture {referring to CE482; linked
below} -- the box to the right, which would be to the east, has a
corner sticking out, or just a corner of the box shows. Is that the
same box that appears to be resting on the window ledge in Exhibit
715?"
DAY -- "In my opinion, it is."
CE482:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/ce482.jpg
~~~~~~~
That brings us to the photos and testimony of Robert L. Studebaker of
the DPD.....
JOE BALL -- "Were there any boxes on the ledge of this window?"
ROBERT STUDEBAKER -- "Yes."
BALL -- "Did you take some pictures showing those boxes?"
STUDEBAKER -- "Yes."
BALL -- "Was that before any of them were moved?"
STUDEBAKER -- "That picture right there is the one that shows them,
and the other pictures show them before they were moved."
BALL -- "You mean Exhibit A and B?"
STUDEBAKER -- "A and B." {Studebaker Exhibits A and B linked
below....}
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/studea.jpg
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/studeb.jpg
BALL -- "Do you have a picture that shows the boxes themselves, just
shot of those boxes in the window?"
STUDEBAKER -- "This one, Exhibit A, shows that--this is the exact--now
this print here isn't too good, but you can see the indentation in
this box right here. This is before it was ever moved. ... If I had
known what you wanted, I would have brought you a better print--picked
out a better print."
BALL -- "Now, you say on Exhibit A it shows a box in the window?"
STUDEBAKER -- "These boxes [indicating], yes, sir."
BALL -- "Is that the way they were piled up?"
STUDEBAKER -- "Yes, just exactly like that."
~~~~~~~
The boxes were moved, of course, at some point after being initially
photographed....and they were then photographed again, for some
reason, by Studebaker, after the boxes had been moved.
The additional photo of the SN boxes after those cartons had obviously
been moved will (naturally) lead the conspiracy freaks to reach the
unprovable conclusion that the DPD was up to no good on November 22nd
by moving a box from the windowsill to the top of another box.
However, Robert Studebaker unambiguously explained in his WC testimony
that CE509 (which is the very same picture that appears in Studebaker
Exhibit D) depicts a photograph of the SN boxes AFTER those boxes had
been moved and dusted for fingerprints. .....
CE509:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/ce509.jpg
BALL -- "Now, I will show you another picture which we will mark as
Exhibit D. Was that taken by you?"
STUDEBAKER -- "Yes."
BALL -- "Does that show the position of the boxes before or after they
were {moved}?"
STUDEBAKER -- "That's after they were dusted; there's fingerprint dust
on every box."
BALL -- "And they were not in that position then when you first saw
them?"
STUDEBAKER -- "No."
~~~~~~~
As an aside -- There's also this testimony (below) given by Mr.
Studebaker (regarding the empty paper bag that was found in the
southeast corner of the TSBD's sixth floor, which was never
photographed prior to being picked up by Studebaker....which is
something that invariably causes CTers to scream "It Was Fake!").
But is it truly reasonable to believe that Robert Studebaker is lying
through his teeth here? If anyone thinks that is a reasonable thing to
believe...please tell us why it's reasonable?.....
BALL -- "Now, did you at any time see any paper sack around there?"
STUDEBAKER -- "Yes, sir."
BALL -- "Where?"
STUDEBAKER -- "Storage room there...in the southeast corner of the
building, folded."
BALL -- "Where was it with respect to the three boxes of which the top
two were Rolling Readers?"
STUDEBAKER -- "Directly east. ... I drew a diagram in there for the
FBI...he wanted an approximate location of where the paper was found."
BALL -- "Where you have the dotted lines?"
STUDEBAKER -- "Yes."
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0255a.htm
BALL -- "Now, there is something that looks like steam pipes or water
pipes in the corner there?"
STUDEBAKER -- "Yes."
BALL -- "Where was that with reference to those pipes--the paper
wrapping?"
STUDEBAKER -- "Laying right beside it."
BALL -- "Was it folded over?"
STUDEBAKER -- "It was doubled; it was a piece of paper about this long
and it was doubled over."
BALL -- "How long was it, approximately?"
STUDEBAKER -- "I don't know. I picked it up and dusted it, and they
took it down there and sent it to Washington and that's the last I
have seen of it, and I don't know."*
[* = Later in this same WC session, Studebaker did provide a size
estimate for the paper bag.]
BALL -- "Did you take a picture of it before you picked it up?"
STUDEBAKER -- "No."
BALL -- "Does that sack show in any of the pictures you took?"
STUDEBAKER -- "No, it doesn't show in any of the pictures."
BALL -- "Was it near the window?"
STUDEBAKER -- "Yes, sir."
BALL -- "Which way from the window?"
STUDEBAKER -- "It was east of the window."
BALL -- "Over in the corner?"
STUDEBAKER -- "Over in the corner -- in the southeast corner of the
building; in the far southeast corner; as far as you can get is where
it was."
[Later testimony....]
BALL -- "Now, how big was this paper that you saw? You saw the
wrapper; tell me about how big that paper bag was; how long was it?"
STUDEBAKER -- "It was about, I would say, 3-and-a-half to 4 feet
long."
[The bag was 38 inches long, which makes Studebaker's estimate a
fairly good one, IMO. Oswald's rifle, found on the 6th Floor at 1:22
PM on 11/22/63, measured 34.8 inches when it was disassembled.]
~~~~~~~
So, when all the dust has settled after examining the official WC
documents and the officers' WC testimony, who should I now trust?
Should I believe the officials of the DPD and the Dallas Sheriff's
Office who said that the box was IN THE WINDOW when the DPD got to the
6th Floor on November 22nd?
Or should I believe the persistent rantings of rabid conspiracists who
desperately WANT some kind of conspiracy to exist in the JFK murder
case, despite the total lack of direct support to prop up such
unprovable rantings?
Not a real tough call to make, now is it?
aeffects
When it comes to quoting fiction (the WCR), you can post by the pound
David...... doesn't change the FACT, it's F-I-C-T-I-O-N...
bigdog
> SOME CONSPIRACY THEORISTS SEEM TO THINK THAT THE DALLAS POLICE (AS
> PART OF SOME NEFARIOUS "PLOT" TO FRAME LEE HARVEY OSWALD) MOVED THE
> BOXES IN THE SIXTH-FLOOR SNIPER'S NEST PRIOR TO THE BOXES BEING
> PHOTOGRAPHED.....
>
> AND MANY CTers ALSO THINK THAT THE PAPER BAG FOUND IN THE NEST WAS
> "MANUFACTURED" OR "FAKED" BY THE COPS IN SOME MANNER, TOO.....
>
> BUT DOES ANY OF THE VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE BEAR OUT SUCH VILE
> CONSPIRATORIAL ALLEGATIONS AIMED AT THE D.P.D.?.....
>
> SIMPLY PUT -- NO, IT DOES NOT.
>
>
> By the way, CE511 depicts the exact same thing that is also shown in
> "Studebaker Exhibit B", and is also the same as CE715 (with 715
> lacking the circles around the two bullet shells that are visible in
> the photo shown in 511; the reason that all three shells aren't seen
> is due to the angle of the picture; the third shell is out of sight in
> that photograph)....
>
>
> There's also this testimony from Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Luke
> Mooney.....
>
> MOONEY -- "So I stood guard to see that no one disturbed anything
> until Captain Will Fritz approached with his group of officers."
>
> ~~~~~~~
>
> Footnote -- Why on Earth Joe Ball didn't utilize either CE1301 or
> Studebaker Exhibit J (the latter being a "re-creation" done by
> Studebaker himself of the original box configuration in the SN window)
> when questioning Luke Mooney is a mystery to me. .....
>
>
> Studebaker Exhibit J:http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0...
>
> read more »
This is what makes almost every conspiracy theory so ludicrous. Since
there is so much physical evidence which incriminates Oswald in both
murders, in order to exonerate him, CTs must resort to the ludicrous
position that all this evidence was faked by the authorities in an
effort to frame poor Oswald. Considering that there were four law
enforcement agencies working on the investigation, the DPD, the
Sheriff's office, the FBI, and the Secret Service, this charge is
preposterous. It would have taken collusion by all four entities and
everyone working on the investigation to have so completely
incriminated Oswald. We're talking about two separate branches of the
Federal government, Justice and Treasury, and two local law
enforcement agencies. How could anyone believe you could get all four
of these agencies working together to cover up the facts. It's a
ridiculous proposition. That is why the only CTs who have any
credibility are the ones who acknowledge what is so painfully obvious,
that Oswald was the shooter. Those who refuse to accept that can be
written off as fruitcakes and crackpots. Did I step on some toes. TOO
BAD!!!
Walt
> SOME CONSPIRACY THEORISTS SEEM TO THINK THAT THE DALLAS POLICE (AS
> PART OF SOME NEFARIOUS "PLOT" TO FRAME LEE HARVEY OSWALD) MOVED THE
> BOXES IN THE SIXTH-FLOOR SNIPER'S NEST PRIOR TO THE BOXES BEING
> PHOTOGRAPHED.....
There's no doubt about it.... The cops DID move the boxes in the so
called sniper's nest. Most of the photographs that the Warren
Commission used are FAKE photographs created by the DPD AFTER they
placed the boxes to support their claim that Oswald fired from that
location.
>
> AND MANY CTers ALSO THINK THAT THE PAPER BAG FOUND IN THE NEST WAS
> "MANUFACTURED" OR "FAKED" BY THE COPS IN SOME MANNER, TOO.....
>
> BUT DOES ANY OF THE VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE BEAR OUT SUCH VILE
> CONSPIRATORIAL ALLEGATIONS AIMED AT THE D.P.D.?.....
>
> SIMPLY PUT -- NO, IT DOES NOT.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Multiple DPD and Sheriff officials provided evidence (via their Warren
> Commission testimony and their official DPD photographs) that proves
> the conspiracy theorists are wrong when they accuse the DPD and Dallas
> Sheriff's Department of all kinds of lies and conspiracy-favoring
> activity with respect to the "box" evidence found inside the "Sniper's
> Nest" on the 6th Floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building
> shortly after John F. Kennedy was assassinated on November 22, 1963.
>
> Luke Mooney, Carl Day, and Robert Studebaker all provided such
> evidence and testimony. Are they all liars? And are BOTH sets of DPD
> photos (taken by Day and Studebaker) to be considered "faked"?
>
> Mooney testified (plain as day) that there was a box "tilted" (on the
> windowsill) when he first saw the box arrangement in the Sniper's
> Nest.
The TRUE original photographs show the Rolling Readers box as the top
box of a stack of three boxes.
It takes a little study of the triangular shadow on the box and the
scene in Dealey plaza outside the window ....but when the photos are
studied it is very clear that there was no box sitting tilted on the
window sill when the so called sniper's nest was first discovered and
photographed.
>
> A portion of Mooney's Warren Commission testimony regarding this
> matter is shown below. .....
>
> ~~~~~~~
>
> JOE BALL -- "Is that the way the boxes looked?"
>
> (Ball is referring to CE509, linked below....)
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/ce509.jpg
>
> LUKE MOONEY -- "That is [sic] the three boxes, but one of them was
> tilted off just a little, laying down on the edge, I believe, to my
I BELIEVE.... Meaning I'm not sure.
> knowledge."
>
> BALL -- "Are they arranged as they were when you saw them?"
>
> MOONEY -- "I am not positive. As I remember right, there was one box
> tilted off."
>
> BALL -- "Do I understand that you say that it appeared to you that the
> top box was tilted?"
>
> MOONEY -- "The end of it was laying this way."
>
> BALL -- "Now, in this same picture, {CE} 511, you see a box in the
> window. Does that seem to be about the angle?"
>
> MOONEY -- "Yes; that box was tilted."
>
> BALL -- "That was tilted in that way?"
>
> MOONEY -- "Yes, sir."
>
> ~~~~~~~
>
> Here is CE511 that Mooney was referring to:
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0...
>
> By the way, CE511 depicts the exact same thing that is also shown in
> "Studebaker Exhibit B", and is also the same as CE715 (with 715
> lacking the circles around the two bullet shells that are visible in
> the photo shown in 511; the reason that all three shells aren't seen
> is due to the angle of the picture; the third shell is out of sight in
> that photograph)....
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0...
>
> There's also this testimony from Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Luke
> Mooney.....
>
> MOONEY -- "So I stood guard to see that no one disturbed anything
> until Captain Will Fritz approached with his group of officers."
>
> ~~~~~~~
>
> Footnote -- Why on Earth Joe Ball didn't utilize either CE1301 or
> Studebaker Exhibit J (the latter being a "re-creation" done by
> Studebaker himself of the original box configuration in the SN window)
> when questioning Luke Mooney is a mystery to me. .....
>
> CE1301:http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0...
>
> Studebaker Exhibit J:http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh21/html/WH_Vol21_0...
>
This photo is a FAKE created in the DPD photo lab.....
Give it up Von Pea Brain..... You don't have the reasoning ability of
a gnat.
Walt
>
> But is it truly reasonable to ...
>
> read more »
David Von Pein
The above declaration coming from a man who believes John F. Kennedy
was hit in the throat from the front at approx. Z-Frame 161 and then
continued to smile and wave happily to the Dealey Plaza crowd FOR
ALMOST THIRTY MORE Z-FILM FRAMES (about 1.5 seconds) after being shot.
Name ONE single, solitary person who has studied the JFK murder case
who actually believes the President was struck in the throat (with the
bullet exiting his back) at approx. Z161.
Walt has the reasoning ability of a dead man.
Gil Jesus
justm...@gmail.com
>
> - Show quoted text -
GO GET THE BASTARDS, WALT !!! (Walt is my hero)
That about sums it up Chico....you just proved you're an idiot!
Sam Brown
always a gentleman. More than any one can say for you, disgraceful little
man.
"Gil Jesus" <gjj...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:4eodc3hsfko7rvdvc...@4ax.com...
aeffects
> You are not fit to shine Walts shoes Gil. Walt is not a lying scumbag, he is
> always a gentleman. More than any one can say for you, disgraceful little
> man.
stick around puddin..... Walt Cakebread does have a temper, and he
knows this case, enough to bury your sorry *arse* in JFK minutae. But
then that requires knowledge of case evidence, testimony and exhibits
-- something you've not only failed at (over and over ) but have shown
absolutely no knowledge of...... Based on what we've seen here it
should take you about 5 years to get up to speed. Till then, there's
always pud-pulling contests for carpet munchers, eh...
> "Gil Jesus" <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote in message
Sam Brown
"aeffects" <aeff...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1187496456....@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 18, 7:41 pm, "Sam Brown" <samjbrow...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>> You are not fit to shine Walts shoes Gil. Walt is not a lying scumbag, he
>> is
>> always a gentleman. More than any one can say for you, disgraceful little
>> man.
Yap Yap Grandad.
aeffects
> "aeffects" <aeffe...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1187496456....@i38g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Aug 18, 7:41 pm, "Sam Brown" <samjbrow...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> >> You are not fit to shine Walts shoes Gil. Walt is not a lying scumbag, he
> >> is
> >> always a gentleman. More than any one can say for you, disgraceful little
> >> man.
>
> Yap Yap Grandad.
>
we'll get out of you what you know about this case, Sammy daPUD.... he-
he
tomnln
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm
"Sam Brown" <samjb...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:46c7c74c$0$15276$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
tomnln
Meet John /McAdams>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/frick.htm
Meet tom lowery>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/tom_lowery.htm
Meet Yo(Momma)Harvey>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/baileynme.htm
Meet Sam>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/sam_brown.htm
Meet ed cage http://whokilledjfk.net/ed_cage_page.htm
Meet John Lattimer>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/Lattimer.htm
bigdog
> Meet John /McAdams>>>http://whokilledjfk.net/frick.htm
>
> Meet tom lowery>>>http://whokilledjfk.net/tom_lowery.htm
>
> Meet Yo(Momma)Harvey>>>http://whokilledjfk.net/baileynme.htm
>
> Meet Sam>>>http://whokilledjfk.net/sam_brown.htm
>
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
WTF, tomnln. How come you created a web page for all those other LNs
and left me out. I thought we were friends. Don't you like me anymore?
tomnln
"bigdog" <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1187635445.8...@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
Sam Brown
badge of honour to have a page at your poxy site. I hope it costs you money
though. Fuckwit.
"tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:gEqyi.56574$GO6....@newsfe21.lga...
tomnln
(was it you who called justme a cunt?)
Here is the evidence/testimony you keep Dodging>>>
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm
"Sam Brown" <samjb...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:46ca6aa2$0$18464$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
Sam Brown
you enough now. Perhaps you could smack Ellen around before bed. That always
makes you feel better doesn't it ?news:q0uyi.11071$Pv4....@newsfe19.lga...
tomnln
I Really enjoy Smacking YOU Around with evidence/testimony>>>
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm
ps;
I Also Love Retaliating against your name-calling.
I've even Promoted it to Others.
I'll bet you even "Eat out Animals".
"Sam Brown" <samjb...@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:46ca79a3$0$13845$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
Sam Brown
> NAW!
>
> I Really enjoy Smacking YOU Around with evidence/testimony>>>
> http://www.whokilledjfk.net/mexcity.htm
> http://www.whokilledjfk.net/Walker.htm
> http://www.whokilledjfk.net/tippit.htm
>
> ps;
> I Also Love Retaliating against your name-calling.
>
> I've even Promoted it to Others.
>
> I'll bet you even "Eat out Animals".
Stop touching yourself Toothless.