Vincent Bugliosi's 53 "Reasons", #13 - Refuted.

[Ben Holmes]

(13) During interrogation, Oswald put himself on the sixth floor at the time of the assassination.

This is a rather outrageous untruth that Bugliosi is making here. It's true that Oswald was possibly one of the last to leave the 6th floor, sometime around 12 noon, where he was working that day - but he was seen by others, such as Arnold, on the first or second floor after 12 noon.

It's important to note that the Internet's foremost expert on "Reclaiming History" absolutely refuses to respond to this series refuting Bugliosi.

And "Bud" doesn't know the evidence well enough.

Those facts tell the tale, don't they?

[Bud]

On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 9:47:17 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> (13) During interrogation, Oswald put himself on the sixth floor at the time of the assassination.

It falls upon me to include the supportive material that Ben is deceitfully leaving out...

13. Although in his interrogation on Friday afternoon, November 22, Oswald said he was having lunch on the first floor of the Book Depository Building at the time of the assassination,35 during Sunday’s interrogation Oswald slipped up and placed himself on the sixth floor at the time of the assassination, making him the only employee of the Book Depository Building who placed himself on the sixth floor, or was placed there by anyone else, at the time we know an assassin shot Kennedy from the sixth floor. In his Sunday-morning interrogation he said that at lunchtime, one of the “Negro” employees invited him to eat lunch with him and he declined, saying, “You go on down and send the elevator back up and I will join you in a few minutes.” He said before he could finish whatever he was doing, the commotion surrounding the assassination took place and when he “went downstairs,” a policeman questioned him as to his identification, and his boss stated that he was one of their employees.36 The latter confrontation, of course, refers to Officer Marrion Baker, in Roy Truly’s presence, talking to Oswald in the second-floor lunchroom within two minutes after the shooting. Where was Oswald at the time the Negro employee invited him to lunch, and before he descended to the second-floor lunchroom? The sixth floor. Charles Givens testified that around 11:55 a.m., he went up to the sixth floor to get his jacket with cigarettes in it and saw Oswald on the sixth floor. He said to Oswald, “Boy, are you going downstairs…it’s near lunchtime.” He said Oswald answered, “No, sir. When you get downstairs, close the gate to the elevator.”37 There is another very powerful reason why we can know that Oswald, at the time of his confrontation with Baker in the second-floor lunchroom, had just come down from the sixth floor, not up from the first floor, as he claimed. It is an accepted part of conspiracy dogma to believe what Oswald told Fritz during his interrogation—that he had been eating lunch in the lunchroom on the first floor at the time of the shooting and had walked up to the second floor to get a Coke from the Coke machine just before Baker called out to him.38 Assassination literature abounds with references to “the Coca-Cola machine in the second floor lunchroom.” And indeed there was a Coca-Cola machine in the subject room.39 But to my knowledge, there is no direct reference in the assassination literature to a second soft drink machine in the Book Depository Building, and in a phone call to Gary Mack, the curator at the Sixth Floor Museum in the building, he told me he was “unaware” of any other soft drink machine in the building at the time of the assassination.40 What prompted my call to him was not the frequent references in the literature to the Dr. Pepper bottle found on the sixth floor after the shooting,41 since some soft drink machines contain a variety of drinks, but a reference in stock boy Bonnie Ray William’s testimony before the Warren Commission to his getting “a small bottle of Dr. Pepper from the Dr. Pepper machine,”42 and stock boy Wesley Frazier’s testimony that “I have seen him [Oswald] go to the Dr. Pepper machine by the refrigerator and get a Dr. Pepper.”43 Neither Williams nor Frazier expressly said what floor this machine was on, and I was aware, from a photo,44 that there was a refrigerator next to the Coca-Cola machine on the second floor. Through a few phone calls I was able to reach Wesley Frazier, whom I hadn’t talked to since 1986, when he testified for me at the London trial. Still living in Dallas, he told me that “there was a Dr. Pepper machine on the first floor.” Where, specifically, was it? “It was located by the double freight elevator near the back of the building.” Was there a refrigerator nearby? I asked. “Oh, yes, right next to it.” (And indeed, I subsequently found proof of the existence of the machine, with the words “Dr. Pepper” near the top front of it, in an FBI photo taken for the Warren Commission of the northwest corner of the first floor, and it is located right next to the refrigerator.)45 Frazier said that “almost all the guys would get their drinks for lunch from this Dr. Pepper machine. It mostly had Dr. Pepper, but also other drinks like orange and root beer.” I asked him, “What about the Coca-Cola machine in the second-floor lunchroom? Did it have other drinks too?” He said it “only had Coca-Cola in it” and “the only time anybody would go to that machine is if they wanted a Coke, which I did from time to time.” When I asked him whether or not “it was rare” for the workers to go to the second floor to get a Coke, he said, “Yes. We had our own machine on the first floor, where we ate our lunch. It was more convenient to use the machine on the first floor.” Frazier said he could not say whether Oswald ever went to the second floor to get a Coke or ever drank soft drinks other than Dr. Pepper, but “I only recall seeing him with a Dr. Pepper.”46 Author Jim Bishop, in his book The Day Kennedy Was Shot, writes (without a citation, however) that Oswald “invariably drank Dr. Pepper.”47 And we know that Marina told her biographer, Priscilla McMillan, that when he was working at Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall in Dallas in 1963, “after supper” he would walk down the street as he often did “to buy a newspaper and a bottle of Dr. Pepper.”48 So we see that apart from all the conclusive evidence that Oswald shot Kennedy from the sniper’s nest, and therefore had to have descended from there to the second floor, his story about going up to the second floor to get a Coke doesn’t even make sense. Why go up to the second floor to get a drink for your lunch when there’s a soft drink machine on the first floor, the floor you say you are already on, particularly when the apparent drink of your choice is on this first floor, not the second floor?

> This is a rather outrageous untruth that Bugliosi is making here.

You didn`t include the content that he used to support it. Pretty dishonest of you, Ben.

> It's true that Oswald was possibly one of the last to leave the 6th floor, sometime around 12 noon, where he was working that day - but he was seen by others, such as Arnold, on the first or second floor after 12 noon.

In what meaningful way can you establish that those encounters did not occur previous to Oswald being on the upper floors when the flooring crew broke for lunch?

> It's important to note that the Internet's foremost expert on "Reclaiming History" absolutely refuses to respond to this series refuting Bugliosi.
>
> And "Bud" doesn't know the evidence well enough.

I know it well enough to catch most of your lies. I admit I might not catch all of them.

> Those facts tell the tale, don't they?

The fact is that you have failed to refute Bugliosi once more.

[Ben Holmes]

On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 7:42:19 AM UTC-8, Bud wrote:
> On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 9:47:17 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > (13) During interrogation, Oswald put himself on the sixth floor at the time of the assassination.
>
> It falls upon me to include the supportive material that Ben is deceitfully leaving out...
>
> 13. Although in his interrogation on Friday afternoon, November 22, Oswald said he was having lunch on the first floor of the Book Depository Building at the time of the assassination,35 during Sunday’s interrogation Oswald slipped up and placed himself on the sixth floor at the time of the assassination, making him the only employee of the Book Depository Building who placed himself on the sixth floor, or was placed there by anyone else, at the time we know an assassin shot Kennedy from the sixth floor. In his Sunday-morning interrogation he said that at lunchtime, one of the “Negro” employees invited him to eat lunch with him and he declined, saying, “You go on down and send the elevator back up and I will join you in a few minutes.” He said before he could finish whatever he was doing, the commotion surrounding the assassination took place and when he “went downstairs,” a policeman questioned him as to his identification, and his boss stated that he was one of their employees.36 The latter confrontation, of course, refers to Officer Marrion Baker, in Roy Truly’s presence, talking to Oswald in the second-floor lunchroom within two minutes after the shooting. Where was Oswald at the time the Negro employee invited him to lunch, and before he descended to the second-floor lunchroom? The sixth floor. Charles Givens testified that around 11:55 a.m., he went up to the sixth floor to get his jacket with cigarettes in it and saw Oswald on the sixth floor. He said to Oswald, “Boy, are you going downstairs…it’s near lunchtime.” He said Oswald answered, “No, sir. When you get downstairs, close the gate to the elevator.”37 There is another very powerful reason why we can know that Oswald, at the time of his confrontation with Baker in the second-floor lunchroom, had just come down from the sixth floor, not up from the first floor, as he claimed. It is an accepted part of conspiracy dogma to believe what Oswald told Fritz during his interrogation—that he had been eating lunch in the lunchroom on the first floor at the time of the shooting and had walked up to the second floor to get a Coke from the Coke machine just before Baker called out to him.38 Assassination literature abounds with references to “the Coca-Cola machine in the second floor lunchroom.” And indeed there was a Coca-Cola machine in the subject room.39 But to my knowledge, there is no direct reference in the assassination literature to a second soft drink machine in the Book Depository Building, and in a phone call to Gary Mack, the curator at the Sixth Floor Museum in the building, he told me he was “unaware” of any other soft drink machine in the building at the time of the assassination.40 What prompted my call to him was not the frequent references in the literature to the Dr. Pepper bottle found on the sixth floor after the shooting,41 since some soft drink machines contain a variety of drinks, but a reference in stock boy Bonnie Ray William’s testimony before the Warren Commission to his getting “a small bottle of Dr. Pepper from the Dr. Pepper machine,”42 and stock boy Wesley Frazier’s testimony that “I have seen him [Oswald] go to the Dr. Pepper machine by the refrigerator and get a Dr. Pepper.”43 Neither Williams nor Frazier expressly said what floor this machine was on, and I was aware, from a photo,44 that there was a refrigerator next to the Coca-Cola machine on the second floor. Through a few phone calls I was able to reach Wesley Frazier, whom I hadn’t talked to since 1986, when he testified for me at the London trial. Still living in Dallas, he told me that “there was a Dr. Pepper machine on the first floor.” Where, specifically, was it? “It was located by the double freight elevator near the back of the building.” Was there a refrigerator nearby? I asked. “Oh, yes, right next to it.” (And indeed, I subsequently found proof of the existence of the machine, with the words “Dr. Pepper” near the top front of it, in an FBI photo taken for the Warren Commission of the northwest corner of the first floor, and it is located right next to the refrigerator.)45 Frazier said that “almost all the guys would get their drinks for lunch from this Dr. Pepper machine. It mostly had Dr. Pepper, but also other drinks like orange and root beer.” I asked him, “What about the Coca-Cola machine in the second-floor lunchroom? Did it have other drinks too?” He said it “only had Coca-Cola in it” and “the only time anybody would go to that machine is if they wanted a Coke, which I did from time to time.” When I asked him whether or not “it was rare” for the workers to go to the second floor to get a Coke, he said, “Yes. We had our own machine on the first floor, where we ate our lunch. It was more convenient to use the machine on the first floor.” Frazier said he could not say whether Oswald ever went to the second floor to get a Coke or ever drank soft drinks other than Dr. Pepper, but “I only recall seeing him with a Dr. Pepper.”46 Author Jim Bishop, in his book The Day Kennedy Was Shot, writes (without a citation, however) that Oswald “invariably drank Dr. Pepper.”47 And we know that Marina told her biographer, Priscilla McMillan, that when he was working at Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall in Dallas in 1963, “after supper” he would walk down the street as he often did “to buy a newspaper and a bottle of Dr. Pepper.”48 So we see that apart from all the conclusive evidence that Oswald shot Kennedy from the sniper’s nest, and therefore had to have descended from there to the second floor, his story about going up to the second floor to get a Coke doesn’t even make sense. Why go up to the second floor to get a drink for your lunch when there’s a soft drink machine on the first floor, the floor you say you are already on, particularly when the apparent drink of your choice is on this first floor, not the second floor?
>
> > This is a rather outrageous untruth that Bugliosi is making here.
>
> You didn`t include the content that he used to support it. Pretty dishonest of you, Ben.

An assertion isn't evidence.

Cite... CITE - the actual evidence that shows that Oswald "slipped up" and place HIMSELF on the 6th floor AT THE TIME OF THE ASSASSINATION.

You won't be able to do it, no such evidence exists.

Bugliosi simply lied.

David Von Molester knows this - this is why he remains silent.

> > It's true that Oswald was possibly one of the last to leave the 6th floor, sometime around 12 noon, where he was working that day - but he was seen by others, such as Arnold, on the first or second floor after 12 noon.
>
> In what meaningful way can you establish that those encounters did not occur previous to Oswald being on the upper floors when the flooring crew broke for lunch?

You *do* know how to tell time, right?

> > It's important to note that the Internet's foremost expert on "Reclaiming History" absolutely refuses to respond to this series refuting Bugliosi.
> >
> > And "Bud" doesn't know the evidence well enough.
>
> I know it well enough to catch most of your lies. I admit I might not catch all of them.

You haven't caught me in *any* lie.

You see, all you have to do is QUOTE MY WORDS - then cite the evidence that I'm contradicting.

But you haven't ever done that, nor will you ever be able to.

> > Those facts tell the tale, don't they?
>
> The fact is that you have failed to refute Bugliosi once more.

You're lying again, "Bud."

[Bud]

On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 11:36:47 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 7:42:19 AM UTC-8, Bud wrote:
> > On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 9:47:17 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > > (13) During interrogation, Oswald put himself on the sixth floor at the time of the assassination.
> >
> > It falls upon me to include the supportive material that Ben is deceitfully leaving out...
> >
> > 13. Although in his interrogation on Friday afternoon, November 22, Oswald said he was having lunch on the first floor of the Book Depository Building at the time of the assassination,35 during Sunday’s interrogation Oswald slipped up and placed himself on the sixth floor at the time of the assassination, making him the only employee of the Book Depository Building who placed himself on the sixth floor, or was placed there by anyone else, at the time we know an assassin shot Kennedy from the sixth floor. In his Sunday-morning interrogation he said that at lunchtime, one of the “Negro” employees invited him to eat lunch with him and he declined, saying, “You go on down and send the elevator back up and I will join you in a few minutes.” He said before he could finish whatever he was doing, the commotion surrounding the assassination took place and when he “went downstairs,” a policeman questioned him as to his identification, and his boss stated that he was one of their employees.36 The latter confrontation, of course, refers to Officer Marrion Baker, in Roy Truly’s presence, talking to Oswald in the second-floor lunchroom within two minutes after the shooting. Where was Oswald at the time the Negro employee invited him to lunch, and before he descended to the second-floor lunchroom? The sixth floor. Charles Givens testified that around 11:55 a.m., he went up to the sixth floor to get his jacket with cigarettes in it and saw Oswald on the sixth floor. He said to Oswald, “Boy, are you going downstairs…it’s near lunchtime.” He said Oswald answered, “No, sir. When you get downstairs, close the gate to the elevator.”37 There is another very powerful reason why we can know that Oswald, at the time of his confrontation with Baker in the second-floor lunchroom, had just come down from the sixth floor, not up from the first floor, as he claimed. It is an accepted part of conspiracy dogma to believe what Oswald told Fritz during his interrogation—that he had been eating lunch in the lunchroom on the first floor at the time of the shooting and had walked up to the second floor to get a Coke from the Coke machine just before Baker called out to him.38 Assassination literature abounds with references to “the Coca-Cola machine in the second floor lunchroom.” And indeed there was a Coca-Cola machine in the subject room.39 But to my knowledge, there is no direct reference in the assassination literature to a second soft drink machine in the Book Depository Building, and in a phone call to Gary Mack, the curator at the Sixth Floor Museum in the building, he told me he was “unaware” of any other soft drink machine in the building at the time of the assassination.40 What prompted my call to him was not the frequent references in the literature to the Dr. Pepper bottle found on the sixth floor after the shooting,41 since some soft drink machines contain a variety of drinks, but a reference in stock boy Bonnie Ray William’s testimony before the Warren Commission to his getting “a small bottle of Dr. Pepper from the Dr. Pepper machine,”42 and stock boy Wesley Frazier’s testimony that “I have seen him [Oswald] go to the Dr. Pepper machine by the refrigerator and get a Dr. Pepper.”43 Neither Williams nor Frazier expressly said what floor this machine was on, and I was aware, from a photo,44 that there was a refrigerator next to the Coca-Cola machine on the second floor. Through a few phone calls I was able to reach Wesley Frazier, whom I hadn’t talked to since 1986, when he testified for me at the London trial. Still living in Dallas, he told me that “there was a Dr. Pepper machine on the first floor.” Where, specifically, was it? “It was located by the double freight elevator near the back of the building.” Was there a refrigerator nearby? I asked. “Oh, yes, right next to it.” (And indeed, I subsequently found proof of the existence of the machine, with the words “Dr. Pepper” near the top front of it, in an FBI photo taken for the Warren Commission of the northwest corner of the first floor, and it is located right next to the refrigerator.)45 Frazier said that “almost all the guys would get their drinks for lunch from this Dr. Pepper machine. It mostly had Dr. Pepper, but also other drinks like orange and root beer.” I asked him, “What about the Coca-Cola machine in the second-floor lunchroom? Did it have other drinks too?” He said it “only had Coca-Cola in it” and “the only time anybody would go to that machine is if they wanted a Coke, which I did from time to time.” When I asked him whether or not “it was rare” for the workers to go to the second floor to get a Coke, he said, “Yes. We had our own machine on the first floor, where we ate our lunch. It was more convenient to use the machine on the first floor.” Frazier said he could not say whether Oswald ever went to the second floor to get a Coke or ever drank soft drinks other than Dr. Pepper, but “I only recall seeing him with a Dr. Pepper.”46 Author Jim Bishop, in his book The Day Kennedy Was Shot, writes (without a citation, however) that Oswald “invariably drank Dr. Pepper.”47 And we know that Marina told her biographer, Priscilla McMillan, that when he was working at Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall in Dallas in 1963, “after supper” he would walk down the street as he often did “to buy a newspaper and a bottle of Dr. Pepper.”48 So we see that apart from all the conclusive evidence that Oswald shot Kennedy from the sniper’s nest, and therefore had to have descended from there to the second floor, his story about going up to the second floor to get a Coke doesn’t even make sense. Why go up to the second floor to get a drink for your lunch when there’s a soft drink machine on the first floor, the floor you say you are already on, particularly when the apparent drink of your choice is on this first floor, not the second floor?
> >
> > > This is a rather outrageous untruth that Bugliosi is making here.
> >
> > You didn`t include the content that he used to support it. Pretty dishonest of you, Ben.
>
> An assertion isn't evidence.
>
> Cite... CITE - the actual evidence that shows that Oswald "slipped up" and place HIMSELF on the 6th floor AT THE TIME OF THE ASSASSINATION.

Refute... REFUTE - Bugliosi`s claim that Oswald "slipped up".

This is what you set out to do and this is what you are failing at.

> You won't be able to do it, no such evidence exists.
>
> Bugliosi simply lied.
>
> David Von Molester knows this - this is why he remains silent.
>
>
>
> > > It's true that Oswald was possibly one of the last to leave the 6th floor, sometime around 12 noon, where he was working that day - but he was seen by others, such as Arnold, on the first or second floor after 12 noon.
> >
> > In what meaningful way can you establish that those encounters did not occur previous to Oswald being on the upper floors when the flooring crew broke for lunch?
>
>
> You *do* know how to tell time, right?

I know an established time from an unestablished time. Do you?

>
>
> > > It's important to note that the Internet's foremost expert on "Reclaiming History" absolutely refuses to respond to this series refuting Bugliosi.
> > >
> > > And "Bud" doesn't know the evidence well enough.
> >
> > I know it well enough to catch most of your lies. I admit I might not catch all of them.
>
> You haven't caught me in *any* lie.
>
> You see, all you have to do is QUOTE MY WORDS - then cite the evidence that I'm contradicting.

I`ve done that more than once. It dosen`t stop you from denying you`ve lied.

> But you haven't ever done that, nor will you ever be able to.

Not to your satisfaction. You don`t recognize your own lies as such. Thats where I come in, I can.

>
> > > Those facts tell the tale, don't they?
> >
> > The fact is that you have failed to refute Bugliosi once more.
>
> You're lying again, "Bud."

See? I`ve produce the definition of the word "refute" and have shown why what you claim to be refutations fall short. This doesn`t stop you from lying about it.

[Ben Holmes]

On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 9:06:09 AM UTC-8, Bud wrote:
> On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 11:36:47 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 7:42:19 AM UTC-8, Bud wrote:
> > > On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 9:47:17 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > > > (13) During interrogation, Oswald put himself on the sixth floor at the time of the assassination.
> > >
> > > It falls upon me to include the supportive material that Ben is deceitfully leaving out...
> > >
> > > 13. Although in his interrogation on Friday afternoon, November 22, Oswald said he was having lunch on the first floor of the Book Depository Building at the time of the assassination,35 during Sunday’s interrogation Oswald slipped up and placed himself on the sixth floor at the time of the assassination, making him the only employee of the Book Depository Building who placed himself on the sixth floor, or was placed there by anyone else, at the time we know an assassin shot Kennedy from the sixth floor. In his Sunday-morning interrogation he said that at lunchtime, one of the “Negro” employees invited him to eat lunch with him and he declined, saying, “You go on down and send the elevator back up and I will join you in a few minutes.” He said before he could finish whatever he was doing, the commotion surrounding the assassination took place and when he “went downstairs,” a policeman questioned him as to his identification, and his boss stated that he was one of their employees.36 The latter confrontation, of course, refers to Officer Marrion Baker, in Roy Truly’s presence, talking to Oswald in the second-floor lunchroom within two minutes after the shooting. Where was Oswald at the time the Negro employee invited him to lunch, and before he descended to the second-floor lunchroom? The sixth floor. Charles Givens testified that around 11:55 a.m., he went up to the sixth floor to get his jacket with cigarettes in it and saw Oswald on the sixth floor. He said to Oswald, “Boy, are you going downstairs…it’s near lunchtime.” He said Oswald answered, “No, sir. When you get downstairs, close the gate to the elevator.”37 There is another very powerful reason why we can know that Oswald, at the time of his confrontation with Baker in the second-floor lunchroom, had just come down from the sixth floor, not up from the first floor, as he claimed. It is an accepted part of conspiracy dogma to believe what Oswald told Fritz during his interrogation—that he had been eating lunch in the lunchroom on the first floor at the time of the shooting and had walked up to the second floor to get a Coke from the Coke machine just before Baker called out to him.38 Assassination literature abounds with references to “the Coca-Cola machine in the second floor lunchroom.” And indeed there was a Coca-Cola machine in the subject room.39 But to my knowledge, there is no direct reference in the assassination literature to a second soft drink machine in the Book Depository Building, and in a phone call to Gary Mack, the curator at the Sixth Floor Museum in the building, he told me he was “unaware” of any other soft drink machine in the building at the time of the assassination.40 What prompted my call to him was not the frequent references in the literature to the Dr. Pepper bottle found on the sixth floor after the shooting,41 since some soft drink machines contain a variety of drinks, but a reference in stock boy Bonnie Ray William’s testimony before the Warren Commission to his getting “a small bottle of Dr. Pepper from the Dr. Pepper machine,”42 and stock boy Wesley Frazier’s testimony that “I have seen him [Oswald] go to the Dr. Pepper machine by the refrigerator and get a Dr. Pepper.”43 Neither Williams nor Frazier expressly said what floor this machine was on, and I was aware, from a photo,44 that there was a refrigerator next to the Coca-Cola machine on the second floor. Through a few phone calls I was able to reach Wesley Frazier, whom I hadn’t talked to since 1986, when he testified for me at the London trial. Still living in Dallas, he told me that “there was a Dr. Pepper machine on the first floor.” Where, specifically, was it? “It was located by the double freight elevator near the back of the building.” Was there a refrigerator nearby? I asked. “Oh, yes, right next to it.” (And indeed, I subsequently found proof of the existence of the machine, with the words “Dr. Pepper” near the top front of it, in an FBI photo taken for the Warren Commission of the northwest corner of the first floor, and it is located right next to the refrigerator.)45 Frazier said that “almost all the guys would get their drinks for lunch from this Dr. Pepper machine. It mostly had Dr. Pepper, but also other drinks like orange and root beer.” I asked him, “What about the Coca-Cola machine in the second-floor lunchroom? Did it have other drinks too?” He said it “only had Coca-Cola in it” and “the only time anybody would go to that machine is if they wanted a Coke, which I did from time to time.” When I asked him whether or not “it was rare” for the workers to go to the second floor to get a Coke, he said, “Yes. We had our own machine on the first floor, where we ate our lunch. It was more convenient to use the machine on the first floor.” Frazier said he could not say whether Oswald ever went to the second floor to get a Coke or ever drank soft drinks other than Dr. Pepper, but “I only recall seeing him with a Dr. Pepper.”46 Author Jim Bishop, in his book The Day Kennedy Was Shot, writes (without a citation, however) that Oswald “invariably drank Dr. Pepper.”47 And we know that Marina told her biographer, Priscilla McMillan, that when he was working at Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall in Dallas in 1963, “after supper” he would walk down the street as he often did “to buy a newspaper and a bottle of Dr. Pepper.”48 So we see that apart from all the conclusive evidence that Oswald shot Kennedy from the sniper’s nest, and therefore had to have descended from there to the second floor, his story about going up to the second floor to get a Coke doesn’t even make sense. Why go up to the second floor to get a drink for your lunch when there’s a soft drink machine on the first floor, the floor you say you are already on, particularly when the apparent drink of your choice is on this first floor, not the second floor?
> > >
> > > > This is a rather outrageous untruth that Bugliosi is making here.
> > >
> > > You didn`t include the content that he used to support it. Pretty dishonest of you, Ben.
> >
> > An assertion isn't evidence.
> >
> > Cite... CITE - the actual evidence that shows that Oswald "slipped up" and place HIMSELF on the 6th floor AT THE TIME OF THE ASSASSINATION.
>
> Refute... REFUTE - Bugliosi`s claim that Oswald "slipped up".

Simple to do. Since Bugliosi is unable to cite actual source evidence that supports his claim, it's based solely on his statement. Bugliosi IS THE ONLY SOURCE FOR HIS CLAIM.

I can therefore refute his statement with *MY* statement: Bugliosi is lying.

See how easy that was?

[David Von Pein]

Vincent Bugliosi is most certainly NOT "the only source" for his "slipped up" claim. And Ben has VB's book, so he's got to know what the TWO sources are for Vince's claim. Plus, I even told Ben what those 2 sources were in 2 posts at the aaj forum on 12/21/16 and again on 1/21/17 (link below):

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.assassination.jfk/uqvp9wWG0Ok/wIlj95ibAAAJ

I'm not saying I agree 100% with Vincent Bugliosi on his claim that Oswald definitely "slipped up" and placed himself on the sixth floor at the precise time of the assassination, but Ben is certainly dead wrong when he suggests that Vince had no source at all (other than himself) for his "slipped up" claim. Vince used TWO sources (both leading back to Harry Holmes), which Ben Holmes apparently has just totally ignored.

Ben, of course, will now insist that neither of the 2 sources that Bugliosi utilized for his "slipped up" claim place Oswald on the **SIXTH FLOOR AT EXACTLY 12:30**. Well, Ben *could* possibly be correct on that point. But when we add in Vince Bugliosi's *REASONABLE INFERENCE* that he applies to those 2 sources, then it definitely DOES add up to Oswald possibly "slipping up". And that "reasonable inference" is this (which Vince tells us on page 957 of his book):

"WHERE WAS OSWALD AT THE TIME THE NEGRO EMPLOYEE INVITED HIM TO LUNCH, AND BEFORE HE DESCENDED TO THE SECOND-FLOOR LUNCHROOM? The sixth floor." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 957 of "Reclaiming History" [All emphasis Bugliosi's.]

So we have to ADD UP some things in order to reach the conclusion that Oswald "slipped up" and placed himself on the sixth floor. We have to factor in Harry Holmes' statements about what Oswald said he did right around the time of the assassination, and then we have to ADD TO THAT INFORMATION the additional important info that Vince Bugliosi mentions in the quote from Page 957 that I just quoted above -- the fact that we KNOW from other testimony (Charles Givens' testimony) that Lee Oswald was most certainly ON THE SIXTH FLOOR just before noon on November 22nd.

When putting those pieces together, instead of doing what conspiracy theorists like Ben Holmes always do (keeping the pieces isolated and apart from one another), we can see how Mr. Bugliosi arrived at his conclusion that "Oswald slipped up and placed himself on the sixth floor at the time of the assassination".

Also see:
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2016/12/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1214.html

[Ben Holmes]

On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 7:32:34 AM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
> On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 9:06:09 AM UTC-8, Bud wrote:
> > > On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 11:36:47 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 7:42:19 AM UTC-8, Bud wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 9:47:17 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > > > > > (13) During interrogation, Oswald put himself on the sixth floor at the time of the assassination.
> > > > >
> > > > > It falls upon me to include the supportive material that Ben is deceitfully leaving out...
> > > > >
> > > > > 13. Although in his interrogation on Friday afternoon, November 22, Oswald said he was having lunch on the first floor of the Book Depository Building at the time of the assassination,35 during Sunday’s interrogation Oswald slipped up and placed himself on the sixth floor at the time of the assassination, making him the only employee of the Book Depository Building who placed himself on the sixth floor, or was placed there by anyone else, at the time we know an assassin shot Kennedy from the sixth floor. In his Sunday-morning interrogation he said that at lunchtime, one of the “Negro” employees invited him to eat lunch with him and he declined, saying, “You go on down and send the elevator back up and I will join you in a few minutes.” He said before he could finish whatever he was doing, the commotion surrounding the assassination took place and when he “went downstairs,” a policeman questioned him as to his identification, and his boss stated that he was one of their employees.36 The latter confrontation, of course, refers to Officer Marrion Baker, in Roy Truly’s presence, talking to Oswald in the second-floor lunchroom within two minutes after the shooting. Where was Oswald at the time the Negro employee invited him to lunch, and before he descended to the second-floor lunchroom? The sixth floor. Charles Givens testified that around 11:55 a.m., he went up to the sixth floor to get his jacket with cigarettes in it and saw Oswald on the sixth floor. He said to Oswald, “Boy, are you going downstairs…it’s near lunchtime.” He said Oswald answered, “No, sir. When you get downstairs, close the gate to the elevator.”37 There is another very powerful reason why we can know that Oswald, at the time of his confrontation with Baker in the second-floor lunchroom, had just come down from the sixth floor, not up from the first floor, as he claimed. It is an accepted part of conspiracy dogma to believe what Oswald told Fritz during his interrogation—that he had been eating lunch in the lunchroom on the first floor at the time of the shooting and had walked up to the second floor to get a Coke from the Coke machine just before Baker called out to him.38 Assassination literature abounds with references to “the Coca-Cola machine in the second floor lunchroom.” And indeed there was a Coca-Cola machine in the subject room.39 But to my knowledge, there is no direct reference in the assassination literature to a second soft drink machine in the Book Depository Building, and in a phone call to Gary Mack, the curator at the Sixth Floor Museum in the building, he told me he was “unaware” of any other soft drink machine in the building at the time of the assassination.40 What prompted my call to him was not the frequent references in the literature to the Dr. Pepper bottle found on the sixth floor after the shooting,41 since some soft drink machines contain a variety of drinks, but a reference in stock boy Bonnie Ray William’s testimony before the Warren Commission to his getting “a small bottle of Dr. Pepper from the Dr. Pepper machine,”42 and stock boy Wesley Frazier’s testimony that “I have seen him [Oswald] go to the Dr. Pepper machine by the refrigerator and get a Dr. Pepper.”43 Neither Williams nor Frazier expressly said what floor this machine was on, and I was aware, from a photo,44 that there was a refrigerator next to the Coca-Cola machine on the second floor. Through a few phone calls I was able to reach Wesley Frazier, whom I hadn’t talked to since 1986, when he testified for me at the London trial. Still living in Dallas, he told me that “there was a Dr. Pepper machine on the first floor.” Where, specifically, was it? “It was located by the double freight elevator near the back of the building.” Was there a refrigerator nearby? I asked. “Oh, yes, right next to it.” (And indeed, I subsequently found proof of the existence of the machine, with the words “Dr. Pepper” near the top front of it, in an FBI photo taken for the Warren Commission of the northwest corner of the first floor, and it is located right next to the refrigerator.)45 Frazier said that “almost all the guys would get their drinks for lunch from this Dr. Pepper machine. It mostly had Dr. Pepper, but also other drinks like orange and root beer.” I asked him, “What about the Coca-Cola machine in the second-floor lunchroom? Did it have other drinks too?” He said it “only had Coca-Cola in it” and “the only time anybody would go to that machine is if they wanted a Coke, which I did from time to time.” When I asked him whether or not “it was rare” for the workers to go to the second floor to get a Coke, he said, “Yes. We had our own machine on the first floor, where we ate our lunch. It was more convenient to use the machine on the first floor.” Frazier said he could not say whether Oswald ever went to the second floor to get a Coke or ever drank soft drinks other than Dr. Pepper, but “I only recall seeing him with a Dr. Pepper.”46 Author Jim Bishop, in his book The Day Kennedy Was Shot, writes (without a citation, however) that Oswald “invariably drank Dr. Pepper.”47 And we know that Marina told her biographer, Priscilla McMillan, that when he was working at Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall in Dallas in 1963, “after supper” he would walk down the street as he often did “to buy a newspaper and a bottle of Dr. Pepper.”48 So we see that apart from all the conclusive evidence that Oswald shot Kennedy from the sniper’s nest, and therefore had to have descended from there to the second floor, his story about going up to the second floor to get a Coke doesn’t even make sense. Why go up to the second floor to get a drink for your lunch when there’s a soft drink machine on the first floor, the floor you say you are already on, particularly when the apparent drink of your choice is on this first floor, not the second floor?
> > > > >
> > > > > > This is a rather outrageous untruth that Bugliosi is making here.
> > > > >
> > > > > You didn`t include the content that he used to support it. Pretty dishonest of you, Ben.
> > > >
> > > > An assertion isn't evidence.
> > > >
> > > > Cite... CITE - the actual evidence that shows that Oswald "slipped up" and place HIMSELF on the 6th floor AT THE TIME OF THE ASSASSINATION.
> > >
> > > Refute... REFUTE - Bugliosi`s claim that Oswald "slipped up".
> >
> >
> > Simple to do. Since Bugliosi is unable to cite actual source evidence that supports his claim, it's based solely on his statement. Bugliosi IS THE ONLY SOURCE FOR HIS CLAIM.
> >
> > I can therefore refute his statement with *MY* statement: Bugliosi is lying.
> >
> > See how easy that was?
>
> Vincent Bugliosi is most certainly NOT "the only source" for his "slipped up" claim. And Ben has VB's book, so he's got to know what the TWO sources are for Vince's claim. Plus, I even told Ben what those 2 sources were in 2 posts at the aaj forum on 12/21/16 and again on 1/21/17 (link below):

Tut tut tut, David Von Molester...

QUOTE this "evidence" so everyone can read it.

DEMONSTRATE how this "evidence" actually supports his claim.

Speculation is not evidence, no matter how desperate you get.

Bugliosi lied, it's just that simple.

[David Von Pein]

I already provided you with the two sources Vince used, and I provided the links too. What more do you want?

But since Ben seems to be incapable of clicking a link, I'll provide the 2 sources yet again....

WCR, p.636:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0330b.htm

7 H 302 (Tesimony of Harry D. Holmes):
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh7/html/WC_Vol7_0155b.htm

[David Von Pein]

Footnote----

When I said to add in VB's "reasonable inference" above, I could have also said "add in an additional FACT". Because it's not really even an "inference" Vince is making there. He's just adding in an ADDITIONAL *FACT* (Charles Givens' testimony), which tells us that Lee Oswald was, indeed, on the sixth floor at the time he asked Givens to send an elevator back upstairs.

So it's really a matter of adding an additional FACT to Harry Holmes' statements about what Oswald said. And then inferring WHERE Oswald was when Oswald said what he said in the presence of Postal Instector Harry D. Holmes.

[Ben Holmes]

You can keep running, David Von Molester...

But you'll NEVER actually quote the evidence, AND DEMONSTRATE THAT IT SUPPORTS WHAT BUGLIOSI SAID...

Bugliosi, and now you, are simply lying.

Oswald *NEVER* stated that he was on the 6th floor at the time of the assassination.

That's a lie.

And you *KNOW* this!!!

[Ben Holmes]

On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 8:09:13 AM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
> Footnote----
>
> When I said to add in VB's "reasonable inference" above, I could have also said "add in an additional FACT". Because it's not really even an "inference" Vince is making there. He's just adding in an ADDITIONAL *FACT* (Charles Givens' testimony), which tells us that Lee Oswald was, indeed, on the sixth floor at the time he asked Givens to send an elevator back upstairs.

This was prior to 12 noon, as you well know.

Why are you lying, Davy Von Molester???

Why are you desperately trying to imply that this supports Bugliosi's claim that Oswald said he was on the 6th floor at the time of the assassination???

> So it's really a matter of adding an additional FACT to Harry Holmes' statements about what Oswald said. And then inferring WHERE Oswald was when Oswald said what he said in the presence of Postal Instector Harry D. Holmes.

No Davy... it's SPECULATION...

You're a liar to suggest otherwise.

[Bud]

You confuse your ability to criticize with actual refutation. You have to show that his assertions cannot be true. You are failing miserable. I suggest you change the header to "I am going to criticize Bugliosi`s assertions" or even "I am going to draw into question Bugliosi`s assertions". You are no more refuting him than you are showing he is still alive.

> I can therefore refute his statement with *MY* statement: Bugliosi is lying.
>
> See how easy that was?

All you are doing is showing your ignorance of what the word "refute" means.

[Bud]

A strawman and an unsupportable assertion, you are outdoing yourself now.

[Ben Holmes]

Au contraire!

I realize that an inadequate criticism could, itself, be refuted.

But you've refuted *NONE* of my points.

So yes, my UNREFUTED criticisms do successfully refute Bugliosi.

> You have to show that his assertions cannot be true.

Easily done.

There are hundreds of thousands of murders each year.

Find just *one* who was convicted based on not reading the newspaper that day.

Or alternatively, find ANYONE who has ever served on a jury who will agree that not being observed reading a newspaper by one witness on the day of a murder is evidence that the non-reader is the sole murderer.

I assert that you CANNOT SUPPORT THAT CLAIM. And indeed, you refuse to even try.

As does Davy Von Molester...

[David Von Pein]

On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 1:35:44 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 8:09:13 AM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
> > Footnote----
> >
> > When I said to add in VB's "reasonable inference" above, I could have also said "add in an additional FACT". Because it's not really even an "inference" Vince is making there. He's just adding in an ADDITIONAL *FACT* (Charles Givens' testimony), which tells us that Lee Oswald was, indeed, on the sixth floor at the time he asked Givens to send an elevator back upstairs.
>
> This was prior to 12 noon, as you well know.
>
> Why are you lying, Davy Von Molester???
>
> Why are you desperately trying to imply that this supports Bugliosi's claim that Oswald said he was on the 6th floor at the time of the assassination???
>

As I said before, you have to ADD THINGS UP, Holmes. You never ever do any "adding up". You like to isolate and keep things separate. The "isolation" trick, of course, is the only conceivable way that you (or any rabid CTer) can possibly even begin to justify your claim that LHO is innocent.

And because of this penchant for separating and isolating everything related to Lee Oswald, you are therefore not qualified to evaluate any of the evidence associated with JFK's murder. You are a total DISGRACE when it comes to piecing together relevant evidence and testimony.

E.G., you know perfectly well what I was talking about in my previous posts regarding Bugliosi PUTTING TOGETHER Harry Holmes' statements and Charles Givens' testimony, but you're too deeply invested in your silly "I MUST PROVE OSWALD WAS INNOCENT" policy to reasonably evaluate the sum total of that evidence provided by Harry Holmes and Givens.

But as I also said, I'm not entirely convinced by Bugliosi's 13th item on his "53 Items" list. I think Vince might be inferring TOO MUCH when he said Oswald "slipped up". But I do think it's quite POSSIBLE that Mr. Bugliosi was, indeed, correct too. I'm on the fence about that particular item.

However, I do know that Ben Holmes is wrong when he said that there's no evidence AT ALL to support Bugliosi's Item #13. And I demonstrated that Ben is dead wrong in my previous posts in this thread.

[Ben Holmes]

How can it be a "strawman" to state that Oswald NEVER said what Bugliosi claims he said? This is the relevant issue. Perhaps you should go look up what a "strawman" actually is.

My statement could be QUICKLY AND EASILY shown to be false by merely quoting the relevant evidence that Oswald ever put himself on the 6th floor at the time of the assassination.

You refuse to do so...

Even Davy Von Molester refuses to do so.

Nor is a negative provable, as even a moron knows...

[David Von Pein]

No matter how many hundreds of times Ben is reminded that Vince is NOT saying that "not reading a newspaper", BY ITSELF, is proof that Oswald is guilty, Ben will continue to ignore these reminders.

And no matter how many times Holmes is reminded that he needs to ADD THINGS TOGETHER, he'll continue to keep every piece of evidence isolated from all the other things that ADD UP to Oswald's blatantly obvious guilt.

You can lead a horse to water, but....well, you know....

[Bud]

<snicker> Still trying to shift the burden.

> So yes, my UNREFUTED criticisms do successfully refute Bugliosi.

You really think that is the criteria for refutation? You seem to be living in your own world with it`s own rules and it`s own meanings for words.

> > You have to show that his assertions cannot be true.
>
> Easily done.
>
> There are hundreds of thousands of murders each year.
>
> Find just *one* who was convicted based on not reading the newspaper that day.

Shifting the burden again.

And are you saying that seemingly trivial details are never used in building a case?

> Or alternatively, find ANYONE who has ever served on a jury who will agree that not being observed reading a newspaper by one witness on the day of a murder is evidence that the non-reader is the sole murderer.

Ask them if a change in routine could be considered significant in light of other information.

> I assert that you CANNOT SUPPORT THAT CLAIM. And indeed, you refuse to even try.

Shifting the burden. You need to stop all this diversionary crap and concentrate on your stated objective.

[Bud]

Perhaps you should look up the word "stated" and compare it with what Bugliosi actually said.

> My statement could be QUICKLY AND EASILY shown to be false by merely quoting the relevant evidence that Oswald ever put himself on the 6th floor at the time of the assassination.

"put himself" is a different concept than "stated". He could put himself somewhere without actually coming right out and saying he was somewhere.

[Ben Holmes]

On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 11:16:22 AM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
> On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 1:35:44 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 8:09:13 AM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
> > > Footnote----
> > >
> > > When I said to add in VB's "reasonable inference" above, I could have also said "add in an additional FACT". Because it's not really even an "inference" Vince is making there. He's just adding in an ADDITIONAL *FACT* (Charles Givens' testimony), which tells us that Lee Oswald was, indeed, on the sixth floor at the time he asked Givens to send an elevator back upstairs.
> >
> > This was prior to 12 noon, as you well know.
> >
> > Why are you lying, Davy Von Molester???
> >
> > Why are you desperately trying to imply that this supports Bugliosi's claim that Oswald said he was on the 6th floor at the time of the assassination???
> >
>
> As I said before, you have to ADD THINGS UP, Holmes.

Nope.

You can have all the fake trees you want, they'll never add up to a forest of real trees.

If *NONE* of the individual bits of "evidence" support the claim Bugliosi is making, they don't suddenly gather credibility and power when added together.

Now, why can't you QUOTE this source that Bugliosi alleges supports his claim?

Could it be because it simply doesn't?

You're a coward, Davy Von Molester...

[Ben Holmes]

You can't show EVEN THE SLIGHTEST CONNECTION WHATSOEVER between these events.

You're a coward, Davy Von Molester...

> And no matter how many times Holmes is reminded that he needs to ADD THINGS TOGETHER, he'll continue to keep every piece of evidence isolated from all the other things that ADD UP to Oswald's blatantly obvious guilt.

"Blatantly obvious???" - based on WHAT??

PRODUCE IT, DAVY... or keep right on running away...

> You can lead a horse to water, but....well, you know....

Indeed, I can keep showing just how silly Bugliosi's claims are, and like the dishonest scum you are, you'll keep running away.

[Bud]

Oswald.

[David Von Pein]

Well, Ben, it would help if you had the SLIGHTEST ability to be able to "piece things together". You have demonstrated in every post you make that you do not possess such an ability, or you just simply don't WANT to "piece" any of the evidence together. It's got to be one or the other.

[David Von Pein]

On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 2:59:44 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 11:16:22 AM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
> > On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 1:35:44 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > > On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 8:09:13 AM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
> > > > Footnote----
> > > >
> > > > When I said to add in VB's "reasonable inference" above, I could have also said "add in an additional FACT". Because it's not really even an "inference" Vince is making there. He's just adding in an ADDITIONAL *FACT* (Charles Givens' testimony), which tells us that Lee Oswald was, indeed, on the sixth floor at the time he asked Givens to send an elevator back upstairs.
> > >
> > > This was prior to 12 noon, as you well know.
> > >
> > > Why are you lying, Davy Von Molester???
> > >
> > > Why are you desperately trying to imply that this supports Bugliosi's claim that Oswald said he was on the 6th floor at the time of the assassination???
> > >
> >
> > As I said before, you have to ADD THINGS UP, Holmes.
>
> Nope.
>
> You can have all the fake trees you want, they'll never add up to a forest of real trees.
>

So, Ben, are you willing to go out on your shaky limb in that vast forest of "fake trees" and say right here and now that you think that EVERY PIECE OF EVIDENCE THAT POINTS TO THE GUILT OF LEE HARVEY OSWALD IS A "FAKE" PIECE OF EVIDENCE?

Please confirm your belief that NONE of the evidence in the JFK/Tippit cases is real or genuine or legitimate, Ben. Please. I want you to say it "on the air" here at acj. Just for the record (and for the benefit of my funny bone too, of course).

Thank you.

[Ben Holmes]

On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 11:43:16 AM UTC-8, Bud wrote:
> On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 2:09:42 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 10:55:39 AM UTC-8, Bud wrote:
> > > On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 10:00:44 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 9:06:09 AM UTC-8, Bud wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 11:36:47 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > > > > > On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 7:42:19 AM UTC-8, Bud wrote:
> > > > > > > On Thursday, February 2, 2017 at 9:47:17 AM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > > > > > > > (13) During interrogation, Oswald put himself on the sixth floor at the time of the assassination.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It falls upon me to include the supportive material that Ben is deceitfully leaving out...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 13. Although in his interrogation on Friday afternoon, November 22, Oswald said he was having lunch on the first floor of the Book Depository Building at the time of the assassination,35 during Sunday’s interrogation Oswald slipped up and placed himself on the sixth floor at the time of the assassination, making him the only employee of the Book Depository Building who placed himself on the sixth floor, or was placed there by anyone else, at the time we know an assassin shot Kennedy from the sixth floor. In his Sunday-morning interrogation he said that at lunchtime, one of the “Negro” employees invited him to eat lunch with him and he declined, saying, “You go on down and send the elevator back up and I will join you in a few minutes.” He said before he could finish whatever he was doing, the commotion surrounding the assassination took place and when he “went downstairs,” a policeman questioned him as to his identification, and his boss stated that he was one of their employees.36 The latter confrontation, of course, refers to Officer Marrion Baker, in Roy Truly’s presence, talking to Oswald in the second-floor lunchroom within two minutes after the shooting. Where was Oswald at the time the Negro employee invited him to lunch, and before he descended to the second-floor lunchroom? The sixth floor. Charles Givens testified that around 11:55 a.m., he went up to the sixth floor to get his jacket with cigarettes in it and saw Oswald on the sixth floor. He said to Oswald, “Boy, are you going downstairs…it’s near lunchtime.” He said Oswald answered, “No, sir. When you get downstairs, close the gate to the elevator.”37 There is another very powerful reason why we can know that Oswald, at the time of his confrontation with Baker in the second-floor lunchroom, had just come down from the sixth floor, not up from the first floor, as he claimed. It is an accepted part of conspiracy dogma to believe what Oswald told Fritz during his interrogation—that he had been eating lunch in the lunchroom on the first floor at the time of the shooting and had walked up to the second floor to get a Coke from the Coke machine just before Baker called out to him.38 Assassination literature abounds with references to “the Coca-Cola machine in the second floor lunchroom.” And indeed there was a Coca-Cola machine in the subject room.39 But to my knowledge, there is no direct reference in the assassination literature to a second soft drink machine in the Book Depository Building, and in a phone call to Gary Mack, the curator at the Sixth Floor Museum in the building, he told me he was “unaware” of any other soft drink machine in the building at the time of the assassination.40 What prompted my call to him was not the frequent references in the literature to the Dr. Pepper bottle found on the sixth floor after the shooting,41 since some soft drink machines contain a variety of drinks, but a reference in stock boy Bonnie Ray William’s testimony before the Warren Commission to his getting “a small bottle of Dr. Pepper from the Dr. Pepper machine,”42 and stock boy Wesley Frazier’s testimony that “I have seen him [Oswald] go to the Dr. Pepper machine by the refrigerator and get a Dr. Pepper.”43 Neither Williams nor Frazier expressly said what floor this machine was on, and I was aware, from a photo,44 that there was a refrigerator next to the Coca-Cola machine on the second floor. Through a few phone calls I was able to reach Wesley Frazier, whom I hadn’t talked to since 1986, when he testified for me at the London trial. Still living in Dallas, he told me that “there was a Dr. Pepper machine on the first floor.” Where, specifically, was it? “It was located by the double freight elevator near the back of the building.” Was there a refrigerator nearby? I asked. “Oh, yes, right next to it.” (And indeed, I subsequently found proof of the existence of the machine, with the words “Dr. Pepper” near the top front of it, in an FBI photo taken for the Warren Commission of the northwest corner of the first floor, and it is located right next to the refrigerator.)45 Frazier said that “almost all the guys would get their drinks for lunch from this Dr. Pepper machine. It mostly had Dr. Pepper, but also other drinks like orange and root beer.” I asked him, “What about the Coca-Cola machine in the second-floor lunchroom? Did it have other drinks too?” He said it “only had Coca-Cola in it” and “the only time anybody would go to that machine is if they wanted a Coke, which I did from time to time.” When I asked him whether or not “it was rare” for the workers to go to the second floor to get a Coke, he said, “Yes. We had our own machine on the first floor, where we ate our lunch. It was more convenient to use the machine on the first floor.” Frazier said he could not say whether Oswald ever went to the second floor to get a Coke or ever drank soft drinks other than Dr. Pepper, but “I only recall seeing him with a Dr. Pepper.”46 Author Jim Bishop, in his book The Day Kennedy Was Shot, writes (without a citation, however) that Oswald “invariably drank Dr. Pepper.”47 And we know that Marina told her biographer, Priscilla McMillan, that when he was working at Jaggers-Chiles-Stovall in Dallas in 1963, “after supper” he would walk down the street as he often did “to buy a newspaper and a bottle of Dr. Pepper.”48 So we see that apart from all the conclusive evidence that Oswald shot Kennedy from the sniper’s nest, and therefore had to have descended from there to the second floor, his story about going up to the second floor to get a Coke doesn’t even make sense. Why go up to the second floor to get a drink for your lunch when there’s a soft drink machine on the first floor, the floor you say you are already on, particularly when the apparent drink of your choice is on this first floor, not the second floor?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This is a rather outrageous untruth that Bugliosi is making here.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You didn`t include the content that he used to support it. Pretty dishonest of you, Ben.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > An assertion isn't evidence.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cite... CITE - the actual evidence that shows that Oswald "slipped up" and place HIMSELF on the 6th floor AT THE TIME OF THE ASSASSINATION.
> > > > >
> > > > > Refute... REFUTE - Bugliosi`s claim that Oswald "slipped up".
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Simple to do. Since Bugliosi is unable to cite actual source evidence that supports his claim, it's based solely on his statement. Bugliosi IS THE ONLY SOURCE FOR HIS CLAIM.
> > >
> > > You confuse your ability to criticize with actual refutation.
> >
> > Au contraire!
> >
> > I realize that an inadequate criticism could, itself, be refuted.
> >
> > But you've refuted *NONE* of my points.
>
> <snicker> Still trying to shift the burden.

Tut tut tut... it was Bugliosi's claim to make.

He couldn't do it.

You desperately demand that the burden be shifted to me.

You lose.

[Ben Holmes]

You can run all you want to, "Bud" - but you can't convince anyone with lies.

[Ben Holmes]

Did Givens read the newspaper that day?

[Ben Holmes]

You can run, Davy Von Molester - but all I do is keep pointing out your cowardice.

These speculations by Bugliosi would have gotten him LAUGHED OUT OF COURT - and you know it.

If you think you don't know it, try running these refutations of mine past any attorney.

But you know in your heart what they'd say.

Any attorney who tried to indict someone because a single witness didn't see the "suspect" reading a newspaper is a kook.

Bugliosi certainly would never have gone to court with THAT nonsense.

[Ben Holmes]

On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 12:37:33 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
> On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 2:59:44 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 11:16:22 AM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
> > > On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 1:35:44 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > > > On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 8:09:13 AM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
> > > > > Footnote----
> > > > >
> > > > > When I said to add in VB's "reasonable inference" above, I could have also said "add in an additional FACT". Because it's not really even an "inference" Vince is making there. He's just adding in an ADDITIONAL *FACT* (Charles Givens' testimony), which tells us that Lee Oswald was, indeed, on the sixth floor at the time he asked Givens to send an elevator back upstairs.
> > > >
> > > > This was prior to 12 noon, as you well know.
> > > >
> > > > Why are you lying, Davy Von Molester???
> > > >
> > > > Why are you desperately trying to imply that this supports Bugliosi's claim that Oswald said he was on the 6th floor at the time of the assassination???
> > > >
> > >
> > > As I said before, you have to ADD THINGS UP, Holmes.
> >
> > Nope.
> >
> > You can have all the fake trees you want, they'll never add up to a forest of real trees.
> >
>
> So, Ben, are you willing to go out on your shaky limb in that vast forest of "fake trees" and say right here and now that you think that EVERY PIECE OF EVIDENCE THAT POINTS TO THE GUILT OF LEE HARVEY OSWALD IS A "FAKE" PIECE OF EVIDENCE?

Why are you trying desperately to get me to say something?

WHY CAN'T YOU ANSWER WHAT I ACTUALLY HAVE BEEN POSTING EVERY DAY???

[David Von Pein]

Because my funny bone needs its daily laugh. And who better than Ben Holmes to supply it?

> WHY CAN'T YOU ANSWER WHAT I ACTUALLY HAVE BEEN POSTING EVERY DAY???

I have. You've just ignored it (as usual). The best response to your nonsense about Bugliosi is the following comment that I made days ago, which I'll repeat for the 5th or 6th time here....

"Virtually all of [Vincent] Bugliosi's arguments (when evaluated and weighed AS A UNIT, and not merely isolated individually) make perfect sense to any reasonable person who knows the basic facts of the JFK murder case." -- DVP; Jan. 25, 2017

[Bud]

You started this posts with the intention of refuting Bugliosi. I suggest you get to it, this is getting tedious.

> You desperately demand that the burden be shifted to me.

You took on the burden. You started this posts with the intention of refuting Bugliosi. Get to it.

> You lose.

[Bud]

Who did Givens kill?

[Ben Holmes]

On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 2:22:16 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
> On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 5:09:09 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 12:37:33 PM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
> > > On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 2:59:44 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > > > On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 11:16:22 AM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
> > > > > On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 1:35:44 PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
> > > > > > On Friday, February 3, 2017 at 8:09:13 AM UTC-8, David Von Pein wrote:
> > > > > > > Footnote----
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > When I said to add in VB's "reasonable inference" above, I could have also said "add in an additional FACT". Because it's not really even an "inference" Vince is making there. He's just adding in an ADDITIONAL *FACT* (Charles Givens' testimony), which tells us that Lee Oswald was, indeed, on the sixth floor at the time he asked Givens to send an elevator back upstairs.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This was prior to 12 noon, as you well know.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Why are you lying, Davy Von Molester???
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Why are you desperately trying to imply that this supports Bugliosi's claim that Oswald said he was on the 6th floor at the time of the assassination???
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > As I said before, you have to ADD THINGS UP, Holmes.
> > > >
> > > > Nope.
> > > >
> > > > You can have all the fake trees you want, they'll never add up to a forest of real trees.
> > > >
> > >
> > > So, Ben, are you willing to go out on your shaky limb in that vast forest of "fake trees" and say right here and now that you think that EVERY PIECE OF EVIDENCE THAT POINTS TO THE GUILT OF LEE HARVEY OSWALD IS A "FAKE" PIECE OF EVIDENCE?
> >
> > Why are you trying desperately to get me to say something?
> >
>
> Because my funny bone needs its daily laugh. And who better than Ben Holmes to supply it?

You're lying again, Davy Von Molester.

The truth is, you CANNOT refute what I actually say, so you're desperately trying to get me to say something that you *CAN* refute, in order to give the impression that you've refuted my series on Bugliosi.

But you've been avoiding ANY DEBATE AT ALL on the actual issues I point out.

> > WHY CAN'T YOU ANSWER WHAT I ACTUALLY HAVE BEEN POSTING EVERY DAY???
>
> I have.

You're a liar, Davy Von Molester.

Anyone can check these threads, and look in vain for your answer to any of the questions I raise.

>You've just ignored it (as usual). The best response to your nonsense about Bugliosi is the following comment that I made days ago, which I'll repeat for the 5th or 6th time here....
>
> "Virtually all of [Vincent] Bugliosi's arguments (when evaluated and weighed AS A UNIT, and not merely isolated individually) make perfect sense to any reasonable person who knows the basic facts of the JFK murder case." -- DVP; Jan. 25, 2017

Sorry, this isn't an answer.

I've already pointed out the nonsensical nature of this response.

Now if you were an honest man, you'd explain how Bugliosi can claim that a single witness, CONTRADICTING what he'd previously stated about Oswald reading a newspaper - has ANYTHING AT ALL to do with him being a murderer, let alone being the *sole* murderer of JFK.

But you're not honest... are you Davy?

[Ben Holmes]

JFK of course.

The fact that you refuse to demonstrate that he read the newspaper, and given that Bugliosi has made a connection between not reading a newspaper, and killing JFK - means that Givens is the killer.

Not only that, but the *SOLE* killer of JFK.

You lose!

[Bud]

The only thing you are showing is that you don`t understand the arguments you are arguing against.

[Ben Holmes]

A naked assertion by a proven liar isn't very much to go on...

[Bud]

Ok, I`ll put some clothes on it. If Givens and a habit of reading the paper in the Domino room every morning and did not the morning of the assassination *and* he had the truckload of implications that Oswald had against him, then he would be the suspect.

[Ben Holmes]

All you've just done is show what a kook you are!!!

You *STILL* can't make a logical argument that reading a newspaper, or not reading a newspaper, is evidence of guilt in a murder, let alone evidence of *sole* guilt.

It's precisely because of examples such as this that I point to the FAITH that believers have. You have FAITH in your holy book, the WCR and in any books that support your holy book, such as "Reclaiming History."

[Bud]

Until you understand the actual argument you are only going to continue to make yourself look bad.

> It's precisely because of examples such as this that I point to the FAITH that believers have. You have FAITH in your holy book, the WCR and in any books that support your holy book, such as "Reclaiming History."

I wouldn`t need either. It was a very simple crime.

[Ben Holmes]

Still a kook!

Still a loser...

[Bud]

Confession is good for the soul.