JFK Assassination Forum Archives -- Misc. Topics Of Interest (Part 169)

[David Von Pein]

ARCHIVED JFK ASSASSINATION FORUM POSTS OF INTEREST (PART 169):

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


"JFK: 3 SHOTS THAT CHANGED AMERICA":
http://JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/2011/11/jfk-3-shots-that-changed-america.html
http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2011/11/jfk-3-shots-that-changed-america.html


11 SECONDS IN DALLAS?:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/18/historians-claim-new-research-shows-oswald-acted-alone-in-jfk-assassination/
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/df7ca678545b1bff


THE CURIOUS LACK OF PRE-11/22/63 JFK TELEVISION COVERAGE:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/5b428cd6372c1414
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/78cc5f6aee40c5ca


WHO IS IN THE SIXTH-FLOOR DEPOSITORY WINDOW?:
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=18374&st=15&p=238361&#entry238361


LEE OSWALD, EDWIN WALKER, AND JOHN KENNEDY:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/694b9c19edea7f30


JOHN CONNALLY AND THE BULLET:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/e5aa60d2426cfaee


VINCE PALAMARA:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/c00765b350e841f8
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/d2ac9a89d4a0b11d


WILLIAM NEWMAN:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/5aab9353ce491862
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/3a46222e9bff8c8f
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/3e107e621bb4ab4e


OPINIONS:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/opinions.htm
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/2d077c0ae60431f9


SOME MORE THINGS:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/f81a6dba72c0abd1
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/de147538d4c19c1b
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/ef219f4a4d348f31
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/4b1db97519187623


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

[David Von Pein]

"The Walker shooting, IMO, has always been a vital key to
understanding OSWALD HIMSELF. Because when Oswald took that gun and
fired a shot at General Edwin Walker's head on April 10, 1963, it
forever proved that the man who was charged seven months later with
the murder of the President of the United States positively had it
WITHIN HIMSELF the willingness to kill a human being.

"In other words -- Oswald was, in effect, a POLITICAL ASSASSIN
many months prior to November 22, 1963. And, in my view, that's a very
important thing to know about Lee Harvey Oswald. And it's a part of
Oswald's inner character that conspiracy theorists SHOULD (but don't)
pay a lot more attention to, particularly the large number of
conspiracists who currently reside in the silly "Anybody But Oswald"
fraternity." -- David Von Pein; February 13, 2010

http://Quoting-Common-Sense.blogspot.com

[David Von Pein]

Here are some of my own random thoughts about Max Holland's 2011
National Geographic documentary, "JFK: The Lost Bullet":

1.) Assassination researcher Max Holland attempted to bolster his "11
second" shooting timeline with an interesting discovery: A possible
bullet hole in a portion of the metal traffic-light frame which hung
above Elm Street on 11/22/63 when President Kennedy was assassinated.
The traffic-light defect can be clearly seen in the November 27, 1963,
Secret Service re-enactment film (photo below). Now, whether that
traffic-light defect was caused by a bullet fired from Lee Harvey
Oswald's rifle, no one can say for sure (not even Max Holland). But it
is an intriguing discovery nonetheless.

http://www.washingtondecoded.com/.a/6a00d834523b6869e20153930d7bce970b-800wi

http://dvp-potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/01/1963-secret-service-film.html

2.) Via laser beam technology, the "Lost Bullet" researchers re-staged
the Single-Bullet Theory. The laser-beam "shooter" wasn't on the sixth
floor exactly, but instead was perched outside the sniper's window on
a crane or cherry-picker device that hoisted him six floors above Elm
Street. His "shot" lined up (generally) with the SBT shot.

Although it would have been nice to see some more details of this
"SBT" part of the program, which was very brief, and only showed the
"victims" (the stand-ins for JFK and Connally) in tight close-ups, and
I really couldn't tell if the men were lined up correctly in the car;
and I couldn't really tell whether they had Connally turned far enough
to his right. And there was no indication of where the "laser shot"
would have exited on JFK's body. So this segment, while okay, could
have been better, IMO.

3.) Some assassination figures who haven't been seen in decades turned
up for the "Lost Bullet" filming in Dealey Plaza, including 63-year-
old Amos Euins, who was a key witness on 11/22/63, as he actually got
a look at the gunman on the sixth floor of the Depository, and he saw
the rifle in the window, which Euins said resembled a "pipe" to him.
It's good to see Amos again. And, boy, he looks great at age 63 too.
I'd swear he was in his 40s or early 50s.

Former Secret Service agent John J. Howlett and Dealey Plaza witnesses
Tina Towner and James Tague also made appearances. And Max Holland &
Co. definitely want America to believe that Tague was wounded by
Oswald's FIRST shot, although Tague (at least prior to 2011) always
maintained he wasn't stung in the face by the first bullet. He always
said it was a later shot that struck him.

4.) A detailed digital restoration of several of the assassination
films was done for the program, including the films taken by Abraham
Zapruder, Robert Hughes, Tina Towner, Mark Bell, and Elsie Dorman.
(And, perhaps, the Orville Nix film too. I can't recall if they said
the Nix film was actually digitally enhanced or not, but maybe it
was.)

And while the restoration of the films was nice to see (albeit in very
choppy, interrupted segments--a few seconds here, then a few seconds
there), I can't really see where it actually aided Mr. Holland's cause
in coming to his unique conclusion that Oswald's first (missed) shot
struck the traffic light PRIOR to Zapruder frame 133 (i.e., prior to
the time when Zapruder resumed filming the motorcade after briefly
stopping his camera).

In fact, the film that helped Holland by far the most wasn't an
"assassination" film at all. It was, instead, the film taken by the
U.S. Secret Service on November 27, 1963, during a filmed
reconstruction of the shooting in Dealey Plaza (the film which shows
what appears to be a possible defect, or hole, in the traffic light
structure).

5.) A pretty large mistake was made by the narrator near the start of
the 1-hour "Lost Bullet" show, when he said that both lone-assassin
believers and conspiracists alike agree on the fact that just TWO
bullets struck President Kennedy and just ONE bullet struck Governor
Connally.

I don't know where the "Lost Bullet" script writers got their
information, but as we all know here on these Internet forums, there
are many, many conspiracy theorists who believe that JFK was struck by
more than just two bullets on November 22nd.

In fact, from my online experience, the vast majority of conspiracists
who participate regularly in Internet discussions firmly believe that
a MINIMUM of three shots struck JFK's body; and many of those CTers
also think Connally was hit at least twice. (And if you happen to be
in league with James H. Fetzer, then you believe that a total of SEVEN
bullets struck the two victims -- 4 bullets hit Kennedy and 3 hit
Connally -- which is an absolutely ridiculous scenario, of course.)

6.) The "Lost Bullet" producers tried to pass off an audio clip of
NBC's Tom Pettit describing the shooting of Oswald as actually being a
description of the frenzied scene in Dealey Plaza after JFK was shot.
An interesting piece of deception there. No big deal, of course. But
it certainly wasn't accurate.

Overall, I think "JFK: The Lost Bullet" was just a "so-so"
documentary. Not too bad. But certainly not great either. The restored
film clips were nice to see, especially the Dorman and Towner films,
which looked really crisp and sharp. But it didn't look to me like the
Zapruder Film was any clearer or sharper than the 1998 MPI restored
digital copy that I own, or the stabilized version that I have on one
of my webpages (below):

http://www.box.com/shared/7n9bertqjo

And the laser-beam test that was done from the approximate (but not
exact) position of where Lee Harvey Oswald was firing from was also
fairly good, but, as mentioned, I would have liked to see some more
details of that laser test, particularly from a variety of camera
angles, to confirm the correct alignment of the two limo victims.

I can hear the conspiracy theorists' complaints about that SBT laser
test now -- "They didn't have the angles right at all!" -- "The wounds
are in the wrong places altogether!" -- "They didn't fire any REAL
bullets into the stand-ins!" -- "They didn't even go INTO the building
to do the test! They were perched on a crane OUTSIDE the sixth floor!
So this test is worthless!" -- Etc., etc.

Max Holland's "11 second" and "Traffic Light" theories could possibly
be accurate. Nobody can know with 100% certainty, of course. And since
Max is attempting to fill in a gap concerning the shot that MISSED the
limousine's occupants, it becomes a very difficult (if not impossible)
task to really "prove" anything beyond all reasonable doubt regarding
the timing of Oswald's first shot and what happened to that bullet
after it left LHO's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle.

Holland didn't address the problem that his theory has with respect to
one very important timing issue -- that being: John Connally's
"timing" of that first shot. More about that can be found in this 2007
post of mine:

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/df7ca678545b1bff

David Von Pein
November 20-21, 2011

[lazu...@webtv.net]

I don't think anybody that knows anything about the case finds the show
convincing.Most witnesses heard 3 shots fired, but not until at least
ZFilm160-190. There are tons more witnesses who heard shots coming from
the knoll/overpass area than heard anyone fire before the ZFilm started
shooting.And there are more witnesses who heard more than 3 shots fired
than someone who fired an early shot. Also, as Bob Harris said how could
someone fire early at 130 decibals when the motorcade is very close to
the TSBD and nobody hears it, including the SS follow up car that would
have been almost under the window.?...Laz

[aeffects]

On Nov 21, 2:07 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:

<snip>

no advertising troll!

[David Von Pein]

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/b8dde05e2157bdaa

http://www.washingtondecoded.com/site/2011/11/the-.html

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

I don't understand this at all. In June 2011, Max Holland had
"eliminated" the hole in the traffic light as being a possible "bullet
hole" (it's in a report co-authored by Holland, it says [see second
link above]), but he then went ahead and said it possibly WAS a bullet
hole on the "Lost Bullet" special anyhow? Weird.


"JM/HD" THEN SAID:

Perhaps they filmed at Dealey Plaza prior to June 15, 2011 along with
the editing.


DVP NOW SAYS:

I suppose that's possible, yes. But it's still rather disingenuous on
Mr. Holland's part to allow his comments (regardless of when they were
put on film) about a possible bullet defect in the traffic light to be
aired in the final broadcast of the NatGeo special on 11/20/2011.

Do you think Max Holland, upon learning of the "gap" in the design of
the traffic light in mid June of 2011, would have had no power to stop
(or edit) the final National Geographic broadcast (which was still
more than five months away, as of 6/15/11)?

That's a strange situation, IMO.

I suppose it's possible that the NatGeo producers just couldn't bear
to edit out the thing that was, by far, the biggest "new" revelation
(or "bombshell", if you prefer that word) that came out of the one-
hour "Lost Bullet" special. So, they just let the viewers think that
the "defect" (white spot) that we see in the traffic light could
possibly have been caused by a bullet from Lee Harvey Oswald's gun.

But if that last statement I just made is correct, then if I were Max
Holland, I'd be boiling mad and fit to be tied. Because the net result
of the "Lost Bullet" program (as it aired on Nov. 20th), PLUS the
detailed "Technical Report" of Max Holland's research (which has
Holland's name on it as a co-author and was put online on November 20,
2011) is this:

1.) There's almost no way in the world that the "white spot" that we
see on that traffic light (in the 11/27/63 Secret Service film) is the
result of a bullet.

2.) Max Holland, five months before the "Lost Bullet" special aired,
knew full well that #1 above is true.

3.) The National Geographic Channel went ahead and aired Holland's
opinion anyway that the white spot could still be a bullet defect in
the traffic light.

Any way you slice it, there's a bad odor coming from this whole
situation. (IMO.)

Perhaps, however, there's something about this that I'm missing. But
based on the NatGeo special (as it aired), in conjunction with the
June 2011 Technical Report with Mr. Holland's name on it, I'm not
quite sure what that missing "something" might be.

Perhaps Max Holland still thinks that the white spot on the traffic
light IS, indeed, a bullet defect--even AFTER he saw the same type of
traffic light which has a similar "gap" in its metal structure. (Ya
think?)

~shrug~

[David Von Pein]

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/519cc6d7d61e9784/54800160664e864c?#54800160664e864c

DON ROBERDEAU SAID:

>>> "When you and I chatted in early 2007, you admitted to me that you had never tried to speak with, nor, had you ever interviewed even one DP witness.... Perhaps, you could choose to take this opportunity to actually contact [Amos] EUINS and interview him for us - and ask him why he's changed the number of shots he warrenatti-testified to that he heard from 4, down to his current 3.... and, ask him about those last 2 being bunched distinctly closer, etc." <<<


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Good idea. That's a mystery to me.

And my earlier comments about Euins looking good obviously had nothing
to do with ANYTHING at all pertaining to the evidence in the case, or
to how reliable or unreliable a witness Euins might be, etc. I was
merely making a general observation.

And I'm detecting a little "dig" of another sordid sort in your
comments too, Don. (But maybe that was unintentional, eh?) :)

And, yes, Tina Towner, indeed, looked pretty good too.

But if you REALLY want to see someone "looking good", watch the first
video on my Olivia Newton-John webpage below. This is enough to make
any red-blooded American male want to forget about the Grassy Knoll
and the Depositiory for a few minutes (even on the anniversary of the
assassination). ~grin~ .....

http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2011/06/olivia-newton-john.html

[David Von Pein]

http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=18411&st=75&p=239205&#entry239205

CONSPIRACY KOOK LEE FARLEY (AT "THE EDUCATION FORUM") ASKED:

Why did Ted Callaway have to ask Domingo Benavides which way the
killer went if he saw him and spoke to him?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

That's an easy one, Lee:

Since Callaway didn't actually SEE THE MURDER take place, Callaway was
merely confirming that the person he saw with a gun on Patton Avenue
was, indeed, the ONE & ONLY KILLER of Officer Tippit.

Callaway, at the time, had no way of knowing if there were one, two,
or more killers. So it doesn't seem strange that he would want to
confirm (in his own mind) that "THE KILLER" escaped down Patton. And
he did confirm that via Benavides.

I achieved my goal though -- Because I just knew beyond all doubt that
one or more of you conspiracy retards here at the "Education Forum"
would try to paint Ted Callaway as a bald-faced liar. And I was 100%
correct. You actually think Callaway DIDN'T see anyone run past him on
Patton on 11/22. Beautiful.

And I see that DiEugenio decided to wait until Farley posted his inane
remarks about Callaway before he chimed in with his confirmation that
he, too, disbelieves Callaway.

Two (kook) birds for the price of one. Not a bad day's work.

Now, let's move on to William Scoggins (another witness who verifies
the presence of Lee Harvey Oswald on Tenth Street during the Tippit
murder):

Just exactly how are you conspiracy kooks going to attempt to
discredit Mr. Scoggins in order to pretend that your #1 Patsy for all
Nov. 22 murders was totally innocent?

I can't wait to hear the CT brilliance.

[aeffects]

On Nov 27, 2:17 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
...

> I can't wait to hear the CT brilliance.

here ya go shithead: you're alimentary canal is full of flatulence!
Take it to the bank!

[David Von Pein]

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/1f5a9f323cbabce7/73e07a246a661c18?#73e07a246a661c18


TONY MARSH UTTERED:

>>> "Ruby was in the building several times but not in the hallway when they were moving Oswald around. He didn't camp out waiting for them to move Oswald." <<<

DAVID V.P. RESPONDED:

I was talking about Ruby having access to the COUNTY JAIL, not CITY
HALL (DPD).

Get better reading glasses.

[OT -- Robert Morrow needs some better glasses too. Did you see the
goofy error he made on Edu. Forum yesterday? It was quite humorous.
Just wanted to throw that in for a bonus.] :)

>>> "He [Ruby] said that he knew that they were going to transfer Oswald on Sunday morning at 10 AM. That is when he chose to be in the basement, his last chance to get Oswald." <<<

Then why wasn't Ruby in the basement at 10 AM? At that time, he was
still in his apartment, miles away. He didn't get into the basement
until 11:20 AM.

You surely aren't going to suggest that Ruby WAS in the basement at
10:00, are you?

And I'll ask again -- Why did Sunday morning in the basement
necessarily represent Ruby's "last chance" to plug Oswald?

Given Ruby's "I Know Everybody In Town" status, why couldn't he have
gained easy access into Sheriff Decker's County Jail building in order
to complete his nefarious "mission" on poor Patsy Lee? (Especially in
light of the fact that so many conspiracy theorists believe that
virtually ALL of Dallas law enforcement was "in" on some kind of plot.
Surely Decker's boys would have been more than happy to put out the
"Come In & Shoot Oswald" welcome mat for ol' Jack.)

>>> "There is no way that you can look at Ruby milling around waiting for Oswald to come down minutes before the shooting and claim that it was just luck that Ruby got there at the last second." <<<

You're making stuff up out of thin air. Ruby wasn't "milling around"
waiting for Oswald on Sunday morning in the basement. There's ample
proof that he could not possibly have arrived in that basement until
(at most) one minute prior to Oswald coming out.

"Milling around" indeed. Where the heck are you getting that from?

[David Von Pein]

http://EducationForum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=18411&st=195&p=239829&#entry239829


JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID (SEE ABOVE LINK FOR THE FULL CONTEXT):


>>> "Do you consider this "REA shipping" to post office boxes?" <<<


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

In a way, yes.

But in the Hendon example [cited by Dale Myers], the physical gun
itself would have never been in the post office, that's true.

But if Hendon is not correct in the Oswald instance, and IF the Post
Office COD regulations were the same in 1963 as they were in 2003
(which, I'll admit, I cannot know for sure, but if they were, then
"Any mailer" could have used the COD mailing methods described in the
regs I posted earlier), which then means there is another possible way
that Oswald could have picked up his revolver in March '63.

Via such conditions, he could have picked it up right at the post
office, with the P.O. then forwarding the money to REA, with REA then
forwarding $19.95 to Seaport Traders.

But regardless of WHERE he picked it up, all reasonable people who
have looked at this case know that Oswald DID pick up the gun that HE
HIMSELF ordered in March 1963 from Seaport Traders, Inc.

And, once again, I'll ask this very logical question:

Who in the heck orders something by mail-order, and has it sent to his
post office box, but then doesn't even bother to pick it up?

That'd be kinda crazy to do that, wouldnt it?

And, yes, Jim, I know that you and your CT buddies think that there's
no evidence whatsoever to show that Oswald even ORDERED the Smith &
Wesson revolver. But, again, we have to distinguish between the
Anybody-But-Oswald "conspiracy clowns" (like you) and "reasonable
people interested in the truth" (people like me and many thousands of
others).

And when that distinction is made and observed, then the truth
regarding Lee Harvey Oswald's 1963 revolver purchase becomes a lot
clearer.

[aeffects]

On Dec 1, 7:27 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:

snip....

no advertising creepo

[aeffects]

On Nov 27, 7:27 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
snip

still running from the evidence, we see.

[David Von Pein]

CONSPIRACY KOOK:

>>> "If the FBI was able to be so successful in tracking down the weapons so quickly (they were at Seaport Traders half-way across the country within eight days of the shootings), why in the remaining months did they simply not bother to look into the rest of the transaction with REA?" <<<


DAVID VON PEIN:


Probably because they didn't need to do that to establish and confirm
what Seaport had already established and confirmed -- namely: That Lee
Harvey Oswald (aka A.J. Hidell) had ordered (and undoubtedly picked up
and took possession of) Smith & Wesson Revolver #V510210.

Your question is particularly weak and unimportant because it deals
with the shipping of Oswald's REVOLVER only. And since the FBI already
knew (via the bullet shells that Oswald dumped at the scene of the
crime) that the gun Oswald had on him in the theater was the SAME gun
that murdered Tippit, then there was really no need to establish just
exactly WHERE Oswald picked up the revolver.

The FBI knew it was Oswald's gun via just the Seaport documents. And I
imagine that at least a few people in the FBI had enough common sense
to add up the following things and arrive at the obvious conclusion
that Oswald took possession of V510210 in March '63:

1.) Oswald ordered the revolver from Seaport.

2.) Seaport's paperwork establishes that they [Seaport Traders, Inc.]
received Oswald's/Hidell's order (probably on March 13th, 1963, via
the typewritten date on Michaelis Exhibit No. 2).

3.) Seaport's paperwork establishes the fact that Revolver V510210 was
sent to Oswald's P.O. Box (or at least a notification card was sent to
the box, with Oswald possibly needing to go to the REA office to get
the gun itself).

4.) The gun was never returned to Seaport as "undelivered".

5.) The Seaport paperwork further indicates that the revolver shipped
to Oswald was definitely PAID FOR and the order completed on REA's
end, because the proper forms are attached to the red copy of the
invoice in Seaport's files. (And this is another fact that CTers on
this forum apparently want to completely ignore; and this fact was
established in Heinz Michaelis' WC testimony.)

6.) J.D. Tippit was murdered with Revolver V510210.

7.) Lee Harvey Oswald had Revolver V510210 in his hands (attempting to
shoot a policeman with it) at approximately 1:50 PM CST on Friday,
November 22nd, 1963 AD.

Given the above ironclad facts, tell me again WHY the Federal Bureau
of Investigation (or anybody else for that matter) would have needed
to go to the REA office to establish whether or not Lee Oswald picked
up Revolver V510210 and whether or not Oswald shot Officer Tippit with
that same gun?

In actuality, you could really throw out Items 1 through 5 above,
because even without establishing those things, Oswald is still proven
guilty of murdering J.D. Tippit. Just #6 and #7 by themselves
establish that fact for all time.

[aeffects]

On Dec 2, 11:26 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:

<sniperoo>

uh-uh!

[David Von Pein]

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/063e88cdaa62cf09


It looks to me as though Nellie is focusing a lot of her attention on
her husband (JBC) in the Z230s and 240s, and she doesn't turn to look
at JFK until about Z256 or so. (And she was likely focusing on JBC
because JBC was shouting "Oh, no no".)

My summary:

I think all reasonable people would agree that Nellie could not have
possibly seen JBC's initial involuntary reactions to being hit at Z225-
Z230 or so. Those things happened in the blink of an eye, and Nellie
was not looking at JBC at that time. She, therefore, missed seeing the
crucial "impact" of the bullet on JBC.

She then said she turned to look straight at the President and noticed
JFK's hands up at his neck.

But Bob's looping GIF is, indeed, interesting--but not really for the
reason he desires. I found it interesting because it seems to show
Mrs. Connally paying particular attention to JOHN CONNALLY (not JOHN
KENNEDY) in the Zapruder frames very shortly after the SBT bullet
struck both men (the Z230s).

http://jfkhistory.com/nellie2.gif

[aeffects]

On Jan 7, 5:12 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:

<snip>

> If Oswald did, indeed, fire five shots at Tippit (which can never be
> proven, of course), instead of just four shots, then it's possible
> that the fifth bullet shell was simply lost to history, never having
> been recovered by anyone after the shooting.

can't even prove Oswald fired a single shot, moron.... lmfao!

[David Von Pein]

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/4aade01e61db8969/7071de4a57fe816e?#7071de4a57fe816e


DONALD C. WILLIS SAID:

>>> "If I were a LNer, I too would flee from confronting the full implications of Sgt. [Gerald] Hill's admission that he did send the "auto .38" transmission. It doesn't just discredit his Commission-testimony denial re sending it; it discredits the testimony of Benavides, Poe, & Hill himself re the supposed throwing down of hulls by the shooter. Obviously, the hulls were found on the ground because the latter's gun ejected them *automatically*, as per Hill's DPD-radio transmission." <<<


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

So, apparently Don Willis thinks that J.D. Tippit's murderer was
firing bullets from the corner of 10th & Patton, even though we know
that Tippit himself was found lying in the street beside his patrol
car, which was many yards down the road from the corner.

Would Willis now like to pretend that Tippit was really shot at the
corner, but after being shot four times at point-blank range, he
managed to stagger down the street before he finally crumpled to his
death?

Awaiting Donald's brilliant explanation regarding his theory that a
gunman fired an automatic at Tippit FROM THE CORNER of Tenth and
Patton.

It appears to me as if Donald Willis has really boxed himself into a
tricky and untenable corner when he said this---

"Obviously, the hulls were found on the ground because the
latter's gun ejected them automatically."

Via the above silly theory, Willis has no choice but to discount and
disregard the observations of ALL of the witnesses who saw the
shooting occur on Tenth Street. Willis has to now believe that
Tippit's real killer was shooting from a location where absolutely
ZERO witnesses claim to have seen a gunman.

Via Willis' loony theory, the real killer would have been located
practically right next to William Scoggins, who was sitting in his
taxicab at the corner of 10th & Patton. Yet Scoggins testified that
the shooting occurred many yards up Tenth Street, not right at the
corner.

And the other witnesses (Markham and Benavides) also confirm that
Tippit's one and only killer shot Tippit from the sidewalk on 10th
Street, with the shooter firing from across the hood of Tippit's
police car.

Or maybe Willis would like to add a new wrinkle to his theory -- maybe
he would like to now claim that Tippit's body and his police car were
later MOVED to a location further up Tenth Street, which is where Car
No. 10 was later photographed.

If a gunman had really fired at Tippit from the corner where two of
the bullet shells were found, here's how far away from Tippit that
gunman would have been (via CE523):

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0128a.htm

Also:

Don Willis' theory has yet another insurmountable problem if he wants
to pretend that an "automatic" pistol was really used to kill Officer
Tippit, and that problem is the fact that two of the bullet shells
that were later found near the scene of J.D. Tippit's murder were
found by Barbara Davis and Virginia Davis in the SIDE YARD of their
apartment building--on PATTON AVENUE, not on Tenth Street. (See page
266 of Dale Myers' book "With Malice" for an illustration that shows
exactly where those two shells were found.)

Which would mean that if the shells were really being fired by an
automatic weapon, then the gunman was either running around the corner
as he was firing the gun, or he was somehow able to shoot Tippit from
the SIDE YARD of the Davises' residence, which would mean the killer
would have to shoot THROUGH THE APARTMENT BUILDING in order to hit
Tippit.

Obviously what happened is this: Lee Harvey Oswald shot J.D. Tippit
with Smith & Wesson revolver #V510210, and after firing four (or
perhaps five) bullets at Tippit, Oswald ran (or walked briskly) toward
the corner of Tenth & Patton. When he reached the corner, Oswald began
to unload the empty shells from his revolver, with two of the shells
falling to the ground on Tenth Street (very near the corner itself),
with the other two shells coming out of the gun after Oswald had
reached the side yard of the Davis apartment building (again see page
266 of "With Malice").

The above scenario of Oswald's shell-dumping is also perfectly
consistent with the known characteristics of Lee Oswald's V510210
revolver, which is a gun that would result in bulged (or slightly
expanded) cartridge cases after bullets were fired through the
rechambered revolver. Which means the shells would have a tendency to
stick in the chamber, resulting in additional effort being required by
any gunman attempting to manually remove the shells from the weapon
(see page 258 of "With Malice").

This "sticky shells" situation was almost certainly the case with
Oswald's revolver on November 22, 1963, at 10th & Patton, with the
shells being a bit difficult for Oswald to remove from the gun all at
once. Hence, there were two shells found near the corner on Tenth
Street, while the other two shells were found around the corner in the
Davises' side yard.

It's also quite possible that the "sticky" nature of Oswald's bullet
shells could be the reason that only four shells were recovered at the
Tippit murder scene (with the possibility existing that Oswald
actually fired five bullets at Officer Tippit, with one bullet missing
the target).

If Oswald did, indeed, fire five shots at Tippit (which can never be
proven, of course), instead of just four shots, then it's possible
that the fifth bullet shell was simply lost to history, never having
been recovered by anyone after the shooting.

The above scenario is somewhat buttressed by the testimony of
eyewitness Sam Guinyard, who watched Oswald flee the scene of Tippit's
murder from Ted Callaway's car lot.

Guinyard told the Warren Commission that he saw Oswald "knocking empty
shells out of his pistol", although it's a little unclear exactly
where Oswald was located when Guinyard saw him removing the shells.
It's possible Guinyard was only referring to Oswald kicking out shells
near the corner of 10th & Patton. But it's also possible that Guinyard
saw Oswald still in the process of dumping shells out of the gun when
Oswald was much further down Patton Avenue.

And if the latter situation is true, then it's quite conceivable that
Oswald could have removed at least one bullet shell from his revolver
when he was near the corner of Patton and Jefferson Boulevard. And we
know that no bullet shells were recovered that far away from where
J.D. Tippit was killed.

http://With--Malice.blogspot.com

http://JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/2011/04/index.html#JD-Tippit

[David Von Pein]

A CONSPIRACY THEORIST NAMED CHRIS SAID:


>>> "It is a ridiculous contention that the kill shot was from the rear." <<<


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:


But it's even more ridiculous to use Hathcock and Roberts as some kind
of proof that the head shot came from the front (as you are doing).

By far the best evidence to determine if the head shot was a REAR shot
or a FRONTAL shot is the autopsy of President Kennedy. That's what
autopsies are for--to determine things like: How many bullets hit the
victim and from what direction those bullets were fired.

And the autopsy (plus the testimony of all three autopsy surgeons)
leaves no doubt about the direction of the head shot -- it entered
JFK's head FROM BEHIND. The autopsy, plus the photos and X-rays,
confirm that fact beyond all doubt. The back of JFK's skull was
bevelled in such a way that eliminates the possibility of any frontal
shot striking Kennedy's cranium. Why do so many CTers simply ignore
the "bevelling" on JFK's skull? Why?

JFK's leading autopsy physician, Dr. James Humes, talks about the
definitive nature of the bevelling (or "coning") aspect of the head
wound in the 1967 CBS-TV video presented below:

http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2011/05/dr-james-humes.html

And we don't need Hathcock or Roberts to answer any questions about
JFK's head wounds. The autopsy answers those questions--just like it's
supposed to do. The President was struck by two bullets and only two
bullets, and both of those missiles entered his body from behind.
That's a provable fact. And anyone who says otherwise is just flat-out
ignoring the best evidence in the case concerning John F. Kennedy's
bullet wounds.


>>> "Hathcock stated that he and friends tried to duplicate the situation and they were unable to do it." <<<

So what? Who cares? One man obviously DID do it on 11/22/63 -- Lee
Harvey Oswald. All kinds of evidence says he did it. Live with it.

Plus, we also know that multiple gunmen for CBS in 1967 were able to
duplicate (or beat) Oswald's shooting performance. And those riflemen
are shown (on film) pulling it off.

I guess you must think that CBS is part of the cover-up too, eh Chris?
CBS just lied like cheap rugs to the viewing audience in '67 when they
said that some of those expert marksmen were able to hit the moving
target twice in under 6 seconds. Right, Chris?

>>> "I consider that extremely important evidence [the Hathcock/Roberts stuff]." <<<

I don't. In fact, it's worthless. Hathcock and Roberts don't trump the
much better evidence in this case. And you're not a reasonable person
if you think they do.

>>> "Sorry, but you can't dismiss such experience just because it doesn't agree with what you would like to convince everyone about." <<<

I don't need to "convince" anyone. The autopsy is the thing that does
the convincing--not some nobody in Indiana named David Von Pein. And
not a couple of snipers named Hathcock and Roberts either. I just
merely point out the BEST evidence in the JFK case to conspiracy
theorists who continually want to mangle and misrepresent that
evidence.

>>> "I would rather take the comments of those three than just our little discussions here, or the WC trumped up baloney." <<<

There's the rub right there, Chris. You've convinced yourself that the
WC was nothing but "trumped up baloney". But that's merely speculation
on your part. Nothing but a wild guess...and you know it.

And your beef here is really with Humes, Boswell, and Finck -- not the
Warren Commission. Because the WC didn't conduct JFK's autopsy at
Bethesda. And the WC didn't tell Dr. Humes what to say in front of
these CBS-TV cameras in 1967:

http://DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2011/05/dr-james-humes.html

Chris -- do you really and truly believe that Dr. Humes was full of
shit when he said what he said about President Kennedy's wounds in the
above-linked video? Do you really believe that Humes was lying his ass
off in that CBS special?

And did Humes then continue the lies and deception about JFK's wounds
when he testified in front of two more Government panels in 1978
(HSCA) and 1996 (ARRB)?

Do you REALLY think Humes was lying ALL of those times? Decade after
decade? And Boswell too? And Finck? Because none of those autopsy
doctors ever ONCE changed their basic opinion about the direction from
which the shots came that struck President Kennedy. All of those
doctors ALWAYS maintained that JFK was struck by only two bullets,
with both bullets coming from above and behind the President's car.

So, unless you really do want to propose a theory that has ALL THREE
of the autopsy surgeons telling lie after lie (for years on end), then
one thing becomes abundantly clear -- Chris is dead wrong and the
autopsy report is correct about JFK's head wounds. Period. End of
story.