Vincent Bugliosi's 53 Reasons - #4 - Chickenshit Edition...

Ben Holmes

unread,

Apr 13, 2023, 12:17:45 PM4/13/23

to

This is the special Chickenshit Version... I wouldn't want him to call
BT George a liar again...

4. Oswald and his wife, Marina, shared an abiding interest in
President Kennedy and his family and spoke of them often. Yet on
Thursday evening, the night before the assassination, when Marina
brought up in conversation with Oswald the president's scheduled visit
to Dallas the next day, she said, "He just ignored a little bit, you
know, to talk about [it] ... maybe changed subject about talking about
... newborn baby or something like that ... It was quite unusual that
he did not want to talk about President Kennedy being in Dallas that
particular evening. That was quite peculiar."

Let's examine FIRST the source material... over a decade later...

Mr. McDONALD - Did you all eat dinner together, you and Lee and the
Paines?
Mrs. PORTER - Yes. No, I recall that--Was President Kennedy supposed
to come Friday?
Mr. McDONALD - That is correct.
Mrs. PORTER - OK, so that was quite interesting news to me, and I was
asking Lee about the President being in Dallas, and he did not make
any comment about it at all. It seemed like he didn't--well, like
before I said that he was more listening to me, but now when I recall
back, it was quite unusual that he did not want to talk about
President Kennedy being in Dallas that particular evening. That was
quite peculiar.
Mr. McDONALD - What did he say? What did you say to him about
President Kennedy's trip to Dallas?
Mrs. PORTER - It was quite exciting, you know, for me to talk about,
but it seemed like he is changing the subject or just refused to talk
about, but it wasn't in any hostile way or violent form. Just looked
like he just ignored a little bit you know to talk about.
Mr. McDONALD - What did he say; do you remember?
Mrs. PORTER - No, I don't.
Mr. McDONALD - How did he dismiss talking about Kennedy? Did he say---
Mrs. PORTER - Maybe changed subject about talking about a newborn baby
or something like that.
Mr. McDONALD - How many times did you bring up the subject of
President Kennedy coming to Dallas?
Mrs. PORTER - I don't remember how many times now.
Mr. McDONALD - Did it come up more than once?
Mrs. PORTER - Probably.
Mr. McDONALD - And what was his reaction each time?
Mrs. PORTER - He just didn't want to talk about it somehow.
Mr. McDONALD - Was anyone else talking about it? Was Ruth Paine
talking about it?
Mrs. PORTER - Yes, Mrs. Paine.
Mr. McDONALD - Mrs. Paine was discussing it?
Mrs. PORTER - Yes, that is how I learned, from Mrs. Paine, that Mr.
Kennedy coming, President Kennedy coming to town.
Mr. McDONALD - And what was your reaction then? Did his not wanting to
talk about the upcoming visit of President Kennedy-what was your
reaction to his attitude?
Mrs. PORTER - Well, I did not--if he didn't want to talk about, I mean
I did not pursue further.

From the HSCA testimony... note that Marina wasn't even sure what day
the President was coming, she didn't know what topic Oswald brought
up, she doesn't remember how many times the topic was brought up - yet
Bugliosi is using over a decade later memories from Marina - a woman
PROVEN BY THE HSCA TO HAVE LIED REPEATEDLY - as evidence against
Oswald.

Now, PRESUMING that Marina was telling the truth, and had ACCURATELY
recalled a conversation the night before JFK came to town, despite the
fact that she couldn't remember when JFK came to town - we continue:

How silly! I ask readers - how many times do you FAIL to bring up, or
discuss a topic? I'd be sentenced to multiple death sentences if this
is all it took as evidence of crime. Bugliosi is clearly stretching in
order to find "evidence" that Oswald was guilty.

Again, the same theme as I've mentioned before – presuming a person's
guilt, then looking at all actions or statements as 'proof' of that
guilt.

There are MILLIONS of people worldwide who last night did not discuss
a favorite topic... should we expect to see a few million murders
today? Yet this is the logic that Bugliosi employs.

Notice also that Bugliosi couldn't find any corroboration for this
decade old "memory" of Marina...

Using tactics like this, how difficult would it be for me to convict
"Bud" of being an honest, conscientious, and religious human being?

"Bud" claims he's not defending Bugliosi - but even examples as silly
as this one, "Bud" will rabidly defend.

And strangely enough, the number one Bugliosi fan online, David Von
Pein; is remaining quite silent on these issues. Perhaps he knows what
"Bud" doesn't...

Keep in mind that Corbett is learning these facts for the first
time...

And did anyone notice that despite addressing *more* of Bugliosi's
argument - pointing out that it came from decade old memory of a
PROVEN liar - my basic argument REMAINED PRECISELY THE SAME?

John Corbett

unread,

Apr 13, 2023, 1:56:17 PM4/13/23

to

Benny still can't offer an alternative scenario so he is reduced to taking potshots at the
WC and Bugliosi's defense of it. We can continue to ignore this crap. I know I will.

If Benny ever puts on his big boy pants and can offer a scenario, we'll have something to
talk about.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Apr 13, 2023, 2:22:55 PM4/13/23

to

On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 10:56:15 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

Curiously, you posted no evidence. no citations, no documents, no
testimony, no exhibits, no witness videos.

Only comments. We gain nothing from the above.

Which makes who exactly the fool?

>If Benny ever puts on his big boy pants and can offer a scenario, we'll have something to
>talk about.

John Corbett

unread,

Apr 13, 2023, 4:58:06 PM4/13/23

to

Which one of those links contains your scenario?

Ben Holmes

unread,

Apr 13, 2023, 5:49:12 PM4/13/23

to

On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 13:58:05 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

And, as everyone can see, Corbutt is TERRIFIED of addressing this
refutation... clearly he knows he lost.

Which sentence of YOUR magnum opus contains your scenario?

And why can't you respond to my scenario?

John Corbett

unread,

Apr 13, 2023, 7:16:19 PM4/13/23

to

Keep pretending I didn't provide you with a scenario. Here it is again, asshole.

My scenario is the WCR scenario. Here's the short version:

Early in the week, Oswald learned that JFK's motorcade would be passing by the TSBD. For
reasons known only to him, he decided he would take advantage of this and kill JFK. He
constructed a makeshift bag and made an unusual Thursday night trip to the Paine's house in Irving to fetch his rifle. Because the rifle was 42" long and the bag only 40", he had to disassemble the rifle to make it fit. He went to Buell Wesley Frazier's house the next morning to get a ride to work. He lied to Frazier, telling him the package contained curtain rods. He carried
the package containing the rifle into work. He eventually decided to attempt the assassination from the southeast corner window of the 6th floor. He opened the package and reassembled the rifle and lay in wait for JFK's motorcade to appear which it did at 12:30 pm. He waited until the
limo had turned the corner on to Elm St and several seconds later fired the first shot that missed. I should point out this is my conclusion since the WC never concluded which of Oswald's shots missed. After missing the first shot, Oswald waited until JFK passed by the oak tree far enough
that he had a clear line of fire. Less than a second after JFK came into the clear, Oswald fired his second shot which struck JFK in the upper back, exited from his throat, passed through JBC's
torso, struck his wrist and lodged in his thigh. Almost 5 seconds later, Oswald fired his third
shot which struck JFK in the back of the head, blew open the upper right side of his head,, and exited from the front right of his skull. Pieces of that bullet were later found on the floor of the
limo and matched to Oswald's rifle as was the bullet that had lodged in JBC's thigh that was later found on a gurney at Parkland Hospital. The head wound was fatal and JFK was officially
pronounced dead at 1:00 pm. Oswald left the 6th floor window, walked across the 6th floor toward the rear stairs, dropping his rifle between some boxes. He descended the stairs and was
briefly detained by Officer Marrion Baker who released him after Roy Truly vouched for him as
an employee of the TSBD. He left the building at the front and first try to leave the area by bus. When the bus couldn't get throught the Houston/Elm intersection, he got off and walked several blocks to pick up a cab which took him to the neighborhood where his rooming house was. He entered the rooming house, fetched his handgun and a jacket and left about 1:00 pm. Shortly
after that he was stopped at 10th and Patton streets by officer J. D. Tippit. After a brief
conversation, Tippit got out of his cruiser and was shot dead by Oswald. Oswald fled the scene and later snuck into the Texas Theater as police cars were prowling the aread looking for a cop killer. They were notified by a witness that Oswald had snuck into the theater and the cops
went in. They surrounded him at which time Oswald pulled his handgun and tried to shoot one of
the arresting officers.

Here's where you deny you delete what I wrote and deny I ever provided you with a scenario.

> And why can't you respond to my scenario?

Because you won't provide one.

Everyone of the links you post begins with this:

"First - a quick review is in order. I've demonstrated that I will do
precisely what I say I will: to wit, I will match in length, detail,
and number of citations any scenario posted by a believer."

You say YOU WILL provide a scenario, not that you have. You are admitting you haven't.
You claim you will match in length and detail any scenario posted by a believer. Well, I
just posted a lengthy scenario so let's see if you will make good on your pledge. Nobody
of course believes you will. You never make good on anything you promise. You just keep
telling one lie after another. It's the reason nobody can stand you. Even most of the
other conspiracy hobbyists think you're a flaming asshole. It's the only thing they have right.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Apr 13, 2023, 7:24:55 PM4/13/23

to

On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 16:16:18 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 14:49:08 -0700, Ben Holmes <Ad...@ConspiracyJFKForum.com> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 13:58:05 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
>><geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thursday, April 13, 2023 at 2:22:55?PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:

Keep pretending that you answered my question. WHICH SENTENCE OF YOUR
MAGNUM OPUS CONTAINS YOUR SCENARIO?

Why can't you answer?

Are you too stupid to understand the question?

>> And why can't you respond to my scenario?
>
>Because you won't provide one.

You're lying again, Corbutt. Why are you incapable of RESPONDING TO
THE POSTS THAT *I* ASSERT IS MY SCENARIO.

Even a weasel can't get around that phrasing... so I predict Corbutt
will run.

Remember folks, I predicted it here first.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Apr 13, 2023, 7:27:04 PM4/13/23

to

All day... and not a *SINGLE* believer addressed the point I made. I
can convict every one of you of murder based on Bugliosi's argument.

And Von Penis is STILL yellow...

John Corbett

unread,

Apr 13, 2023, 11:51:45 PM4/13/23

to

Asserting you have provided a scenario isn't the same as providing one. You don't
even seem to understand what a scenario is. I'll help you out and give you a
definition.

scenario
noun
sce·nar·io sə-ˈner-ē-ˌō US also and especially British -ˈnär-
pluralscenarios
Synonyms of scenario
1
a
: an outline or synopsis of a play
especially : a plot outline used by actors of the commedia dell'arte
b
: the libretto of an opera
2
a
: SCREENPLAY
b
: SHOOTING SCRIPT
3
: a sequence of events especially when imagined
especially : an account or synopsis of a possible course of action or events

Since we are not talking about a script or a screenplay, the operative definition
is #3. A SEQUENCE OF EVENTS. Nothing in any of those links provides a
sequence of events. Every one of them is criticism of the Warren Commission.
The scenario I provided is a sequence of events of the assassination of JFK
Can you man up and provide such a sequence of events. I know. That's a stupid
question. Of course you can't. Or won't.

John Corbett

unread,

Apr 13, 2023, 11:53:11 PM4/13/23

to

I'm not going to respond to any argument you make until you have lived up
to your promise to provide a scenario.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Apr 14, 2023, 9:21:12 AM4/14/23

to

On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 20:51:44 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Thursday, April 13, 2023 at 7:24:55?PM UTC-4, Ben Holmes wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 16:16:18 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
>> <geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 14:49:08 -0700, Ben Holmes <Ad...@ConspiracyJFKForum.com> wrote:
>
>>>> And why can't you respond to my scenario?
>>>
>>>Because you won't provide one.
>> You're lying again, Corbutt. Why are you incapable of RESPONDING TO
>> THE POSTS THAT *I* ASSERT IS MY SCENARIO.
>>
>Asserting you have provided a scenario isn't the same as providing one.

You can continue to run, but you aren't going to convince anyone.

You can't even respond to my scenario...

And that tells the tale.

Believers run.

EVERY

SINGLE

TIME!

Ben Holmes

unread,

Apr 14, 2023, 9:22:59 AM4/14/23

to

On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 20:53:10 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

It's not that you don't *want* to respond, it's that you CANNOT.

Cowards run... that's what cowards do.

EVERY

SINGLE

TIME!

Ben Holmes

unread,

Apr 14, 2023, 9:41:07 AM4/14/23

to

On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 09:17:40 -0700, Ben Holmes
<Ad...@ConspiracyJFKForum.com> wrote:

Everyone notice that Chickenshit didn't respond to the "Chickenshit
Edition?" He's clearly a coward.

Cowards run.

EVERY

SINGLE

TIME!

John Corbett

unread,

Apr 14, 2023, 12:22:58 PM4/14/23

to

Funny how Benny keeps calling other people chickenshits when he is the one
who keeps refusing to present his scenario of the assassination.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Apr 14, 2023, 1:02:17 PM4/14/23

to

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 09:22:56 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

Ben Holmes

unread,

Apr 14, 2023, 6:33:05 PM4/14/23

to

On Thu, 13 Apr 2023 20:53:10 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

And despite his claim that he'd start answering these after I posted
my scenario... dead silence.

Charles Schuyler

unread,

Apr 14, 2023, 6:36:15 PM4/14/23

to

You haven't posted a scenario.

And you never will.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Apr 14, 2023, 6:39:11 PM4/14/23

to

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 15:36:13 -0700 (PDT), Charles Schuyler
<ch...@reducedfeemortgage.com> wrote:

Corbutt says I did... You calling him a liar?

Amusingly, you've **NEVER** posted a scenario... and indeed, have
bragged that you don't have one.

>And you never will.

Provably posted three times now just in THIS forum.

Will you tell the truth? No. And you never will.

Charles Schuyler

unread,

Apr 14, 2023, 6:51:35 PM4/14/23

to

No. His "take" is that your so-called scenario is empty. No shooting sequence, no tests for your implausible list of goofy things you allege occurred, etc.

>
> Amusingly, you've **NEVER** posted a scenario... and indeed, have
> bragged that you don't have one.

Correct.

>
>
> >And you never will.
>
>
> Provably posted three times now just in THIS forum.

Liar. Your multi-segment Magnum Opus is just a series of begged questions and assorted other logical fallacies. Just the usual hobby points you've been trotting out for almost twenty years. At least you're no longer including the Lady in Yellow Pants in the Z film. Have the welts ever healed from that beat down, little fella?

Are you still sticking with a lunch in the brown wrapping paper bag Oswald brought to work, or have you switched back to the curtain rods story?

Ben Holmes

unread,

Apr 14, 2023, 7:26:52 PM4/14/23

to

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 15:51:34 -0700 (PDT), Charles Schuyler
<ch...@reducedfeemortgage.com> wrote:

Yes.

>> Amusingly, you've **NEVER** posted a scenario... and indeed, have
>> bragged that you don't have one.
>
>Correct.

So you're a coward who demands of others what *YOU YOURSELF* refuse to
provide.

>>>And you never will.
>>
>>
>> Provably posted three times now just in THIS forum.
>
>Liar.

Someone's certainly lying. Shall we put it to a poll?

John Corbett

unread,

Apr 15, 2023, 12:41:37 AM4/15/23

to

I answered you in your #4 Refuted thread.

Ben Holmes

unread,

Apr 17, 2023, 9:56:09 AM4/17/23

to

On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 21:41:36 -0700 (PDT), John Corbett
<geowri...@gmail.com> wrote:

You had *NOT* answered me at the time when I posted this.