Martin Hay's review of David Von Pein's book

[David Von Pein]

"Yes, it always comes down to the clothes." -- C. Varnell

Gee, what a surprise.

[Stephen Roy]

Stephen Roy,

There are facts, and there is evidence. The two are different.

That today in Simsbury, Connecticut, the temperature reached 67 degrees is a fact.

That a prosecutor attempts to introduce into evidence a letter the prosecutor maintains was written by Oswald is a different matter.

The prosecutor has a burden. The weather report is what it is. A fact.

Nothing changes what I said. If, as you suggest, one MUST conclude that there is "proof that powerful U.S. officials obfuscated the facts," then no fact can be trusted. I'm arguing that you overstated it.

You are an attorney, are you not? Certainly you recognize that two or more parties can disagree on even basic facts, and in this case, they do. We disagree on where the bullets struck, where they came from, where Oswald was, what time Tippitt was killed, the true nature of Oswald's politics, etc, etc. I'm sure you're also aware that doubt can be raised about almost any fact, which is often the core of criminal defense.

[Paul Baker]

I think that Martin's review is flawed. I don't have time to pick it apart, because there is too much to pick apart. So I'd like to focus on one part of Martin's review. Then, like a house of cards and a breeze, it all falls flat on its face.

That package. It's not too hard to tear apart any argument about its perceived size, or what it contained. In hindsight, of course, we all like to pay special attention to that package. At the time though it probably wasn't considered important by anyone that noticed it.

Lee told Frazier that it contained curtain rods. This is a lie. Why? Because:

* Lee didn't need curtain rods.

* No curtain rods were found anywhere in the TSBD in the wake of the assassination.

* Why on earth would Lee make a special journey to get some curtain rods that he didn't really need? If he did need them (which he didn't) why didn't he just get them during his usual weekend visit?

It's really a no-brainer.

So we know that the package didn't contain curtain rods, but we know it existed and that it contained something. So what was in that bag if it wasn't Lee's rifle?

One thing you can't accuse the the authors of is failing to apply basic common sense.

Package argument destroyed. My, that was quite easy!

Paul.

[Thomas Graves]

I think that Martin's review is flawed. I don't have time to pick it apart, because there is too much to pick apart. So I'd like to focus on one part of Martin's review. Then, like a house of cards and a breeze, it all falls flat on its face.

That package. It's not too hard to tear apart any argument about its perceived size, or what it contained. In hindsight, of course, we all like to pay special attention to that package. At the time though it probably wasn't considered important by anyone that noticed it.

Lee told Frazier that it contained curtain rods. This is a lie. Why? Because:

* Lee didn't need curtain rods.

* No curtain rods were found anywhere in the TSBD in the wake of the assassination.

* Why on earth would Lee make a special journey to get some curtain rods that he didn't really need? If he did need them (which he didn't) why didn't he just get them during his usual weekend visit?

It's really a no-brainer.

So we know that the package didn't contain curtain rods, but we know it existed and that it contained something. So what was in that bag if it wasn't Lee's rifle?

One thing you can't accuse the the authors of is failing to apply basic common sense.

Package argument destroyed. My, that was quite easy!

Paul.

How do you know Lee had a package?

Edited April 18, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Paul Baker]

Thomas, I rely on the weight of evidence. If you're suggesting that Lee wasn't carrying a package that morning, how do you account for those people that saw him carrying one?

Edited April 18, 2015 by Paul Baker

[Thomas Graves]

Thomas, I rely on the weight of evidence. If you're suggesting that Lee wasn't carrying a package that morning, how do you account for those people that saw him carrying one?

How do you account for the fact that Frazier said the package was not long enough to have contained the broken-down rifle?

[Ray Mitcham]

Paul, only two people said they saw Oswald carrying a package. Frazier and his sister.

Do you agree that they could have been lying for their own reasons?

Just because they said he was carrying curtain rods, does not necessarily mean it is true. Not strong evidence on which to base a opinion.

[David Von Pein]

Only two people said they saw Oswald carrying a package. Frazier and his sister.

And given the circumstances, why would you expect anybody else to necessarily have seen Oswald with the package?

It's early in the morning on Nov. 22. Lee walks toward the Frazier house. Linnie Mae happens to be looking out the window and sees LHO with the package. Then the only other person that I would have completely EXPECTED to see the package---Buell Wesley Frazier---sees the paper bag on the back seat (and sees LHO carry it into the TSBD Building).

And it's quite possible that Oswald might have stashed the bag/rifle in the Loading Dock area BEFORE he ever entered the inner door that led to the TSBD's first floor (where Jack Dougherty was). But we also know that Dougherty said he only saw LHO that morning out of the "corner" of his eye. So why would you expect him to have necessarily seen any package even if Lee had it with him at that time?

So, IMO, the argument about "Only Two People Saw Him With The Package" is a very weak argument given the time of day and the conditions of Oswald putting the package in the back seat of Frazier's car (where nobody BUT Frazier and Oswald himself could possibly see it on the way to work). Therefore, I wouldn't necessarily expect anyone else to see that brown bag. And, quite obviously (given the overall evidence and testimony), I'm right---nobody else did see it.

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/oswald-his-rifle-and-his-paper-bag.html

Edited April 18, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Paul Baker]

Hi Ray, are suggesting that Buell and Linnie were coerced into lying about the package?

What's your stance? Was there a package, or wasn't there? Yes or no will suffice.

[Paul Baker]

Thomas, I rely on the weight of evidence. If you're suggesting that Lee wasn't carrying a package that morning, how do you account for those people that saw him carrying one?

How do you account for the fact that Frazier said the package was not long enough to have contained the broken-down rifle?

If you've seen The Trial Of Lee Harvey Oswald, you'll recognise that Buell isn't the sharpest tool in the box. That's why he worked in the TSBD. Though at heart he is clearly an honest person, he's one that could probably be easily cajoled into saying anything. A smart attorney will twist him around his little finger. Gerry Spence plays with heartstrings. Bugliosi works with facts.

The question stands. What was in that paper bag?

[Ray Mitcham]

Only two people said they saw Oswald carrying a package. Frazier and his sister.

And given the circumstances, why would you expect anybody else to necessarily have seen Oswald with the package?

I wouldn't Expect anything. Nobody else saw the package.

It's early in the morning on Nov. 22. Lee walks toward the Frazier house. Linnie Mae happens to be looking out the window and sees LHO with the package. Then the only other person that I would have completely EXPECTED to see the package---Buell Wesley Frazier---sees the paper bag on the back seat (and sees LHO carry it into the TSBD Building).

You can expect whatever you want. Nobody else saw the package.Period.

And it's quite possible that Oswald might have stashed the bag/rifle in the Loading Dock area BEFORE he ever entered the inner door that led to the TSBD's first floor (where Jack Dougherty was). But we also know that Dougherty said he only saw LHO that morning out of the "corner" of his eye. So why would you expect him to have necessarily seen any package even if Lee had it with him at that time?

As I said, I don't expect anything. Whether the rifle was in the loading bay before or after he entered the doors immaterial. Nobody else saw the package.

So, IMO, the argument about "Only Two People Saw Him With The Package" is a very weak argument given the time of day and the conditions of Oswald putting the package in the back seat of Frazier's car (where nobody BUT Frazier and Oswald himself could possibly see it on the way to work). Therefore, I wouldn't necessarily expect anyone else to see that brown bag. And, quite obviously (given the overall evidence and testimony), I'm right---nobody else did see it.

No sh*t, Sherlock. You are right, as I have been telling you all along. Nobody else saw the package. therefore they could both be lying.

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/oswald-his-rifle-and-his-paper-bag.html

[Ray Mitcham]

Hi Ray, are suggesting that Buell and Linnie were coerced into lying about the package?

What's your stance? Was there a package, or wasn't there? Yes or no will suffice.

Hi Paul. An easy yes or no doesn't suit.

t don't know.

However either they were both lying, to CYTA, and there was no bag. Therefore no rifle.

Or they weren't lying and the bag was too small to carry the broken down rifle.

(I tend to think that they were lying, but that's only a feeling in my water.)

Either way, The story doesn't add up.

Edited April 18, 2015 by Ray Mitcham

[Jon G. Tidd]

Stephen Roy,

There should not be any debate over the central facts of JFK's assassination. There should not be any uncertainty as to the central facts. There should be no room for doubt as to the central facts.

The President of the United States was murdered in broad daylight in view of hundreds. To him and to his body attended two teams of physicians. And yet a coherent, clear description of his wounds is absent from the testimonial, written, and photographic record. This should not be. The only reasonable explanation why it's the case is that certain U.S. officials did not want there to be a coherent, clear description. These officials blurred the facts.

It is reasonable to assume that if U.S. officials would blur some of the facts, they would blur any pertinent facts they could.

Facts do exist. Although one might not know precisely the high temperature today in my community, it doesn't matter to me or anyone else here whether it's 67.012 degrees or 67.013 degrees. Who cares? It does matter to everyone here here where JFK's back wound precisely was located. The mere fact this fact is not known with acceptable precision tells me U.S. officials didn't want the precise location to be known.

The argument here isn't academic. It goes to what purported facts one can trust when one observes some facts have been blurred. It's not that one can debate anything. It's that some things simply should not be debatable; and that they are, all alone, is highly suspicious.

By the way, as I've pointed out before and elsewhere, there is no "evidence" in the JFK case from a legal standpoint. The use of the word "evidence" by DVP is an appeal to authority, an authority that doesn't exist.

[Paul Baker]

.. either they were both lying, to CYTA, and there was no bag. Therefore no rifle.

Or they weren't lying and the bag was too small to carry the broken down rifle.

Hi Ray, thanks for your reply.

So in your opinion, Lee didn't take his rifle into the TSBD that morning.

If he didn't take it in that morning, how did it get there? Do you think he took it on a different day, or did someone else take it in to help incriminate him?

Perhaps you believe it was never there at all, I'd be interested to know.

Paul.

[Ron Ecker]

Didn't Hemming say that Oswald was told to take his rifle to work that day because someone wanted to buy it? That's one possible explanation, though it came of course from Hemming.

But let's say that Oswald did take his rifle to work that day, in a package or inside his pants, and used it to shoot at the president. If he did that, he wasn't the only one shooting. How do we know that? Because for one thing, the Mannlicher Carcano, or any other rifle you can name, does not fire magic bullets. Which brings us back to Von Pein's fairy-tale land.