Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton


      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team

David Von Pein

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by David Von Pein

  1. When did the Coke Appear?

    MARTIN WEIDMANN SAID: So, Dorothy Garner, who remained near the stairs on the 4th floor when Adams and Styles went down and who saw Baker and Truly come up, just somehow completely missed Oswald racing down from the 6th floor just moments after Adams and Styles started their descent? Really? DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Why in the world would anyone think Dorothy Garner had her eyes transfixed on the STAIRS every single second immediately following the President's assassination? How silly would that be, considering what had just happened outside those fourth-floor, SOUTH-SIDE windows just moments earlier? Why would she (or anyone) have kept a vigil on the staircase? Therefore, since it makes no logical sense to think that Garner (or ANYBODY ELSE) had their eyes peeled on those stairs every second, Oswald could have easily been on that 4th-floor landing for a matter of--what?--five seconds and not been seen by anyone who was on the same floor. Or do conspiracy theorists REALLY want to contend that Dorothy Garner never took her eyes off those stairs between 12:30 and 12:32 PM? That's incredibly silly to believe that's the case (even if she DID catch a glimpse of Truly and Baker).
  2. When did the Coke Appear?

    WALT CAKEBREAD SAID: It would have taken several minutes to place the rifle in position and then cover it with paper and boxes of books. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Absolute nonsense. You make it sound like he was constructing the Pyramids. FWIW, it's my own opinion (based on LHO's clipboard being found very near this same area of the stairs and rifle) that Oswald likely pre-arranged his rifle-stashing area near the stairwell in advance of 12:30 PM. But even if he didn't pre-arrange it, Walt's theory is just more of the same over-the-top dreck that Walt always utilizes in order to keep from having to admit what the evidence so plainly shows--and that is: Walt's favorite "patsy" was, in truth, the assassin of President Kennedy -- and Oswald himself hid his own rifle in those boxes before fleeing down the nearby stairway. Simple and Occam-like. But Walt likes the "Pyramids" approach better. DAVID VON PEIN LATER SAID: "Curt Jester", in his post linked HERE, is assigning ludicrous levels of assumed perfection to things that can never be pinned down that accurately. All of these "timelines" revolving around Vickie Adams, Sandra Styles, Bill Shelley, Marrion Baker, and also Lee Harvey Oswald can only be estimated to a certain degree, and can never be micro-analyzed right down to the second....and everybody knows it (even "Curt Jester"). If Vickie Adams' timeline, which is discussed during her Warren Commission testimony HERE, is off just a TINY little bit--then Oswald can make it. That's all it takes. And yet a whole book has been written by Barry Ernest that focuses chiefly on a theory that is completely destroyed if Miss Adams is just SLIGHTLY off in her time estimate. And yet, even though most readers SHOULD realize that Ernest's whole book is based on a TIME ESTIMATE given by a witness, Ernest's book has, amazingly, received glowing reviews from the Amazon readers, averaging 4.4 stars (out of 5 maximum) at Amazon.com (through this writing on May 7, 2013). It goes to show how eager the public is to disbelieve the Warren Commission, and how eager and willing they are to base their pro-conspiracy thinking on something as flimsy as one witness' estimate of when she started down those Book Depository stairs. Kinda sad, isn't it? JEAN DAVISON SAID: I have a question for anyone who accepts Vickie Adams' time line and believes that she came downstairs before Truly & Baker had reached the freight elevator on the 1st floor. If she's right, how does her story prove that Oswald didn't come down those stairs? In the WC version, Baker spotted Oswald just after each man had reached the second floor landing. That means that while Truly & Baker were rushing up from the 1st floor to the second, Oswald would've presumably been hurrying from about the 3rd floor to the 2nd. So where were Adams and Styles during that time, according to Adams? Already outside the building! Can someone explain how her time line prevents Oswald from using those stairs? DAVID VON PEIN SAID: It doesn't prevent Oswald from using those same stairs. And that is something I have also pointed out in my posts in the past: "I'll say this regarding Vickie Adams' timeline....The more I think about this subject, the more I realize that even if Adams DID descend those stairs as quickly as she said she did, that particular scenario really does no harm whatsoever to the "Oswald Did It" conclusion. Why? Because...then Adams and Styles very likely BEAT Lee Harvey Oswald to the stairs. Hence, it's likely that Adams & Styles were always AHEAD of Oswald on their descent down the stairs. And if Adams & Styles were really THAT fast at getting to the first floor, then they could have possibly beaten Baker & Truly too, with B&T only getting on the stairs after A&S had vacated the stairwell." -- DVP; February 17, 2011 COLIN CROW SAID: Did Adams and Styles descend before or after Baker and Truly ascended? DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Conspiracy theorists are defeated either way. If Adams and Styles descended BEFORE Baker and Truly started up the stairs, then there's absolutely no reason why Lee Oswald couldn't have used those same stairs without being seen or heard by the two women. Oswald would have simply been a little BEHIND Adams/Styles. And if Adams/Styles descended AFTER Baker/Truly started up, then the girls were on the stairs AFTER all three men (Baker, Truly, and Oswald) had already used those same stairs. Why is this so complicated for so many CTers? Regardless of which way the timing falls, there's no reason under the sun to conclude that Oswald couldn't have utilized those very same stairs in the northwest corner of the Book Depository Building and yet not be seen by Vickie Adams and Sandra Styles. The conspiracy theorists who try and use "timeline" estimates provided by witnesses to positively prove that Oswald couldn't have shot President Kennedy are relying on very flimsy "proof". Especially in light of all of that OTHER stuff that Oswald left behind on the sixth floor that indicates Oswald was, indeed, up there shooting at the President with a Carcano rifle. Also.... Can any CTer explain how the alleged "real assassin" (or assassins, plural)--i.e., an alleged killer OTHER than Lee Oswald--managed to get downstairs without anyone on ANY Depository floor noticing him/them? CTers never want to face that question of "HOW DID THE REAL ASSASSINS ELUDE DETECTION?" As long as Lee Harvey Oswald can somehow be exonerated via the flimsy "timeline" analysis, most CTers are happy. And to hell with the question I just asked above. TOM SCULLY SAID: Question for David von Pein [sic].... Do you think the time observations of the witnesses you have criticized were any less credible than Gladys Johnson claiming she first talked to OH Lee about three weeks before she said she rented a room to him on 14 Oct., and that Lee told her during that first encounter that he wanted to be near his work? What work. Or the 1:04 time fix of Earline [sic] Roberts who also stated in early December that police had arrived about thirty minutes after Oswald departed. DPD detective Potts established in his testimony that he and other officers arrived at 3:00 pm. Or that Whaley had any idea who Oswald was or what time near exact that Oswald got in or out of his cab? DAVID VON PEIN SAID: No. You're only helping to emphasize my point about "timelines". Timelines always have to be taken with a grain of salt, including each instance you mentioned above. And the Vickie Adams timeline too. Marrion Baker's timeline is more accurate because a detailed reconstruction of his movements was done by the Warren Commission. Now, perhaps such a detailed reconstruction of Victoria Adams' movements should have also been done. Obviously, quite a few CTers think that such an Adams re-creation should have been performed by the Commission. I'll leave it to others to debate whether the Commission was being deliberately deceptive by not doing such a re-creation with Miss Adams. But as far as I can recall, I have always adhered to the "Grain Of Salt" policy when discussing any "witness timeline" issues. All such times must be considered ESTIMATES. And that includes the time estimates provided by Earlene Roberts and Helen Markham and T.F. Bowley too. http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/07/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-743.html
  3. When did the Coke Appear?

    I'm very familiar with "The Stroud Letter", Sandy.
  4. Kennedy Videos

  5. When did the Coke Appear?

    Right. Which means, of course, that the very likely solution to this is: Styles and Adams were on the stairs AFTER Oswald, Truly, & Baker. (Unless you want to think that Adams & Styles somehow BEAT Baker & Truly to the stairs, which doesn't seem likely.) It's a pretty simple solution if you ask me---just as I wrote in 2011.... ---Quote On:--- "With respect to Vickie Adams, the ONLY thing a person needs to accept in order to have Oswald on the back stairs within one to two minutes after the President's assassination is to accept the almost certain fact that Victoria Adams was simply inaccurate in her time estimate about when she and Sandra Styles were on the back staircase. And if she's off by a mere ONE MINUTE, or even less, then her whole story unravels and it then becomes quite easy to accept the fact that Oswald used the back stairs just after shooting President Kennedy from the sixth floor. The key to pretty much knowing without a doubt that Adams and Styles were on the stairs only AFTER Lee Oswald used the same stairs is not really Oswald himself--but Roy Truly and Marrion Baker. Because if Adams was really on the stairs as early as she said she was, she would have had virtually no choice but to have seen (or heard) the two men who we know for a fact WERE on those stairs within about 60 to 75 seconds of the assassination -- Truly and Baker. Since Adams saw nobody and heard nobody, the very likely solution is that she was mistaken about her timing (which couldn't be a more common error with human beings), and she was on the stairs AFTER all three men (Oswald, Baker, and Truly) had already utilized the same stairs." -- DVP; February 14, 2011 http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/17359-new-book-on-victoria-adams-by-author-barry-ernest/?tab=comments#comment-219588
  6. When did the Coke Appear?

    Also.... The video Jim DiEugenio posted featuring Sandra Styles does NOTHING to contradict or undermine the quote I posted earlier from Sean Murphy. And Sandy Larsen's post containing additional correspondence between Murphy and Styles only tends to buttress the notion that Sandra thinks she and Adams started down the stairs LATER than what Vickie Adams has claimed, mainly due to this comment from Styles: "I only go by what seems reasonable. I can only report my personal recollections the best I can. I was easily led back then, lol. If she [Vickie Adams] said we went down immediately, I thought that must be true. If the interviewer said that was not possible due to the amount of time it took the police to get over there, I re-thought it and accepted HIS assessment. The truth may lie somewhere in between. What is logical is that, in all the pandemonium, it is unlikely that we would hear shots and head for the back stairs!" -- Sandra Styles [DVP's emphasis]
  7. When did the Coke Appear?

    But the time they left the steps to go to the concrete island doesn't really help your argument at all. You don't think it was possible for 3 measly minutes to have elapsed between the time they left the Depository steps until the time they re-entered the building? You can't be serious! Because THAT'S the key "timing" issue here---the amount of time it took Shelley and Lovelady to RE-ENTER THE BUILDING, not merely the amount of time it took the two men to START their journey to the concrete island and then to the railroad yards. And you don't DENY that they DID travel to both of those locations, correct? So how could it have taken much LESS than three minutes, Sandy? Or do you think they both just LIED about going to those locations right after shooting? Seems to me as if 3 minutes would be a minumum amount of time to do what Lovelady and Shelley always said they did. Why would you disagree with that? And once again --- How did you CONFIRM without doubt that the lady we see in the Darnell Film is Gloria C.? You don't allow for even the POSSIBILITY that it could be someone else?
  8. How the FBI lost the rifle's fingerprints

    MIKE KILROY SAID: Thanks for replying, David. .... Did Oswald have a dime on him when arrested? DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Yes, he sure did. He had three of them, in fact. (See Commission Exhibit No. 1148 for the coinage breakdown.) MIKE KILROY SAID: So you think he dropped his bag in [the] sniper's nest when he came into the building and then later put it together with a dime with the clock ticking there? DAVID VON PEIN SAID: I don't know exactly how, when, and where Lee Harvey Oswald managed to assemble his rifle within the Book Depository on 11/22/63. Nobody knows those details. Oswald took that information with him to his grave, unfortunately. But I have speculated about some of the things Oswald might have done after he got to work on November 22nd, and when he might have done them --- here. Plus, FWIW, I think it's quite possible that Oswald might have temporarily hidden his rifle package out on the loading dock of the Depository when he first got to work on 11/22. More about that here.
  9. How the FBI lost the rifle's fingerprints

    Sandy, From another discussion that took place in March 2013, I can offer up the following information regarding the palmprint that Lieutenant J.C. Day lifted off of Oswald's rifle.... JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID: In an actual court proceeding, [Dallas Police Lieutenant J.C.] Day would have been impeached by Drain and LaTona [sic] to the point that he would [have] been laughable. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: And just exactly HOW would Vince Drain and Sebastian Latona have "impeached" Lt. Carl Day of the DPD? You actually think something Drain and Latona said means that Day couldn't possibly have lifted Oswald's palmprint from the rifle on November 22? If you DO really believe that, you've taken a trip deeper into Rod Serling's T-Zone than even I had figured. I'll also add this: Anyone who thinks that J.C. Day was a [L-word] regarding the palmprint matter needs to read "Reclaiming History", starting on Page 799. A key excerpt: "Warren Commission assistant counsel Wesley Liebeler told the HSCA that in "late August or September" of 1964, he suggested questioning [DPD Lieutenant J.C.] Day further in an attempt to resolve the multitude of questions that remained surrounding the discovery of the palm print. It had occurred to Liebeler and a few other assistant counsels, as it would later to Mark Lane, that perhaps the palm print didn't come from the rifle at all. The Commission, at that time, only had Day's word for it. It wanted something stronger. But when Liebeler approached Chief Counsel J. Lee Rankin about it, he objected. "Mr. Rankin was not terribly enthusiastic about having a couple of Commission lawyers go down to Dallas and start questioning the Dallas Police Department," Liebeler told the HSCA in 1978. "Quite frankly . . . it would have raised all kinds of questions at that time as to what in the hell was going on, what are we doing going down and taking depositions from the Dallas Police Department two months after the report was supposed to be out?" But Liebeler said they realized the problem could be resolved "in another way." Several Commission assistant counsels subsequently met with FBI inspector James R. Malley, the bureau's liaison with the Commission, and FBI fingerprint expert Sebastian Latona. Liebeler asked Latona whether there was a way to prove that the lift came from the rifle. Latona reexamined the lift submitted by Lieutenant Day and noticed pits, marks, and rust spots on it that corresponded to identical areas on the underside of the rifle barrel--the very spot from which Day said the print had been lifted. J. Edgar Hoover sent a letter by courier to the Commission on September 4 to confirm this finding, along with a photograph showing the corresponding marks on the barrel and the lift. Liebeler was satisfied. Now, there was no doubt whatsoever--the palm print Day had lifted had come from Oswald's rifle." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Page 803 of "Reclaiming History" [Also See: 11 HSCA 254-255.] [Another related discussion can be found here.]
  10. When did the Coke Appear?

    Go tell that to your pal Sean Murphy.... "Sandra Styles...claimed she told [Barry] Ernest what she was now telling me: that she and Victoria Adams did *not* go to the rear stairs anything close to as quickly as Victoria had claimed." -- Sean Murphy; January 27, 2011 https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.assassination.jfk/W7McW4aaYMc/rmbO883N__wJ
  11. When did the Coke Appear?

    SANDY LARSEN SAID: Shelley and Lovelady BOTH changed zero seconds to three minutes. The Darnell film shows that their initial assessments were correct, the three minutes wrong. BOTH made that change! How convenient for the two to be wrong in the very same way. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Once again, you're assigning absurd levels of assumed timestamping accuracy to the Lovelady/Shelley statements. But such pinpoint accuracy concerning those statements just cannot be obtained. Upon reading Shelley's and Lovelady's Day 1 statements that you quoted in this previous post, there is NOTHING in those 11/22/63 statements by either witness that would justify this conclusion by you: "Shelley and Lovelady BOTH changed zero seconds to three minutes." Here's what Shelley and Lovelady said on Day 1 (Nov. 22) (copied from your own post, Sandy).... "After [the shooting] was over we went back into the building...." -- Billy Lovelady; 11/22/63 "...immediately after hearing the shots [Lovelady] and Shelley started running towards the presidential car, but it sped away...[They] then returned to the [TSBD]." -- 11/22/63 FBI Report "I ran across the street to the corner of the park and ran into [Gloria Calvery]...I went back to the building and went inside and called my wife and told her what happened." -- William Shelley; 11/22/63 [End Quotes.] None of those three statements eliminates the possibility that Lovelady and Shelley could have remained outside the building for three or more minutes before they entered the west entrance. In fact, it's obvious to me from the last two statements quoted above that at least A LITTLE BIT OF TIME must have elapsed in order for Shelley and Lovelady to do the things they said they did in those statements (e.g., "Lovelady and Shelley started running towards the presidential car" and "I ran across the street to the corner of the park"). Do you think those men accomplished those things in "zero seconds" (which is what you claimed in your last post)? Just because MORE details emerged in the later statements of both Lovelady and Shelley, you think that is proof that both men "lied" about those additional details. But that's just silly if you ask me. There were no sinister or sneaky alterations done to the later statements given by Lovelady and Shelley. There were merely more details revealed in those later statements. Simple as that. Plus.... When we look at all of the 1964 statements by Lovelady and Shelley that you, yourself, quoted in an earlier post, we can easily see that those statements themselves are all over the place as far as how many minutes the two men took to get back inside the TSBD. In their '64 statements, we find ALL of these various estimates.... "...approximately five minutes..." "...about three minutes..." "...about ten minutes later..." "...about three or four minutes after the shots..." "...we...watched them searching for a while..." [End Quotes.] So why you think both men changed their statements to an exact figure of "three minutes" is a mystery to me, because they did no such thing. They were all over the map in their estimates, ranging from "about three minutes" all the way up to "about ten minutes". And as far as the Darnell Film is concerned.... How in the world do you KNOW WITH 100% CERTAINTY that the woman we see near Billy Lovelady in this still photo is, in fact, Gloria Calvery? That frame from the film is not clear at all. Certainly not nearly clear enough to make a positive identification of an unknown individual. But you're convinced anyway that the lady near Lovelady couldn't be anyone BUT Gloria Calvery, is that right? SANDY LARSEN SAID: The reason you think their was no reason for them to lie is that you don't know the whole story. According to Victoria Adams' testimony, she came down the steps shortly after the shots. Oddly, she didn't hear anybody else using the steps. She should have heard Oswald going down to the 2nd floor. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: And if she had really been on the stairs as early as she claimed, she most certainly should have heard (or seen) Marrion Baker and Roy Truly coming up the stairs. But she didn't hear them and she didn't see them. Why not? SANDY LARSEN SAID: [Victoria Adams'] testimony continues... that when she reached the first floor she saw Shelley and Lovelady, who had supposedly just entered the west entrance SEVERAL MINUTES after the shooting. [The] WC concluded from this that Victoria Adams did NOT come down the steps as quickly as she had thought. Because it had taken Shelley and Lovelady several minutes before they had entered the west door. Therefore, Victoria Adams' testimony was discredited. She didn't hear Oswald come down the steps because she came down later that what she'd thought. NOW, HERE'S THE RUB... a few years ago, researcher Barry Earnest [sic] interviewed Victoria Adams. She told him that she did NOT see Lovelady and Shelley upon her arrival at the first floor. The WC had changed her testimony to her saying that she DID see them! I believe it was that revelation that got researchers looking closely at the testimonies of Shelley and Lovelady, and the Darnell film. And we now have a nearly complete picture of what really happened. Shelley and Lovelady lied about the 3-minute wait. (Though their initial statements were correct.) Baker lied about the second-floor encounter. (Though his initial statement was probably correct.) Victoria Adams' testimony was changed. (Her actual testimony was correct.) And I believe Adams had a coworker who corroborates her actual testimony... was it Sandra Styles? This person wasn't ask to testify before the WC. So there we have it. ALL the initial statements fit together like a glove, and are supported by what we see in the Darnell film. In contrast, the later WC testimony is wildly inconsistent with the original statements and Darnell film. The second floor encounter did not happen. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Sandy, In my opinion, you don't have nearly enough evidence to back up this bold declaration that you made: "The second floor encounter did not happen". As I explained earlier, the initial November 22nd statements provided by Shelley and Lovelady are not IN ANY WAY inconsistent or contradictory to their later 1964 statements. The witnesses simply added more details about the timing in their later statements. They weren't lying; they were adding more TRUTHFUL details. And you cannot possibly prove otherwise (even though you think you have already). As for Victoria Adams claiming her Warren Commission testimony was "changed" or "altered" --- well, I've heard that allegation before too. A witness years later is interviewed and says she (or he) thinks their testimony was changed (Julia Mercer being another example of this). But the likely answer is, of course: The witness being interviewed years (or decades) later is very likely not remembering correctly what her verbatim Warren Commission testimony was. That, IMO, is a much more logical explanation rather than to jump aboard the "Testimony Was Altered For Sinister Reasons" bandwagon. Also (re: Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles).... You might be interested in what Sean Murphy said in 2011 about Miss Styles (and Murphy is a CTer, no less!): "Sandra Styles mentioned to me that this author [Barry Ernest] had contacted her some years ago. She even knew the name of the book (which I hadn't heard of myself). Sandra claimed she told Ernest what she was now telling me: that she and Victoria Adams did *not* go to the rear stairs anything close to as quickly as Victoria had claimed. I find it a little worrying that there is no mention of Sandra's counter-version in any of the promotional material linked here. Why is the book not titled 'The GirlS On The Stairs'? It will be interesting to see how Ernest deals with Sandra's information." -- Sean Murphy; January 27, 2011 More about Adams and Styles and Dorothy Garner and Jack Dougherty and the "Stroud Document" and Barry Ernest can be found at my webpage here.
  12. How the FBI lost the rifle's fingerprints

    Hi Mike K., There's testimony in the WC volumes to the effect that the Carcano can be assembled using nothing but just a regular ol' ten-cent piece. (Do you disagree with that?) Re: the spacing of the shots.... There were several witnesses (at least 7 or 8) who said the shots were more "evenly spaced", instead of the last 2 being closer together. So there's certainly SOME conflicting testimony regarding that subject (although you'll never hear a CTer ever mention the eight witnesses I talk about in the post below when it comes to this topic).... http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/05/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-710.html
  13. When did the Coke Appear?

    Yeah, thank the Maker I have all these astute Education Forum members to tell me what really went down with respect to all those rotten liars named Truly, Baker, Shelley, and Lovelady. Otherwise, I'd just be totally lost.
  14. Kennedy Videos

  15. How the FBI lost the rifle's fingerprints

    You're overstating Nicol's testimony. Nicol only said that ONE of the 4 Tippit bullets could be matched to Oswald's revolver. Not all four. But the thing that CTers never like to admit is that Tippit was killed by bullets that each exhibited unique and different characteristics. And OSWALD owned a revolver that fired such erratic bullets. That's kind of interesting, don't you think? It's only a circumstantial thing, but it certainly goes in the direction of OSWALD'S revolver being in the mix of potential weapons that could have killed Tippit. And then when you add in the ballistics PROOF that it was Oswald's gun (which he was holding 35 minutes after the murder)--namely the 4 bullet shells--then LHO's guilt becomes ironclad.
  16. How the FBI lost the rifle's fingerprints

    The same type of "striation" test the FBI has always used. Both fragments came from the C2766 rifle without a doubt.... http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/frazr1.htm
  17. How the FBI lost the rifle's fingerprints

    CE637 is a picture of the palmprint. I can't see any distinct print there either, but do you really think the DPD & WC just introduced a BLANK CARD and then just SAID it had LHO's palmprint on it? The print is on that card---it's just very hard to see because the detail in the picture is not very good. Plus.... Latona positively IDed CE637 as the palmprint of Oswald. Was Latona lying here too?.... Mr. EISENBERG. Did you attempt to identify this print which shows on the lift Exhibit 637? Mr. LATONA. Yes; I did. Mr. EISENBERG. Did you succeed in making identification? Mr. LATONA. On the basis of my comparison, I did effect an identification. Mr. EISENBERG. And whose print was that, Mr. Latona? Mr. LATONA. The palmprint which appears on the lift was identified by me as the right palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald.
  18. When did the Coke Appear?

    SANDY LARSEN SAID: That wasn't in your list [about "Fort Worth" and the revolver]. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Yes, it was. It's in Part 2 of my "Oswald's Lies" series. SANDY LARSEN SAID: He [Lee Harvey Oswald] was obviously a patsy. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: My thoughts on the matter.... http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/The "Patsy Plot" Silliness (Part 1)
  19. When did the Coke Appear?

    Sandy, I think you're assigning assumed levels of accuracy that are way too high when it comes to your interpretation of all of those various witness statements. Via such statements, given over a period of time (and which vary to some degree in their details, including adding more details [TRUE details, mind you, not made-up details] to subsequent tellings of their story which they had not previously mentioned, which is a very normal thing to have happen when someone tells a story over and over again), there's no way to pinpoint a perfect timeline with spot-on accuracy. Can't be done. And the reason it can't be done is mainly because none of those witnesses was specifically TIMING anything that they did on November 22nd. Therefore, when they told their stories later on, they were providing ESTIMATES (i.e., their BEST GUESSES) concerning how long it took them to do this or that. To think we could possibly nail with detailed precision (practically right down to the minute) the type of exact timeline that the conspiracy theorists require would be akin to believing in miracles. In short, there was absolutely no need for Billy Lovelady or Bill Shelley to "lie" about anything that happened on 11/22/63. And I see no "proof" that either one of them did. You, Sandy, obviously strongly disagree with me. But to think that someone within "Officialdom" somehow got all of these various people (Lovelady, Shelley, Baker, Truly, and maybe more?) to tell a bunch of lies just so the official "patsy framers" could say the second-floor lunchroom encounter took place is something that I think all reasonable people would consider to be a totally FANTASTIC idea. And it's a fantastic idea that I don't think the conspiracy theorists have nearly enough support for. Also.... Why is it that so many people who weren't charged with committing two murders (e.g., Billy Lovelady, Bill Shelley, Marrion Baker, et al) are accused of being liars in the JFK case, and the person who was charged with two murders is treated with kid gloves by so many conspiracists? Isn't that also a rather "fantastic" idea? (I think it is.) But thanks, Sandy, for providing your detailed response in this thread. This discussion has made a good addition to my JFK Archives.
  20. When did the Coke Appear?

    So, you think Oswald DIDN'T own a rifle? You think Oswald bought his revolver in Fort Worth? You think Oswald was telling the TRUTH when he said he had never used the alias "Hidell" in his life? You think Oswald was telling the truth when he said he had never said anything at all about "curtain rods" to Wes Frazier? You think Oswald was being truthful when he said he didn't carry any large-ish bag into the TSBD on Nov. 22? You think Oswald was being truthful when he said "I didn't shoot anybody" (not even J.D. Tippit)?! And on and on.... Come now, Sandy, you're wayyyyy too smart to fall for such obvious lies.......aren't you?
  21. When did the Coke Appear?

    Sandy, I think it just goes to show that if someone (such as a conspiracy believer) tries hard enough, they will probably be able to scour the records and statements and find something that they feel verifies the thing they are trying to prove. Take the "Greer Shot JFK" theory. If you look at a particular frame of the Zapruder Film, the sunlight on Roy Kellerman's head does somewhat resemble a "gun". So, for some CTers, that frame(s) of the Z-Film--alone--is enough for them to advance their ludicrous theory. And I have no doubt that a good researcher who has access to all the documents and various witness and FBI statements and reports can probably come up with a pretty decent argument for why that researcher believes the second-floor encounter is a fake. There's always SOMETHING that doesn't quite "ADD UP", isn't there? Somebody's statement, for example, will almost always be in conflict with this other person's statement. But I think you, Sandy, said it well in your last post when you said this: "The point is that there is no incentive for trying to make the encounter fake." I agree with that sentiment, too. And I'd like to see your "proof" to back up these three bold declarations (I, of course, don't think any of these things are correct at all): "We have proof that Lovelady lied, and Shelley lied, and we know from Victoria Adams that the WC altered her testimony." -- S. Larsen
  22. When did the Coke Appear?

    Oh, come now, Sandy. You must be kidding. The evidence is telling us that Oswald was a Mega L-i-a-r. http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/Oswald's Lies (Part 1)
  23. When did the Coke Appear?

    Everybody does that, Ray. Picking and choosing is human nature and always will be. I've yet to meet a single person who doesn't "pick & choose" to a certain extent. CTers certainly do it too. They love the part about Oswald telling Fritz that he (LHO) was on the "first floor" eating lunch when JFK was shot (WCR, p.600), but many Internet CTers have decided to just ignore the part when Oswald told Fritz he was on the "second floor" when the officer came in.
  24. When did the Coke Appear?

    Only if I choose to believe the word of the alleged assassin. (Duh!) And given Lee's track record for telling lies (and lots of them), why in the world would anyone believe most of the things Oswald told Fritz? But in one of the rare instances when he actually told the truth, we CAN believe him when he told Fritz that the encounter with Baker happened on the SECOND FLOOR. We KNOW that part of Oswald's statement to Fritz was true because we've got Baker AND Truly to corroborate it. Many CTers here, however, seem to feel that FRITZ was the l-i-a-r when he said LHO said it was the second floor. Some CTers are desperate to keep that encounter from occurring on the second floor, which is kind of funny and ironic, because I can recall arguing with some conspiracy theorists not that long ago who were using the "Second-Floor Encounter" as absolute PROOF (in their minds) that Oswald was innocent. Because they'd always tell me that there was no way in the world Oswald could have possibly made it down to the lunchroom from the sixth floor in about 90 seconds (despite the fact that a Secret Service agent did it [twice] in less than 80 seconds). But nowadays, it seems to be in vogue for conspiracists to believe the 2nd-floor encounter never took place AT ALL. Funny, huh? It's similar to the transformation that has occurred with the "paper bag" theory too. In the past, CTers would always say "That bag Oswald took to work is too short to hold the rifle" (and many CTers still do use that argument, of course). But it's now becoming more popular among CTers to just pretend that the bag never existed in the first place. Poof! It's gone! Oswald never had ANY paper bag with him at all on November 22! Wesley Frazier AND Linnie Randle lied their butts off! That's how silly and fantastic some of the conspiracy theories have become.