Jump to content
The Education Forum
David Von Pein

In Lee Harvey Oswald's Room

Recommended Posts

Hey Dave,

Do you really believe the Dallas PD lineups were fair?

Do you think Howard Brennan, the key eye witness to Oswald being the Sixth Floor Sniper, - do you think they asked him a leading question when a cop asked him, "Is the man you saw the second one from the left?"

Thanks,

BK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you really believe the Dallas PD lineups were fair?

Yes.

Do you think Howard Brennan, the key eye witness to Oswald being the Sixth Floor Sniper, - do you think they asked him a leading question when a cop asked him, "Is the man you saw the second one from the left?"

What conspiracy book did you pull that out of, Bill?

I'll ask you the same question I asked Jim D.:

What would it take to get you to I.D. a person as a criminal even when you knew that person was innocent?

Would any amount of coercion be enough to get you to identify a man as a murderer whom you knew was really innocent?

Shouldn't conspiracy theorists occasionally ask themselves the above question (as it relates to the several witnesses who positively IDed Lee Oswald as the murderer of JFK and/or J.D. Tippit)?

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you really believe the Dallas PD lineups were fair?

Yes.

Do you think Howard Brennan, the key eye witness to Oswald being the Sixth Floor Sniper, - do you think they asked him a leading question when a cop asked him, "Is the man you saw the second one from the left?"

What conspiracy book did you pull that out of, Bill?

I'll ask you the same question I asked Jim D.:

What would it take to get you to I.D. a person as a criminal even when you knew that person was innocent?

Would any amount of coercion be enough to get you to identify a man as a murderer whom you knew was really innocent?

Shouldn't conspiracy theorists occasionally ask themselves the above question (as it relates to the several witnesses who positively IDed Lee Oswald as the murderer of JFK and/or J.D. Tippit)?

Gee Dave,

I got that from Howard Brennan's book, that your pal Ken Rahn posted at his web site.

As for your question, I think it's a good one, and everyone should ask themselves that question, not just idiot Conspiracy Theorists.

Brennan, the Conspiracy Theorists who was suspicious of the Olds Getaway car outside the TSBD, certainly didn't need any coerrcion after they killed Oswald, did he?

I think that would have changed my mind too.

BK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1998 article by Dale Myers:

Oswald’s Mail-Order Revolver Purchase: Critical Allegations Prove False

After reading Myers' article above, I've made the appropriate addendums to this related article below regarding how Oswald came into physical possession of the V510210 revolver. Thank you, Dale Myers, for some great info here:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/08/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-42.html

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DVP posted:

Would any amount of coercion be enough to get you to identify a man as a murderer whom you knew was really innocent?

Shouldn't conspiracy theorists occasionally ask themselves the above question (as it relates to the several witnesses who positively IDed Lee Oswald as the murderer of JFK and/or J.D. Tippit)?

I wonder then Mr Pein, whether LNers like yourself shouldn't occasstionally ask themselves how not several witnesses, nor a few or a handful... but many, many, many witnesses (including those closest to the scene, riding in the lead car, riding in the limo, standing beside the limo, on a motorcycle right behind the limo, in the SS follow-up car, standing in front of the TSBD, standing across from the TSBD, standing on the overpass, sitting in a little building overlooking the RR yard, etc...) who all POSITIVELY place shots coming from behind the picket fence, what type of coercion was put on them to DENY identifying the location of the gunfire OTHER than the TSBD 6th floor SE window...

Coerced to change their minds and testimony about the number of shots and their direction.

Brennan never ID'd Oswald... no amount of coercion, circumstance or fear could and get him to finger the wrong man, while no amount of conscious could keep him from searching out the spotlight.

I am willing to hold up the list of witnesses who heard/saw a shot from the GK against the tiny number who ID Oswald as committing any crime. At least enough to create reasonable doubt... a concept that never seems to enter the conversation.

and as long as there is significant reasonable doubt, LHO is innocent until proven guilty, at least in the legal system that was in place at the time

Edited by David Josephs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1998 article by Dale Myers:

Oswald’s Mail-Order Revolver Purchase: Critical Allegations Prove False

After reading Myers' article above, I've made the appropriate addendums to this related article below regarding how Oswald came into physical possession of the V510210 revolver. Thank you, Dale Myers, for some great info here:

http://jfk-archives....io-part-42.html

Thanks Dave,

I had never heard of Newcome and Adams before, and this whole Dodd Committeess looking into mail order handguns and FPCC is certainly interesting.

It's a shame that Congress exempted itself from the FOIA and the records of these committees and subcommittees are not open for public consumption.

In any case, I'll read what Dale has to say about this, and try to get the Newome & Adams stuff, - please post if anybody has it.

Thanks,

BK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Davey, still up to your old tricks huh.

What Myers is saying is the reverse of what you said! And you didn't even notice that? C'mon. Come clean.

Your argument was this: REA shipped the revolver to the box. The post office then collected payment from LHO. The post office then served as fiduciary for the transaction. Even though this is illogical and not really precedented--look at how Fed Ex operates--I granted you the right to make the argument. I then pointed out the (many) problems with it.

Now, Myers' does something completely different. He says in essence that DiEugenio was right. That normal procedure was to have REA mail a notification card to the post office. Then the customer would go to the REA office to pick up the merchandise.

And you don' t bat an eyelash.

Jim,

Of course I was fully aware that Dale Myers' article said the opposite of what I said to you in our exchanges about this REA matter in this thread. That was the whole purpose for my posting it in the first place--to get it straightened out.

I certainly wasn't trying to imply that the quoted passages I used from Myers' article were saying the exact same thing I had said about the revolver earlier this week in this forum thread. (Duh.)

BTW, here's an "Edit" that I wrote this morning, which I have added to my archived blog version of this "revolver" discussion:

Quoting from my blog post:

"EDIT --- Since writing the above remarks, I've come into possession of additional information concerning the method by which Lee Harvey Oswald likely came into physical possession of the .38 Smith & Wesson mail-order revolver he ordered from Seaport Traders, Inc.

"This information comes from the person who probably knows more about the J.D. Tippit murder (and, hence, more about the gun that was used to kill Officer Tippit) than anyone else on the planet, Dale K. Myers, the author of the excellent 1998 book "With Malice: Lee Harvey Oswald And The Murder Of Officer J.D. Tippit"." -- DVP

[End quote.]

I then added excerpts from Dale Myers' article directly underneath the words quoted above.

BTW #2 (and just "for the record"):

I'll remind Jim DiEugenio that I also made the following remarks in this Education Forum post four days ago, on August 3, 2010 (and please note that the post has not been edited by me since August 4, 2010 [via my local time in Indiana], three days ago):

"I suppose it's possible that I'm wrong about how these types of "COD" transactions worked when companies shipped merchandise to P.O. Boxes, but if the PHYSICAL ITEM itself was actually shipped to P.O. Box 2915 (and Heinz Michaelis said it was in his WC testimony), then it means that the post office employees would be initially handling the money from Oswald (since, quite obviously, Oswald didn't set up camp and live right there inside his post office box as he waited for the delivery truck to show up with his pistol)." -- DVP

Therefore, via the above remarks, I was essentially admitting several days ago that I wasn't absolutely certain as to the exact location where Oswald picked up his Smith & Wesson revolver in 1963.

The problem with this is the following, and I quote your Bible, the WR: "...the revolver was actually shipped on March 20 by Railway Express. (p. 174, emphasis added) There can be no ambiguity here. If REA shipped it, it had to go to the P. O. box. Why? Because that is the address on the order form.

Right. And thanks for posting that passage from Page 174 of the Warren Report, because it further clouds and confuses the very same issue about WHERE the physical gun was sent. I.E., was the revolver sent to the post office or was it retained at the REA offices?

But you should also take note of the source note (#588) that appears on page 174 of the WCR concerning that quoted passage -- it leads to the various Michaelis exhibits and to Heinz Michaelis' WC testimony at 7 H 376-378, which is the exact testimony that I found confusing regarding this precise "Where Was The Revolver Shipped?" topic.

I think it's quite obvious that even the Warren Commission itself was confused about it. But that confusion is pretty well ironed out in Dale Myers' article. But I certainly agree that it seems a bit confusing.

In fact, that very thing about Heinz Michaelis saying to the Warren Commission that the GUN ITSELF was shipped to P.O. Box 2915 is the main thing that made me say this to you (Jim D.) the other day:

[DVP Quote On:]

"There was very likely no need for Oswald to go to the Railway Express office to pick up the revolver. The gun itself was physically shipped by REA to Oswald's Dallas P.O. Box. We know that via Michaelis Exhibit No. 4 and the testimony of Heinz W. Michaelis [at 7 H 378]:

JOSEPH BALL -- "I will show you another document here which is a slip of red paper marked "Railway Express Agency" which has been heretofore identified with an FBI Exhibit No. DL-29 [which was marked by the Warren Commission as "Michaelis Exhibit No. 4"]. What is that document?" ....

HEINZ MICHAELIS -- "That is a copy of the receipt which we got from the Railway Express Agency showing that on March 20, 1963, one carton with a pistol was shipped to A. Hidell, P.O. Box 2915, Dallas, Texas." "

[/Quote off.]

But in Myers' article, we can see that it's very likely that only a NOTIFICATION CARD was actually put into Oswald's P.O. Box -- and the physical gun itself was probably never inside the Dallas post office at all. Which does make sense too, because it eliminates the post office employees from having to handle any money from the person who is claiming the package.

Which, of course, is something you yourself were saying the other day too--i.e., it would be odd for the post office to have to handle the money that is really supposed to go to Railway Express (and then to Seaport Traders).

And you're right--it does make more sense for the C.O.D. cash transaction to be handled by the REA people themselves.

But when looking at Heinz Michaelis' testimony shown above about the GUN PACKAGE ITSELF being physically sent to PO Box 2915, I deferred to that explanation. And, quite obviously, so did the Warren Commission on page 174 of the WCR.

But it's probably not entirely accurate. What Michaelis should have said is that a card of notification of delivery gets sent to the P.O. Box, but not the merchandise itself.

It would have been nice if Joe Ball had asked Michaelis this question (but he never did):

"Now, Mr. Michaelis, what would Lee Oswald have had to do in order to physically take possession of the revolver he ordered through Seaport Traders after that gun was shipped by you via Railway Express? Would he have picked up the package at his post office box, or is there some other method by which he would get his package in a C.O.D. transaction like this one?"

Unfortunately, no question similar to the one simulated above was asked of witness Heinz Michaelis.

Here is the other problem. Myers pictures the exhibits in the WR from page 173. Please show me where the address of REA in Dallas is noted on any of these documents. Or the phone number. This leaves the obvious question: How did Oswald know where to go to pick up the revolver?

Oh, come now James! You can't be serious here!

The Railway Express notification card that would have been put into Oswald's post office box isn't among the documents pictured on Page 173 of the Warren Report.

That notification card no longer exists. And that's very likely because it was thrown away by the Railway Express people shortly after Oswald picked up his revolver at REA. That card had served its purpose, and there was really no reason for anybody to keep it.

It's also reasonable to assume that the notification card that was put into Oswald's P.O. Box had the address of the REA Express office on it. Hence, Oswald knew where to go to get his revolver.

For Pete sake, Jim, isn't this obvious?!

Plus, Heinz Michaelis testified that there was proof that REA remitted the $19.95 to Seaport Traders. Which, quite obviously, would indicate that SOMEBODY PAID RAILWAY EXPRESS the amount of the C.O.D., and that "somebody" was undoubtedly the same person who ordered the gun in the first place--Lee Harvey Oswald.

Quoting from Michaelis' WC testimony:

JOE BALL -- "Is there anything in your files which shows that the Railway Express did remit to you the $19.95?"

HEINZ MICHAELIS -- "The fact that the exhibit number...was attached to the red copy of the invoice...indicates that the money was received."

In addition, as I mentioned the other day, the word "Paid" is written in on Michaelis Exhibit No. 2. And why would this order be marked as "Paid" if it wasn't really "paid" by the person who ordered it?:

MichaelisEx2.jpg?t=1280887140

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You like Myers because he says Oswald killed Tippit. Period. The fact that he reverses your thesis is immaterial to your objective.

Firstly: I certainly would take the word of Dale Myers (who is a person I respect greatly) over the word of an Anybody-But-Oswald conspiracy theorist any day of the week. That goes without saying, of course. (Duh.)

Secondly: There's some additional information provided by Myers in his 1998 article re this matter that you didn't provide, which pretty much seals the deal about Oswald's REA pick-up:

Quoting Myers:

"REA Express VP, Robert Hendon, testified that in a similar case, "a card was sent to the name and address" on the package. Presumably, a card was sent to Oswald's P.O. Box, notifying him that a package was to be picked up at the REA Express Office."

Myers' source for the above quote:

"Subcommittee to Investigate Juvenile Delinquency, S1448-11, op. cit., p.3465"

(The remainder of DiEugenio's latest post has all been addressed in earlier posts. No need to beat Jim's dead horse for a fourth time. Jim knows Oswald ordered, paid for, and picked up the Tippit murder weapon. He just wants to concentrate on the chaff...as per usual.)

Rebutting+Jim+DiEugenio-1.jpg

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But , hey, there is always the testimony of Brewer at that phony TV trial.

I asked the "other side" why it took the DPD until the 4th of December 1963 to take a statement from Julia Postal, and why it took them until the 6th December to take a statement from Johnny Brewer.

The only answer they could come up with was; the DPD were busy.

I asked them why the DPD or the FBI didn't interview, look for or even ask for the names of the friends of Johnny Brewer (who worked for IBM) who were in his store when Oswald walked in all "scared" looking. Their answer? None.

I asked them why during the fast frisk that Gerald Hill, in an interview with CBS's Ed Barker, describes as;

"--an officer checks under your arm pits, your crotch, your pockets, your -- your shirt, your waistband of your trousers, and any place that a weapon could be concealed, that -- even as small as a razor blade, or anything of this type that you could conceivably get to and either hurt the officer or hurt yourself."

and they didn't find five .38 bullets in his trouser pocket. The "other sides" answer? They've yet to come up with one.

Let's put it this way. Everywhere Gerald Hill is over the course the first 2 hours of the assassination dodgy evidence turns up. We also have testimony that states that Gerald Hill moved the chicken bones and sack before it was photographed.

Lee, wouldn't Hill calling in the wrong type of weapon tend to go against his having planted the pistol on Oswald? To put it another way, wouldn't he have described the planted weapon in his call, instead of the one he did describe (an automatic, IIRC)?

With the chicken bones, are you saying he moved them around on the 6th floor, or from the 5th to the 6th? I now have extremely strong evidence that the chicken was eaten by Williams on the 5th floor. It is a transcript of the HSCA inteview with Harold Norman, and it will be posted on my website soon.

Already posted is the transcript of the HSCA interview with Marion Baker. http://reopenkennedycase.weebly.com/richard-gilbride-hsca-collection.html In this, Baker once again has trouble keeping his story straight and reverts to the truth in one gleaming instance where he states it was the officer who took Truly's deposition on 11/23 who told him his encounter in the TSBD was on the second floor and it had been with Oswald. Prior to that, neither of those contentions existed - that is - not Oswald - not 2nd floor. So much for his testimony that he recognised Oswald, who was sitting in the same small office as him while he gave his statement over the phone to Marvin Johnson. He did not recognise Oswald because it was NOT Oswald he encountered - nor was the encounter on the second floor. It was changed to the second floor bcause of the statement made by Mrs Reid -- and you can see her name hand written at the bottom of Truly's statement. The encounter was also changed from a 30 year old with dark hair weighing 165 and wearing a tan jacket to Oswald for obvious reasons... http://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/jfk-f1/oswald-s-two-cop-encounters-t42.htm

I urge everyone who hasn't read the CBS interview with Ed Barker to do so. It is fascinating. I am intrigued by the adhesive tape marks and lint he finds on the revolver shells that he removes. He also talks about how he urged Joe Poe to not pass him the shells that have been found at the Tippit scene because he didn't need to be added to the evidence chain. And then goes on to describe how he takes the gun off Bob Carroll in the theater (later to change to in the car during his Warren Commission testimony) when he didn't have to insert himself into the "chain." I think Greg and Duke have hit the nail on the head as to why he did though.

http://www.aarclibra...es/SGTHILL1.pdf

http://www.aarclibra...es/SGTHILL2.pdf

Hi Greg,

With regard to Gerald Hill radioing through an "automatic" rather than a "pistol", I don't believe that he had any great detailed knowledge of what was actually happening around him and the Oak Cliff events were made up on the fly. I think he only knew he had to make sure there was enough evidence to corner and seal the fate of the "cop killer" on the orders of Captain Fritz. This is why Fritz wasn't in much hurry to go and find Oswald once he was given his name by Truly and Shelley. I even think Fritz was "making it up" as he went along to a certain degree, hence the pocketing of one of the MC shells until it became apparent what the damage was to the President.

I am right when I state that according to the dispatches, Hill rang his ID of the weapon through much later than when he had observed the shells with Joe Poe? Hill didn't actually call this through until 1:34 according to the transcripts?

So this is before Hill is at the Abundant Life Temple. If Hill is the one collecting "something" at the ALT he wouldn't have known what the "type" of firearm was that he was going to throw on Oswald until he actually had it? If he did pick it up there then he didn't actually have it until after he'd rang the "automatic" call through.

As far as Hill moving the bones around, I don't know, I'm just going off what Jim Ewell says he saw. He claims he was outside the TSBD looking up and Hill popped his head out of the sixth floor window shouting that they'd found the snipers nest and had hold of the food items showing them to the crowd below. If we take Hill's testimony as being accurate he had left the TSBD long before Studebaker had turned up to photograph anything, so he is moving evidence around illegally.

The evidence you say you are going to post about Bonnie Ray Williams is really intriguing me. I've never believed that BRW was on the sixth floor and have always wondered why the cover-up artists needed him moved onto that floor. I think it opened up some difficulties for the FBI and the WC so there they must have had a damn good reason to want him on the 6th floor. I've just never been able to figure out why? I speculated it was to get rid of the non-Oswald fingerprints on the Dr. Pepper bottle but am I right in assuming that you think these items were still BRW's. They just decided to move them up a floor?

The Marion Baker HSCA deposition is a great find and very interesting. I agree with you 100%, the person Baker accosted wasn't Oswald. I think he saw Oswald with Truly on the first floor and it was Truly who, recognising Oswald, switched the people. I still think Truly had something to do with the logistics and planning of the assassination.

When will the BRW transcript be on your website? Keep us posted.

Lee

Lee

Craig's reporting of Qswald really did throw a spanner in the works as any truthful report would upset thier proposed timelines for Oswald.Whereas the Mauser report did the same thing Hill did with the auto .Fritz was still working "on the fly" .But if Brewer did not see Oswald who else knew he would be in the theatre?.

Ian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is "other information"? All it says is what I said all along: REA sent a card to the post office. Which is what you resisted, until Myers said the same thing.

Just like I said before, Dale Myers provided additional info from the Vice President of Railway Express. Can't you read?

Why not tell anyone that Michaelis, your prime witness, did not really work for Seaport. He was actually working for another mail order company called Merchants.

Nope. It was called Merchanteers.

And he did not take a supervisory position with Seaport until two months before the assassination! I've been waiting for you to reveal that. You didn't. Why?

Didn't know it. And I really don't care. It's a meaningless fact--SINCE OSWALD HAD THE TIPPIT MURDER WEAPON ON HIM 35 MINUTES AFTER TIPPIT WAS SHOT.

Maybe I should make that last sentence 70 feet tall and in blinking neon letters so that Mr. DiEugenio will get the message. So far, that little tidbit of a fact has apparently gone sailing right past his chaff-seeking nose.

The obvious question is: Why didn't the FBI find the person who was supervising mail transactions for Seaport prior to that and who was much more familiar with how the company kept books and records. This guy had to read stuff out of a notebook the FBI had prepared for him.

Mr. Michaelis did just fine. It's the conspiracy theorists who are the major problem in this case. They couldn't find oil in their own backyard if it was gushing through their windows.

A certain Mr. DiEugenio can't even figure out that Oswald shot Tippit, even though Oswald HAD THE MURDER WEAPON IN HIS HANDS 35 MINUTES AFTER TIPPIT WAS SHOT.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also -- Hugh Aynesworth told me last year that he saw the curtains and curtain rods in Oswald's Beckley room on the afternoon of Nov. 22nd:

"David: I was in that rooming house -- Oswald's room -- within two hours of him leaving it that day and there were good curtains and rods there. Absolutely no reason to replace them." -- Hugh Aynesworth; September 15, 2009

Oh, Hugh Aynesworth, well that settles that. There is a guy who is above reproach on this case.

Jim: Someone should be PAYING you to deal with all this disinfo crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

~yawn~

Sure easy to see why these jokers won't debate you, Jim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No date, no initials, no signature--this for an express delivery system that specialized in home delivery. Davey, every time that Fed Ex delivers something to me, at home or if I pick it up, I sign for it.

What good would it do you, Jim, even if a signed receipt for the revolver with the name "A. Hidell" or even "Lee Harvey Oswald" existed? You know what would happen. I sure do anyway:

You would merely say that THAT document has been forged too.

You think EVERY document connected with BOTH firearm purchases made by Oswald in 1963 is fake. Every one! From the money order for the C2766 rifle...to the order form for the rifle...to the envelope the order form for the rifle was mailed in...to the order form for the revolver.

All of the above is FAKE and PHONY, per Jim DiEugenio.

Admit it, Jim--you think all of that stuff is fake, despite EVERY item listed being said by handwriting experts to be in the writing of LHO.

So, having an extra receipt or two is meaningless to a conspiracy theorist like you, James. It would just be more stuff that you would pretend was faked by the evil patsy plotters.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Davey:

When normal procedure is bypassed, when normal records are somehow missing, when you have to put stuff together from an incomplete record and assume something happened when you actually should be sure, then yes, something is wrong someplace.

As per your comment about things being faked, well that has been proven in this case more than once e.g. CE 399.

Question for Davey: About LHO having the revolver in question in his hand at the theater. Are you ignoring all the info posted above from people who don't think LHO had that revolver on him at the theater? And also the fact that a revolver does not eject automatic shells? And all the evidence that indicates someone dropped Oswald's wallet at the scene--and that wallet cannot be Tippit's.

Dawn, I should be paid, but I will take donations.

Maybe if you were paid you'd repsond to your PMs and emails.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...