Jump to content
The Education Forum
David Josephs

Where is the CHECK/MO for Oswald's $10

Recommended Posts

Lee,

I hope he keeps the decorum a bit higher here.

This is the EDUCATION Forum you know, not sure what one liners he has learned would help teach us squat.

Ed

Edited by Ed LeDoux

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But you'll always be haunted by the fact that Helen Markham left her house between 1:04-1:07pm and T.F. Bowley's watch will, for the rest of time, be at 1:10pm when he looked at it.

Which means Tippit was killed between 1:07pm and 1:09pm. And that being the case, Oswald didn't do it and your stinking and so-called best evidence is shown up for what it truly is.

Fraudulent.

It doesn't mean anything of the sort, Lee.

Since ALL of the times associated with Oswald's movements after he fled the Book Depository are merely ESTIMATES (and, undeniably, they ARE only estimates and approximations), we cannot say with 100% certainty that Earlene Roberts' timing of how long Oswald stayed inside his Beckley Avenue room is spot-on perfect.

In fact, common sense, coupled with some of Mrs. Roberts' own testimony, would indicate that Oswald was only in his room for a very few seconds--one minute at most. Here's why I say that:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/in-lee-harvey-oswalds-room.html

So, even if Tippit was killed at 1:07 or 1:09 (or whatever time close to 1:00 you want to come up with), we're really only talking about a very few minutes in real time here. Oswald might very well have left his roominghouse BEFORE 1:00 PM, which would have placed him at Tenth & Patton earlier than 1:14-1:15.

My own opinion (coupled with the excellent and detailed research done on the Tippit murder by author Dale K. Myers) is that Tippit was probably killed at 1:14 to 1:15 PM. But it could conceivably have been earlier, because (as noted) the timing of Lee Harvey Oswald's movements after 12:30 PM is not firmly fixed in stone. And it never was. We can only guess as to the EXACT times.

But, in the final analysis of J.D. Tippit's murder, the hard physical evidence simply HAS to trump all other evidence.

And just because conspiracy theorists like Jim DiEugenio and Lee Farley want to believe that the physical evidence in the Tippit case is "fraudulent" (to use Farley's own term), that doesn't mean that everybody is required to accept such far-fetched notions.

And it's a particularly far-fetched notion in the Tippit case, due to the fact that a DPD officer had been slain. Therefore, according to the theories of people like DiEugenio and Farley, apparently a bunch of cops in charge of investigating the murder of their fellow officer, decided to just IGNORE the real evidence at the scene and, instead, they decided they were going to frame an innocent schnook named Lee Oswald.

Do you realize how silly that proposition is?

I wonder if James DiEugenio or Lee Farley (or any other conspiracist) really do realize how silly that theory truly is. And it certainly IS just a "theory". Because no CTer on the planet has PROVEN that ANY evidence that exists against Lee Harvey Oswald in either the JFK or Tippit murder cases is "fraudulent".

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Robert Morrow

The fatal flaw with von Pein's arguments, and he makes this mistake over and over, is that he ASSUMES that the fabricated physical evidence of the JFK assassination can be trusted. Once the authorities have been caught one, two, three, four, five times monkeying with the evidence (just one example substituting a Mann-Carcano for a Mauser), then they have absolutely NO credibility on any of the fabricated evidence of the JFK case. These same authorities, particularly the FBI and Secret Service, simply destroyed the real evidence.

Another huge one is the Zapruder Film itself which strongly implies a head kill shot to JFK from the front right and not the TSBD. If the 1963 FBI, Secret Service, LBJ, Hoover, Warren Commission can ignore that and still try the fantasy game of pinning it all on a phantom Oswald who was not on the 6th floor TSBD, then you can't trust anything - and I mean anything - that the authorities of the time presented as evidence.

The murderers of JFK were running the non-investigation and cover up into JFK's death.

One good thing about Lee Farley is that he does not trust or take at face value ANYTHING the Dallas police, FBI or Secret Service or Warren Commission said. Perhaps, Farley goes a little overboard on this ... but based on the evidence of official corruption, that is a good starting point to take on the JFK case.

Edited by Robert Morrow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The fatal flaw with von Pein's [sic] arguments, and he makes this mistake over and over, is that he ASSUMES that the fabricated physical evidence of the JFK assassination can be trusted. Once the authorities have been caught one, two, three, four, five times monkeying with the evidence (just one example substituting a Mann-Carcano for a Mauser), then they have absolutely NO credibility on any of the fabricated evidence of the JFK case. These same authorities, particularly the FBI and Secret Service, simply destroyed the real evidence.

This allegation has never ever been PROVEN to be true, of course. (Except for the Hosty note. And we all know why that note was destroyed. And it certainly had nothing to do with any "plot" to kill JFK.)

Morrow just WANTS all the "real" evidence to have been destroyed and replaced with "Oz Did It" stuff. And, like all Anybody-But-Oz conspiracy clowns, he WANTS Oswald to be innocent. A strange hobby, indeed.

And the MC/Mauser example is laughable. I suppose Morrow still places faith in Roger Craig, even after reading his 1968 interview. Right, Bob?

RogerCraigInterview.jpg

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't care how long he was in his room.

But it could be very important, because the WC's estimated times were being based on Earlene Roberts being RIGHT when she said that LHO was in his room for "3 to 4 minutes".

But just look at what ELSE Earlene Roberts said:

JOE BALL -- "How long did he [Oswald] stay in the room?"

EARLENE ROBERTS -- "Oh, maybe not over 3 or 4 minutes. Just long enough, I guess, to go in there and get a jacket and put it on and he went out zipping it." (Emphasis added by DVP.)

-------------

So, from Mrs. Roberts' OWN MOUTH, we have her saying that LHO likely wasn't in his room any longer than it would take "to go in there and get a jacket and put it on".

Also take note of the words "maybe" and "I guess" in Roberts' WC testimony there.

IOW--She was GUESSING. That's all. She wasn't timing Oswald with a stopwatch.

And I kinda doubt that it would take 3-4 minutes to just get a jacket. In fact, via the re-enactment done in THIS 1978 MOVIE (see Part 4), it took the actor playing Oswald a mere 22 seconds to do all the things that we're fairly certain Oswald did while he was in his room on 11/22--e.g., grab his gun and put his jacket on.

But even if the WC estimates are correct (with LHO leaving 1026 Beckley at precisely 1:03), there was still time enough for Oswald to get to the Tippit murder site by 1:14-1:15 (which is the best estimate for when Tippit's murder took place, being based primarily on the DPD radio tapes, which indicate that Bowley's call to the DPD occurred at 1:18, which followed about 90 seconds of microphone "pumping" by Domingo Benavides prior to Bowley taking the mike).

We know that the trip from 1026 Beckley to 10th & Patton can be done in about 11 minutes. Several people have done it in just that amount of time. (Plus, we can't possibly know how fast Oswald was walking, or exactly what route he took to get there.)

Let me ask you this, Lee:

Do you think it's reasonable to believe that Benavides waited for NINE MINUTES to grab Tippit's radio and start pumping the mike?

And via the most commonly-believed scenario among CTers of Tippit being killed at 1:06, you've got Benavides waiting for about TEN FULL MINUTES to get on that radio.

Frankly, Lee, that's goofy. Benavides didn't wait any nine or ten minutes before grabbing that microphone. And you know he didn't.

Hence, via the DPD tapes (and common sense, plus Benavides' testimony), Tippit was likely shot at about 1:14 or 1:15.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We'll go through the DPD dispatches tomorrow. .... They're as bogus as everything else in this case. Demonstrably bogus.

Oh, of course. You have no choice but to fall back on the "EVERYTHING IS BOGUS" ploy. It's your religion.

And why do you not consider Callaway a good witness again? It's because he took Tippit's gun and went to hunt the killer?

Great reasoning there, Lee. I wonder if a jury would swallow that hunk of nonsense?

You gonna ignore Archer's HSCA interview? Don't like what he had to say about your beloved Commission?

There's nothing specific in that Archer interview. Just generalizations. What was it that was supposedly "altered" or "changed" that would indicate the WC was trying to frame LHO, or cover-up a conspiracy? Any idea?

And if you think it's something "new" to me when a CT monger like yourself quotes a witness saying their testimony or affidavits have been "altered" -- well, it's not new. Julia Mercer comes to mind. (So, I guess Decker's Sheriff's Office was in the habit of "altering" official affidavits too, huh?)

It is my firm belief that nobody's statements or testimony were "altered" in order to aid a cover-up in the JFK case. (The text in bold being the key part of that sentence.)

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
David, correct me if I'm wrong, but the only reason for saying this would be to indicate that changes in a story over time is indicative of someone lying (here, I am referring only to substantial changes that give an entirely different picture to that originally stated). Is that about how you see it?

Essentially, yes, I think that would be an accurate way to put it, Greg. And Jean Hill and Roger Craig being probably the two best examples of such behavior you'll find in the JFK case. There's no question that both Craig and J. Hill were outright liars when it came to some of the things they said in later years.

The people who love to cite Roger Craig's "7.65 Mauser" story have no choice but to totally ignore Craig's 1968 interview with the L.A. Free Press, where he specifically said that he had no idea WHAT KIND of gun the rifle was that was found on the sixth floor of the TSBD.

QUESTION: "Did you handle that rifle [found on the sixth floor of the TSBD]?"

ROGER CRAIG: "Yes, I did. I couldn't give its name because I don't know foreign rifles."

This '68 L.A. Free Press article (with "RC" being Roger Craig) is the proof that Craig was a bald-faced xxxx when he later insisted in the Mark Lane video "Two Men In Dallas" that he had seen (with his own eyes) the words "7.65 Mauser" stamped on the barrel of the gun.

Craig also claimed to have "handled" the rifle after it was found on 11/22/63. That very likely is another lie told by Craig.

RogerCraigInterview.jpg?t=1286685995

But getting back to Ted Callaway -- He was always very consistent in his story, from 1963 and onward. And he IDed LHO on the day of the assassination, not at some later point in time. (And yes, you can now throw Howard Brennan up in my face if you like--because he did not ID Oswald on 11/22. But, IMO, his reason for not doing so on 11/22 makes a great deal of sense to me. YMMV.)

Thank you, David.

Now let me add to your list of Jean Hill and Roger Craig.

The following witnesses all made substantial changes to their stories once before the WC to what they had said previously to investigators and/or reporters (and in one case, William Manchester).

In no particular order:

Buell Wesley Frazier

Marrion Baker

Bonnie Ray Williams

Charles Givens

Marina Oswald

"Nick" McDonald

Henry Wade

There are more if you want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You said you can still get him [Oswald] there for 1:06-1:09. Show me.

Sure:

Earlene Roberts was very likely wrong about her "3 to 4 minute" estimate. Oswald, just like Frederic Forrest in the 1978 movie scene I linked to, probably was in his cubbyhole of a room for about 30 seconds, and not anywhere near three or four minutes.

David Belin & Co. walked the distance from Neely & Beckley to 1026 Beckley in 5 min. & 45 sec.

If Oswald had moved considerably faster than Belin's "walking" pace, he could have shaved some time off of Belin's re-creation time and could have likely been inside his room by about 12:57.

He's in his room for 30 seconds, then heads for Tenth Street.

He can positively get to Tenth & Patton in about 11 minutes (that's been done by Dave Perry and others in past reconstructions).

That puts him beside Tippit's patrol car at precisely 1:09. Which, as mentioned, would also have to mean that Domingo Benavides stood beside Tippit's police car picking lint out of his belly button for SEVEN MINUTES before using the police radio. And that is not a reasonable thing to believe, IMO.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no proof that Oswald ever picked up the revolver in question.

None.

In fact, the preponderance of the evidence indicates he did not.

One of the silliest arguments I ever saw is DVP saying that the USPS kept a special box for people picking up merchandise from private carriers. HA HA HA

He then switched to Oswald picking it up at REA [Railway Express Agency]. He did not realize he was boxed in on this one.

Because there is no evidence the FBI ever went to REA to check on this. None.

That is because Oswald never went to REA.

So, since there's no official record of Oswald having gone to the REA office to pick up the revolver (which is a revolver that we know beyond all doubt that he definitely ordered; Jimbo's absurd protests notwithstanding), this must mean, per DiEugenio, that Oswald couldn't possibly have gone to REA to get the gun.

Brilliant, Jim.

Via that tortured logic, then whenever a person does something that is not witnessed by someone else (or was not investigated by anybody in order to seek out anyone who saw it occurring), I guess this would mean that the thing the person did never really got done, because nobody was there to see it or verify its happening.

Jim, you continue to be one of the best jokes on the World Wide Web when it comes to the topic of President Kennedy's assassination.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no proof that Oswald ever picked up the revolver in question.

None.

In fact, the preponderance of the evidence indicates he did not.

One of the silliest arguments I ever saw is DVP saying that the USPS kept a special box for people picking up merchandise from private carriers. HA HA HA

He then switched to Oswald picking it up at REA [Railway Express Agency]. He did not realize he was boxed in on this one.

Because there is no evidence the FBI ever went to REA to check on this. None.

That is because Oswald never went to REA.

So, since there's no official record of Oswald having gone to the REA office to pick up the revolver (which is a revolver that we know beyond all doubt that he definitely ordered; Jimbo's absurd protests notwithstanding), this must mean, per DiEugenio, that Oswald couldn't possibly have gone to REA to get the gun.

Brilliant, Jim.

Via that tortured logic, then whenever a person does something that is not witnessed by someone else, I guess this would mean that the thing the person did never really got done (because nobody was there to see it or verify its happening).

Jim, you continue to be one of the best jokes on the World Wide Web when it comes to the topic of President Kennedy's assassination.

No, DVP, that's not the logic at all, because there is evidence - solid hard - time card Jaggers/Chiles/Stoval employee records that clearly state where Oswald was every day of the week and what he was doing - what project he was working on every hour, and there is no indication he ever left to pick up the rifle or the pistol, both of which arrived at the Post Office on the same day even though they were ordered a month apart.

You can't just assume he did something just because nobody saw him do it, especially when there is hard evidence he didn't do it.

You can't put Oswald in the Sixth Floor window at the time of the assassination either, and using your logic, because you have no witness testimony or hard evidence he was there - he must have been.

BK

And BTW, I just posted some photos I took at Dealey Plaza the year Jesse Ventura spoke - was that the 40th anniversary? Does anybody know?

JFKcountercoup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your both wrong for different reasons.

we know beyond all doubt that he definitely ordered; Jimbo's absurd protests notwithstanding?? But so what if he could that says nothing about whether he did

There are so many ways in a job, prob more back then that allow for ''doing stuff''. The longer you work there the good ways are eventually found.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no indication he ever left to pick up the rifle or the pistol, both of which arrived at the Post Office on the same day even though they were ordered a month apart.

Where is your proof the rifle and pistol arrived at the P.O. (coming from Chicago and Los Angeles, respectively) "on the same day"? There's no proof of that. (Not that it really matters, of course.)

Plus: Why couldn't Oswald have picked up his guns on a Saturday, instead of a workday? He didn't work Saturdays at Jaggars, did he? And weren't the post offices open at least a half-day on Saturdays in Dallas in 1963? (They are here in Indiana.)

Another basic, common-sense point needs to be made here----

Who the heck orders something through the mail, and then doesn't even bother to go and pick it up?

And please don't chime in with "Where's the proof Oswald ordered ANY guns through the mail?" -- because that's totally absurd. OF COURSE Oswald ordered his guns via mail-order. Hence, he would have been expecting them to arrive at the place he had them sent--his P.O. Box. Hence, he would have picked the damn things up.

Can anyone possibly fight the basic logic of my last paragraph?

And, IMO, the rifle and pistol were not ordered a month apart. Oswald merely filled out the pistol coupon on January 27th, but it's almost a certainty that he didn't mail it until March 12th...the same day he mailed in his rifle coupon to Klein's.

How can we know this?

Because BOTH Seaport & Klein's internal paperwork show stamped dates of "March 13, 1963" on the respective invoices for those purchases. (Which, of course, would also mean, if I'm correct, that Oswald's revolver coupon made it to L.A. in just one day -- which is possible, since he very likely used Air Mail to mail it too, like he did his Klein's order.)

But do you really think that Seaport received Oswald's order in late January, but then didn't write up the invoice until March 13th? I would doubt it.

And please note that the Seaport order indicates with an "X" the method of Oswald's initial $10 deposit -- via "Cash".

MichaelisEx2.jpg

WaldmanExhibitNo7.jpg?t=1279170764

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your [sic] both wrong for different reasons.

we know beyond all doubt that he definitely ordered; Jimbo's absurd protests notwithstanding?? But so what if he could that says nothing about whether he did

There are so many ways in a job, prob more back then that allow for ''doing stuff''. The longer you work there the good ways are eventually found.

WTF?

Nice batch of gibberish there, John.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you David. :)

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...