Jump to content
The Education Forum
David Von Pein

1967 Debate: Mark Lane vs. Wesley Liebeler

Recommended Posts

Incredible how DVP completely reverses the standard of evidence. Which shows he has no comprehension of what the legal system is all about.

Jimmy thinks we're in a courtroom here at Edu. Forum. Somebody should straighten Jim out on that mistake.

And isn't it funny that BOTH the WC and the HSCA had no problem at all coming to the conclusion that CE399 was THE EXACT BULLET that injured both JFK and John Connally. And that's a lot of LAWYERS making that claim.

Are you a lawyer, Jim?

That's what I thought.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

understanding basic legal jurisprudence and procedure is not limited to lawyers, D. other people are allowed to study and understand the law, too.

on the other hand, continuing to place good faith in the conclusions formed by the WC and the HSCA does seem to be limited to - well, the limited...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No Davey, someone should tell you what the legal standards are before you place one of them as the title of your book.

And then you backtrack inside the book since you know the title is a complete bait and switch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wait.

DVP has written a book?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on the other hand, continuing to place good faith in the conclusions formed by the WC and the HSCA does seem to be limited to...

...people with some basic common sense and an ability to evaluate the evidence properly?

Yeah, I agree. It is.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reprise....

And isn't it funny that BOTH the WC and the HSCA had no problem at all coming to the conclusion that CE399 was THE EXACT BULLET that injured both JFK and John Connally. And that's a lot of LAWYERS making that claim.

(But I guess all of those lawyers working for the WC and HSCA should take a back seat to those two seasoned courtroom professionals and inimitable barristers---James DiEugenio and Glenn Nall.)

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, Davey is so enamored of this, and yet he does not understand what this has all been about.

Lawyers are advocates.

The WC were advocates for the prosecution of Oswald. We all know that nine ways to Sunday.

Now, the adversary system only works if along with the prosecution in place there are two other things in place:

1. The defense

2. A judge to make sure the rules of evidence are followed.

The WC lacked either one. Therefore, it was a runaway prosecution. No controls. A travesty.

And when you throw in what Hoover did, its kind of sick.

That is why they accepted the bogus CE 399.

In any real legal proceeding, forget it. The WC was a joke.

That is why that New Orleans judge almost fell out of his chair when Shaw's lawyers wanted to try and admit it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The WC were advocates for the prosecution of Oswald.

And Jimmy says that even though he knows that several of the WC lawyers said exactly the OPPOSITE, i.e., lawyers such as David Belin and Burt Griffin and Joseph Ball have said that they WANTED to find evidence of a conspiracy, but they couldn't do it.

But, naturally, Belin, Griffin, and Ball (et al) were just lying through their collective teeth when they made such statements---right, Jim?

Was there even ONE lawyer on the entire staff of the WC or the HSCA who was honest, Jim? Anybody at all?

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before Davey jumps on and says:

"Oh, the great Jim DIEugenio left out the HSCA acceptance."

Everyone, including Davey, knows what happened to the HSCA. It started as a really populist movement inspired by the revelations of the Church Committee, the publicity surrounding the Hosty note, and the ABC show on the Z film.

With Downing there, it looked like it was actually going to find out what really happened.

It quickly went awry when Downing left and Gonzalez took charge and got into that nutty brouhaha with Sprague. First Gonzalez left, then Sprague left, then Tanenbaum left, then Al Lewis left.

And then, what made it worse, is after everyone saw what happened to Sprague, no one wanted the Chief Counsel job. For good reason. Sprague was a legendary prosecutor who had a sterling reputation. As Joe Rauh, a famous Democratic lobbyist said, "You know, I never thought the Kennedy case was a conspiracy until now. But if they can do that to DIck Sprague, it must have been."

Well Chris Dodd, who Tanenbaum makes into an utterly sly and sinister character in his roman a clef, Corruption of Blood, somehow came up with Blakey. Blakey got the message from what happened to Sprague. "We are going to write a report." And the other line was "You have to get your conspiracy smaller." Or as his assistant said in one of the most notorious, but accurate, quotes ever made in this case: "No, no, no. You don't have to do that. Like I said, that's the real world. That's irrelevant."

Talk about demoralizing. The staffers now went out and made T shirts saying, "Reality is irrelevant." That was it. As Bud Fensterwald later wrote, "The HSCA sure went to hell in a hand basket didn't it?"

This is all in Fonzi's absolutely first class book The Last Investigation. You have read it have you not Davey? Or too busy reading letters from Blaine.

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

may i snicker?

no?

ok, forget i asked.

["the jury will pretend the witness didn't say that."]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DVP: And Jimmy says that even though he knows that several of the WC lawyers said exactly the OPPOSITE,

Davey, do you really know nothing about the WC?

​The junior counsel, and even the senior counsel were nothing. They had no power at all. I mean you saw what happened when Liebeler wrote his famous memo right? Pointing out the problems in the report?

​Let me educate you on that one: He was called in by Rankin and Redlich. He was asked by the HSCA as to what happened when he tried to defend his memo? Well, recall, Liebeler was a UCLA Bruin prof. And recall this was back in 1964 when USC was beginning to produce a powerhouse team with Mike Garrett etc. Wesley replied with words to the effect: it was sort of like a UCLA/ USC football game from the mid sixties, I got steam rolled.

I guess Davey didn't know how power works in a bureaucracy. That is how it works Davey. From the horse's mouth.

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

​The junior counsel, and even the senior counsel were nothing.

Yeah, right, Jimmy. They were merely the ones doing almost all of the heavy lifting (i.e., the investigating and interrogation of witnesses). And yet they were "nothing"? That's a crock, Jimmy.

Maybe you should go back and learn a little more, Jimbo. (Start with Page 334 of "Reclaiming History".)

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Davey,

Maybe you also forgot about the meeting Ball had with Redlich as related in Inquest?

Some of the staff were a little wiser than you. (Which isn't hard to be.)

They did not want to use witnesses as bad as Brennan, Marina, and Markham. (Which is what Liebeler also objected to in his memo. You have read that, have you not?)

Same thing happened here as what happened to Liebeler. They got overruled. That's the real world Davey. I mean do you let the employees run your KFC? Do they set the prices and policies?

BTW, Redlich, who actually wrote a large part of the final report, actually said to Liebeler, "I work for the Commission and they want it in."

Now, who was the Commission? It was the Troika plus Warren. Because Willens in his dairy related a story about getting the opinion from Dulles and Warren on an issue, and then writing that he had to now get the opinion of the "other two commissioners." Two, Howard? Should that not have been five?

He gave the game away. Its like I have always said, the WC was the Troika,: Dulles, McCloy and Ford, With Warren for window dressing. That is who Redlich was working for. And Hoover was doing most of the investigative work. Some line up eh?

Davey, please quit or I am going to call the referee over to stop it.

Edited by James DiEugenio

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...