Why Does DVP Rattle Cages Here?

[David Von Pein]

More liars....

More false statements....

More crooked cops....

More "right-wing crackers" who "despised the Kennedys" (Mr. Truly) -- (My, how very convenient for the plotters there, eh? They have a "right-wing cracker who despised the Kennedys" right there as a TSBD boss, so they can use him in the frame-up too. And, right on cue, Truly gladly hops on board. Gee, what luck! Did Truly have a hand in killing Tippit and O.J.'s ex-wife too?)

I'm loving this, Jim. I'm having a ball. Thanks for being you.

Edited July 15, 2015 by David Von Pein

[James DiEugenio]

You left out one thing, as you usually do:

More altered first day evidence.

Which you said you could not find. The implication being that the critics' made it up.

Wrong again Davey.

Edited July 15, 2015 by James DiEugenio

[Robert Prudhomme]

"So, Jim, according to you, there was NO WAY IN HADES that Baker's "third or fourth floor" remark in his Day 1 affidavit could have POSSIBLY been just a simple mistake, right Jim? That was impossible, right? He MUST have been lying when he later confirmed it was the second floor? Is that how you see it? Gees"

DVP, you continually make stupid comments like this, and feign surprise when we don't accept your logic.

A MISTAKE???? For Pete's sake, he only went up ONE floor! How could he possibly believe he had arrived at the 4th floor??

And you call Jim D. a clown. If anyone belongs in the circus, it's you, Davey.

[Ian Lloyd]

A MISTAKE???? For Pete's sake, he only went up ONE floor! How could he possibly believe he had arrived at the 4th floor??

Funny thing, I was thinking about exactly that earlier today and was looking at the layout drawings for the TSBD...To go from the 1st floor to the 2nd floor meant ascending 2 relatively small flights of stairs. Also, if Baker encountered LHO in the lunchroom, why didn't he write that in his affidavit on the 22nd? Why say he "...saw a man walking away from the stairway."? Sure sounds to me like he/they encountered someone walking away from the stairway in an open area. Wouldn't he have said something like he stopped a man in a lunchroom if that was the case?

[James DiEugenio]

Sean produced some very good pictures of that lunchroom.

They covered just about every square foot of it.

To me, it was simply not possible to confuse a stair well for that lunch room.

[Ian Lloyd]

It all boils down to semantics, I suppose...the official story has LHO being spotted by Baker as LHO passed by the window in a door. Now, if LHO was walking away from the door, then Baker sees him "walking away from the stairway". So, not necessarily a lie, but...

If I'd encountered someone inside a lunchroom (or any other specific room or area), I'd most likely describe it in those terms. That's not to say that everyone else would do the same, but, as an "ordinary Joe"...

[Pat Speer]

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, the idea that Baker would have an accurate memory of his encounter with Oswald has no basis in reality. A policeman running through a crowd and climbing a staircase is not gonna have a clear memory of every person he passes and every face he looks at, and would be unlikely to accurately recall on what floor he saw someone, etc. Human memory just doesn't work that way.

And no, policeman in general and motorcycle cops specifically, are not trained to memorize these details.

Expecting Baker to have a clear memory of his encounter with Oswald is like expecting a policeman involved in a high-speed chase of having a clear memory of every car he passed...when asked about it hours later. Nope, sorry, that just ain't gonna happen.

Which is why we have to rely on Truly on this issue. Unlike Baker, who was in a blur, Truly was essentially running through his own house, looking for something suspicious. His recollections would thereby be far more reliable than Baker's. It seems clear, moreover, that when one studies the timeline of Baker's statements, that he did just that--that he was told what Truly said, and that he tried to bring his story in line with Truly's.

And so...if one wishes to go there, one might venture that Truly was part of the plot, that he ran along with Baker to provide cover for anyone Baker might encounter inside, and that he "covered" for someone inside the building on one of the floors, and then convinced Baker this was Oswald, and that they ran into him on the second floor. This is possible, IMO.

But there's just not a lot of evidence for it, IMO. While Truly may have had ties to the Birchers, or the Klan, most of those suspicious of him think those groups uninvolved in the assassination.

There's also this. When one reads Truly's statements and testimony, he doesn't come across as someone anxious to pile on Oswald. Those trying to paint Oswald as a lone-nut will often talk about his scrambled-egg mind, or his beating his wife, or his inability to hold down a job. Truly, on the other hand, described Oswald as an excellent employee.

His comments regarding the shooting itself also fail to support the Oswald-did-it scenario. As a result, I just don't see him as a conspirator.

From patspeer.com, chapter 8:

Roy Truly (11-23-63 statement to the Dallas Sheriff’s Department, 24H227) “After the President passed, we heard what sounded like an explosion. I heard three such explosions. Then I realized they must have been shots.” (11-23-63 FBI report, CD5 p322) “Shortly after 12:30 PM, as the President’s procession did pass in front of the building, he heard what he believes to be three shots. He was unable to place exactly the source of these shots but believed they came from the area of the railroad yards adjoining the depository building." (11-23-63 FBI report, CD5 p324)"He saw the President go by and at about that time heard three explosions." (12-2-63 FBI report on an investigation performed 11-25-63, CD385, p.7) "Mr. ROY S. TRULY, Warehouse Manager, TSBD, was exhibited an Associated Press photograph described as "DN 5, 11/22/63, Dallas, Texas," depicting an individual standing in the entrance of the TSBD who resembled Lee Harvey Oswald. Mr. Truly, after viewing this photograph, stated, "That picture resembles Oswald, but it's not Lee Oswald, it's Billy Lovelady." (12-4-63 sworn statement to the U.S. Secret Service, CD87 p793) "I heard three shots fired and moments later a man who I believed to be a motor cycle policeman came running up to the entrance of the building, and I accompanied him inside." (12-7-63 Secret Service report based on interviews conducted between 12-2 and 12-5, CD87 p778) "Mr. Roy S. Truly...has been interviewed on several occasion between November 26 and December 4, 1963...the President's automobile passed his location at about 12:30 P.M., and a moment later three shots rang out." (3-19-64 statement to the FBI, 22H677) “At the time President John F. Kennedy was shot I was standing with Mr. Campbell in the street just in front of the building entrance. I heard three shots fired...” (3-24-64 testimony before the Warren Commission, 3H212-241) (When asked where he was standing when the shots were fired) "I would judge out in Elm Street, 10 to 15 or 20 feet from the front steps. We first stood on the steps, the bottom steps a few minutes, and then we walked out in the line of spectators on the side of Elm Street." (He was told to mark an "I" on Exhibit 361 showing his location. But the only identifiable mark on this exhibit as published by the Warren Commission appears to be on the north side of the Elm Street extension directly in front of the building, 20-30 feet west of the steps, not where Campbell claimed they'd been standing.) (When describing the turn of the limo onto Elm Street) “the driver of the presidential car swung out too far to the right, and he came almost within an inch of running into this little abutment here, between Elm and the Parkway. And he slowed down perceptibly and pulled back to the left to get over into the middle lane of the parkway. Not being familiar with the street, he came too far out this way when he made his turn." (When asked the speed of the limousine) "he picked up speed along here, and then seemed to have fallen back into line, and I would say 10 or 12 miles an hour in this area." (When asked what happened next) "I heard an explosion, which I thought was a toy cannon or a loud firecracker from west of the building. Nothing happened after the first explosion. Everything was frozen. And immediately after two more explosions, which I realized that I thought was a gun, a rifle of some kind. The President’s—I saw the President’s car swerve to the left and stop somewheres down in this area. It is misleading here. And that is the last I saw of his car, because this crowd, when the third shot rang out--there was a large crowd all along this abutment here, this little wall, and there was some around us in front--they began screaming and falling to the ground. And the people in front of myself and Mr. Campbell surged back, either in terror or panic. They must have seen this thing. I became separated from Mr. Campbell. They just practically bore me back to the first step on the entrance of our building." (When asked how long the limo stopped) "It would be hard to say over a second or two or something like that. I didn't see, I just saw it stop. I don't know. I didn't see it start up." (9-26-64 interview with William Manchester, as represented in The Death of a President, 1967) (On the uncomfortable fact so many Secret Service agents failed to recognize the first shot as a shot) "It was comprehensible that Roy Truly should dismiss the first shot as a cherry bomb..." (3-21-68 interview with Barry Ernest recounted in The Girl on the Stairs, published 2011) "He had been standing outside when the motorcade passed. Truly 'distinctly heard three shots,' he said, and then accompanied a 'running' police officer, Marrion Baker, into the depository." (11-09-83 AP article found in the Indiana Gazette) "Twenty years later, he refuses to talk about what he saw on Nov. 22,1963. "That's something that was in the past and you don't talk about," Truly said politely. "Everybody who was there has lived through it and that's all I want to say."

[Mark Knight]

I just find it oddly disconcerting that folks like DVP find folks who are in positions of authority whose stories don't fit the official version simply "misremember," but other people "lie" when their stories don't fit the official narrative.

Funny how that works...Officer Baker "misremembered," but Roger Craig "lied"....hmmmmmmmmm.

[Jon G. Tidd]

DVP,

Your critics are chattering at you.

Please rattle some cages here.

Here's some raw meat. On 11-22-63, the DPD didn't give an "f" who committed the crime. The Dallas DPD simply wanted [a] the crime to be solved, and the TV camera to be turned away from the Dallas DPD.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Jon G. Tidd

[Pat Speer]

I just find it oddly disconcerting that folks like DVP find folks who are in positions of authority whose stories don't fit the official version simply "misremember," but other people "lie" when their stories don't fit the official narrative.

Funny how that works...Officer Baker "misremembered," but Roger Craig "lied"....hmmmmmmmmm.

That's a heckuva good point, Mark.

I brought this up with John McAdams once, and proved to him that Michael Baden told as many "untruths" as Jim Garrison, and asked him why it's okay for him to call Garrison a xxxx, but not okay for me to call Baden a xxxx. His answer was most illuminating.

He said that it was unfair to call someone a xxxx if there was no reason for them to lie, as their opinion was validated by the facts as he (McAdams) understood them. In other words, if someone says something that's not accurate while trying to convince him (McAdams) of something he doesn't wanna believe well, the man is a xxxx, but if someone says something that's inaccurate while trying to convince him (McAdams) of something he is willing to believe, well, then, the man is simply mistaken.

And this, coming from the author of "Assassination Logic"!

[Mark Knight]

...and THAT, my friends, is my biggest complaint with DVP.

[David Von Pein]

A MISTAKE???? For Pete's sake, he only went up ONE floor! How could he possibly believe he had arrived at the 4th floor??

Maybe it was because of the way the TSBD's stairways were constructed. Perhaps someone better informed of the way the stairs were configured can chime in on this....but didn't it take two "sets" of L-shaped stairs to constitute a whole flight of steps? Frankly, I've always been a little perplexed by the configuration of the TSBD stairwells.

Anyway, Marrion Baker made a mistake in his 11/22 affidavit. And anyone who thinks it was anything other than an honest mistake is a person bent on creating a conspiracy where none exists at all.

Here's the sixth-floor diagram....

Edited July 16, 2015 by David Von Pein

[Kenneth Drew]

Why Does DVP Rattle Cages Here?

The answer is simple. His theory is the government's theory.

The government's theory is simple. It appeals to those who prefer simplicity.

To challenge DVP is to challenge the U.S. Government.

Some here believe it's easier to deride DVP than to say the U.S. Government has lied and continues to lie.

DVP is a surrogate. I wonder if he understands his role.

Don't tell me that I'm just a patsy in this thing, and that I'm merely being used (unwittingly) by the wicked United States Government! Please, God, no!! Anything but that!

Maybe you, Jon, can help me better understand my "role" in this confusing and complex swine-filled JFK-related labyrinthine underbelly.

Because I am, you see, nothing but a puppet on the string of an evil Government empire which is built on lies and deceit and treachery.

Can you help me escape this torturous dungeon, Jon?

For if Jon G. Tidd won't help me overcome the Dark Side, who will? Obi-Wan?

Thank you so much, Jon.

In reality, of course, the Government's theory is simple because this case, when boiled down to its basics, IS simple --- one man with one gun murdered the President from the murderer's workplace one day in November of 1963.

There's nothing complicated or complex about what Lee Harvey Oswald did that day in Dallas. He smuggled his own rifle to work in a paper bag and got extremely lucky when the perfect opportunity was presented to him at 12:30 PM on the vacant sixth floor of the Book Depository Building.

The above "simple" scenario is what the evidence shows happened, and is what the history books will record as the probable truth for centuries to come.

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

"Reason does not always appeal to unreasonable men." -- President John F. Kennedy; November 16, 1961

"What a sickening irony it is that this man who came through so much should die at the hands of a man worth so little." -- Alex Dreier; ABC News; November 22, 1963

Quoting-Common-Sense.blogspot.com

Don't tell me that I'm just a patsy in this thing, and that I'm merely being used (unwittingly) Ok, we won't tell. We'll leave you in the dark. But, realistically I think most of us here don't believe that you believe what you say. No matter how illogical any of the 'government evidence' is, you buy it 'whole hog'. I think you would swear the assassination happened in 64 if you read that the government said it was. I think most think you very gullible and don't take you seriously. It might make a little sense if you actually tried to use the witness statements as they made them rather than how you change them to be. I just read a statement where you referred to Oswald's fingerprints on something on the 6th floor. You know his prints weren't there on anything linked to the shooting. Yet, you still say it. I don't need a denial on this, I wouldn't believe you anyhow.

[Kenneth Drew]

Why Does DVP Rattle Cages Here?

The answer is simple. His theory is the government's theory.

The government's theory is simple. It appeals to those who prefer simplicity.

To challenge DVP is to challenge the U.S. Government.

Some here believe it's easier to deride DVP than to say the U.S. Government has lied and continues to lie.

DVP is a surrogate. I wonder if he understands his role.

Don't tell me that I'm just a patsy in this thing, and that I'm merely being used (unwittingly) by the wicked United States Government! Please, God, no!! Anything but that!

Maybe you, Jon, can help me better understand my "role" in this confusing and complex swine-filled JFK-related labyrinthine underbelly.

Because I am, you see, nothing but a puppet on the string of an evil Government empire which is built on lies and deceit and treachery.

Can you help me escape this torturous dungeon, Jon?

For if Jon G. Tidd won't help me overcome the Dark Side, who will? Obi-Wan?

Thank you so much, Jon.

In reality, of course, the Government's theory is simple because this case, when boiled down to its basics, IS simple --- one man with one gun murdered the President from the murderer's workplace one day in November of 1963.

There's nothing complicated or complex about what Lee Harvey Oswald did that day in Dallas. He smuggled his own rifle to work in a paper bag and got extremely lucky when the perfect opportunity was presented to him at 12:30 PM on the vacant sixth floor of the Book Depository Building.

The above "simple" scenario is what the evidence shows happened, and is what the history books will record as the probable truth for centuries to come.

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

"Reason does not always appeal to unreasonable men." -- President John F. Kennedy; November 16, 1961

"What a sickening irony it is that this man who came through so much should die at the hands of a man worth so little." -- Alex Dreier; ABC News; November 22, 1963

Quoting-Common-Sense.blogspot.com

"What a sickening irony it is that this man who came through so much should die at the hands of a man worth so little." -- Alex Dreier; ABC News; November 22, 1963 Wonder how he knew who had killed JFK on 11/22 when the world didn't know it until the Warren Report reached a conclusion.

[David Von Pein]

Wonder how he knew who had killed JFK on 11/22 when the world didn't know it until the Warren Report reached a conclusion.

The world knew it by 11:26 PM CST on 11/22. It was obvious then. It's even more obvious today. Too bad you haven't joined the world yet.