Jump to content
The Education Forum
Fred Litwin

I Was a Teenage JFK Conspiracy Freak

Recommended Posts

On 9/18/2018 at 6:10 PM, W. Niederhut said:

Let me comment on this, as a graduate of Harvard Medical School, (1983) and a Board Certified psychiatrist.

The autopsy evidence (above) clearly supports the conclusion that a ruptured cerebral aneurysm was the cause of David Ferrie's death.

But that does not prove that he didn't commit suicide.

For example, he may have taken pills that caused a hypertensive crisis, resulting in rupture of the aneurysm.  An amphetamine overdose is one example.  Less likely, in my opinion, but possible, would be a hypertensive crisis caused by an L-thyroxine overdose.  

   Did they do a serum toxicology screen at autopsy?

I'm re-posting this, because Mr. Litwin and his fellow "Lone Nutter's" still don't get it.

To wit, even IF the David Ferrie autopsy report is genuine, (and one has to wonder, given the obvious sabotage of the Garrison investigation) it doesn't prove that Ferrie was not murdered, by himself or others.

He could have ingested drug(s) which caused his cerebral aneurysm to rupture as a result of a hypertensive crisis.

 

 

Edited by W. Niederhut

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a good point and I agree.  He could have done so, or someone else could have also.

 

Also, do you have any idea about the differences in the time of death, I mean Lardner vs Chetta?  Are you familiar with that issue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

This is a good point and I agree.  He could have done so, or someone else could have also.

 

Also, do you have any idea about the differences in the time of death, I mean Lardner vs Chetta?  Are you familiar with that issue?

No, I need to study the facts.  Were these different estimates of the time of Ferrie's death? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes there was. The coroner initially said he died around midnight.

But then, George Lardner stepped forward and said he was with Ferrie until four am on February 22nd. 

Due to this, the coroner revised his time of death and said four am was the the outward boundary of when he could have passed on.

Cyril Wecht says that a coroner should not be that far off on an estimated time of death.

But if Ferrie was killed, this would mean that the killers were waiting for Lardner to leave.

Also, Ferrie had purchased a hundred thyroid pills the day before, these were gone when Garrison got there.

The other thing that makes this so odd is the murder of Eladio DelValle about 24 hours later. If Ferrie had broken down and started cooperating,  the trail probably would have led, to Florida and JM WAVE in the east, meaning Del Valle, and Sergio Arcacha Smith in Dallas.

Is it only a coincidence that DelValle's body was found dead gangland style with a shot in the chest  and his body was left in the vicinity of Bernardo De Torres' apartment? De Torres had been a militant Cuban exile who had infiltrated Garrison's inquiry.

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Paul Baker said:

There is a certain amount of confusion here about what constitutes valid science, compared to its presentation and interpretation inside a courtroom. That's a wider issue which does nothing to invalidate the NAA technique which is proven to work extremely effectively on small, sometimes microscopic, metallic and metal alloy samples. The NAA analysis of the bullet fragments retrieved from the crime scene essentially supports the lone gunman scenario as well as the single bullet theory.


No it doesn't. Apparently when your eyes see this:

 

Quote

Compositional bullet lead analysis (CBLA) using NAA has been discredited and is no longer used by the FBI. Quoting from this Wikipedia article:

The technique used by Guinn [i.e. NAA] to analyse the bullet lead from the JFK assassination was a form of what has become known as Compositional Bullet Lead Analysis (CBLA). Until 2004 the FBI used this technique [NAA] to determine whether a crime scene bullet lead sample came from a particular box of ammunition or a particular batch of bullets. Guinn claimed that with the JFK bullet fragments, the technique could be used to identify the exact bullet the fragments came from.

However, the validity of CBLA was discredited in a 2002 paper ("A Metallurgical Review of the Interpretation of Compositional Bullet Lead Analysis", (2002) 127 Forensic Science International, 174-191)[89] co-authored by Randich and by former FBI Chief Metallurgist, William Tobin.

The 2002 Tobin/Randich paper prompted the National Academy of Sciences (Board on Chemical Science and Technology) to review the science of bullet lead analysis. In a report in 2004[90] the NAS found the scientific basis for matching bullet sources from the analysis of bullet lead composition as practiced by the FBI [i.e. NAA] was flawed. As a result of that report, the courts appear to have stopped accepting this evidence[91] and the FBI has stopped using bullet lead analysis for forensic purposes.[92]


Here is what the Wikipedia article on CBLA (using NAA) has to say:

Comparative bullet-lead analysis (CBLA), ....is a now discredited and abandoned[1]forensic technique which used chemistry to link crime scene bullets to ones possessed by suspects on the theory that each batch of lead had a unique elemental makeup.[2]

The technique was first used after U.S. President John F. Kennedy's assassination in 1963.[2]

 

....your brain reads this:

 

Quote

Compositional bullet lead analysis (CBLA) using NAA has been discredited and is no longer used by the FBI. Quoting from this Wikipedia article:

The technique used by Guinn [i.e. NAA] to analyse the bullet lead from the JFK assassination was a form of what has become known as Compositional Bullet Lead Analysis (CBLA). Until 2004 the FBI used this technique [NAA] to determine whether a crime scene bullet lead sample came from a particular box of ammunition or a particular batch of bullets. Guinn claimed that with the JFK bullet fragments, the technique could be used to identify the exact bullet the fragments came from.

However, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah.

The 2002 Tobin/Randich paper prompted the National Academy of Sciences (Board on Chemical Science and Technology) to review the science of bullet lead analysis. In a report in 2004[90] the NAS found blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah.


Here is what the Wikipedia article on CBLA (using NAA) has to say:

Comparative bullet-lead analysis (CBLA), ....is a now blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah. f blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah, blah, blah blah, blah.

The technique was first used after U.S. President John F. Kennedy's assassination in 1963.[2]

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

The other thing that makes this so odd is the murder of Eladio DelValle about 24 hours later. If Ferrie had broken down and started cooperating,  the trail probably would have led, to Florida and JM WAVE in the east, meaning Del Valle, and Sergio Arcacha Smith in Dallas.

 

Jim,

I think you are right on the money.

I have always felt the murders were connected, but that's just my opinion.

 

Steve Thomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

Yes there was. The coroner initially said he died around midnight.

But then, George Lardner stepped forward and said he was with Ferrie until four am on February 22nd. 

Due to this, the coroner revised his time of death and said four am was the the outward boundary of when he could have passed on.

Cyril Wecht says that a coroner should not be that far off on an estimated time of death.

But if Ferrie was killed, this would mean that the killers were waiting for Lardner to leave.

Also, Ferrie had purchased a hundred thyroid pills the day before, these were gone when Garrison got there.

The other thing that makes this so odd is the murder of Eladio DelValle about 24 hours later. If Ferrie had broken down and started cooperating,  the trail probably would have led, to Florida and JM WAVE in the east, meaning Del Valle, and Sergio Arcacha Smith in Dallas.

Is it only a coincidence that DelValle's body was found dead gangland style with a shot in the chest  and his body was left in the vicinity of Bernardo De Torres' apartment? De Torres had been a militant Cuban exile who had infiltrated Garrison's inquiry.

Jim,  I thought I'd read Del Valle was killed on the same night Ferrie died.  Within 24 hours could be construed as such.  Anyway I thought Delvalle was being sought at the time by a investigator out of Garrisons office who turned out to be a FBI or CIA asset.  I read at some point Delvalle was found in his white Cadillac with his head cut open by a hatchet.  A sure sign by the mob to shut up.  Then I read it was "just" chopped with a machete.  Note the (small) marks on top of the head.

https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailV2&ccid=ZQp2l129&id=12ECA1605C785E9CF8C29046F0623D9BD645DD9A&thid=OIP.ZQp2l1298mFYYaoVI8VH2AHaK1&mediaurl=http%3a%2f%2fwww.oocities.org%2fgarrisoninvestigation%2fvalle.jpg&exph=332&expw=227&q=eladio+del+valle+autopsy+photographs&simid=607989749053851010&selectedIndex=0&qpvt=eladio+del+valle+autopsy+photographs&ajaxhist=0 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

Neither one is really even needed to come to the reasonable conclusion that only bullets from Lee Harvey Oswald's Carcano rifle were fired at President Kennedy in Dealey Plaza. Here's why that is so....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/vincent-guinn-and-naa.html

 

This is true, of course.

Jim, you keep on copying and pasting swathes of cherry-picked text to support your stance. (By the way, in any real research community, that approach isn't particularly effective). Incidentally, discrediting CBLA is not equivalent to discrediting NAA. 

The methodology is sound and proven. The NAA studies conducted as part of the investigation of President Kennedy support the notion that the bullets fired that day originated from a single source. The technique could have just as easily demonstrated that the bullets came from more than one source (in which case I'm certain that DiEugenio et al wouldn't be quite so critical of it).

This is just one small corner of a case in which all hard physical evidence supports, way beyond any reasonable doubt, the lone gunman and the single bullet theory. There is no hard physical evidence that supports any other scenario.

Edited by Paul Baker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Paul Baker said:

There is no hard physical evidence that supports any other scenario.

What about the bullet holes in Kennedy's clothes? And the Zapruder film that shows him sitting upright when he's hit in the back?

What about the Dictabelt that corroborates the testimony of several dozen witnesses concerning a shot from the grassy knoll?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Paul Baker said:

This is true, of course.

Jim, you keep on copying and pasting swathes of cherry-picked text to support your stance. (By the way, in any real research community, that approach isn't particularly effective). Incidentally, discrediting CBLA is not equivalent to discrediting NAA. 

The methodology is sound and proven. The NAA studies conducted as part of the investigation of President Kennedy support the notion that the bullets fired that day originated from a single source. The technique could have just as easily demonstrated that the bullets came from more than one source (in which case I'm certain that DiEugenio et al wouldn't be quite so critical of it).

This is just one small corner of a case in which all hard physical evidence supports, way beyond any reasonable doubt, the lone gunman and the single bullet theory. There is no hard physical evidence that supports any other scenario.

If you don't think the statements of the autopsy participants pertain to physical evidence, isn't at least the face sheet diagram physical evidence? That one is stained in blood. It shows the small head wound too low to fit a scenario with all damage to the head being caused by a 6.5 round from the Sixth Floor. It even has a little arrow pointing up next to the dot, indicating that the upwards bullet path required was understood on the night of the autopsy.

 

Rqgkmvi.jpg

Edited by Micah Mileto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, Paul Baker is a perfect example of how the Oswald did it crowd ends up being what they accuse the critics of being i.e. solipsistic and eccentric.

PB: the NAA studies conducted as part of the investigation of President Kennedy support the notion that the bullets fired that day came from a single source.

Assuming that Baker means Guinn's work on this topic, which came to be called CBLA, he is simply wrong.  And its not me who is saying this, its a metallurgist, Ric Randich, and a professional statistician namely Pat Grant.  Both of whom have been published in peer reviewed literature on the subject. Here is the money shot:

Perhaps the most arresting piece of evidence produced by the duo was a chart measuring the trace elements of the five pieces of evidence Guinn analyzed: the bullet left in the rifle at the so-called "sniper's nest", the bullet that Oswald allegedly fired at General Walker, and the three samples from the Kennedy assassination. The values varied widely, but especially for the "sniper's nest" bullet and the Walker bullet. Peter Dale Scott looked at this chart and surmised that it looked like those two bullets came from a different gun or type of ammunition. Right before this chart was placed on the overhead, Randich was talking about how trace metal values can vary widely in a particular run if one of the ingots used for the metals has been replaced on the production line. I asked him if he was then saying that theoretically all of those bullets, with their wide trace metal values, could come from one box. He replied that yes, they could. I then asked him, "Then what's the basis for this science?" He replied, "You're talking to the choir." Today, this new analysis is so convincing that the man that originally sponsored it and then advocated it to convict Oswald, Robert Blakey, has now joined the choir. Unfortunately, like many things in this case, the truth has emerged 28 years too late.

 

Now, if Baker wants to argue with those two guys, fine, please do and copy us on it.  I would love to see the results.  Baker reminds me of Don Quixote on this,  he does not know what a windmill is.  Its gone Paul, CBLA was always a mirage and people like MIlam and Art Snyder knew it over 20 years ago.  MIlam once said that, to him, CBLA was as bad as the medical evidence in this case.  Which is putrid.

 

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ron:

I was just quoting from a report that went to Garrison's desk from Lou Ivon which was the first time Garrison was alerted to Del Valle's death.

The asset you refer to was Bernardo DeTorres.  He was the infiltrator in Garrison's office, and  turned out to be a prime suspect in JFK's murder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should have noted, as Baker is sinking he latches on to a life raft sent out by DVP.

DVP: Neither one is really even needed to come to the reasonable conclusion that only bullets from Lee Harvey Oswald's Carcano rifle were fired at President Kennedy in Dealey Plaza. Here's why that is so....

Baker then agrees with this!  But here is what DVP links to in part:

Dr. Vincent P. Guinn, in 1978, came to the conclusion, via his NAA
studies, that the above 5 bullet specimens very likely came from just
two individual bullets, with both of those bullets "most likely" being
Western Cartridge Company/Mannlicher-Carcano bullets.

LOL! :driveIn other words, DVP predictably hangs on to a test that he knows has been discredited beyond recognition.  But that is DVP.  It is what we expect from him.  But Baker is supposed to be a scientist. Whew.

 

The other rubbish DVP spews is that the bullets were linked to "Oswald's rifle".  When, as Sandy Larsen just showed, there is no credible case that the rifle in evidence was ordered by Oswald. For one, its the wrong rifle.

Then DVP talks about the fragments in the car.  He does not tell us that those fragments are the head and tail of a bullet that was supposed to have gone through Kennedy's skull and left its middle portion right outside the skull table in the rear of his head.  Yesirree. Except that did not happen until 1968 when the autopsy was changed.We all know what their guy, Larry Sturdivan, said about this: "...to have a cross section sheared out is physically impossible." 

Finally, there is the whole fantasy of CE 399.  After the work of Ray Marcus, John Hunt, Gary Aguilar and TInk Thompson, anyone who buys that fantasy is out of Cervantes.  This is what is called a reliable conclusion by DVP. :stupid

The "scientist" Mr. Baker meets up with the polemicist DVP.  And he evidently did not even read what the guy wrote. This is the problem with some of the "scientists" in this case.  Baker belongs with Guinn, Canning and Alvarez.  In Litwin's book.

 

 

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James DiEugenio said:

DVP predictably hangs on to a test that he knows has been discredited beyond recognition.  But that is DVP.  It is what we expect from him.

Jim,

You can't possibly deny the common sense that resides within my three articles below. Oh, yes, you can try and pretend that my common-sense observations regarding the 5 bullet specimens examined by Dr. Vincent Guinn are pure bunk and not worth a hoot, but any reasonable person (which automatically eliminates retired schoolteacher James DiEugenio of Los Angeles, California) who looks at the "5 bullet specimens" information will have no choice but to acknowledge that my comments on this matter make a lot of (common) sense....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/head-shot-bullet-fragments-and-naa.html

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/vincent-guinn-and-naa.html

https://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/12/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-97.html

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know I've posted this picture before on other threats, but unfortunately it hasn't attracted the attention it deserves in my opinion. So I'm posting it again:

 

altgens-6-ue-large-best.jpg

I think this photograph is important, because it constitutes exactly the kind of "hard physical evidence" Paul Baker was talking about. If we examine this photo closely, we'll notice that President Kennedy has obviously already been hit by a bullet. He can be seen grasping at his throat. In the background we can see the School Book Depository. In front of it there's a crowd of people, most of whom seem completely unaware of what has just happened.

Now important is what we DON'T SEE. And that is any kind of involuntary startle reaction. But that is exactly what we would expect if a high-powered rifle had just been fired just a few meters above them and if the shock wave of a super-sonic bullet had just passed over their heads.

Notice that even the baby (slightly to the left of "doorman") does NOT exhibit any kind of reaction to a loud noise. (And I guess we all know how easily little children are startled by loud noises.) And if you've ever been startled by a loud noise, you can certainly confirm that people react almost instantaneously to really loud noises.

So in my opinion, this photo is "hard, physical" evidence that the shot that hit Kennedy in the back, WAS NOT fired from Oswald's rifle. And this again is corroborated by the holes in Kennedy's clothes that rule out a trajectory from the 6th floor window.

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...