Jump to content
The Education Forum
Cory Santos

“Hogwash” by the silly wc rascals.

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Its hard to believe how much baloney that DVP can get into one post. 

 

The Warren Commission did have the autopsy materials.  In one of the executive sessions, McCloy asks about this point. Rankin replies that they have them for the Commission only in a  room off the hall.  This point is also acknowledged in the McKnight book.  (This is the kind of research that this guy does.)

All of this makes this lie even worse.

Last year Jim DiEugenio opined that the location of JFK's back wound is unknowable.

That opinion moves the T3 back wound up as well, possibly. 

Obfuscation is obfuscation, whether it comes from Gerald Ford or a JFK Master Class expert.

What are the odds of any of the Big-Name-JFK-Researcher T3 Deniers ever standing corrected on the issue?

Edited by Cliff Varnell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is the neck wound in the autopsy photo?  Can you identify the T3 wound?

where-is-the-back-wound.jpg

And, a magnification of the Jfk back wound(s):

jfk-autopsy-back-photo-a2.jpg

Edited by John Butler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a reverse angle to that picture which Gil Jesus always shows.  DVP does not.

The point is this about the WC and the lie about the autopsy photos.

The Commission tried to keep this a secret.  Not even the staff lawyers knew about it.  (Although Specter did see one or two photos from Elmer Moore who ended up being Warren's assistant.)  But not only does it belie what Ford said, it also belies the complaint these guys would always offer: well we did not have the autopsy materials.  Yes they did.  McCloy was one of the worst on this.  But he knew they did.  The other thing is, they would blame the Kennedy family on this issue, when in fact the deed of gift had not even been signed at that time.  In reality, the Secret Service had control of the materials.

Now, one thing that was accomplished by doing this trickery is that it made it easier for Specter to complete his cover up on the medical evidence.  We know from the Law book that Specter almost automatically threw out anything he knew would scuttle the Single Bullet Fantasy or the two shots from the rear scenario e.g. the Burkley death certificate, the testimony and reporting of SIbert and O'Nneill.  Well, by keeping the autopsy materials away from him  that made his job job much easier.  As the photos above suggest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, John Butler said:

Where is the neck wound in the autopsy photo?  Can you identify the T3 wound?

where-is-the-back-wound.jpg

 

There's no proof that this is a photo of JFK's back.

The second defect -- closest to the ruler -- is consistent with a wound just under the upper margin of the scapula, next to the spinal column, described by many witnesses.

Share this post


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

There is a reverse angle to that picture which Gil Jesus always shows.  DVP does not.

The point is this about the WC and the lie about the autopsy photos.

The Commission tried to keep this a secret.  Not even the staff lawyers knew about it.  (Although Specter did see one or two photos from Elmer Moore who ended up being Warren's assistant.)  But not only does it belie what Ford said, it also belies the complaint these guys would always offer: well we did not have the autopsy materials.  Yes they did.  McCloy was one of the worst on this.  But he knew they did.  The other thing is, they would blame the Kennedy family on this issue, when in fact the deed of gift had not even been signed at that time.  In reality, the Secret Service had control of the materials.

Now, one thing that was accomplished by doing this trickery is that it made it easier for Specter to complete his cover up on the medical evidence.  We know from the Law book that Specter almost automatically threw out anything he knew would scuttle the Single Bullet Fantasy or the two shots from the rear scenario e.g. the Burkley death certificate, the testimony and reporting of SIbert and O'Nneill.  Well, by keeping the autopsy materials away from him  that made his job job much easier.  As the photos above suggest.

So why does James DiEugenio, Tink Thompson, Cyril Wecht, Pat Speer, David Mantik and many others continue the cover-up by denying JFK was struck in the back at T3?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/18/2018 at 7:26 PM, David Von Pein said:

The CE903 photo taken in the Dallas garage is adjusted to account for the 3.15-degree downward slope of Elm Street, making the angle through JFK's body equal to 17.72 degrees downward (as opposed to just over 20 degrees if the car had been photographed out on Elm Street).

Commission-Exhibit-903.jpg

 

And the sixth floor TSBD window is over Arlen Spector's out stretched left hand i take it.......LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL Go put the limo at Z220 on Elm St and tell me if you stood beside JFK and placed this rod over his right shoulder it would be pointing at the TSBD 6th floor......any shot from the 6th floor to JFK had to have a trajectory across the right rear tail light or slightly inside that across the boot.

Guess who weighed in on Cyril Wecht;s retrial for fraud crimes commiteed as county coroner in Pen. The good senator Arlen Spector said the DA should not proceed with a retrial of over 40 + charges. Cyril later coughed up $200,000 in settlement costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Adam Johnson said:

Go put the limo at Z220 on Elm St and tell me if you stood beside JFK and placed this rod over his right shoulder it would be pointing at the TSBD 6th floor......

Yes, it definitely would have pointed back to the sixth floor. The "17-43-30" angle was determined while the car was out on Elm Street (prior to being taken to the enclosed garage for the CE903 photo). That fact was confirmed in the testimony of the FBI's Lyndal Shaneyfelt....

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The average angle, allowing for the 3'9" street grade, results in an average angle between frame 210 and frame 225 of 17 degrees, 43 minutes, 30 seconds.

Mr. SPECTER. And that is the average angle from the muzzle to President Kennedy as he sat in the car or President Kennedy's stand-in as he sat in the car?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. To the wound entrance.

Mr. SPECTER. Is the average angle of 17-43-30 measured from the muzzle to the President's body as the President would be seated in the car?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is out on the street in those frame positions, yes. It is measured to the point of the wound on the back of the President.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/shaneyf2.htm

CE903-Complete-Series-Logo.png

 

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Adam Johnson said:

And the sixth floor TSBD window is over Arlen Spector's out stretched left hand i take it.......LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL Go put the limo at Z220 on Elm St and tell me if you stood beside JFK and placed this rod over his right shoulder it would be pointing at the TSBD 6th floor......any shot from the 6th floor to JFK had to have a trajectory across the right rear tail light or slightly inside that across the boot.

Guess who weighed in on Cyril Wecht;s retrial for fraud crimes commiteed as county coroner in Pen. The good senator Arlen Spector said the DA should not proceed with a retrial of over 40 + charges. Cyril later coughed up $200,000 in settlement costs.

Your facts need some clarification.  The first time he was charged criminally he was acquitted.  However a civil case was still brought against him by the county.  The civil case was settled for $200,000.00 in the 1990s, not the criminal case as your post seems to suggest. Then another case was brought in the 2000s, this is the case, as opposed to the first, that Specter spoke about.

Edited by Cory Santos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

Yes, it definitely would have pointed back to the sixth floor. The "17-43-30" angle was determined while the car was out on Elm Street (prior to being taken to the enclosed garage for the CE903 photo). That fact was confirmed in the testimony of the FBI's Lyndal Shaneyfelt....

Mr. SHANEYFELT. The average angle, allowing for the 3'9" street grade, results in an average angle between frame 210 and frame 225 of 17 degrees, 43 minutes, 30 seconds.

Mr. SPECTER. And that is the average angle from the muzzle to President Kennedy as he sat in the car or President Kennedy's stand-in as he sat in the car?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is correct. To the wound entrance.

Mr. SPECTER. Is the average angle of 17-43-30 measured from the muzzle to the President's body as the President would be seated in the car?

Mr. SHANEYFELT. That is out on the street in those frame positions, yes. It is measured to the point of the wound on the back of the President.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/shaneyf2.htm

CE903-Complete-Series-Logo.png

 

But its not the same limo.  You cannot recreat an accident of a Mercedes driving a BMW because they are similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

But [it's] not the same limo. You cannot [recreate] an accident of a Mercedes driving a BMW because they are similar.

The seating layouts of the JFK limo and the SS car were very similar. And any differences were taken into account (as confirmed, again, by Shaneyfelt's WC testimony)....

Mr. SPECTER. Was there any difference between the position of President Kennedy's stand-in and the position of President Kennedy on the day of the assassination by virtue of any difference in the automobiles in which each rode?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; because of the difference in the automobiles there was a variation of 10 inches, a vertical distance of 10 inches that had to be considered. The stand-in for President Kennedy was sitting 10 inches higher and. the stand-in for Governor Connally was sitting 10 inches higher than the President and Governor Connally were sitting and we took this into account in our calculations.
Mr. SPECTER. Was any allowance then made in the photographing of the first point or rather last point at which the spot was visible on the back of the coat of President Kennedy's stand-in before passing under the oak tree?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Yes; there was. After establishing this position, represented by frame 161, where the chalk mark was about to disappear under the tree, we established a point 10 inches below that as the actual point where President Kennedy would have had a chalk mark on his back or where the wound would have been if the car was 10 inches lower. And we rolled the car then sufficiently forward to reestablish the position that the chalk mark would be in at its last clear shot before going under the tree, based on this 10 inches, and this gave us frame 166 of the Zapruder film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DVP , please mate you cant tell me you believe that Arlen Spector in the White House garage photo is holding this metal rod at the same direction shown by the cross hairs in the Secet Service reenactment from the 6th floor window.

 

SSrecre2.PNG

 

Edited by Adam Johnson

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

Your facts need some clarification.  The first time he was charged criminally he was acquitted.  However a civil case was still brought against him by the county.  The civil case was settled for $200,000.00 in the 1990s, not the criminal case as your post seems to suggest. Then another case was brought in the 2000s, this is the case, as opposed to the first, that Specter spoke about.

Yep Corey your right, sorry, i got my wiki facts messed up......the settlement was from the 90's civil case and this is the wiki blurb on the 2008 legal stuff :

 

Federal criminal trial[edit]

On January 28, 2008, a federal trial against Wecht began, on charges of public corruption. Roughly two weeks prior to the trial, 43 of the 84 counts against Wecht were withdrawn; judge Arthur J. Schwab dismissed those charges with prejudice.[34] Following trial the jury could not reach agreement on the remaining counts, and the judge declared a mistrial. The prosecution immediately announced that they planned to retry Wecht.[35]

Concerns were raised about the motivation and conduct of the prosecution before and after the trial.[36][37] Speculation arose that the prosecution of Wecht was politically motivated. Former Attorney General and Governor of Pennsylvania Dick Thornburgh, a defense lawyer for Wecht, testified before a house panel investigating the US Attorneys' Firing Scandal that Wecht was targeted politically.[38][39]

Congressmen Mike Doyle (whose district includes Pittsburgh) and John Conyers questioned the prosecution's tactics in the aftermath of the first trial and instituted Congressional hearings on the matter.[40]

Op-eds in The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review called for dismissal of the proposed re-trial.[41] On April 12, 2008, 33 prominent leaders in the Pittsburgh community sent a letter to Attorney General Michael Mukasey and US Attorney Mary Beth Buchanan requesting that the prosecution dismiss the indictment against Wecht. Shortly after the press release of this letter, Senator Arlen Specter publicly recommended against a retrial for Wecht.[42] Former jurors stated to the press that they believed that the prosecution had been politically motivated.[43]

On May 5, 2008, the Department of Justice's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) revealed that it initiated an investigation into the Wecht prosecution due to claims that the case was a "selective prosecution".[44]

On May 14, 2009, a new trial judge in the retrial excluded most of the evidence against Wecht because it was seized under an illegal and improperly executed search warrant.[45]

On June 2, 2009, Buchanan announced that her office would file a motion to dismiss all charges against Wecht.[46]

Thanks,

Adam

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Adam Johnson said:

DVP , please mate you [can't] tell me you believe that Arlen Spector [sic] in the White House garage photo [sic; it was in Dallas, not at the White House] is holding this metal rod at the same direction shown by the cross hairs in the Secet Service reenactment from the 6th floor window. 

SSrecre2.PNG

 

Yes, indeed, he is ---- exactly 17.72 degrees downward (as measured by a surveyor out on Elm Street in Dealey Plaza).

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can take all the photos you want of this or that notion.  You can calculate firing angles from the 6th floor Sniper's Nest forever.  But, you still have to prove  beyond a reasonable doubt that Oswald was on the 6th floor and shots were fired from there.  And, you can't do that at all. 

Chief Jesse Curry said he could not put Oswald on the 6th floor with a rifle in his hand.  If it ever came to trial this would be a powerful statement.  Oswald had to die to keep people from saying things like that.

The 8 out of 10 of the closest witnesses (people in the TSBD) who were within 40 feet of the Sniper's Nest (about the distance across the average American home) said the shots came from some other place than the Sniper's Nest.  This would establish reasonable doubt and Oswald would walk.  Another reason Oswald had to die.

 

  1. Harold Norman- 11-26-63 FBI statement Norman said he heard a shot as the vehicle turned onto Elm St.  He changed that later but, consistently said the shots came from above.

  2. Bonnie Ray Williams- Sheriff’s Office statement 11-22-63:  First, said he heard two shots when the presidential limo turned onto Houston.  Later, he changed that to a turn onto Elm St. and then later changed that to 3 shots. Williams said the shots came from above.

  3. James “Junior” Jarman- Warren Commission testimony:  At first, Jarman said much the same as Williams and Norman about hearing a shot from above.  He later changed his testimony at the Warren Hearing to hearing shots from low and to the left.

  4. Elsie Dorman- FBI statement 11-24-63:  She thought the shots came from the Court Records Building on Houston St.

  5. Sandra Styles- In a statement made to the FBI on 3-19-64 she said she heard shots but, did not know where they came from and offered no other relevant information.  However, in a video published in October, 2017 she said as the presidential vehicle turned into the intersection she heard 3 shots.   Reference:  Jobert Jefford Paulson video, Oct. 17, 2017- The Case of the Lady Who Did Not See the Assassin.

  6. Vickie Adams- FBI statement 11-24-63:  She said when the president’s vehicle entered the intersection she heard 3 shots. Her view was obstructed by trees.  The sound came from the west or right side of the building.

  7. Dorothy Garner- FBI statement 3-20-64:  When the shots occured the presidential vehicle was out of sight, obscured by trees.  This would be in front of the TSBD.  She thought the shots came from the west. 

  8. Mary Hollies- 2-18-64 statement to Detective Potts said she heard 3 shots as the motorcade turned into the intersection.

  9. Betty Alice Foster- FBI statement 3-19-64: She was with Mary Hollies.  She heard something like fireworks after the President’s car turned down Elm St. 

  10. Steven Wilson- FBI statement 3-30-63:  He said his view was obstructed by trees and heard 3 distinct shots.  FBI Statement 3-25-64:  The shots came from the west.

And, there are many other witnesses who said something different to what the official story of the WC.  Reasonable doubt would be established and Oswald if he lived would have walked.

Edited by John Butler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is so silly.  But that is Davey. Any fool, or zealot, can handle a pointer.  (But note Davey never shows the reverse angle.)

But what about the ramifications of that picture?

From Jim Gordon on May 27, 2014 to DVP:

As I see it you have three major problems.

First. The body has no natural path from entrance to exit without the body suffering incredible damage.

Second. The bullet enters at a point lower than it exit point. How was this bullet able on a downward trajectory move upwards in the body?

Third. If the bullet did take the direct route from entrance to exit, once it had passed T1 there was no means to correct its direction. It will exit going in the wrong direction.

His last point is devastating to DVP, Bugliosi and Dale "Mr. Single Bullet Fact" Myers.  John Orr's simulation will demonstrate that not only did Myers pull  a hoax--as has been proven by Harris, Speer, and Cranor--but it will show why he did so.  

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

×