David Von Pein

Bonus Discussion......

WALT CAKEBREAD SAID:

This utterly ridiculous statement is the product of a warped brain. The author bases his statement on his imagination.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Quite the contrary, Mr. Cakebread. The "warped brain" is possessed by the conspiracy theorists who are constantly bending over backwards in order to pretend that virtually all of the evidence that hangs Mr. Oswald is tainted or fraudulent---without a bit of proof to show that any of it was actually faked. A CTer's suspicions about the evidence is more than enough "proof" for them.

In reality, of course, my 2013 statement concerning Oswald and the Tippit murder is a perfectly accurate quote given the sum total of the evidence as it exists in the Tippit case.

Regarding some of the physical evidence in the Tippit case....

There's absolutely nothing "tainted" or "suspicious" when it comes to the two bullet shells found by Barbara and Virginia Davis in their side yard on 11/22/63. There's a clear and distinct chain of possession for each of those shell casings—going from each Davis girl straight into the hands of two different Dallas Police Department officers.

Oh, yes, I expect Walter Cakebread to storm back into this discussion very shortly and argue that he knows for a fact that the DPD markings that exist on the two bullet shells found by the Davis girls—those being the markings put there by Detective C.N. Dhority and Crime Lab Captain George M. Doughty (one bullet shell each)—are in some fashion fraudulent, manufactured, or fake, and therefore should be discarded as "real" evidence in the J.D. Tippit murder investigation. But a conspiracy theorist's suspicions about those two shells do not add up to anything even remotely resembling "proof" that the shells are not legitimate evidence.

And I suppose that Walt will also argue that the following two excerpts from the FBI report found on pages 414 and 415 of Warren Commission Volume 24 are nothing but lies as well:

"On June 12, 1964, four .38 Special cartridge cases...were shown to Captain G.M. Doughty of the Dallas Police Department. .... Captain Doughty identified his marking on one of these cases. .... Captain Doughty stated this is the same shell which he obtained from Barbara Jeanette Davis at Dallas, Texas, on November 22, 1963." -- CE2011; Page 7

"On June 12, 1964, the same four cartridge cases...were shown by Special Agent Bardwell D. Odum to Detective C.N. Dhority, Homicide Division, Dallas Police Department. .... Detective Dhority identified his marking on one of these cartridge cases. .... He stated this is the same cartridge case which he obtained from Virginia Davis, Dallas, Texas, on November 22, 1963." -- CE2011; Page 8

(Also see Pages 266-269 of Dale Myers' book "With Malice"; 1998 Edition.)


OTTO BECK SAID:

You can beat Walt to it and tell us what mark Dhority put on the shell.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Don't know. The markings on the shell are not clear enough to discern when looking at the series of three pictures of the shell which were photographed by Dale Myers and published on page 268 of "With Malice" (1998 Edition).

But the markings were discernible to Dhority himself in June of '64 when he positively IDed the shell as the one he marked on 11/22/63....

"Detective Dhority identified his marking on one of these cartridge cases. .... He stated this is the same cartridge case which he obtained from Virginia Davis...on November 22, 1963." -- CD1258, p.8 and CE2011, p.8 [http://maryferrell.org/Doc=11653]

David Von Pein
September 26-27, 2021
 

1 hour ago, Michael Griffith said:

You are stuck in a time warp, as if it were still the 1960s.

I'd say it was YOU who is the one "stuck" somewhere. You're stuck in a Conspiracy Universe filled with outdated and very worn-out excuses in your efforts to exonerate an obvious cop-killer. And the Poe shells are another red herring utilized by desperate CTers. The OTHER 2 shells found on 10th Street are always pretty much ignored by the CT faithful. (Those 2 shells have a clear and clean chain of custody, despite the silly CTer protestations.)

More....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/murder-of-jd-tippit-part-2.html

The constant "He Couldn't Have Possibly Gotten To Tenth Street In Time To Kill Tippit" refrain we keep hearing from conspiracy theorists is a huge red herring (i.e., cop out). CTers will forever ignore the very best evidence in the Tippit case---the bullet shells that littered 10th & Patton on 11/22/63.

Dealey Plaza in 1948 (click for a bigger view)....

November 18, 1963.....

Wanna see a truly "doctored" photograph?

Click Here.  (Also pictured below.)

It's an obviously altered and doctored version of one of James Altgens' Dealey Plaza pictures which appeared on the front page of The Sun-Herald in Sydney, Australia, on Nov. 24, 1963.

What the Sydney newspaper editors did, incredibly, is that they turned a portion of the bottom of a street light pole into the head of JFK. And the newspaper people also totally eliminated the entire light pole from the photo.

10 minutes ago, Tony Krome said:

Unfortunately, 12:45 was before any rifle was found.

Yes, that's certainly true. The rifle was found at 1:22 PM.

10 minutes ago, Tony Krome said:

I figure there was an approximate one hour window between when the rifle was found and the Argentine announcement.

But Tony, doesn't the Tom Alyea footage [below] convince you that a CARCANO rifle was plucked from those box stacks on the sixth floor, vs. it being an Argentine Mauser? If not, why not? Many gun "experts" have looked at this film (the Alyea Film) and have concluded that Lieutenant Day is unquestionably picking up a Carcano rifle off of the floor....

On 11/17/2023 at 12:31 AM, Tony Krome said:

What was the first model/make rifle description publicly described?

I don't recall. But you might be able to find an answer here:

http://jfk-assassination-as-it-happened.blogspot.com

Good luck.

P.S. -- The very first description of the rifle that was made by anybody was no doubt the 12:45 PM (CST) APB bulletin that was put out over the DPD radio --- "Attention all squads. The suspect from Elm and Houston is reported to be an unknown white male about thirty, slender build, 5 feet 10 inches tall, 165 pounds, armed with what is thought to be a 30-caliber rifle. No further description at this time, or information. 12:45."

32 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

Oswald wasn't framed by conspiracy theorists.

I never said (or even implied) that he was. What I said (with tongue in cheek) was this....

"I'm sure that many CTers, though, think it was merely a case of the Oswald Patsy Framers just being idiots and morons when they decided to plant an ARGENTINE MAUSER at the crime scene, even though those plotters had to know that the Oswald they were framing owned a MANNLICHER-CARCANO."

18 minutes ago, Tony Krome said:

I'm sure it's all a big mix up.

Indeed, it is.

Because....

We know that "Oswald" did not own an "Argentine Mauser".

And....

We know that CE139 is not an "Argentine Mauser" either.

I'm sure that many CTers, though, think it was merely a case of the Oswald Patsy Framers just being idiots and morons when they decided to plant an ARGENTINE MAUSER at the crime scene, even though those plotters had to know that the Oswald they were framing owned a MANNLICHER-CARCANO.

A brilliant strategy indeed.

37 minutes ago, Tony Krome said:

Special thanks to David Von Pein for revealing Ryder's Argentine Mauser hours after the assassination.

Tony's post above was then edited 5 minutes later to this revised version....

37 minutes ago, Tony Krome said:

Special thanks to David Von Pein for revealing a rifle Ryder mentioned re; the Argentine Mauser hours after the assassination.

And that same 6th-floor assassination weapon was ALSO described (at various times on Nov. 22 and 23) as a German Mauser, a 30-30 rifle, and a Japanese weapon (and possibly even more inaccurate descriptions). They can't ALL be the right description, can they?

So if you have a desire to cling to bad information based on the early media errors, then, yes, you can easily "create" your own conspiracy theory. It's easy to do that kind of CT "creating". All you need to do is pick one of these many media mistakes and run with it as if it were the unvarnished 100% truth. But why anybody would want to do something so foolish is beyond me...

2 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Wow. Dial Ryder. Ruth Paine. Linnie Mae Randall. Wesley Frazier.

Does every suspicious person connected to Oswald live in that neighborhood?

So Ryder is now a "suspicious person" too, eh? Why is that?

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

Much to the chagrin of David Lifton and others, who were desperate to believe the tracheotomy incision was far too large, and somehow mysterious, he [Dr. McClelland] would say the incision in the photos was as he remembered it looking at Parkland. 

Exactly, Pat. .....

"The next time some conspiracy buff brings up the "gaping" nature of JFK's trach wound, show them the video on this webpage of Dr. Robert McClelland saying on PBS-TV in 1988 that the trach incision in the autopsy pictures looks "exactly the same size and the same configuration" as it was when he saw it at Parkland. .... And even though I think Dr. McClelland is as kooky as a 9-dollar bill with regard to his comments concerning the location of JFK's large head wound, I certainly don't have any reason to think he's kooky about his comments regarding the trach wound -- and that's because I don't believe for a single second that anybody "altered" any of JFK's wounds between Parkland and Bethesda." -- David Von Pein; November 2013

~~~~~~~~~

"Some people have even said 'Oh, that tracheostomy has been altered; it's too big a wound'. Well, I can speak for that -- no, it had not been altered. That's exactly the way it was made at Parkland. It's just that people expected it to be smaller." -- Dr. R.N. McClelland; Via This Excellent 2009 Interview

~~~~~~~~~

Related Discussion:

DR. PERRY, DAVID LIFTON, & THE TRACH WOUND

3 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

Don’t forget, according to David [Von Pein][,] Jackie kept the head in place so well that surgeons were fooled.  

That is unquestionably what did happen.*

No other explanation comes close.*

* IMHO.

31 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

Yes the Parkland doctors were so easily fooled.  Come on.  That is as ridiculous as saying Marilyn was not murdered.  

So, Cory, what's your "better explanation" to reconcile the various "BOH" witnesses?

And....

Marilyn was definitely not murdered.

So color me "ridiculous". (Again.)

9 hours ago, Vince Palamara said:

Both Hill and Landis stated that the back of Kennedy's head was missing...

And we know for a FACT---based on this and this (in tandem)---that both Clint Hill and Paul Landis were 100% dead wrong when they stated that the back of President Kennedy's head was "missing".

They aren't l-i-a-r-s, they're just wrong (like all the other "BOH" witnesses).

And, very likely, one of the reasons for why most of the BOH witnesses had a mistaken impression of where the large exit wound on President Kennedy's head was located---possibly the #1 primary reason---clearly rests in the lap (literally) of First Lady Jackie Kennedy. Because Mrs. Kennedy, without doubt, manipulated and CHANGED the configuration of JFK's head wound while the limousine was speeding to Parkland Hospital. We know that for a fact because Jackie told us so in her Warren Commission testimony. She said that during the drive to the hospital, she tried to "hold his hair on, and his skull on".

So, Jacqueline Kennedy, in effect, closed up the huge gaping hole in the right-front of JFK's head. And she must have done a pretty good job of "closing" it up too, so that the witnesses in Trauma Room No. 1 weren't even aware there was a huge gaping wound in the upper-right part of the President's head. Which left those witnesses staring at a head that was essentially intact (from their point of view).

So what they mostly saw was the massive amount of blood that was pooling, via gravity, toward the RIGHT-REAR portion of JFK's head, with much of that blood no doubt clinging to the right-rear (occipital) area of the head, giving the false impression that the one and only wound in the President's head was located in the right-rear (occipital) area of the head.

Incredible, you say?

Impossible for so many witnesses to be fooled by the closing up of one single flap on the President's head?

Many people think such a thing was impossible. But what better explanation is there? (And the "Fake Autopsy Photos & X-rays" explanation doesn't come even close to qualifying as a "better" explanation.)

DVP

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/04/index.html#JFK-Head-Wounds

51 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

The visa application is irrelevant.

Even though it has Oswald's picture on it AND Oswald's signature?? And yet it's still "irrelevant"??

Yeah, right.

52 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Sylvia Duran said it was a short blond guy. Eusebio Azcue said it was a short blond guy.

That's some great "Oswald imposter", isn't it? A blond guy?

Was LHO blond?

Perry, your witness.

54 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Well, guess what Dave? Since you believe that that was the real Oswald in the Cuban Embassy, then you also must believe that he received $6500 to kill Kennedy... he and his red-haired negro associate. Because that is what Gilberto Alvarado witnessed in the consul.

What happened to the 6500 clams? Did Oswald blow it all on hamburgers and hookers on the way back to Texas from Mexico?

32 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

How do you explain the multiple witnesses who said they saw Oswald at a twist party at the Duran's, witnessed Oswald being given $6500 to kill Kennedy, etc.?

The "twist party" sighting was very likely just mistaken identity.

The "$6500" nonsense is so totally ridiculous and preposterous (even from a CT POV), it's hard to imagine even a hardline CTer buying into it. (And Vince Bugliosi covers that topic in great detail in his book, much of which I've archived at my website HERE.)

32 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

How do you explain the fact that it was an Oswald imposter who was in the Cuban consulate trying to get a visa? Why would somebody do that?

Do you, Sandy, really think THIS is a fake LHO visa application (complete with "fake" LHO photo and "fake" LHO signature)?

Because if that's not a fake, then the REAL Oswald WAS at the Cuban consulate in Mex. City in 1963. Simple as that.

MORE TALK ABOUT BUELL WESLEY FRAZIER, LINNIE MAE RANDLE, PAPER BAGS, CARPORT SLATS, AND CURTAIN RODS:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2018/03/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1275.html

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/07/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-746.html

-----------

An excerpt from the above discussions:

DVP said:

"I certainly don't think Linnie Mae was lying at all. She possibly HEARD more than she SAW.

I.E.,

She peeks out the kitchen door and HEARS the person who she just saw walk toward her brother's car (Lee Oswald). It's obvious that the person at Frazier's car at that point in time was the person Randle just saw cross the street (Oswald).

Randle then HEARS the door of Frazier's car being opened. It's also possible that she gets enough of a glimpse of Oswald through the slats of the carport to see at least a portion of Oswald as he places the bag in the car.

So, the combination of HEARING what Oswald was doing at the car and very likely SEEING a little bit of Oswald through the slats was certainly enough information, IMO, for Mrs. Linnie Mae Randle to reasonably testify in the following manner:

"He opened the right back door and I just saw that he was laying the package down, so I closed the door." "

9 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Oswald didn't just happen to get a job in the very building he needed to be working at for him to be made the patsy. The CIA plotters had to have gotten him to work there. There is just no way around that fact.

Oh brother.

9 hours ago, Jean Ceulemans said:

If they were super-humans, a list of offenses wouldn't be needed, simple. 

Huh? Who in this discussion ever mentioned anybody being "super human"???

I don't even know what you mean by that. Sounds like something out of a sci-fi movie.

Please elaborate.

4 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I believe that Linnie Mae Randall [sic] was a CIA asset and that she was instructed by the CIA to plant the story of the large bag. .... Or it could be that Ruth Paine's handler asked her to recruit Linnie Mae to do this. And be paid to do so, of course. As always, my belief is subject to change if a problem is found with it, or a more likely explanation is discovered.

I've got an explanation that is 10,000 times "more likely" to be the accurate one when compared to any alternative theory concerning any alleged conspiratorial involvement of Linnie Mae Randle, Ruth Paine, or Buell Wesley Frazier.

But at this stage in your rapidly developing and accelerating conspiracy-oriented mind, I kind of doubt that my ho-hum explanation would interest you much. But I'll repeat a portion of my thoughts anyway (taken from this 2022 discussion which occurred right here at the EF Forum)....

"There's no way everything connected with the way Lee Oswald got his TSBD job could have been planned in advance by a band of CIA-sponsored housewives on Fifth Street in Irving, Texas." -- DVP; December 18, 2022

5 hours ago, Alan Ford said:

We're supposed to believe that Mr. Oswald became a person of interest when he was noticed 'missing'. You would think that law enforcement would want to speak with the man who had given him a ride to work that morning and was universally considered his one friend in the place. But no, not a hint of Mr. Frazier's having received any attention at this stage.

Right after the shooting, the police weren't even aware that LHO rode to work with Frazier. So "at this stage", why would they have had any reason at all to single out Buell as a "person of interest"?