David Von Pein

Yes. On Page 116 and in Lyndal Shaneyfelt's testimony (at 15 H 700) [Note---There's a printing error on Page 700 of WC Vol. 15, with some of Shaneyfelt's testimony being mistakenly repeated a second time, beginning with "The absence of copper precludes..." ].... --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Due to Jackie's handiwork of "trying to hold his head on" during the ride to Parkland, most of the witnesses probably didn't get to see the full WIDE-OPEN extent of the large head wound at the right-front of the head. They, instead, saw all the gore/blood/brains that was pooling at the RIGHT-REAR of JFK's head on the gurney. This led those witnesses to believe there was a large "wound" at the right-rear, when, in fact, no such "wound" was there at all (as proven by the autopsy pictures AND X-rays). That's not exactly a perfectly satisfying explanation--even for me. And I'm sure all CTers think such an explanation is totally laughable, preposterous, and idiotic. But it's the best I can do. (And it's Dr. Michael Baden's best explanation as well -- Click Here.)

All of those things have, indeed, been explained in non-conspiratorial ways over the last 60 years. Most of those items (if not all) were covered in a pretty decent amount of depth, of course, in Vincent Bugliosi's 2007 tome. And many other Lone Assassin advocates, including myself, have tackled most of those things as well. A very reasonable possibility for Tague's injury, as a matter of fact, is provided right there in the Warren Report itself (on my all-time favorite WCR page, which nearly every CTer continues to ignore on a daily basis --- Page 117). So the Warren Commission itself had, in effect, started debunking some of the pro-conspiracy nonsense before their final report ever went to press.

Yes, they can all be wrong. And they are....as these autopsy materials pictured below prove for all time. Because, as we all can see, there is positively no huge hole anywhere in the BACK of JFK's head. And every bit of BONE at the right-rear of his head is STILL THERE. None of the REAR head bone is blown out at all.... Interestingly, it would seem as though the very few Dealey Plaza witnesses who were in a position to view the head wound close-up at the time of the shooting are some of the very few witnesses who got the location of the wound correct when asked later. Those witnesses being Bill Newman, Abe Zapruder, and Gayle Newman:

Of course I'm going to call it that....because that's exactly what it was --- a Mistaken Observation made by several different individuals.

Why you think "mistake" and "hallucination" are the same thing is a mystery to me. ~shrug~

I strongly disagree, Sandy. I agree totally with the things Pat Speer said in his last post. And, just like Pat, I too am often accused of saying the Parkland doctors were "hallucinating". But I have never said anybody at Parkland suffered from hallucinations. Most of the Parkland doctors were, however, unquestionably WRONG (i.e., mistaken) about the location of JFK's large head wound, and the autopsy photos and X-rays provide the undeniable proof that those Parkland physicians were wrong, and as such they all (for some inexplicable reason) experienced a "Mass Mistaken Observation" (for lack of a better phrase). http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com / The Back Of JFK's Head (Part 1)

Plus there's the always-ignored fact that Clint Hill's head (and others in the limo too) have the exact same degree of "blackness" in the Z-Film frames as does JFK's head --- as discussed HERE. So the CT Fantasists must also think Hill's head has been "blacked out" too (I guess). The "Fakery" craziness never ends.

So, according to Rob Reiner in the 10th and final installment of his "Who Killed JFK?" podcast series (which can be heard HERE), the "real assassins" shoot up Dealey Plaza using FIVE gunmen located to the front and rear of JFK; and they are doing this while also attempting to frame just ONE lone "patsy" in the Book Depository. Does that sound like a plan that's likely to succeed....or doomed to fail? Also.... Is it even remotely likely that such a FIVE-SHOOTER / ONE-PATSY plot would have even been considered by any group(s) who was planning to kill the President and wanted to get away with it and wanted to pin the blame on just one lone killer in the Depository Building on 11/22/63? Were the architects of such a loony, over-the-top plot all insane....or did they merely enjoy the challenge of doing things the (very!) hard way? In short, such a pre-planned "multi-gunmen with just one patsy" assassination scheme, very similar in nature to Oliver Stone's absurd 3-Gun, 1-Patsy plot, is just plain idiotic.* * Not to mention the fact that there's not one shred of physical evidence to indicate that more than just one assassin (located on the sixth floor of the TSBD) fired any shots at President Kennedy, let alone five gunmen. But I guess the actual evidence in the JFK murder case doesn't mean very much to Mr. Reiner.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com / Dorothy Garner And The Back Stairs

And, therefore, I guess you must think that THREE different NON-GOVERNMENT individuals (Baker, Truly, and Fritz) just decided to go along with the "government cover-up" by lying through their teeth regarding the 2FLRE? Is that correct? Or do you think that all 3 of the above-named individuals were, in fact, part of the "Government" of the USA? Even Patrolman M.L. Baker?? Time for Sandy to Get Real.

So you think BAKER lied. And you think TRULY lied. And you think FRITZ lied when he said that Oswald himself said he encountered the policeman on the second floor. And you think BOOKHOUT lied when he said (on Page 619 of the WCR) that Oswald admitted that the 2nd-floor encounter did occur. When you need to accuse so many people of telling blatant lies, it should send up a red flag to all reasonable researchers.

Mr. BELIN -- How long do you think it was between the time the shots were fired and the time you left the window to start toward the stairway? Miss ADAMS -- Between 15 and 30 seconds, estimated, approximately. ----------------------------------- http://DVP's JFK Archives / Victoria Adams & Sandra Styles -----------------------------------

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com / The Conspiracy Myths Continue ---------------------- PATRICE MITSOS SAID: No, David. You're the one who's wrong. You don't face facts. And, you dismiss the 80% of Americans who stongly believe that there was a conspiracy, and that the deadly bullet was shot from the front. And I know that these would be two separate polls, as it's two different issues...where did the kill shot come from?, and do you believe the WC? And about 80% of Americans believe that the kill shot came from the grassy knoll, and about the same percentage KNOW...IN THEIR HEARTS AND/OR THROUGH THEIR RESEARCH that the WR is nothing but GARBAGE. You lack a BIG DOSE of common sense. You think one damn bullet is going to do ALL THE DAMAGE that little Spector [sic] said it did? DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Patrice, And just how many of that "80% of Americans" do you really think know a great deal about the facts and circumstances surrounding JFK's death? (Answer--a very small percentage of that 80%.) And btw, the latest poll, as discussed earlier at this Facebook group, shows a drop in the number of people who believe in a conspiracy. It's down to 59% now (per the AP poll). That's still a high percentage, yes, but the conspiracy theorists like to exaggerate the poll numbers in their favor. I see that happen all the time at various forums, with some conspiracist claiming that "90 percent of Americans think the Warren Commission was full of [feces]" (paraphrased). But, again, most of those people being polled probably wouldn't know who J.D. Tippit, Buell Wesley Frazier, and Earle Cabell were if their lives depended on it. Point being: the vast majority of Americans who participate in news polls are, for the most part, ignorant of the intricate facts about the JFK case. So what does their opinion really mean? I think it means they've watched a few conspiracy-oriented documentaries or movies (particularly Oliver Stone's 1991 fantasy flick, "JFK"), and they've based their opinion on those few things they've seen or heard about the case. And we all know that Oliver Stone wouldn't present the true facts about JFK's assassination on the big screen if he had a gun pointed at his head. The people who went to see his movie came out of the theater not even knowing that Lee Harvey Oswald carried a bulky paper package into the Book Depository just hours before JFK was murdered. That tells you how anxious Oliver is to tell the whole truth. David Von Pein June 2013

Thank you.

I concede no such stupid thing. The autopsy photos & X-rays & the Z-Film prove (for all time)---in tandem---the fact that there was definitely NO large hole in the BACK of Kennedy's cranium, regardless of what ANY of the Parkland doctors said they saw. There is no wound in JFK's "forehead". You're mixed up (again).

And yet they concluded there WAS a conspiracy. So they were both CORRUPT and TRUTHFUL at the same time???? Doesn't that seem the slightest bit odd to you?

You're all mixed up. I'm not suggesting McClelland is putting his hand on the SIDE of his head at all. Quite the contrary. He's definitely putting his hand over the BACK of his head (just as I said in my prior post). You need to read THIS PAGE to see what a silly mixed-up fool I happen to think Dr. McClelland is/was with respect to this issue relating to the location of the large wound in JFK's head.

There is a ZERO per cent chance of the autopsy photos being "fraudulent" / "fake" / "altered", as confirmed in 7 HSCA 41, which is a page of the House Select Committee's volumes that nearly 100% of CTers will either totally ignore or they'll pretend that the entire Photographic Panel of the HSCA was filled with either all l-i-a-r-s or an assortment of nothing but boneheads who didn't know what the hell they were talking about when they said none of the photos had been altered. I wonder why so many conspiracy theorists on this planet think they know more about photo analysis and interpretation than the multiple photo experts who comprised the HSCA's Photographic Panel? That's a question I've never been able to answer.

My, what a convenient and handy cop-out for conspiracy theorists to use, year after year --- "We don't know any facts". In other words, Robert Burrows must believe that virtually everybody in Officialdom was on a mission to frame Lee H. Oswald in November of 1963 (and for many months afterward too). Typical ridiculous over-the-top CT mindset.

SANDY LARSEN SAID THIS. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: But banks obviously didn't treat both checks and Postal Money Orders "exactly the same way" in 1963. How can we know this is so? 1. There's no bank stamps on the Hidell Postal Money Order (other than the Klein's endorsement). BUT, even though #1 is true with respect to Oswald's $21.45 money order.... 2. There IS a File Locator Number (FLN) stamped on the Hidell PMO (just where it should be, in the upper left corner). And we know that FLNs are the very last thing stamped on a PMO after it has been deposited and processed. 3. And the PMO in question ended up in Alexandria, Virginia, at the Postal Records Center --- which is just exactly where it should have ended its journey after being properly processed. Now, tell me again why anyone would believe the Hidell Postal Money Order was a fraudulent document. More:

But the fact that Sandra Styles said (as of July 2008 at any rate) that she specifically recalls that she and Victoria Adams had attempted to descend via the "front-of-building elevator" (but that elevator was unavailable to them, for some unknown reason) is a detail that should not be completely dismissed (even if it is a "late arriving" detail from 2008). "We made an attempt to take the front-of-building elevator downstairs. For some reason, however, this elevator—which, unlike the rear elevator, went only as high as the fourth floor—did not come when we called it. It was only after trying to call the elevator that we thought of going towards the rear stairs. And even then we did not proceed very quickly — we were wearing high-heel shoes!" -- S. Styles; 2008

I'm just wondering, though, if Lovelady had actually SEEN (with his own eyes) Truly & Baker going to the stairs....or if (just perhaps) he was telling the HSCA in 1978 something he knew had happened but hadn't actually seen himself??? Because it would certainly seem as though the things Lovelady & Shelley said they did after the shooting would consume a minimum of at least a couple of minutes before they re-entered the building, which would mean Lovelady couldn't possibly have actually SEEN Baker & Truly on the 1st floor, because we know B&T were in the lunchroom with Oswald within about 90 seconds of the last shot. But, boy!, trying to fit everybody's "timing" issues into a workable theory sure does cause headaches, doesn't it? Because there's always going to be some piece of the "timing" puzzle that doesn't quite fit.

Nope. That SE stairway only connects the first and second floors. It doesn't go higher than Floor 2. So those stairs were never an option for Adams & Styles.