David Von Pein

And does the lack of a FNB stamp somehow UNDO all of those other items I just discussed?

Oh, good! More "planted" stuff. Lovely. And just how was the planting of the 2 front-seat fragments accomplished, Sandy? And who did it? And when? Care to elaborate? And then, on top of CE567/569, you must ALSO think that all 3 bullet shells found in the Sniper's Nest were also planted, right? Plus, CE399 was planted into the evidence pile of this case too. Correct? And was Oswald's palmprint (CE637) planted on the rifle too, Sandy? And, expanding on the evidence a little, was CE142 (the paper bag) planted too? And the 2 LHO prints on that paper bag....also planted? And the fibers matching the Paine blanket that were found inside that same paper bag? Also planted there? And the multiple prints of LHO's on two boxes deep within the Sniper's Nest? Were those planted? Or do you want to use the standard CTer retort of -- Well, he worked there, you dummy! OF COURSE his prints were going to be on two boxes DEEP INSIDE the tiny little Nest where the assassin of JFK was firing at the President? And, moving to Tenth Street, were the 4 bullet shells from LHO's revolver also planted? And was Oswald waving around a gun in the theater, or was that just a lie by the police (and by Johnny Brewer)?

More B.S. from Jimmy D. (as per usual). The cold hard immutable fact is that the rabid CTers of the Internet have blown up the "money order problem" to absurd levels of perceived and wholly unproven conspiracy. The Hidell money order actually isn't a problem at all. Not even close. There is MUCH more evidence to prove the M.O. is a genuine and valid document than there is to even suggest it's a fraud. And Jimmy D. apparently won't even consider the notion that Oswald went to the post office BEFORE he ever went to work on March 12th (vs. buying the M.O. after 8:00 AM). It's quite possible the post office opened prior to 8 AM. And even if it didn't, there are numerous other ways in which Oswald could have purchased the M.O. and still have put in his full day's work on March 12. Perhaps he was just a little late for work that day, but he was punched in at 8:00 anyway. Is that not a possibility? (Not in a CTer world, no.) And, incredibly, due to their silly theory that the Hidell M.O. serial number was "Out Of Order", Jimmy and The Almighty John Armstrong think that the Main Dallas Post Office had a never-ending supply of blank U.S. Postal Money Orders on hand in 1962 and 1963, so that they would never EVER have to re-stock its supply of PMOs. (Hilarious.) It's time for another Money Order Summary: ...Lee Oswald's writing is on the money order. ...All of the proper post office stamps are on the M.O. ...A Klein's stamp is on the M.O. ...A File Locator Number is on the M.O. (indicating it made it to the FRB). ...The M.O. was found at the Federal Records Center in Alexandria (exactly where it should have been located after proper processing). ...The "bleed-thru" on the M.O. has been explained (see Cadigan Exhibit No. 11). ...Waldman No. 7 is consistent in EVERY way with all other documents relating to Oswald's rifle purchase. With all of this in evidence, Jimmy D. thinks a trial judge would be rolling in his robes laughing within 15 minutes of the Hidell Postal Money Order being presented in court. James DiEugenio, as usual, is nestled firmly and comfortably in his little fantasy world of wholesale fakery and forgery.

Maybe he did go upstairs. So what? Oswald could have initially dashed up to the balcony, and then (a little later) he came back downstairs. Why is that scenario not possible in the CT world? Burroughs, who was busy stocking candy in the candy case, could have easily missed seeing Oswald moving around nearby. He obviously DID miss seeing Oswald enter the theater from the street. There can be no question about that fact (given the observations provided by Brewer and Postal, who saw Oswald go into the theater).

Here's a look at the storefront, Scott. ....

Garrison KNEW full well there were multiple witnesses who SAW OSWALD HIMSELF dumping shells on the ground. But Garrison IGNORES all of those witnesses. THAT'S what's wrong with it, Sandy. So, you don't consider CE567 or CE569 (the two bullet fragments found in the front seat of JFK's car) to be "evidence", Sandy? Why not? jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/09/ce567-and-ce569.html

I give up, Scott. This is hopeless.

Scott, Brewer meant that Oswald came about 5 feet into the recessed area. But LHO never actually entered the store itself. The lobby area was several feet deep, as you can see in the video below (which includes yet another brief interview with Johnny Brewer)....

And you can also see how easy it is for conspiracy believers, eager to "find" a conspiracy, to concoct and construct a conspiracy theory or a "cover-up" tailored to their needs. This Money Order topic being a perfect example. There were some discrepancies about "Kansas City vs. Washington", so CTers concoct a "second" money order which conveniently "disappears". When, in fact, there was no "second" money order at all. Just the one, found in Alexandria/Washington. The exact same type of CTer concoction has occurred with respect to a lot of the other evidence in the JFK case too -- such as the mystery "Mauser" rifle (which never existed, of course) and the alleged bullet that many CTers are convinced fell off of Governor Connally's stretcher in Parkland Hospital and was then deep-sixed by evil plotters. No such bullet exists--and it never did (of course). It's the product of pure invention by conspiracists. Another example is the theory of a whole bullet being found in the grass in Dealey Plaza within minutes of the assassination (which never happened, of course). And another is the theory that a whole bullet was recovered at JFK's autopsy. That never happened either. But many CTers insist it did (despite FBI agent James Sibert telling us in so many words that it didn't).

Oh, come now, Scott! You can't be serious! You actually think Belin meant OSWALD when he said "HE" in that U-turn question? Brewer had just talked about a police car making a U-turn before Belin asked that question about a "U-turn". The "HE" that Belin was referring to was the MALE POLICEMAN in his police car, which Brewer had just a second earlier said had made a "U-turn". Also -- Do you think the term "U-turn" sounds more like they were talking about a PERSON or a VEHICLE?

EDIT TO THIS POST -- After looking at Mrs. Postal's 12/4/63 affidavit, I see I was incorrect about the "ticket" information. Postal, in her affidavit, says that she definitely DID inform the police that the suspect in the theater had not purchased a ticket (after the policeman on the phone asked her if he had bought a ticket). So I stand corrected on that point.

Oh, I see where you're confused now, Scott. You think Brewer was talking about OSWALD when he refers to the "U-turn at Zangs". But Brewer was referring to the POLICE CAR making a "U-turn" there, not Oswald. .... Mr. BREWER - I heard the police cars coming up Jefferson, and he stepped in, and the police made a U-turn and went back down East Jefferson. Mr. BELIN - Where did he make the U-turn? Mr. BREWER - At Zangs.

She derived some of the information concerning Oswald from Johnny Brewer, of course. And she deduced some info on her own, as she says in her affidavit: Julia-Postal-Affidavit.png And here's Johnny Brewer's affidavit: Johnny-Brewer-Affidavit.gif

Good Lord. What in the world are you talking about? Why are you trying to micro-manage every split-second of Johnny Brewer's testimony? Johnny said he saw Oswald come into the recessed open-air "lobby" in front of his shoe store (LHO didn't actually ENTER the store itself; that's fairly obvious from Brewer's testimony), and Oswald stood there looking at the shoes and at one point was staring at Brewer through the window. And then, a few seconds later (not simultaneously while he was staring at Brewer), Oswald looked over his shoulder after the police cars had passed by. Oswald then walked up toward the theater, and Brewer left his store and followed him. Now, a much more important question is the one that follows for Scott R. Kaiser.... Why on Earth did anyone need to explain all of that to you? ~DVP patented shrug~

Good job, Chuck. You have managed to completely ignore the manner in which the police actually became aware of Lee Harvey Oswald's whereabouts in the Texas Theater, and instead you've decided it would be a good idea to just invent a bunch of crap about Dulles, Cabell, and that omnipresent "CIA handler". Fantasy is a lot more intriguing than Julia Postal and Johnny Brewer, isn't it? http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2016/02/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1106.html

~ sigh ~ Jimmy has the memory of a potato chip. He likes to totally ignore the fact that I proved that I was right about the way the post office handles COD money. Jimbo probably thinks I just made up this postal regulation below: "Any mailer may use collect on delivery (COD) service to mail an article for which the mailer has not been paid and have its price and the cost of the postage collected from the recipient. If the recipient pays the amount due by check payable to the mailer, the USPS forwards the check to the mailer. If the recipient pays the amount due in cash, the USPS collects the money order fee(s) from the recipient and sends a postal money order(s) to the mailer." jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/12/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-72.html

How do you know he didn't? Just because he didn't mention a height figure in his 11/22 affidavit? You think that means Brennan couldn't have mentioned "5 feet 10" to the police? ------------ "Critics of Brennan's story will also usually cite the fact that Brennan didn't positively identify Oswald in a police line-up on the day of the assassination, which is correct. However, the critics fail to assess the true reason as to WHY that was the case. Brennan was, initially, just plain scared to I.D. Oswald as the man who murdered JFK. And he said as much in his official testimony given to the Warren Commission on March 24, 1964. He feared that he and his family might be in some danger if the assassination turned out to be the result of some wider plot. [...] It's pretty clear that Brennan's affidavit includes a good general description of the assassin he would later I.D. as Oswald: "He was a white man in his early 30s, slender, nice looking, slender and would weigh about 165 to 175 pounds." -- Howard L. Brennan; November 22, 1963 Many CTers also believe that Howard Brennan is full of nothing but hot air and that his fingering of Oswald was a direct result of Brennan having first seen LHO on TV or in the newspapers. However, this type of argument is cut down several pegs when Brennan's INITIAL description of the assassin in the window is taken into account. Brennan, just minutes after the shooting, and well before he ever saw Oswald's picture or knew who he was, described an assassin whose general features did fit those of Lee Oswald, which would have been a pretty amazing coincidence, indeed, if the real killer wasn't Oswald. It would also be truly remarkable on the "coincidence" scale if Brennan just happened, at random, to generally describe the owner of the rifle that was found at 1:22 PM on the very same floor of the Book Depository where Brennan saw this man firing "some type of a high-powered rifle" (Brennan's WC words) at the President's vehicle. The totality of Brennan's eyewitness testimony indicates one thing -- he saw Lee Harvey Oswald shooting a gun at JFK. Another theory that CTers seem to like quite a bit is the one that claims it wasn't really Brennan who gave the first description of the Depository sniper to the police just a few minutes after the shooting. Conspiracists want to believe, evidently, that either the police simply made up out of thin air the description of the assailant in the TSBD .... or .... that it was some other (unknown and never identified) person who gave DPD Inspector J. Herbert Sawyer the description of the killer....which was a description that almost perfectly matched the one Brennan gave in his 11/22 affidavit. I don't deny that there was/is some confusion regarding who exactly it was who gave the first description of the assassin to the police (which was the basis for the initial APB broadcast by the DPD at 12:44 PM on 11/22/63). But to believe that it was someone other than Brennan who gave Inspector Sawyer the description of the killer is to also believe that two strange things occurred in relation to this "other" witness (with #2 belonging in a separate "Very Odd And Amazingly Coincidental" category): 1.) It was a witness who was never identified (and never bothered to come forward to be identified), even though he is providing some of the most important info in history. 2.) This unknown witness' physical description of the assassin just happens to perfectly coincide with the info that Brennan supplied the police and the Secret Service and (later) the Warren Commission. Also -- If there WAS, in fact, yet ANOTHER witness who saw the exact same thing that Brennan saw, this would tend to buttress (even more) the notion that Oswald, or someone who looked very similar to Oswald, was firing from just where Brennan said the man was firing from in the Book Depository Building. Herbert Sawyer broadcast the following description of the assassin over the Dallas Police radio just at 12:44 PM, just 14 minutes after President Kennedy was shot: "The wanted person in this is a slender white male about 30, 5-feet-10, 165, carrying what looks to be a thirty-thirty or some type of Winchester." Now, the "30-30/Winchester" remark indicates that the description put out over the DPD radio by Sawyer probably came from multiple sources, one of which (given the physical description supplied) was almost certainly Brennan." -- DVP; February 2006 http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/howard-brennan.html

I don't hate Jim Garrison, Healy. I love the guy! He's a great advertisement for the "Lone Assassin" side. Just check out his ludicrous claims in the quotes I cited above, including the evidence-mangling one about the Tippit bullet shells being strewn all over Tenth Street "by the real killers" (plural). Garrison wanted his gullible "Playboy Magazine" audience to just trust his idiotic claims about the shells and the "real killers" (plural!), without bothering to even mention the fact that multiple witnesses actually saw Oswald (and ONLY Oswald) dumping shells on the ground right after he murdered Officer Tippit. So, Healy, do you think Mr. Garrison was being totally fair and forthright in this quote below? Or did Big Jim leave out just a tad bit of the facts here? And after looking at this completely distorted version of the story surrounding the Tippit bullet shells, do you think anyone should place ANY faith whatsoever in anything else Jim Garrison said about the JFK and Tippit evidence? If so, why?.... "The clincher, as far as I'm concerned, is that four cartridges were found at the scene of the [Tippit] slaying. Now, revolvers do not eject cartridges, so when someone is shot, you don't later find gratuitous cartridges strewn over the sidewalk -- unless the murderer deliberately takes the trouble to eject them. We suspect that cartridges had been previously obtained from Oswald's .38 revolver and left at the murder site by the real killers as part of the setup to incriminate Oswald." -- Jim Garrison; 1967 jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/07/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-980.html

Some people still take Jim Garrison seriously too, Sandy. And Garrison was pretty darn bad (as proven by the preposterous Garrison quotes below). What does that tell you about those CTers? Let the hilarity commence..... "I can't go into all the details on this, but the murder of Tippit, which I am convinced Oswald didn't commit, was clearly designed to set the stage for Oswald's liquidation in the Texas Theater after another anonymous tip-off." -- Jim Garrison; 1967 "The clincher, as far as I'm concerned, is that four cartridges were found at the scene of the [Tippit] slaying. Now, revolvers do not eject cartridges, so when someone is shot, you don't later find gratuitous cartridges strewn over the sidewalk -- unless the murderer deliberately takes the trouble to eject them. We suspect that cartridges had been previously obtained from Oswald's .38 revolver and left at the murder site by the real killers as part of the setup to incriminate Oswald." -- Jim Garrison; 1967 "If there's one thing the Warren Commission and its 26 volumes of supportive evidence demonstrate conclusively, it's that Lee Harvey Oswald did not shoot John Kennedy on November 22, 1963." -- Jim Garrison; 1967 "Lee Oswald was totally, unequivocally, completely innocent of the assassination .... and the fact that history, or in the re-writing of history, disinformation has made a villain out of this young man who wanted nothing more than to be a fine Marine .... is in some ways the greatest injustice of all." -- Jim Garrison; Spoken during an on-camera interview for the A&E Cable-TV mini-series "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" (Part 4; "The Patsy"). "There is no 'overwhelming' evidence that Oswald shot from the Book Depository. The only evidence available indicates that he did NOT." -- Jim Garrison; 1/31/68 jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/jim-garrison-part-1.html

RONALD MOSHKI SAID: How did they know Oswald was in a theater? And THAT theater? DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Answer: Shoe-store manager Johnny C. Brewer observed Lee Oswald lurking in the lobby/entrance of Brewer's shoe store on Jefferson Blvd., with Brewer noting that Oswald was acting "funny" and that he seemed "scared" and seemed to be avoiding the wailing police cars. Brewer, who was listening to the radio at this time and had just heard about a police officer being shot just blocks from his shoe store, then followed Oswald up the street to the nearby Texas Theater, where Brewer observed Oswald entering the theater without stopping at the box office. Brewer then checked with ticket-seller Julia Postal to see if she had sold the man a ticket. She said she had not. Postal then called the police, telling them that she and Brewer were of the opinion that the man was "running from them" for some reason. The police then arrived (in mass) a few minutes later. This was a perfectly ordinary and to-be-expected chain of events that led to Lee Harvey Oswald's arrest inside the Texas Theater on Jefferson Boulevard in Oak Cliff at approximately 1:50 PM CST on Friday, November 22nd, 1963 AD. So, when watching Oliver Stone's fictional version of Oswald's theater capture, try to keep in mind the following fact..... OLIVER STONE'S VERSION OF THIS EVENT IS PURE BULLxxxx AND AVOIDS BREWER'S AND POSTAL'S INVOLVEMENT ENTIRELY. Thanks. And God bless. RONALD MOSHKI SAID: Thanxx to David; can you summarize what Stone did, please? Have not seen that but once or twice a long time ago. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Oliver Stone (in his 1991 movie "JFK"), via voice-over narration from Kevin Costner (playing Jim Garrison) during the courtroom scene, claims that when the police converged in mass on the Texas Theater it was (quoting verbatim from the movie itself) -- "The most remarkable example of police intuition since the Reichstag fire. I don't buy it. They knew--someone knew--Oswald was going to be there. In fact, as early as 12:44, only 14 minutes after the assassination, the police radio put out a description matching Oswald's size and build." But there was nothing whatsoever "remarkable" or unusual about the police converging quickly (and in great numbers) on the theater where Oswald was hiding. A police officer had been gunned down in the street only half-an-hour earlier. The police knew that the killer was ON FOOT and heading down Jefferson Boulevard. When they received that call from Julia Postal, OBVIOUSLY the police were going to move (fast) to check out the "suspicious" man who just went into the dark movie theater. And yet, to hear Stone telling it (through Garrison/Costner's words in the script), the cops swarming the theater was some incredible piece of fortune-telling and crystal-ball-gazing. Nonsense. I need to correct an error I made in my earlier post --- Upon being reminded of some additional dialogue in Oliver Stone's film (via this link from Dave Reitzes' excellent website), I will retract my earlier statement where I said that Stone avoided Brewer's and Postal's involvement entirely in the "JFK" movie. I see now, via Mr. Reitzes' site, that I was not correct there, because Brewer is, indeed, mentioned (and so is the "cashier", who was Postal). However, it's still fairly obvious (via the dialogue I quoted above) that Mr. Stone just doesn't want to believe that the ONLY reason the police descended upon the theater on November 22nd was because of the observations of Johnny Brewer and Julia Postal. Stone doesn't "buy it". But if anybody, after researching the true facts regarding Brewer and Postal, still "buys" Stone's version put forth in his movie, then they'd probably buy that bridge that's always for sale in Brooklyn too. Also -- The 12:44 PM police broadcast put out by the Dallas Police Department for the assassin of JFK was not the slightest bit suspicious or "conspiratorial" in any way either (contrary to what Oliver Stone wants his viewing audience to believe). Howard Brennan almost immediately approached the police after the shooting to give them a description of the man he had clearly seen pulling the trigger from the sixth-floor TSBD window -- with that description generally matching Oswald's "size and build" (as Stone/Garrison/Costner said in the film). So, quite obviously, the police didn't just sit on their collective hands sipping sodas and munching on Dunkin' Donuts for an hour. Instead, they acted on this witness' information and put out an APB broadcast over all channels of the police radio at 12:43-12:44 PM on November 22nd, less than 15 minutes after the last shot came out of Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle. So, once again, as can be easily determined once the true facts of the case are researched, Ollie Stone has deliberately deceived and misled his movie-going audience. David Von Pein October 21, 2007

Here are 4 more hours of Helms, Scott. The one-hour version above consists of just my favorite "Highlights" from Helms' testimony. Enjoy. .... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEfayCFUpus

I did that once already (in Post 172), when you decided to truncate Johnny Brewer's '86 mock trial testimony in order to make Johnny look like an idiot (which he certainly was not). I pointed out your error when I said this.... "Why didn't you quote the very next words out of Brewer's mouth? Those words being.... "...with his back to the street while all of the commotion was going on outside; I thought that quite unusual." You're trying your darndest to make Johnny Brewer out to be a falsehood teller, aren't you Scott? Why are you doing that? Any particular reason?" -- DVP You bet I do. I can keep supplying you with audio/video material until doomsday. Here's a great witness for you to pick apart at the seams. You should be in 7th Heaven here. Good luck.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9W5JM40LT4

Well, Scott, based on your last few posts, it's pretty clear that your goal was to try and discredit both Johnny Brewer and Officer M.N. McDonald any way you could. That goal is quite obvious when looking at your sarcastic comments about Brewer and McDonald.... "At what point did Oswald turn from Zangs, and at what point did Oswald look over his shoulder to make sure the police had gone by? Just when John decided to follow Oswald to the theater who covered the cash register and watched the store while he says someone covered the back exit and our man John covered the front exit. Did Oswald say, well it's all over now or "This is it". Boy, was that officer lucky he got his hand in between the hammer and the primer, I'm sure that left a hell of a pinch on his hand that there had to be busies [~big shrug here by DVP~] and photos were taken to show how he was able to save his life right. And, I'm sure these photos exist, he's a hero! I heard about someone coming out and bleeding." -- Scott R. Kaiser You, Scott, seem to be implying in your above remarks that you have some doubt as to whether Johnny Brewer actually followed Oswald to the theater AT ALL. Right? And you seem to doubt that Officer McDonald was telling the truth about getting his hand pinched during his struggle with Oswald. Right? In other words, you seem to want to blame everybody in sight except that guy with a gun in his hands in the theater who was acting "funny" and "scared" (per Brewer's testimony)---and that would be Mr. Oswald.

Keep it up, Scott. You're doing an excellent job of exhibiting the kind of behavior I have come to fully expect from nearly all conspiracy theorists on the Internet. It's that "Everything Is Suspicious To Me" and "Everybody's Guilty Of Something EXCEPT Lee Harvey Oswald" mindset. You have apparently been sent down from heaven to prove my point about CTers. Thanks for your cooperation. Now, why don't you try the same trick again on Ruth Paine. I'm sure you won't have any trouble at all turning Ruth into a sinister character. You'll probably have a field day with this testimony. Don't disappoint me, Scott. I want your full report on why you don't believe a single word uttered by Mrs. Ruth Hyde Paine here....

1964 video with Johnny Brewer in his shoe store.... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDKhiuSI9ig