David Von Pein

BTW, the Edgewood Arsenal "Wound Ballistics Of 6.5-mm. Mannlicher-Carcano Ammunition" report is very interesting reading too. More conspiracy theorists should look at it. Here it is: http://MaryFerrell.org/documentID=62296 Every single test performed between April 1964 and October 1964 by Dr. Olivier and Dr. Dziemian at Edgewood Arsenal is consistent with the Warren Commission's ultimate conclusions. For example: Per the Edgewood Arsenal ballistics tests with Lee Harvey Oswald's rifle, that exact rifle was capable of causing all of the wounds that were inflicted on President Kennedy and Governor Connally in Dallas on November 22, 1963. Quoting from the Edgewood report: "Experiments were performed with the 6.5-mm Mannlicher-Carcano assassination rifle, serial no. C2766, and 6.5-mm Western Cartridge Company, lot WCC 6000, Mannlicher-Carcano ball ammunition to reproduce the conditions occurring at the time of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy on 22 November 1963. The results indicated that the wounds sustained by the President and by Governor Connally, including the massive head wound of the President, could be produced by the above type of bullet and rifle." ------------------------------- And Dr. Lattimer's experiments produced results very similar to those of Olivier's 1964 tests. Quoting Lattimer: "Combinations of human skull tops and melons were tested, and, again, all fell backward off the stand toward the shooter. No melon or skull combination ever fell AWAY from the shooter. Human skulls were then packed with solid melon contents and taped and sewed tightly together with strong tape and thread to simulate the scalp. We fired into these at the same point and at the same angle as the President was struck. The skull wounds produced were strikingly similar to Kennedy's [see illustration below]. Again, the skulls fell or jumped off the stand toward the shooter, and large fragments of the top of the skulls flew upward and forward for distances of forty feet or more, just as fragments of Kennedy's skull can be seen to have done in frames 313 through 318 of the Zapruder movie." -- John K. Lattimer; Page 251 of "Kennedy And Lincoln"

Thank you, Pat and Ramon, for the information about Larry Sturdivan's HSCA testimony. Allow me to add the following quotes from Sturdivan's book, "The JFK Myths": "The calculations show that no bullet of reasonable size can possibly throw a person in any direction. So, if the laws of physics prove that a bullet could not have "thrown" him [JFK], why did he move backward into the car seat just after the shot that killed him? [...] The question is: Did the gunshot produce enough force in expelling the material from Kennedy's head to throw his body backward into the limousine? Based on the high-speed movies of the skull shot simulations at the Biophysics Laboratory, the answer is no. [...] Dr. John Lattimer conducted some skull shots that resembled the Biophysics Division's simulations, but for which the skulls were filled with animal brain tissue. In his shots, all skulls fell back from the table [actually a ladder] in the direction of the shooter. Evidently, the lack of a jet effect from the stiff gelatin in the Biophysics Lab's simulation was a bit misleading and there was enough of a jet effect to move Kennedy's head back after its forward surge." -- Larry M. Sturdivan; Pages 162 and 164 of "The JFK Myths: A Scientific Investigation Of The Kennedy Assassination" (©2005)

IN 2013, JIM DiEUGENIO SAID: And we haven't even gotten to the most bizarre point of all: the calendar with the rifle delivery marking. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: That has been fully explained--by Ruth Paine herself--in her Warren Commission testimony. Naturally, Jimbo D. thinks this is just one more lie (among hundreds) told by "Ruthy" [as DiEugenio sarcastically calls her].... jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/04/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-87.html#Ruth-Paine-Calendar

Prediction: Pat Speer will now change his "pool" analogy to this.... The bullet (in Dr. Lattimer's tests) becomes the cue stick. The skull on the ladder becomes the cue ball. And the ladder becomes the object ball which is being struck by the cue ball (skull). But that's still a bit of a stretch for the conspiracy theorists, unless they can invent a way for the cue stick (the bullet) to impart reverse english onto the cue ball (the skull). Let's chalk up and play a game or two.

I would love to see that too, because from my experience as a billiards players, I don't think it's possible.

Like Glenn Nall, I'm a fairly decent pool player myself, and as far as I am aware, the only way to get a pool ball to move backwards (toward the pool player) is to utilize reverse english while striking the cue ball (which is something I became pretty good at doing in my younger days). The cue ball will then travel backwards (or a little left or right, depending on where the player strikes the cue ball). But the OBJECT ball(s)--i.e., the balls the cue ball is hitting--will not travel backwards. Those balls always travel forward--away from the shooter/billiards player. But, maybe Pat Speer thinks that John Lattimer had a special kind of Mannlicher-Carcano rifle---one that fired bullets with reverse english attached to them. However, even if that scenario were possible, it's still not a good "pool" analogy. Because, as mentioned, from my experience as a pool player, it's only the CUE BALL--or in Pat's analogy, THE BULLET ITSELF--that would be subject to any REVERSAL of direction--not the "13 ball" or any of the "object" balls (or in Dr. Lattimer's experiments--the skulls). What I'd really like to know is if Dr. Alfred Olivier's test skulls that he shot for his assassination tests at Edgewood Arsenal moved TOWARD the shooter after the skulls were shot with rifle bullets. I don't think that information ever came out in Olivier's Warren Commission testimony, mainly because the Commission wasn't concerned a single bit about the rear head snap exhibited by President Kennedy after he was shot. It was a complete non-issue to the Warren Commission (since they had conclusive proof via the autopsy report and the autopsy doctors that JFK had been hit in the head by just a single bullet, which entered from BEHIND). But it would still be nice to know which direction Dr. Olivier's test skulls traveled--forward or backward.

Thanks, Bob. So nice to see you too.

Absolute nonsense, Pat. Lattimer's test skulls were long gone off the ladder before there was any "recoil" (i.e., backward movement) of the ladder.

Yes, Pat. But the melon jumps off the table after being shot, moves BACKWARDS (toward the shooter), then (of course) falls off the table. But regardless of how small the table was, that hunk of fruit did move toward the gunman after it was struck with a Carcano rifle bullet. I see nothing phony or fraudulent about that melon test. Plus, Dr. Lattimer filmed his skull tests too. And the skulls were propelled TOWARD the gunman as well. (And, no, the ladder did not cause the skulls to move backward, as many CTers like to use as a convenient excuse. That ladder doesn't even *start* to tip backward until well *after* the skulls have started their journey to the rear.)

The Penn & Teller melon literally *jumps* backward off of the table. Yes, the table is a small table, but the melon definitely moved toward the gunman. And if a "jet effect" didn't cause that movement, what did? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d7TbB4uxJEk

Jon, What makes you believe the autopsy photographs and X-rays are "fakes"?

OK, let's do that.... jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/01/debunking-jfk-conspiracy-myths.html Another "fake" video, Glenn?

Oops! I made a boo-boo, didn't I? So sorry. Previous post edited.....to this: "Let's see you debunk the photos and X-rays, which prove that nobody in Dealey Plaza hit John F. Kennedy in the front of the head with a bullet."

Exactly. Let's see you debunk the photos and X-rays, which prove that nobody in Dealey Plaza hit John F. Kennedy in the front of the head with a bullet. Good luck, RFH. ....

"Our experiments verified that the backward movement of the President's head was compatible with his being struck from the rear, and that it was certainly not necessary to hit the head from the front in order to make the head move toward the gun." -- John K. Lattimer; Page 255 of "Kennedy And Lincoln" (c.1980) Kennedy-And-Lincoln.blogspot.com

Examining the Warren Commission testimony of Ruth Paine....

Boy, that Edwin A. Walker was sure one lucky SOB, wasn't he? He was plotting to set up Oswald as a patsy back in April '63 (per Mr. Trejo), and LHO just happens to get the TSBD job on Oct. 15 (with the help of someone who cannot possibly be looked upon as a "co-conspirator", Mrs. Linnie Mae Randle of Irving). And then, on top of all that, LHO decides he's going to act like a very guilty person on 11/22/63 shortly after 12:30. You've got to admit, Paul, good fortune like that doesn't come along every day of the week. General Walker must have had TWO crystal balls working for him in the summer and fall of 1963. Maybe three. Tell me, Paul, what makes YOUR theory re: Walker any more FACTUAL and any LESS SPECULATIVE than any OTHER theory offered up by any other conspiracy theorist? Have you got any hard evidence---as opposed to just outright speculation and guesswork? I certainly didn't see anything besides speculation and conjecture in your Post #25 above. And General Walker's papers hardly qualify as proof he had JFK killed. Thank you.

But how does such a pre-arranged "Radical Right greeting", even if it were true, segue into pro-Castro leftist Lee Harvey Oswald killing President Kennedy from the TSBD on Nov. 22? Do you think General Walker himself arranged for Lee Oswald to get hired at the Depository in October? Which would also have to mean that Walker was involved in a miraculous "Seeing Into The Future" conspiracy with Linnie Mae Randle, since it was Randle, not Ruth Paine, who was really the person most responsible for providing anyone on Fifth Street with any information about a possible job opening at the TSBD. Or do you think Walker conceived of a plot against JFK after October 15? Either way, it sounds like a lot of speculation, innuendo, and rumor to me regarding any Walker participation, Paul. The very things you criticize Jim DiEugenio of engaging in.

I'm on ignore here for the most part anyway, Paul. So my participation doesn't matter much. CTers like DiEugenio, who continually throw slings and arrows at Ruth and Michael Paine without a stitch of evidence to back up their slanderous theories, deserve all the criticism and scorn that can possibly be heaped upon them. (IMO.) Listen to what Ruth said in 2003 after hearing that Marina thinks Ruth was part of a conspiracy.... JFK Video / Ruth Paine (2003) "A lot of people will just believe what they're gonna believe. And there's nothing much I can do about it." -- Ruth Paine; 2003

Because many (or most) conspiracy theorists prefer fantasy over facts and the truth. No CTer has ever come within a thousand miles of proving that Ruth Hyde Paine did anything wrong at all. And no CTer has ever proved (and never will, because the idea is incredibly stupid) that Mrs. Paine served as Lee Oswald's "handler" in late 1963 -- which is hilarious in the first place -- what did RUTH HERSELF do to advance the plot along? She certainly did NOT "plant" Oswald in the Depository. That fact has been proven beyond all doubt. CTers see sinister "CIA connections" all over the place. But none of them ever go beyond the conjecture stage--and they never will, because Ruth Paine wasn't with the CIA. The CTer motto is in full bloom when it comes to Ruth Paine --- ACCUSE NOW; PROVE NEVER. jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/04/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-87.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ JIM DiEUGENIO SAID: I am really proud of the section on the Paines in my book. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: That figures. Defamation of character is always something to be proud of, isn't it Jimbo? None of [the] crap DiEugenio [has ever written] comes even close to showing Ruth Paine (or Michael Paine) had anything to do with a conspiracy to murder John Kennedy and/or frame Lee Oswald for that murder. DiEugenio's pathetic attempts to trash Mrs. Paine are sickening. I only wish I could persuade Ruth to start a slander lawsuit. She'd win, hands down. Does anybody have Ruth's phone number? Maybe I'll give her a call. dvp-video-audio-archive.blogspot.com/2012/03/ruth-paine.html

Lots more.... jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/04/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-87.html

BRIAN WALKER SAID: Did Ruth Paine have six or seven metal filing cabinets full of letters, maps, records and index cards with names of pro-Castro sympathizers as has been claimed? Does anyone know anything about this? DAVID VON PEIN SAID: It's very likely just another one of the dozens of myths that conspiracy theorists love to tout as true about the JFK case. And according to what Ruth Paine herself said in a public appearance on September 13, 2013, the story about the "seven file boxes of Cuba sympathizers' names" was a completely bogus story from the get-go. Listen to Ruth talk about it right here. And let's stop and think about this for a moment from the POV of the CTers who think Ruth Paine was a "CIA agent" who was attempting to manipulate and frame Lee Oswald for Kennedy's murder in 1963: In such a circumstance, with Ruth being a "CIA" employee involved in a lot of underhanded shenanigans, would it make any sense for Ruth to keep on her property (or, in general, traceable back to her) six or seven filing cabinets filled with stuff that could only make the authorities (and the conspiracy theorists) suspicious about what she was up to? IMO, the whole thing is just silly to begin with. GARY CRAIG POSTED THIS. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Thanks for supplying Decker Exhibit No. 5323, Gary. Nice to know that Ruth and Michael Paine weren't hiding anything. Do conspiracy theorists actually believe that anything in that "set of file cabinets" could possibly have any relation to any alleged "CIA" activity revolving around either Ruth or Michael Paine and a plot to frame Lee Oswald for JFK's assassination? According to Deputy Walthers' report in Decker Exhibit 5323, the cabinets were seized on either November 22 or 23 and were found right there in Ruth Paine's house in Irving. And if Ruth had been "setting up" Oswald for weeks (or months) prior to Nov. 22, as many conspiracists believe, she, of course, would have to know that the police would be searching her residence right after the assassination, since she was allowing the wife of the "patsy" to stay at her house and since the "patsy" himself stayed there the night before the assassination. All of this indicates, of course, that whatever was in those filing cabinets could not possibly be some "key" to link Ruth and Michael Paine to an assassination plot, nor could it be a key to link the Paines to the CIA -- unless, that is, the conspiracy theorists want to believe that Ruth Paine was a very very stupid person. And by just listening to Ruth speak for only a few minutes, it's fairly obvious that the word "stupid" does not apply to Mrs. Ruth Hyde Paine. GARY CRAIG SAID: What are you talking about? Are you trying to make the metal filing cabinets disappear again, like the DPD and FBI did in '63? Too late, the cat's out of the bag. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Gary, If you were a CIA operative and were tasked with the chore of framing Lee Harvey Oswald for President Kennedy's murder, would you place IN YOUR HOUSE a bunch of stuff that proves you were "CIA"? I.E.: The SAME HOUSE where you are allowing the patsy's wife to live....and the SAME HOUSE where you've "arranged" for the police to think the assassination rifle was stored....and the SAME HOUSE where all of the patsy's belongings are being kept....and the SAME HOUSE where the resident patsy spent his last night of freedom? You'd have to be nuts. And why wasn't Decker Exhibit 5323 destroyed (along with the file cabinets and all those "secret" Ruth Paine documents)? The bumbling, stumbling plotters strike again. They can manage to deep-six a bunch of filing cabinets and tons of suspicious documents relating to that vixen named Ruth, but they can't quite seem to manage to get rid of that one sheet of paper containing Walthers' report about the cabinets. Yeah, right. Naturally, no conspiracy theorist can think of ANY other solution to ANYTHING relating to the JFK case OTHER than "it's a conspiracy". No non-sinister explanation would even be entertained by the likes of a conspiracy monger such as a Gary Craig. So, Ruth Paine is automatically guilty of--something. The conspiracy-happy kooks aren't sure just WHAT she's "guilty" of. But she's got to be guilty of SOMETHING, that much the conspiracy buffs know for sure. The conspiracy nuts who want to hang Ruth Paine are sickening. I only wish she could sue the pants off of at least one of the idiots who has slandered her name since 1963. She couldn't lose. JASON ADAIR SAID: Thumbs up Dave! I've always felt Ruth Paine is a very sympathetic character in the LHO murder spree....and subsequent character assassination by CTs. Ruth is the perfect example of why LNers CARE to post here. To help protect innocent people from slander. RONALD VAN DIJK SAID: I think this is a weak argument. Maybe she (or he) made a mistake? Forgot about the thing? There are other possibilities of course. What did she say about these boxes? Undoubtedly the WC has asked her about these files? Where are these files now? Names? DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Ronald, I can't find a thing in Ruth Paine's Warren Commission testimony or in her Clay Shaw trial testimony concerning the "metal file cabinets" and their contents. Maybe there is something in her extremely lengthy WC sessions about them, but I had no luck finding it. (The CTers would no doubt say that the WC was covering up something re the file cabinets too, since they mentioned nothing about them during Ruth's many hours on the witness stand.) I also noticed that Vince Bugliosi doesn't mention a thing about those file cabinets in his 2007 book. It would be nice to know what was in the file cabinets. But I still stand by my previous argument re the cabinets. If Ruth was "CIA", would she have such things sitting in her garage for the police to find? Or was she supposedly in cahoots with the DPD and Sheriff's Office too? Did she nudge Bill Decker one day and whisper -- "Remember, Bill, you've got to get rid of those filing cabinets." And then Decker complied? Too funny. EDIT -- But, as I mentioned in an earlier post, we do now have Ruth's very own words concerning the topic of the filing cabinets (or "file boxes"). Here again is what Ruth herself said in September of 2013: https://app.box.com/s/iuce7aaneb3xnfj472hy RONALD VAN DIJK SAID: Following the same arguments you use for Ruth Paine: Would Oswald leave a rifle with his fingerprints in the SBD? Would he make the backyard pictures? Would he....? Do you think he was nuts?.... You are explaining the find of the cabinets in a way that suits you. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: I am explaining the file cabinets in a way that suits me....yes. But it's also in a way that makes sense (IMO). Re: Oswald doing those things you mentioned -- There's a big difference: it can be PROVEN he did those things (although very few Internet CTers would ever dare admit that Oswald actually did the first thing on your LHO list--leaving his prints on the rifle in the TSBD on November 22nd -- but he did it all the same). And the backyard photos have been proven to be genuine (i.e., non-phony). That's not even debatable here in the real world of science where a negative exists of one of the pictures which can be tied to Oswald's own camera. Did the plotters manage to steal LHO's camera too? And then got Marina to lie about taking the photos? When does this string of conspiracy-oriented nonsense end? Or does it ever reach an end in this case? (Silly question, I know. Of course it doesn't end...and never will. That's why we're here now.) And btw...yes, Oswald was kinda nuts (not "insane", but just plain "nuts"). You've got to be "kinda nuts" in order to point a gun at someone and pull the trigger (unless it's strictly self-defense). And Oswald did that THREE times in 1963 (Walker, Kennedy, and Tippit.) And none of the three was done in "self-defense". Yes, Oswald was nuts alright. DAVID VON PEIN LATER SAID [QUOTING THE WARREN COMMISSION TESTIMONY OF DALLAS DEPUTY SHERIFF BUDDY WALTHERS]: BUDDY WALTHERS. You could tell it from the way it was tied and the impression of where that barrel went up in it where it was tied, that a rifle had been tied in it, but what kind---you couldn't tell, but you could tell a rifle had been wrapped up in it, and then we found some little metal file cabinets---I don't know what kind you would call them---they would carry an 8 by 10 folder, all right, but with a single handle on top of it and the handle moves. WESLEY LIEBELER. About how many of them would you think there were? Mr. WALTHERS. There were six or seven, I believe, and I put them all in the trunk of my car and we also found a box of pictures, a bunch of pictures that we taken. We didn't go to the trouble of looking at any of this stuff much---just more or less confiscated it at the time, and we looked at it there just like that, and then we took all this stuff and put it in the car and then Mrs. Paine got a phone number from Mrs. Oswald where you could call Lee Harvey Oswald in Oak Cliff. It was a Whitehall phone number, I believe, and they said they didn't know where he lived, but this was where they called him, and I called Sheriff Decker on the phone when I was there and gave him that number for the crisscross, so they could send some men to that house, which I think they did, but I didn't go myself. Then we put everybody in the car, the kids, Mrs. Oswald, and everyone---no; just a minute---before that, though, this Michael Paine or Mitchell Paine, whichever you call it, came home and I had understood from Mrs. Paine already that they weren't living together, that they were separated and he was supposed to be living in Grand Prairie and when he showed up I asked him what was his object in coming home. He said--well, after he had heard about the President's getting shot, he just decided he would take off and come home, and he arrived there while we were there. [...] Mr. LIEBELER. What was in these file cabinets? Mr. WALTHERS. We didn't go through them at the scene. I do remember a letterhead--I can't describe it--I know we opened one of them and we seen what it was, that it was a lot of personal letters and stuff and a letterhead that this Paine fellow had told us about, and he said, "That's from the people he writes to in Russia"; he was talking about this letterhead we had pulled out and so I just pushed it all back down and shut it and took the whole works. Mr. LIEBELER. I have been advised that some story has developed that at some point that when you went out there you found seven file cabinets full of cards that had the names on them of pro-Castro sympathizers or something of that kind, but you don't remember seeing any of them? Mr. WALTHERS. Well, that could have been one, but I didn't see it. Mr. LIEBELER. There certainly weren't any seven file cabinets with the stuff you got out there or anything like that? Mr. WALTHERS. I picked up all of these file cabinets and what all of them contained, I don't know myself to this day. Mr. LIEBELER. As I was sitting here listening to your story, I could see where that story might have come from--you mentioned the "Fair Play for Cuba" leaflets that were in a barrel. Mr. WALTHERS. That's right--we got a stack of them out of that barrel, but things get all twisted around. http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/walthers [END WARREN COMMISSION QUOTES.] Question: What proof is there that the file cabinets belonged to Ruth or Michael Paine? Why couldn't that stuff have been part of Lee Oswald's personal possessions? After all, about everything Lee and Marina owned was in Mrs. Paine's garage in November of '63. This part of Buddy Walthers' Warren Commission testimony above certainly makes it sound as though at least some of the material in at least one of the metal file cabinets belonged to Lee Harvey Oswald: "We opened one of them and we seen what it was, that it was a lot of personal letters and stuff and a letterhead that this Paine fellow had told us about, and he said, "That's from the people he writes to in Russia"; he was talking about this letterhead..." In addition, there is this WC testimony from Marina Oswald, in which she refers to a metal file cabinet owned by Lee Oswald, in which he kept materials associated with his Fair Play For Cuba activities (the box itself can be seen in Commission Exhibit 125): Mr. THORNE. Exhibit 125 is a file cabinet for presumably three by five or five by seven inch cards. Mrs. OSWALD. Lee kept his printing things in that, pencils. Mr. RANKIN. The things that he printed his Fair Play for Cuba leaflets on? Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. Mr. RANKIN. Pencils and materials that he used in connection with that matter? Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. Mr. RANKIN. Did he have any index cards in that metal case? Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, he had some. Mr. RANKIN. You don't know what happened to them? Mrs. OSWALD. No. Mr. RANKIN. Do you know what was on those index cards? Mrs. OSWALD. No. Mr. RANKIN. A list of any people that you know of? Mrs. OSWALD. No. I don't know. Mr. RANKIN. Were those leaflets about Fair Play for Cuba printed? Mrs. OSWALD. Yes. Mr. RANKIN. And then did he stamp something on them after he had them printed? Mrs. OSWALD. He would print his name and address on them. Mr. RANKIN. You don't know what happened to the cards that were in that? Mrs. OSWALD. No. [END WC QUOTES.] Whether the metal box of LHO's (CE125) has any connection at all to the several similar such metal boxes found at Ruth Paine's house on 11/22/63, I haven't the slightest idea. But perhaps Lee owned more than one such box. ~shrug~ LARRY BALDWIN SAID: The questions to LNs (DVP in particular): 1. Did the file cabinets exist as documented? DAVID VON PEIN SAID: I don't think there's any doubt of that fact. Decker Exhibit 5323 is the proof of their "existence", plus Buddy Walthers' WC testimony. He mentions the "six or seven file cabinets" there too. And I certainly don't think Buddy W. just made it up from whole cloth. I will admit, point-blank, that prior to today [July 10, 2013], I had no knowledge of the definitive existence of any such "file cabinets" being confiscated from Ruth Paine's house (other than to hear James DiEugenio ramble on about such cabinets during some of his appearances on Black Op Radio in the past; but you know how far I trust Jimbo; so anything uttered by him isn't going to make a big impression on a person like myself, seeing as how Jimbo can't even get the easy stuff right--like Oswald shooting Tippit). But, anyway, prior to 7/10/13, I really had no desire to dig into the "file cabinet" matter at all. And obviously neither did Vincent Bugliosi, because upon searching my PDF file containing the entire 2800 pages of "Reclaiming History", I couldn't find a single reference to the "file cabinets" in that tome--even when cross-referencing and searching for "Decker Exhibit No. 5323". Vince might have mentioned the cabinets in his book, but if he did, I couldn't find it via my word search today. So, yes, the cabinets (or, more accurately, the "small metal boxes") definitely did (or do) exist. LARRY BALDWIN SAID: 2. Did the material in the file cabinets exist as documented? DAVID VON PEIN SAID: I haven't the slightest idea. Nor do you. And that's because (based on the limited "scope" of my looking into this matter) there doesn't appear to be anything in the testimony of anyone that would clarify the contents of the file cabinets/metal boxes. Walthers said "I don't know myself to this day" what was in the cabinets. And there's nothing in the testimony of Will Fritz or Jesse Curry or Sheriff Bill Decker pertaining to the cabinets either (that I could find via a word search). Nor is there any reference to the cabinets in the testimony of Guy Rose. There is, however, something in the testimony of DPD Detective Richard Stovall that might be of interest (although whether these "boxes" picked up by Stovall are related to the "file cabinets" discussed by Buddy Walthers, I haven't the foggiest).... Mr. STOVALL -- "I've got listed "one grey metal file box, which is 12 inches by 6 inches; youth pictures and literature." I've got, "One black and gray metal box 10 inches by 4 inches, letters, etc., one box brown Keystone projector." Let's stop just a minute and let me tell you about this. These two metal boxes came out of Ruth Paine's bedroom. This Keystone projector came out of the closet in the hall. Then, I have listed, "Three brown metal boxes 12 inches by 4 inches containing phonograph records." They came out of Ruth Paine's bedroom." http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/stovall EDIT -- Please note that most of the above information supplied by Detective Stovall concerning the contents of various "metal boxes" perfectly matches the items that Ruth Paine herself said was in the "file boxes" during her 2013 public appearance that I twice provided above. In that 2013 audio, she said three of the boxes contained "folk dance records", three more boxes contained her "college papers", and the seventh box had a "projector" in it. LARRY BALDWIN SAID: If yes to #1 or #2, what were the Paines doing with this information and what are the implications? DAVID VON PEIN SAID: I'm not convinced the stuff in the "file cabinets" even belonged to Ruth Paine. As I speculated previously, maybe that stuff belonged to Lee Oswald. And this portion of Buddy Walthers' testimony is one reason why I say that: "We opened one of them and we seen what it was, that it was a lot of personal letters and stuff and a letterhead that this Paine fellow had told us about, and he said, "That's from the people he writes to in Russia"; he was talking about this letterhead..." So, as to WHAT exactly was contained in the boxes/cabinets and WHO exactly was the owner of that material -- I have no idea. Do you? RONALD VAN DIJK SAID: And since you checked all conspiracy's [sic] of any sort: Ruth has nothing to do with these cabinets! We can go on to the next topic! Life is easy if you want! DAVID VON PEIN SAID: "We opened one of them and we seen what it was, that it was a lot of personal letters and stuff and a letterhead that this Paine fellow had told us about, and he said, "That's from the people he writes to in Russia"; he was talking about this letterhead..." -- Eddy "Buddy" Walthers Sure sounds like OSWALD'S letter there, doesn't it? And why would Oswald's letter be in Ruth Paine's metal cabinets? Who do you think the "he" is referring to in this sentence, Ronald?..... "That's from the people he writes to in Russia." BRIAN WALKER SAID: Thank you LNs for clearing this up. I didn't know much about this. Thank you kooks for trying to make it seem sinister and getting totally destroyed by LNers who spent a few minutes looking into it. I always enjoy when that happens. VERN SAYLOR SAID: There is no question that the cabinets were found at the Paines house, why wouldn't the DPD, FBI and WC make more of an effort to link them to LHO, esp. after LHO was murdered? DAVID VON PEIN SAID: That's not a bad question. And I'll admit I don't know the answer to it. [...] I would, however, like to know where the metal file cabinets went. And is the metal box I mentioned previously (CE125) part of the "six or seven" cabinets/boxes that were seized by the police at the Paine house? And are the five "metal" boxes referred to in Detective Richard Stovall's WC testimony the same as the metal cabinets described by Buddy Walthers? I just do not know. But I do think that at least ONE of those metal file boxes belonged to Lee Oswald, based on the quote I mentioned earlier from Walthers' WC session (where Walthers quotes Michael Paine).

Pat, Your explanation could possibly explain the "absence of BONE" verbiage that we find in Paragraph 6 of Page 3 of the autopsy report. But your explanation most certainly does not explain the "absence of SCALP" portion of that paragraph. Because even the "peeled back" scalp does NOT have anything MISSING from it in the OCCIPITAL area of JFK's scalp. Plus, there's also still that one word which is, IMO, curiously missing from the description of the large exit wound -- "FRONTAL". The more I look at the pictures and X-rays (and the ARRB comments made by both Dr. Boswell and Dr. Humes), the more conspicuous the absence of the word "Frontal" becomes.

That would have been virtually impossible, Ray. And that's because the photos exist in stereo pairs. .... "The single most important discovery, and one that establishes with absolute and irrefutable certainty that the autopsy photographs have not been altered, is the fact that many of the photographs, when combined in pairs, produce stereoscopic images. ....The only way a forger can successfully alter a detailed stereoscopic image...without detection is to alter both images identically, which is, [photographic expert and HSCA panel member Frank] Scott said, "essentially impossible." .... The entire photographic panel of the HSCA concluded that "the autopsy photographs and X-rays were taken of President Kennedy at the time of his autopsy and that they had not been altered in any manner." This fact alone demolishes the conspiracy theorists' allegations that photographic fakery was used to conceal the plot to kill the president. It also destroys another prime conspiracy belief--that the eyewitness descriptions of the president's wounds that were offered by the Parkland Hospital doctors (and later by some eyewitnesses to the autopsy) are proof that the autopsy photographs had been altered. Obviously, if the autopsy photographs are genuine and unaltered (which all the experts agree), then eyewitness descriptions of the president's wounds that contradict those photographs are not proof of alteration, as some critics claim, but nothing more than examples of understandable, mistaken recollections, or if not that, then deliberate and outright falsehoods." -- Vincent Bugliosi; Pages 223-224 of Endnotes in "Reclaiming History"

James Gordon, I agree that the whole "Back Of The Head" topic is very strange and contradictory. I've often said it's the #1 thing that bugs me the most. But, then too, we DO have what I believe is BETTER evidence than those (admittedly many) "BOH Wound" witnesses --- with that "better evidence" being the autopsy photos and X-rays. Plus, to a lesser extent, the Zapruder Film as well, which also does not agree--at all--with those many "BOH" witnesses. To answer the question you asked above, I'll offer up the following excerpt from my review of Vincent Bugliosi's book, "Reclaiming History": CHAPTER 3 (68 PAGES) -- "PRESIDENT KENNEDY'S AUTOPSY AND THE GUNSHOT WOUNDS TO KENNEDY AND GOVERNOR CONNALLY": DVP: This chapter brings about a "closure" (of sorts) for me with respect to the single biggest "question mark" that I personally have had regarding the entire JFK case -- that being: How could so many different witnesses claim to see a large hole in the back of President Kennedy's head on 11/22/63 (at Parkland and at Bethesda)? I've scratched my head more than a few times when thinking about those back-of-the-head wound witnesses. But at the same time, I have also always realized that there is a bunch of evidence that totally contradicts those witnesses (regardless of how many of them there might be). That contradictory evidence includes: The official autopsy report (signed by three doctors), the autopsy photographs and X-rays, the Zapruder Film, and the never-wavering testimony of all three autopsy doctors (with each doctor agreeing that President Kennedy was hit by only two bullets, with both of those bullets coming from "above and behind" John F. Kennedy). And all of this evidence is also pointed out numerous times by Vince Bugliosi in this chapter as well. Vincent doesn't pull some magical rabbit out of a hat when he discusses this often-heated controversy about the head wounds of the late President. Instead, he relies on basic sound judgment and common sense (like always) to try and figure out a reasonable answer for why the many Parkland witnesses thought they saw what they said they saw. And Vincent's primary explanation regarding this matter is actually an explanation offered up by someone else, HSCA Forensic Pathology Panel member Michael Baden: [Quoting from Mr. Bugliosi's book:] "Dr. Michael Baden has what I believe to be the answer, one whose logic is solid. [Quoting Baden] "The head exit wound was not in the parietal-occipital area, as the Parkland doctors said. They were wrong," [baden] told me. "That's why we have autopsies, photographs, and X-rays to determine things like this. Since the thick growth of hair on Kennedy's head hadn't been shaved at Parkland, there's no way for the doctors to have seen the margins of the wound in the skin of the scalp. All they saw was blood and brain tissue adhering to the hair. And that may have been mostly in the occipital area because he was lying on his back and gravity would push his hair, blood, and brain tissue backward, so many of them probably assumed the exit wound was in the back of the head. But clearly, from the autopsy X-rays and photographs and the observations of the autopsy surgeons, the exit wound and defect was not in the occipital area. There was no defect or wound to the rear of Kennedy's head other than the entrance wound in the upper right part of his head." [End Baden quote]." -- Pages 407-408 of "Reclaiming History" DVP: The above explanation is one that I, too, have postulated as the probable answer to this enduring "head wound" mystery over the years, such as HERE, HERE, and HERE. One other point that I think is worthy of mentioning here is the fact that (as far as I'm aware) there wasn't a single witness at Parkland or Bethesda who claimed to have seen TWO large wounds of exit in JFK's head on 11/22/63. This fact would certainly suggest that there was, indeed, only ONE large wound in Kennedy's head, and that wound was located, per the autopsy and the authenticated autopsy photographs, "chiefly parietal" (i.e., the side and top of the head). On page #410, Bugliosi provides some additional strength to the "No Exit Wound In The Back Of JFK's Head" rope, when he says: "Lest anyone still has any doubt as to the location of the large exit wound in the head...the Zapruder film itself couldn't possibly provide better demonstrative evidence. The film proves conclusively, and beyond all doubt, where the exit wound was. Zapruder frame 313 (when the president's head exploded) and frame 328 (almost a second later) clearly show that the large, gaping exit wound was to the right front of the president's head. The back of his head shows no such large wound and clearly is completely intact." [bugliosi's emphasis.] -- Vince Bugliosi; Page 410 of "RH" DVP: Another excellent visual demonstration that pretty much proves that JFK was shot in the head from BEHIND is the following slow-motion clip from the Zapruder Film, which positively depicts the President's head being pushed FORWARD at the all-important moment of impact when Oswald's bullet strikes the back of Kennedy's head: