David Von Pein

If there had been an Oscar category for "The Most Embellished & Purely Fictional Scenes", then Oliver's film would have been a shoo-in for that award. 😊

Yes, I think so too. I like the loafers as well.

Could it be, Karl, that you're simply mistaken when you call CE718 a "fake" photograph? Plus: If you are to be considered correct about the gun's position in the photo, can you possibly explain just how the people who planted the "unidentifiable" gun managed to twist it like a pretzel before they laid it down in the box stacks? Or do you merely think the Photo Fakers screwed up when they added the rifle to a rifleless picture? (After all, the Photo Faking Team was awfully busy that day, with dozens of photos and films to fake before sundown.)

Oh, I don't know about that, Joe. In the filmed re-enactment (seen below) that Buell Frazier performed for David Wolper's movie cameras (which occurred sometime prior to October of 1964), Buell's ten-year-old Chevrolet sedan seems to be running pretty smoothly and quietly (based on what we can hear during the limited time when the microphone actually picks up the sounds of the car's engine just after Frazier gets in the car and starts it). But maybe Wolper's film crew just got lucky and the 1954 Chevy* was having a good day when this re-creation scene was filmed. * The narration in the Wolper film has the wrong model year for Frazier's vehicle. The narrator, Richard Basehart, says it's a 1953 model. But as we can see from Buell's ownership papers, it's actually a '54 model. I've always wondered why that mistake was made by the Wolper crew, especially since they had Buell Frazier right there with them for this re-enactment scene, and Buell should have been able to tell the film crew that his car was a '54 and not a '53. But maybe Buell just plain forgot and told them it was a '53. That's what I think probably happened.

My blog article already fully acknowledges the "speculative" nature of some of my beliefs regarding the Connally bullet fragments (such as in the two excerpts below). But given the testimony of Connally's doctors plus a look at Connally's pre-operative X-rays, it's my opinion that no reasonable person could possibly come to the conclusion that John Connally ever had more than 2 grains of metal present in his body at any time on November 22, 1963 (after Bullet CE399 fell out of his leg, that is). ------------------- "The distinct possibility exists that John B. Connally went to his grave with a mere TWO tiny bullet fragments left in his whole body (one in the thigh and one in his wrist). The latter part about the wrist is slightly speculative, but comes from a good source: the WC testimony of Dr. Charles F. Gregory." --DVP; December 18, 2011 "The number of bullet fragments that John Connally took with him to his grave is not a definitive number, and I'll readily admit that fact. But I think a good case can be made for only TWO tiny fragments of metal being left in Connally's whole body when combining the testimony of all the doctors involved in Governor Connally's treatment--Drs. Charles Gregory, Robert Shaw, and Tom Shires." --DVP; July 15, 2014

You bet I disagree with Finck's opinion. And it is just his opinion, you know. Why, therefore, do CTers think that Finck's opinion about the fragments is more correct than the opinion of the doctor who actually operated on Gov. Connally? The fact is: Nobody on Earth knows exactly how much the Connally fragments weighed. And that's because only ONE of the fragments was ever weighed. But another fact is: The Connally fragments were certainly very very small---all of them.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/connally-bullet-fragments.html

Ambulance driver Aubrey Rike recorded this Oral History interview at the Sixth Floor Museum in September 2001, and he said several interesting things in that interview that I had not heard before. Such as: Aubrey said he actually talked to First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy at Parkland Hospital on 11/22/63 while Jackie was sitting alone outside of Trauma Room One. And Aubrey also said he gave Jackie a damp cloth so she could wipe off some of the blood from her clothing. So Jackie did wipe off a lot of the blood with the wet cloth supplied to her by Mr. Aubrey Rike. She then gave the bloody cloth back to Rike. I thought that information was very interesting. Another interesting segment of Mr. Rike's interview is the part when Mrs. Kennedy asked Aubrey for a cigarette, which Rike did give to her. But before Jackie was able to take the cigarette from Rike's hand, a Secret Service agent intervened and snatched the package of cigarettes away from Rike, scattering them all over the floor. The SS agent then took one of the remaining cigarettes from the package, inspected it closely, and gave it to Mrs. Kennedy. I wonder if that agent was Clint Hill? And in yet another rarely-heard tidbit, Mr. Rike tells about how he applied some lubricant to President Kennedy's finger so that Jackie Kennedy could more easily get her wedding ring to slide onto JFK's finger. Two more interviews featuring Aubrey Rike are below:

.......

What a fantastic post, Lance. Thank you for taking the time to write it. It's a CS&L* gold mine. * Common Sense & Logic.

I just happened to notice today that The Sixth Floor Museum's website has recently added many full-length interviews from their extensive Oral History Collection. In past years, only limited excerpts from those interviews had been made available on the Sixth Floor site. One of those full-length programs is linked below. It's the complete four-hour video version of the June 2002 Oral History interview featuring assassination eyewitness Buell Wesley Frazier. My previous version of this interview is in audio form only and contains just half of the complete program. So this represents a nice upgrade. My thanks go out to The Sixth Floor Museum At Dealey Plaza for making available this entire interview (plus many others) on their public website. Whether or not the current collection of complete and uncut Oral History programs will remain on The Sixth Floor website in the future, I cannot say. But as of this date (January 8, 2023), the uncut programs are indeed available to view, free of charge. Here's the uncut Buell Frazier interview from 2002 (click on the two "film strip" icons; it's a 2-parter): Complete Online Oral History Collection:

Another "FWIW".... My article on Governor Connally's 1967 assertion that the SBT just might be "possible" after all: http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2017/08/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1257.html Excerpt from above webpage: "Mr. Connally also provided this on-camera statement during that same '67 "Warren Report" special.... "All I can say, with any finality, if the Single-Bullet Theory IS correct, then it had to be the second bullet that hit President Kennedy and me." Therefore, the above almost forgotten words spoken by Governor Connally should (IMO) forever erase the widely accepted erroneous idea that Mr. Connally never even once admitted that he thought the SBT could have possibly occurred that day in Dallas." -- DVP; March 21, 2006

Marjan, But the video in this thread is still certainly in "the early days". It's a CBS interview with Connally on June 22, 1964. You can't get too much "earlier" than that. FYI / FWIW: Here's the full 6/22/64 John Connally interview (which is just one minute longer than Gil's nearly-complete version above).

If the Prayer Man advocates are correct and Lee Harvey Oswald had truly been innocent of shooting President Kennedy and if Oswald had really been standing on the front steps of the Book Depository Building when JFK was shot, is it truly likely (or reasonable to assume) that he would have just clammed up when he was afforded the perfect opportunity to shout his "I Was On The Front Steps!" alibi to the world when he was asked this specific question by a reporter at 7:55 PM CST on 11/22/63: Were you in the building at the time [of the assassination]? Now, if the people who think Oswald is "Prayer Man" are right, then when LHO was confronted with the above question, wouldn't Oswald's logical and likely response have been one that resembled something like this one?: No sir! I was NOT inside the building at the time the President was being shot! I was OUTSIDE that building at that time! I was standing on the front steps of that building, right next to Buell Wesley Frazier and several other employees of the Depository! Go ask Wesley! He'll tell you I was there! But instead of Oswald giving the above answer (or one similar to it), what we heard coming from Lee Oswald's mouth when asked "Were you in the building at the time?" was this: "Naturally, if I work in that building, yes, sir." Now, maybe it's just a funny little quirk that only I possess, but if I had just been dragged into custody by the police and been charged with TWO murders I never committed (because, as we know, a whole lot of misguided conspiracy theorists are of the opinion that Mr. Oswald was innocent of killing Police Officer J.D. Tippit too), I would be wanting to shout my innocence and my provable alibi to everybody in the world as soon as I could! But many conspiracists seem to think that Oswald would have wanted to wait and reveal his "On The Steps" alibi only after he had obtained a lawyer. But is it truly reasonable to think that a person in Oswald's position (if he had been innocent) would have wanted to stay silent about his alibi for two solid days? And is it also reasonable to think that Oswald would have had a desire to actually tell a lie concerning his alibi to Captain Fritz? Because Fritz said this in his written report: "I asked him [Lee Oswald] what part of the building he was in at the time the President was shot, and he said that he was having his lunch about that time on the first floor." -- Captain J.W. Fritz; Warren Report--Page 600 So no matter how you look at it, the "Oswald Is Prayer Man" theory just does not add up. Plus: As I've argued in the past, no matter what any desperate conspiracy theorist wants to believe, the steps in front of the TSBD are most certainly NOT located INSIDE the building. More on that topic here. Also.... "To answer the question about Prayer Man: I have been looking at this all day, and I can tell you this: I 100% have no idea who that person is. I can also tell you 100% that is not Lee Harvey Oswald. First, Lee was not out there. I know that to be true. Second, for anyone who thinks Prayer Man is Lee, the individual has a much larger frame than Lee." -- Buell Wesley Frazier; March 28, 2021

http://jfk-archives / President Kennedy's Brain (Various Discussions)

The answer to the oft-asked question of "Why did JFK's brain weigh so much?" can likely be found right there in the supplementary autopsy report (on Page 544 of the Warren Report). The very first words of that supplementary report are: "Following formalin fixation the brain weighs 1500 gms." So it would seem as if JFK's brain was only weighed AFTER it had been fixed in the liquid (formalin) solution. So that's probably the answer right there---the brain absorbed much of the formalin solution, which added a certain amount of weight to the brain. Why the brain wasn't weighed prior to its being soaked in the watery solution is anyone's guess. Also see Vincent Bugliosi's book, Reclaiming History (on Pages 282 to 285 of Endnotes), for some interesting information regarding the topic of "Brain Weights". (I've culled some excerpts from those pages below. Click to enlarge....)

Chris, Are you aware of the bullet experiment done in 1992 by Dr. Martin Fackler? http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com / The Fackler Bullet

Hence, the reason I used that word -- "probably" -- in my previous post about CE399. Since Gov. Connally wasn't wearing a body cam inside his pants leg on 11/22, what else is there for an LNer and SBT believer like me to do except to engage in a little bit of reasonable "speculating" on this matter?

Thanks, Joe, for that very well-thought-out post. I agree with just about everything you said here. Except for one thing: your criticism of the DeMohrenschildts. They didn't move to Haiti after the assassination. They moved there in May of '63, IIRC, which was months before Marina's "nightmare" began. Isn't that right? Correct me on the timeline if I'm mistaken. Bonus Marina Video From 1964 (with Marina being very self-conscious about that missing front tooth):

I would think so. But even if he didn't, he could have gotten some ammo at a rifle range someplace, couldn't he? I don't see that as a problem. Except for the fact that LHO, by all accounts, was an el-cheapo penny-pincher. I have no idea where the closest rifle range would have been to LHO's Neely St. apartment. Anybody know? Could be. Quite a bit. I don't see any reason to just toss Marina's testimony out the window.

Just goes to show that people enjoy wallowing in fantasy-filled speculation and conjecture. Similarly, David Lifton's book of fantasy, Best Evidence, was on the New York Times best-seller list for three months, getting as high as #4. Conspiracy sells. The Lone-Nut truth? Not so much.

No. The CE399 missile probably entered JBC's thigh in a backward fashion, shedding the one tiny fragment inside his leg. The whole bullet, having not penetrated very far into the thigh at all, fell out of the shallow wound, while the tiny fragment stayed put in the leg.

No. The whole bullet (CE399) caused the small puncture wound in Connally's left thigh. And after CE399 fell out of the thigh wound, what was left behind was just that one extremely small metal fragment, which JBC took to his grave in 1993.