David Von Pein

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

You think there is no Deep State? If not, somebody is not quitting on the LHO as leftie, loser, loner version of the JFKA. 

Oh for Pete sake, just because somebody (like myself, for example) thinks Lee Oswald was a lefty, a loser, and a lone assassin doesn't mean that the person believing those things is a member of the "Deep State".

FYI....

The author of this new book, Paul Roderick Gregory, provided testimony to the Warren Commission on March 31, 1964. His testimony can be found HERE.

And Gregory's father, Peter Paul Gregory, also gave testimony to the Commission (on March 13, 1964). His testimony is HERE.

40 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

(6-27-11 interview with Barry Ernest as recounted in his 2011 online article Another Ignored Witness Found) "The focus of my call to her, of course, was Victoria Adams, whether Mrs. Garner was indeed in a position to have seen Baker and Truly or anyone else on the back stairs...

Thanks for that info, Pat. (And thanks to Barry Ernest too.)

Knowing the evidence that exists against Lee Oswald as I do, my opinion is (and has been for many years) that Oswald did use those back stairs to flee from his sixth-floor sniper's perch, and he did somehow manage to walk between the raindrops (so to speak) so as to avoid being seen by anyone on any of the TSBD floors that he had to traverse in order to make it to the second-floor lunchroom by approximately 12:32 PM.

And, IMO, the information supplied by Dorothy Garner does not and cannot exonerate Lee Harvey Oswald for the assassination of the President, given the evidence that exists against him.

And if LHO wasn't the sixth-floor sniper, then the question needs to be asked --- How, then, did the real 6th-floor assassin(s) manage to avoid being seen by Garner, et al, in the minutes following JFK's murder?

That is certainly a legitimate and valid question that has never been satisfactorily answered (IMO) by any conspiracy theorist.

41 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Why would she even be told the wage? You have no proof she was.

Exactly.

http://jfk-archives/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-87.html#The-Higher-Paying-Job

20 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

In all probability, the judge would have thrown out the case.

Oh sure, Jim. The judge would have tossed the case in the trash---despite the fact that every scrap of evidence up there on the 6th floor* pointed in the direction of Lee Harvey Oswald being the assassin (e.g., Oswald's rifle, his prints on the boxes in the Sniper's Nest, the CE142 paper bag with Oswald's prints on it, and the shell casings from LHO's gun).

And yet Jim D. keeps assuring everyone that it's me (and not the conspiracy theorists) who resides in a world of fantasy.

* Evidence which you think is all fake, of course. But that's another fifty arguments/threads.

18 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

You keep running away from the facts, David. The stairs were noisy. Garner followed Styles and Adams back to the stairs. She heard them go down. She then heard and saw Truly and Baker come up. No Oswald in between. The only possibility you should be entertaining then is that Oswald made it past the fourth floor before Adams and Styles reached the stairs. The timing for this is a problem. Thus, the charade put on by Ball/Belin. 

Has Dorothy Garner ever been interviewed by anyone, Pat? (Beyond the very short "Stroud document", that is.) Did she ever give any details about exactly where she was located (in relation to the stairs) at 12:30 to 12:32 PM CST on 11/22/63?

That would certainly be an important detail to know, don't you think?

The Stroud document is indeed interesting. But before declaring Oswald innocent, I think a little more info is needed beyond just this one single sentence regarding Miss Garner in this June 1964 letter:

2 hours ago, Joseph McBride said:

"Don't believe all this so-called evidence." -- Lee Oswald to his brother Robert, November 23, 1963

And, of course, the assassin of President Kennedy would have no reason at all to tell a lie....right Joe?

2 hours ago, Matt Allison said:

Can one have a vigil in a 120 second time frame?

Sure. It was a very short "vigil", true. But nobody can possibly prove that Dorothy Garner had her eyes on this stairway in the northwest corner of the Book Depository Building (see floor plan below) for every moment of that (approx.) 120-second period (or however many minutes and seconds it actually was).

Also --- Take a look at the small area of the 4th floor that we're talking about here (i.e., the stairwell area in the upper-left corner of the floor plan I've presented below). How much time do you think it would have taken Lee Oswald (or anyone) to have navigated that corner stairway as he quickly came down from the fifth floor?

In other words, how long would Oswald have been in view of anyone on the 4th floor who happened to be looking toward the northwest corner during those few fleeting seconds? I'm guessing five seconds, tops. And after those few seconds on the corner "landing", he then would be totally out of sight of anyone on the fourth floor.

I can easily envision a scenario which has the sixth-floor assassin (namely: a Mr. Oswald) avoiding detection as he swiftly rounds that stairwell corner and flees down those stairs toward the third floor. And, realistically, all he needs in order to do that is five measly seconds away from the gaze of any prying eyes (maybe even less than five seconds).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Related banter (via my saved discussions from 2013 and 2014)....

JEAN DAVISON SAID:

I have a question for anyone who accepts Vickie Adams' time line and believes that she came downstairs before Truly & Baker had reached the freight elevator on the 1st floor.

If she's right, how does her story prove that Oswald didn't come down those stairs?

In the WC version, Baker spotted Oswald just after each man had reached the second floor landing. That means that while Truly & Baker were rushing up from the 1st floor to the second, Oswald would've presumably been hurrying from about the 3rd floor to the 2nd. So where were Adams and Styles during that time, according to Adams? Already outside the building!

Can someone explain how her time line prevents Oswald from using those stairs?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

It doesn't prevent Oswald from using those same stairs. And that is something I have also pointed out in my posts in the past:

"I'll say this regarding Vickie Adams' timeline....The more I think about this subject, the more I realize that even if Adams DID descend those stairs as quickly as she said she did, that particular scenario really does no harm whatsoever to the "Oswald Did It" conclusion.

Why?

Because...then Adams and Styles very likely BEAT Lee Harvey Oswald to the stairs. Hence, it's likely that Adams & Styles were always AHEAD of Oswald on their descent down the stairs.

And if Adams & Styles were really THAT fast at getting to the first floor, then they could have possibly beaten Baker & Truly too, with B&T only getting on the stairs after A&S had vacated the stairwell." -- DVP; February 17, 2011


COLIN CROW SAID:

Did Adams and Styles descend before or after Baker and Truly ascended?


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Conspiracy theorists are defeated either way.

If Adams and Styles descended BEFORE Baker and Truly started up the stairs, then there's absolutely no reason why Lee Oswald couldn't have used those same stairs without being seen or heard by the two women. Oswald would have simply been a little BEHIND Adams/Styles.

And if Adams/Styles descended AFTER Baker/Truly started up, then the girls were on the stairs AFTER all three men (Baker, Truly, and Oswald) had already used those same stairs.

Why is this so complicated for so many CTers? Regardless of which way the timing falls, there's no reason under the sun to conclude that Oswald couldn't have utilized those very same stairs in the northwest corner of the Book Depository Building and yet not be seen by Vickie Adams and Sandra Styles.

The conspiracy theorists who try and use "timeline" estimates provided by witnesses to positively prove that Oswald couldn't have shot President Kennedy are relying on very flimsy "proof". Especially in light of all of that OTHER stuff that Oswald left behind on the sixth floor that indicates Oswald was, indeed, up there shooting at the President with a Carcano rifle.

Also....

Can any CTer explain how the alleged "real assassin" (or assassins, plural)--i.e., an alleged killer OTHER than Lee Oswald--managed to get downstairs without anyone on ANY Depository floor noticing him/them?

CTers never want to face that question of "HOW DID THE REAL ASSASSINS ELUDE DETECTION?"

As long as Lee Harvey Oswald can somehow be exonerated via the flimsy "timeline" analysis, most CTers are happy. And to hell with the question I just asked above.

----------------------------------------------------------

Related Links:

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/17359-new-book-on-victoria-adams-by-author-barry-ernest/

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2017/05/tsbd-photographs-and-floor-plans.html

On 10/14/2022 at 2:53 AM, Joseph McBride said:

Robert Oswald forfeited any credibility by maligning his brother falsely as a killer.

On 10/14/2022 at 10:57 AM, Jonathan Cohen said:

What a ridiculous statement...

It sure is.

Just because Robert Oswald doesn't believe that all of the evidence that exists against his brother is fake evidence, he apparently forfeits "any credibility" in the eyes of a conspiracist named Joseph.

~~SMH~~

13 hours ago, Pete Mellor said:

Typical of a 'lone nut' member to question Garner's eyesight...

I never once questioned Garner's eyesight. I'm questioning the idea that Dorothy Garner kept a continuous second-by-second vigil on the back staircase just after the assassination. Such a notion is ridiculous.

20 minutes ago, Matt Allison said:

I've never read The Girl on the Stairs but if I'm understanding this video correctly, Dorothy Garner puts a giant dent in the WC version of LHO going from the 6th floor to the lunchroom. 

Only if a person wants to believe that Dorothy Garner had her eyes fixed on the TSBD staircase every single second just after the assassination.

From a 2014 discussion:

"Why in the world would anyone think Dorothy Garner had her eyes transfixed on the STAIRS every single second immediately following the President's assassination? How silly would that be, considering what had just happened outside those fourth-floor, SOUTH-SIDE windows just moments earlier? Why would she (or anyone) have kept a vigil on the staircase? Therefore, since it makes no logical sense to think that Garner (or ANYBODY ELSE) had their eyes peeled on those stairs every second, Oswald could have easily been on that 4th-floor landing for a matter of--what?--five seconds and not been seen by anyone who was on the same floor. Or do conspiracy theorists REALLY want to contend that Dorothy Garner never took her eyes off those stairs between 12:30 and 12:32 PM? That's incredibly silly to believe that's the case (even if she DID catch a glimpse of Truly and Baker)." -- DVP; Oct. 2014

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/Adams & Styles

58 minutes ago, Matt Allison said:

I'm a little in the dark about what exactly people seem to suspect Ruth Paine of...

I've been wondering about that very thing for years now....

"Once we remove the notion that ANYONE planted Lee Oswald in the TSBD [Click], then where do you go with any type of "handler" theory? What did Ruth DO to advance the plot forward in the weeks prior to November 22nd? Was letting him stay at her house a few nights in October and November supposedly furthering the plot along? Teaching him to drive? Was that what Ruth's CIA bosses used her for? Fixing Lee potatoes and corn muffins on weekends? Was that her purpose? Just WHAT supposedly was Ruth's role?" -- DVP; September 2, 2014

27 minutes ago, Micah Mileto said:

Was there ever any update to this post-COVID? Did NARA digitize them? If they did, we may be able to hear a full audio recording of the first press conference with Parkland Drs. Perry and Clark.

2 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

So I asked what evidence are you relying on that RFK was murdered.

And the witnesses who were there in the pantry of the Ambassador Hotel most certainly provide the proof that RFK was, indeed, "murdered". The autopsy alone certainly doesn't PROVE he was "murdered".

And I never said the witnesses PROVED there was only one killer of RFK. I was just answering your initial inquiry, which was:

2 hours ago, Pamela Brown said:

How could you fall asleep on anything with Bette Davis in it?

I agree, Pam!

http://DVP's Classic Movies Website / Actor Index---Bette Davis

40 minutes ago, Allen Lowe said:

Von Pein is like a bad nickel, keeps popping up to show us how fake it is. As for Ruth being a war tax protester, was she ever prosecuted for this? Of course not. She has, like all intelligence operatives, a "get out of jail free" card.

And---as usual---a conspiracy theorist (this time someone named Lowe) is more than happy to drag Mrs. Paine through the mud, despite a complete lack of something called "evidence" to support his ridiculous claim that Ruth Paine was an "intelligence operative".  And yet this despicable evidence-free hobby of character assassination against Ruth Paine continues---year after year. Pathetic.

JOE ALESI SAID (at Facebook)....

Max Good has learned that Ruth has now seen “The Assassination and Mrs. Paine”, and [Max] made a post on [The Education Forum]. I’m pleased to announce that not only have I been appointed as Ruth Paine’s Ambassador to the JFK community but could also be her “handler”.

Ruth Paine, handler of Oswald, now has her own handler! I read this to Ruth yesterday and she burst out laughing.

AT FACEBOOK, JOE ALESI SAID:

I saw Ruth yesterday [October 9, 2022] and informed her of the good work you are doing to knock down the lies and misinformation people like DiEugenio are spreading. The best part: She doesn’t even know who DiEugenio is.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Thank you, Joe, for telling Ruth Paine about my online posts supporting her.

And I think it's good that Ruth isn't very much aware of who Jim DiEugenio is. She's probably better off not knowing much about him.

If you see Ruth again, please give her my very best and let her know how much I admire and respect her.

And if you want to provide her with a good laugh, show her this image (also seen below). Ruth might also get a kick out of our "Richmond, Indiana" connection (which, in part, is true; I was born in Richmond and was living there when Ruth visited that town in September of 1963):

The original hilarious post written by "Dealey Joe" in 2010 can be viewed HERE.

6 minutes ago, Joseph McBride said:

Lawford is good in THE LONGEST DAY too.

Also:

Advise & Consent, Easter Parade, and Mrs. Miniver.

http://classic--movies.blogspot.com/2013/01/peter-lawford.html

2 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

Lawford played a sailor in the 1943 film "Sherlock Holmes Faces Death."

Yes, indeed, he did. And that's one of my favorite Basil Rathbone/Nigel Bruce Sherlock entries. A lot of fun. [DVP Review.]

http://DVP's Classic Movies Website/2011/09/Sherlock Holmes Faces Death

Here's a screen capture of Peter Lawford in the Sherlock film. He's only 19 years old here:

6 minutes ago, Joseph McBride said:

With CIA asset Ruth Paine, one must read in code.

plus the obligatory:

http://DVP's JFK Archives / Defending Ruth Paine

3 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

David?

Sirhan killed RFK.....alone. (IMO.)

7 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

In the MM house photo to the right of MM's facial shot there is a back side view of a figure of a woman standing looking at MM's home

The figure looks to be super imposed.   Odd.

Yes, I too took note of that. And the toys on the lawn look superimposed too (IMO). But David Andrews above explained the possible/probable reason for this.

And the "outlining" of people and things in newspaper photographs is something we can also observe with respect to JFK's murder as well. Here's one such Nov. 1963 example involving the famous Altgens photo (click to enlarge):

53 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

In the RFK case you rely on the witnesses saying he was shot. Why not simply rely on the autopsy for that conclusion?

The autopsy will confirm the victim died of gunshot wounds, yes. But an autopsy isn't going to prove "murder". A lot of people die from gunshot wounds and yet weren't "murdered".