David Von Pein

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

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

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):

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".

The best evidence for "murder" in the RFK case would be the many many witnesses who saw Senator Kennedy being shot multiple times. But why would you even bring up the RFK murder in this discussion about the death of Marilyn Monroe? The two deaths aren't remotely similar in nature. And yet this post of yours seems to be implying that those two deaths are similar. ~shrug~

You seriously want to know what "evidence" exists to show that RFK was "murdered"? Is such a silly discussion really warranted?

WTF?! You're obviously just playing around now. Because nobody (especially an individual named Cory A. Santos, Sr., Esq.) could possibly think the death of Marilyn Monroe and the gunshot death of Robert Francis Kennedy are equal in the "evidence of murder" department.

I did. And you said nothing in either of your previous two posts in this thread that comes even close to being "evidence" to show that Marilyn Monroe was murdered.

FYI / FWIW.... Some newspaper front pages following Marilyn's death in Aug. '62.... Click to enlarge....

But when it comes to the topic of Marilyn Monroe's death, you think you've got enough "evidence" to boldly make this claim: "Arguing Marilyn was murdered, and she was..." -- C. Santos Incredible.

I suppose you believe Dorothy Kilgallen was murdered too, right?

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com / Oswald's Changing Alibi

On August 16, 2013, Robert Prudhomme said: David Von Pein then said (on 8/18/2013): I think a better question might be: Why would Oswald have a desire to follow a policeman into the building and then race upstairs to buy a Coke at that exact moment in time? The above question is a particularly valid one (even to most conspiracists), since almost all CTers...acknowledge the fact that Oswald was most certainly "involved" in the assassination "plot" in some manner. In that set of circumstances (with Oswald involved in some plan to kill the President), can anyone imagine LHO wanting to go back inside the building from which shots had just been fired? Given the make-believe fantasy scenario I just outlined, wouldn't Oswald be much better off just staying outside the building entirely? In reality, of course, Oswald was inside the building when those Darnell and Wiegman images were taken. Lee Harvey, at that time, was in the process of hiding his rifle between boxes on the sixth floor and then hurrying down the back stairs after having just fired three shots at the President. More.... https://EducationForum.com/topic=Oswald Leaving TSBD? / Comment=276600

Related Links..... ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://jfk-archives / "Prayer Man" And Other Assorted Topics http://jfk-archives / Lee Oswald's Whereabouts At 12:30 PM On 11/22/63 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Pein" is not my last name.

What's changed?

I think you're probably referring to the alleged "bullet" that Deputy Sheriff Buddy Walthers (allegedly) found and picked up in the grass just across from the Depository. Is that correct? If not, I apologize in advance for this link, which is all about the alleged "Walthers Bullet" (which, of course, was not a "bullet" at all): http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/04/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-927.html

Not exactly. Humes burned ONE draft of the autopsy report and ONE set of bloody notes (from which, I assume, portions of the final autopsy report came). He said he re-wrote the notes "word for word" on fresh paper. I'm surprised that CTers aren't screaming more about the fact that Humes' re-written notes have apparently never seen the light of day either. I don't recall having ever seen them at any rate. Has anyone here seen them?

From the Clark Panel Report.... EXAMINATION OF X-RAY FILMS: The films submitted included: an anteroposterior film of the skull (#1), two left lateral views of the skull taken in slightly different projections (#2 and 3), three views of a group of three separate bony fragments from the skull (#4, 5, and 6), two anteroposterior views of the thoracolumbar region of the trunk (#7 and 11), one anteroposterior view of the right hemithorax, shoulder, and upper arm (#8), one anteroposterior view of the chest (#9), one anteroposterior view of the left hemithorax, shoulder, and upper arm (#10), one anteroposterior view of the lower femurs and knees (#12), one anteroposterior view of the pelvis (#13) and one anteroposterior view of the upper legs (#14).

Yes. It most certainly was. But to clarify.... It was not the autopsy report that was stained with JFK's blood. Only Humes' autopsy notes had blood on them.

Yes, Dr. Humes did burn his original autopsy notes in his home fireplace on 11/24/63. And the reason why he burned those notes is a very logical and sensible reason, as Dr. Humes himself explained in his HSCA testimony on September 7, 1978 (at 1 HSCA 330).... DR. HUMES -- "The original notes which were stained with the blood of our late President, I felt, were inappropriate to retain to turn in to anyone in that condition. I felt that people with some peculiar ideas about the value of that type of material, they might fall into their hands. I sat down and word for word copied what I had on fresh paper." MR. CORNWELL -- "And then destroyed them?" DR. HUMES -- "Destroyed the ones that were stained with the President's blood." ------------------------ Related discussion from September 2010: JAMES DiEUGENIO SAID -- "Autopsy report number one: Burned by Humes and testified to by him before the ARRB. He said it three times and it's in the transcript." DAVID VON PEIN SAID -- "Dr. Humes admitted to the Warren Commission in 1964 that he burned the first draft of the autopsy report [2 H 373]. So we certainly didn't have to wait until Humes' 1996 ARRB testimony to learn about that particular burning episode. And the very fact that Dr. Humes admitted to burning a draft of the autopsy report is a very good sign that that burning was not done with CONSPIRATORIAL intent or with the thought of a COVER-UP in Dr. Humes' mind. For Pete sake, if Humes had been part of a cover-up and/or conspiracy, the last thing in the world he would have ADMITTED to the Warren Commission is that he was burning autopsy papers in his home fireplace. Get real, Jim."

Do you mean Dr. Wecht? If so, I don't think I've ever specifically referred to the former Allegheny County Medical Examiner as "a buffoon, a kook, and a loon". But, yes, I certainly disagree with Dr. Wecht about several things regarding the JFK murder case. Check out the final report of the 1968 Clark Panel.... http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-1968-clark-panel-report.html

Yes, the autopsy physicians were, indeed, "pathologists". But they have also been referred to as "surgeons" as well....including here (twice) on page 60 of the Warren Report. I'm not aware of any THIRD attempt by Dr. Humes at writing the final autopsy report. I only know of two such efforts by Humes, which was due to the fact that the first draft of the autopsy report contained some errors, which an irritated Dr. Humes attempted to clarify (at least in part) during his ARRB testimony session in February of 1996: DR. JAMES J. HUMES -- Well, it [the first draft of the autopsy report] may have had errors in spelling or I don't know what was the matter with it, or whether I even ever did that. I don't know. I can't recall. I absolutely can't recall, and I apologize for that. But that's the way the cookie crumbles. I didn't want anything to remain that some squirrel would grab on and make whatever use that they might. Now, whether you felt that was reasonable or not, I don't know. But it doesn't make any difference because that was my decision and mine alone. Nobody else's. --------------------------- And as for any "confirmation" of the autopsy doctors physically searching for bullets inside President Kennedy's body, we have that confirmation in Dr. Humes' WC testimony (at 2 H 364).... DR. JAMES J. HUMES -- Before the arrival of Colonel Finck, we had made X-rays of the head, neck and torso of the President, and the upper portions of his major extremities, or both his upper and lower extremities. At Colonel Finck's suggestion, we then completed the X-ray examination by X-raying the President's body in toto, and those X-rays are available. ARLEN SPECTER -- What did those X-rays disclose with respect to the possible presence of a missile in the President's body? DR. HUMES -- They showed no evidence of a missile in the President's body at any point. And these were examined by ourselves and by the radiologist, who assisted us in this endeavor.

That would be impossible since neither JFK nor his stretcher was ever located in the area of Parkland where the bullet was found on Nov. 22. Some doctors have stated that Connally's wrist would have sustained more damage if that wrist had been struck by a separate bullet that had not gone through the neck of John Kennedy first. Although I'm sure that conspiracists won't have any trouble finding some medical professionals of their own that will say something to the contrary. Because as everybody here knows, there are plenty of opinions to go around in this case. (And thank you, Matthew, for the opening comments in your previous post.)