David Von Pein

And then, 14 years later, the HSCA decided to continue the "cover-up" by having a Photographic Evidence Panel consisting of---what was it, 19 total members I think it was?---pretend that the autopsy pictures and X-rays (plus the Oswald backyard photos) were genuine and not "forged"? Can you really believe in such generation-to-generation "cover-up" nonsense, Sandy?

Roy Kellerman's "flurry of shells [came] into the car" testimony can easily be reconciled within the "lone assassin" scenario: Kellerman merely heard the effects of the bullet that hit President Kennedy in the head (a bullet that was fired, of course, from the 6th Floor of the TSBD by Lee Oswald). Kellerman undoubtedly heard the two bullet fragments [CE567 and CE569] striking the chrome topping and the windshield of the limousine. Kellerman was sitting right next to this activity in the front of the car, and to him it sounded like a "flurry of shells" or "flurry of shots" coming into the car. (Kellerman said both of those things--"flurry of shells" and "flurry of shots"--during his Warren Commission testimony.) It makes total sense that Kellerman would, indeed, have possibly thought a "flurry of shells" or a "flurry of shots" (i.e., more than one "shell" or "shot") came "into the car". What would ANY of us have thought if we had heard what Roy Kellerman heard while sitting right next to the places where bullet fragments were clanking against the front parts of the automobile during the period of time when bullets were flying around Dealey Plaza? Would you have thought the clanking of bullets in the front part of the car was merely the result of bullet FRAGMENTS striking the automobile? Or would you possibly have thought that multiple ADDITIONAL bullets (or "shells") were being fired into the car? If it were me, I think I'd probably be inclined to think the latter. --------------------------- Another "Flurry" Discussion..... ROBERT HARRIS SAID: Recently, you suggested that when Roy Kellerman heard a "flurry of shells" come into the car, that he was referring to the sound of bullet fragments from the head explosion striking the windshield. Are you suggesting that the sound of a fragment glancing off the glass is so similar to that of a gunshot, that Mr. Kellerman was fooled? DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Of course that's what I am suggesting. Exactly that. From the totality of evidence that tells any reasonable person that ONLY THREE GUNSHOTS WERE FIRED in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63, it's quite obvious that Mr. Kellerman's "flurry of shells" and/or "flurry of shots" were the sounds of the head-shot bullet fragments striking the interior portions of the limousine (the windshield and the metal/chrome near the windshield). Are you, Robert Harris, suggesting that the sounds of bullet fragments striking those objects RIGHT NEXT TO KELLERMAN IN THE CAR made NO audible sound whatsoever? Plus: There's the fact that Secret Service Agent Kellerman is a witness who is on record (at least twice) as having said he heard precisely THREE shots fired in Dealey Plaza. No more. No less. http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/search?q=Kellerman+Flurry

I didn't know Mama Harper was at the Depository on 11/22. Cool! Maybe she was playing the part of Marguerite #2 that day.

No there wasn't. The cycle with the open mic was miles away from Elm & Houston at 12:30.

PAT SPEER SAID [BACK IN OCT. 2007 at the John McAdams newsgroup]: To support that three evenly-spaced shots were fired by a bolt-action rifle, he [DVP] uses Warren Commission testimony taken 4 months or more after the assassination, after the witnesses had been told by the media and their government that Oswald had acted alone. He avoids the earliest statements of the witnesses like the plague. .... This is not chaff, by any means. A competent and committed defense attorney could establish reasonable doubt on this fact alone. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: When thinking some more about witness Harold Norman and his comments made after President Kennedy's assassination, this thought struck me: The argument about the SPACING between the gunshots that Norman heard is really kind of an irrelevant and unimportant argument. Why? Because regardless of the exact number of seconds that passed between the three shots, ALL THREE OF THOSE SHOTS CAME FROM THE SAME RIFLE ABOVE NORMAN'S HEAD. And surely no conspiracy theorist wants to propose a theory that has TWO gunmen and TWO different rifles being fired from the Sniper's Nest window on the 6th Floor directly above Mr. Norman's head....do they? Therefore, no matter what the precise spacing was between the shots, per Norman's never-wavering "I HEARD THREE SHOTS FROM ABOVE ME" account of the shooting, it HAS to mean that the ONE gunman WAS able to fire those three shots from the gunman's ONE rifle in the allotted time to get off three such shots from his bolt-action weapon. The same argument I just made regarding Norman could also be made when it comes to many of the other Dealey Plaza witnesses, i.e., the witnesses who fall into the following category: I HEARD EXACTLY THREE SHOTS AND ALL OF THOSE SHOTS CAME FROM THE GENERAL DIRECTION OF THE BOOK DEPOSITORY BUILDING. That is to say: What major difference does it really make what the precise SPACING was between these three shots, which were ALL shots (per those witnesses in the category just mentioned) that VERY LIKELY CAME FROM THE VERY SAME GUN? So, given these parameters that many witnesses DO agree on (i.e., exactly THREE shots fired and all coming from ONE rear location at or very near the Texas School Book Depository Building), the "spacing" issue is largely a moot point altogether. David Von Pein October 2007

------------------------------------------------------------------ http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2023/06/paul-landis.html

Yeah, you said that before. But no matter how many times you say silly things, they're still going to be silly (and unprovable, of course).

Yeah, I would have cleaned up that mess much sooner, but I first had to call my super @ Covert Central in Virginia.

You're getting sillier by the day.

Huh? Why would you be surprised in the least when an LNer questions the integrity of a CTer? That happens every day. It's a given. It's virtually automatic. What should be surprising you is the fact that Pat Speer has been under such vigorous attack by the CTers in this nearly-all-CT forum in recent months. That is a bit surprising.

My, how convenient for you. Naturally, almost all CTers believe in such nonsense. (There was no "fraudulent conduct", of course. But CTers like to pretend there was.)

I've deleted my post aimed at Pat, after I noticed he added the words "at least not in this century" when referring to Clint Hill's statements.

No. You should believe the AUTHENTICATED autopsy pictures and X-rays. Which are things that prove the Parkland BOH witnesses were all wrong. That's why we have autopsy photos and X-rays---to document where the wounds REALLY are.

.......

No, I did not. There are some CTers who think George H.W. Bush was hanging around the front entrance of the TSBD shortly after JFK was shot, which prompted me to create the webpage below and ask this question: http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com / Why Would A Plotter Do This?

You're wrong. The angle seen in CE903 works just fine --- 17.72 degrees (17d43m30s). But we must always be aware of this fact: Lyndal Shaneyfelt testified that the angle of the string on the wall behind Specter in CE903 is 17 degrees, 43 minutes, 30 seconds [hereafter 17-43-30]. But that particular measurement, keep in mind, is only an AVERAGE angle from the Depository's sixth floor to the chalk mark on the back of the JFK stand-in. It's the average angle between Zapruder Film frames 210 and 225, as testified to by Shaneyfelt. If you split the difference between Z210 and Z225, the 17-43-30 angle would actually equate to the SBT shot striking at Z217.5. But it's very unlikely and improbable that the Warren Commission managed to hit the SBT Z-frame squarely on the (half-frame) head at Z217.5. The bullet, in my own opinion, is obviously striking the victims a little later than that--at Z224. Therefore, what we see in Commission Exhibit 903 really isn't the EXACT angle of the bullet that went through Kennedy and Connally. And I'll admit that. So a tiny little bit of slack and margin-of-error needs to be given to Mr. Specter and the Warren Commission concerning the angle of trajectory depicted in CE903. Because, let's face it, if Kennedy and Connally weren't hit at exactly Z217.5 (and they very likely were not hit at that precise moment in time), then the angle and other measurements are going to be just slightly off. Based on the obvious truth about the angles that I just mentioned above, is there any chance that the conspiracy theorists of the world would be willing to cut Arlen Specter and the Warren Commission just a tiny bit of slack when it comes to the Single-Bullet Theory? Via the CE903 visual demonstration, if a bullet proceeding downward at an angle of 17.72 degrees (aligning perfectly with a "Z210-Z225" angle from the "Oswald window") were to exit JFK's throat at the tie knot, it would then proceed on that same angle directly into the back of Governor Connally in exactly the place where we know a bullet DID enter Connally's upper right back. That's a pretty impressive demonstration if you ask me. I wonder what the odds are of the Warren Commission being able to re-create such a nearly perfect SBT demonstration and yet NOT have such a demonstration represent the truth of what actually happened---even though the angle from the known sniper's window was right where it should be if the shot occurred at around Z217.5 AND the re-created bullet path travelled exactly where a bullet really did strike President Kennedy and John Connally on 11/22/63? I wouldn't want to take those odds to Vegas if I was an anti-SBT conspiracy believer. And yet I'm supposed to believe the CTers who tell me that two (or probably THREE) different bullets lined themselves up beautifully so that Arlen Specter could later present this impressive "one bullet" exhibit to the world. Talk about incredibly good luck for Mr. Specter & Company! .... http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/sbt-perfection-of-ce903.html

Fighting the "Ford Moved The Wound" myth is a 24-hour-a-day battle. It never wants to die the death it so obviously deserves.... http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/gerald-ford-and-sbt.html

Gee, talk about someone not getting the point. Keven Hofeling has earned that distinction with ease in this discussion.

Not according to one particular conspiracy fantasist.... ------------------------------- "The biggest development in the history of JFK assassination research has just happened. We have irrefutable proof now that the garage shooter of Lee Harvey Oswald was FBI Agent James Bookhout. It turns out that the Ruby impostor we found, posing with police, is him, Bookhout. We have a front-facing image of him staring right at us, and it fits perfectly with the young James Bookhout. There is no longer a speck of doubt that an agent of the US government, James Bookhout, shot Lee Harvey Oswald--not Jack Ruby. Please read this and share it. Spread the word. JFK truth is rising. JFK truth is here." -- Ralph C. Cinque; October 11, 2016 ------------------------------- Lots more of this hilarity (aka: insanity) is archived at my website, here: http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2017/05/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1247.html

I have no idea why Keven Hofeling is blasting me on the McClelland "hands-on demonstrations" topic. McClelland's "demonstrations" have ALWAYS placed the large "blow out" wound at the RIGHT-REAR of JFK's head (with very little variation). So where's the disagreement there, Keven? The disagreement comes, of course, when I point out the fact that Dr. McClelland was 100% wrong, as proven for all time by the HSCA-authenticated autopsy photos and X-rays, plus the Z-Film, which also proves that ALL of the witnesses who said there was a huge blow-out wound at the rear of Kennedy's head were dead wrong. But CTers like Keven Hofeling will, evidently, continue to pretend that the autopsy photos AND the X-rays AND the Zapruder Film AND the autopsy report AND the testimony of all 3 autopsy surgeons are ALL (in perfect tandem) fake/phony/altered/manufactured. DVP's JFK Archives / Dr. Robert N. McClelland's Ridiculous And Crazy Beliefs

"The fact that CE573 cannot be linked to any specific rifle is virtual proof, right there, that it was not "planted" into the evidence pile. Because only a total idiot would want to do something so stupid. Although, yes, CE573 looks exactly like CE399 in many respects. No doubt about it. But if you're going to go to the trouble of PLANTING a bullet to frame a particular person, you're surely going to make sure that that bullet can be tied exclusively to the patsy's gun." -- DVP; March 2016 http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/12/edwin-walker-and-lee-harvey-oswald.html

I was just reporting a fact, Pam.