David Von Pein

That doesn't bum me out, Vince. I'm accustomed to most people being dead wrong when it comes to their rejecting the wholly-logical SBT. (And they are dead wrong.) 😁

CTers always ignore the multiple witnesses who said the shots were pretty much "EVENLY SPACED" vs. being "bunched together". At my webpage below, I cite seven such "evenly spaced" examples (plus Nellie Connally, who thought the last two shots were spaced farther apart than shots 1 and 2): http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/05/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-710.html

Re: Malcolm Kilduff.... Here's something I said to John Barbour in 2014: "But you surely cannot believe that when Kilduff casually pointed to his temple that he was inferring that he knew precisely where the bullet entered, can you? That's absurd. Kilduff was merely pointing to his head in a general way to indicate that the President was killed by a bullet through his head/brain. Nothing more than that. And AFAIK, Kilduff was never a conspiracy believer (but I could be mistaken about that)." http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2016/10/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1196.html

Pat, The 2:43 timestamp actually refers to WBAP-Radio, not WBAP-TV. More.... A Study Of When Oswald's Name Was First Mentioned On TV & Radio

So, you think somebody was firing a weapon from on top of the Triple Underpass, eh? Okay.

Karl, In Jay Watson's "blackboard" report (43 minutes into the video you linked above), Jay talks about how the shots were apparently coming from the OVERPASS, not the Grassy Knoll at all. Now, do you (or any CTer) actually believe that any shots came from atop the Triple Underpass bridge? As I said (with emphasis now added on my first four words).... "For the most part, however, the first-day television and radio coverage supports a ONE-assassin, THREE-shots-fired assassination scenario. And that is truly amazing if a multi-gun, six-shots-fired killing had really occurred--as so many conspiracy theorists seem to think did happen in Dealey Plaza."

Related link of interest: Jim Hagerty + A Study Of When Oswald's Name Was First Mentioned On TV & Radio

I had this to say about James Hagerty in 2014: "There is a little bit of "conspiracy" theorizing and speculation, particularly from James Hagerty, who was a former White House press secretary and was an executive at ABC in 1963. Just a few hours after the assassination, Hagerty stated on live TV that JFK's murder had been the result of "a carefully planned conspiracy". But such pure speculation on Hagerty's part was totally irresponsible. Hagerty, of course, had absolutely nothing to back up his claim about the President's murder being a conspiracy. For the most part, however, the first-day television and radio coverage supports a ONE-assassin, THREE-shots-fired assassination scenario. And that is truly amazing if a multi-gun, six-shots-fired killing had really occurred--as so many conspiracy theorists seem to think did happen in Dealey Plaza. Maybe [CTers] think that everybody at CBS, NBC, ABC, WFAA, KLIF, WBAP, and KRLD were all part of an immediate and wide-sweeping cover-up. But, hey, miracles *can* happen from time to time, I suppose. After all, the Mets did win the Series in '69." https://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/11/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-844.html

Gil Jesus said: I don't think I've got a radio report featuring any interview with Earlene Roberts (if I ever find one, I'll post it here), but I do have a video with Mrs. Roberts saying that Oswald left the roominghouse on November 22 wearing a "short coat". (But she didn't say "short GRAY coat".) The video source I'm speaking of is my video below (near the end). That brief piece with Mrs. Roberts at the end comes from the 1964 David Wolper theatrical motion picture "Four Days In November". And I've never been sure if that clip with Roberts was filmed by a local Dallas/Ft. Worth TV station or whether Mrs. Roberts was interviewed and filmed by Wolper's movie crew itself. I suspect it's the latter, but I'm just not sure. But here it is below. The first interview with Roberts on this video, btw, comes from the 1964 CBS-TV special program "November 22nd And The Warren Report" :

But don't forget --- the DPD wasn't the ONLY law enforcement entity gathering and collecting evidence in the JFK case. The Secret Service collected CE399 plus all the bullet fragments from the limousine. And there are many many CTers who feel that the FBI was up to their eyeballs in helping to "frame" Lee Oswald too, after the FBI got ahold of the evidence from the DPD around midnight on Nov. 22. So that's THREE different law agencies (not counting Bill Decker's Sheriff's Dept. as well) who have been accused of playing around with the evidence in the Kennedy/Tippit cases. So, if the evidence in the JFK/Tippit cases is not legitimate, that means THREE different law enforcement entities would have had to possess the very same like-mindedness to want to frame the same man (Lee Oswald) by using fraudulent/manufactured evidence that all points to LHO. Do you believe that, Pat? Or do you think it was just the DPD who were involved with "faking this a little" and "faking that a little"?

So, Joseph, you think JP David Johnston was lying through his teeth to the WC was he said he personally arraigned LHO at 1:35 AM CST on 11/23? And is this document (Johnston Exhibit No. 1), handwritten by Johnston, also a lie?: https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh20/html/WH_Vol20_0168a.htm

I never said anything of the kind. I merely wanted to know what made you think the DPD cops "believed" in the suspect's guilt in the first place.

And that document is obviously not correct, because the testimony of JP David Johnston verifies that Oswald was arraigned for JFK's murder at 1:35 AM on 11/23.... "That arraignment was held at 1:35 a.m., November 23, 1963, in the identification bureau of the Dallas Police Department, and once again I appraised him [Oswald] of his constitutional rights, read the affidavit, and advised him again that I remanded him to the custody of the sheriff, Dallas County, denying bond as capital offense." -- D. Johnston; WC Testimony The video below was recorded about an hour or so before the 1:35 AM arraignment of Oswald. In the video, David Johnston reads the formal charges filed against Oswald (the same charges/affidavit that Johnston would be reading to Oswald an hour later):

And if they DID believe they had the right suspect even BEFORE they started fabricating evidence, please tell me what you think they based that belief on---if not the actual untainted evidence in the case? They surely didn't "believe" a person was guilty on the basis of having no real and untainted evidence against him in the first place, right?

Even in cases where their own police officers have been slain? Even in THAT type of case, you think the DPD would NOT want to seek out and capture the real killer of their brother officer? They would just be content to let the culprit get away and FRAME an innocent guy instead? Come now, Mr. Gram.

..........

I disagree. Again, I think it's that term "legitimate" that must be applied. Is the ambiguity "legitimate"? In other words, is it truly REASONABLE to think that the cops were running around faking/changing/manipulating the Tippit evidence so that Oswald could be framed and the real killer could get away with it? Such a notion to me is preposterous. But to many CTers, it's more than reasonable---it actually happened (despite the CTers' ZERO amount of proof to back up such a vile charge). And around this mulberry bush we pass once more....

Right. And that is just exactly what I have said (twice now) to Jim DiEugenio. Plus, given my current condition of having multiple eggshells permanently affixed to both of my feet while I'm posting at this Internet location, I most certainly wouldn't be stupid enough to come out and call any EF member the L-word. And from the posts I've seen where Bill Brown has utilized the L-word "trick", I don't think Bill has called any current EF member the L-word either. If I'm wrong, Gil, please provide the link(s).

The key word there, Tom, being "legitimate". Dale Myers doesn't think there's "legitimate ambiguity" in the Tippit evidence at all. And he argues his case from that POV. And I happen to agree with him about the evidence that exists in the Tippit murder case. The Tippit case is about as "open and shut" as any case could ever be, IMO. (And HERE is why I believe that.) You and other CTers disagree. Well, okay. There's always going to be that basic disagreement about the Tippit evidence, I guess. But I certainly haven't seen any solid proof to indicate, for example, that the chain of custody is terrible or non-existent for the V510210 revolver (which was definitely shipped to OSWALD'S P.O. Box by Seaport Traders) or that the chain of custody/possession is lousy for the 2 non-Poe bullet shells that littered 10th Street either. And if Officer C.T. Walker's testimony regarding some of the things uttered by Lee Oswald in the police car after his arrest are correct and accurate (and I see no reason to totally disregard Walker's testimony; do you?)....then, in my opinion, Oswald, in essence, practically confessed to murdering J.D. Tippit during that ride in the police car on the way to City Hall. No, he didn't say to Walker: "I just shot me a cop!" But does anybody really think a totally innocent person would say some of the things that Oswald is alleged to have said in the theater and just after his arrest? http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com / They Say It Just Takes A Second To Die

Oh my Lord! These eggshells are getting harder and harder to walk on! It'd be nice if you could learn how to spell his name correctly though. (Even if you do hate the man's guts.) Anyone who can call Dale Myers' book "With Malice" an "incomplete" book must certainly be somebody who has never read it. Because if there's one thing "With Malice" is certainly NOT, it's "incomplete".

OK, Pat. I won't press you any more on Revolver V510210. Thanks.

But, as I said before, neither Bill Brown nor I dodged any rule, and that's because we did not call any FORUM MEMBER the L-word. (And, as we can see, Jim D. above just now did the "spaced out letters" trick again himself.)

That's not what I asked you though, Pat.

That's true. It also helps in finding primary source information on a given subject too (which I try to always link to on my webpages).