The CE399 Planters

[Michael Hogan]

Solid evidence, OFFICIAL evidence, valid evidence are not the equivalent of solid proof.

This shows what Michael Hogan's mindset is -- he's saying that not even "valid evidence" and "solid evidence" are good enough to provide "solid proof" of something in the JFK case.

I said that they are not the equivalent of solid proof. And they're not.

[David Von Pein]

It was planned to remove all bullets and identifiable fragments from the wounds before the official autopsy.

But what about the potential bullets and fragments in John Connally's body?

Connally didn't die, and therefore could not be subjected to any kind of "rigged" or phony autopsy (which is what CTers think happened with JFK's autopsy).

So did the plotters of this grandiose "REMOVE ALL BULLETS AND IDENTIFIABLE FRAGMENTS FROM THE WOUNDS BEFORE THE OFFICIAL AUTOPSY" scheme just get lucky when no bullets or large, identifiable fragments were recovered from the wounds of Governor Connally at Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas?

Conspiracy theorists sound so incredibly silly when they start talking about the physical evidence in the JFK case. And what makes it so incredibly silly, of course, is the fact that none of this stupid crap they think happened with the bullet evidence ever really happened at all. Nor COULD it possibly have happened--unless all of the plotters and conspirators had the same talents and abilities as magician David Copperfield.

Edited September 21, 2010 by David Von Pein

[William Kelly]

It was planned to remove all bullets and identifiable fragments from the wounds before the official autopsy.

But what about the potential bullets and fragments in John Connally's body?

Connally didn't die, and therefore could not be subjected to any kind of "rigged" or phony autopsy (which is what CTers think happened with JFK's autopsy).

So did the plotters of this grandiose "REMOVE ALL BULLETS AND IDENTIFIABLE FRAGMENTS FROM THE WOUNDS BEFORE THE OFFICIAL AUTOPSY" scheme just get lucky when no bullets or large, identifiable fragments were recovered from the wounds of Governor Connally at Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas?

Conspiracy theorists sound so incredibly silly when they start talking about the physical evidence in the JFK case. And what makes it so incredibly silly, of course, is the fact that none of this stupid crap they think happened with the bullet evidence ever really happened at all. Nor COULD it possibly have happened--unless all of the plotters and conspirators had the same talents and abilities as magician David Copperfield.

Yea, what about the potential bullets and fragments in John Connally's body.

IF there are any at all, how could they possibly come from CE399, the pristine bullet?

The alternatives might be even sillier, but The silly part is the official story that we know isn't true.

BKelly

[David Andrews]

But what about the potential bullets and fragments in John Connally's body?

Connally didn't die, and therefore could not be subjected to any kind of "rigged" or phony autopsy (which is what CTers think happened with JFK's autopsy).

He didn't die - so he could lie! Nobody had possession of Big John's body.

Imagine the scene with the Secret Service hustling two coffins out of town, though.

Edited September 21, 2010 by David Andrews

[David Josephs]

The CE399 in evidence was NOT the bullet identified as the one found on the stretcher at Parkland.

Not a single person who handled the bullet found on the stretcher said it was the same as CE399.

The fact that something is entered into evidence does not automatically give it a supportable chain of evidence nor is it irrefutable. If those who handled it can not identify it AND the chain of possession is not firmly established the value as a piece of evidence is greatly diminished.

Regarding the shells, DVP, there is also testimony in evidence that the shells were bunched together when first discovered, that they were picked up and put back down prior to the photos (as were the boxes by the window). If we are to accept CE399 on face value then we must also accept other testimony that appears as evidence in the WCR, right?

Please explain how one of those shells has 2 firing pin marks, or the one with a bent lip. and how the MC even came into Oswald's possession, etc, etc...

A rifle fires a bullet that, when recovered, has not a single shred of evidence that it actually hit anyone - no bone, blood, fibers, nothing.... - but is proven to have been fired from a rifle that originally is found not to have ANY of Oswald's fingerprints, any means of coming into Oswald's possession and is not seen entering the TSBD with Oswald that morning.

Finally, you still haven't explained why Oswald was not up at the Sniper's Nest before 12:15 since he was all alone and had no way of knowing when the motorcade would pass... It was just luck that the plane was 20 minutes late???

I am not saying evidence was faked... just that your case hinges on tying the bullets to the rifle to Oswald being in a position to use them - the evidence contradicts this at every point... or at least puts enough reasonable doubt as to question the actual conclusion.

[David Von Pein]

He [John Connally] didn't die - so he could lie!

Oh, naturally. If you didn't die, you must have lied.

Right, David Andrews?

Hilarious.

[David Von Pein]

Regarding the shells, DVP, there is also testimony in evidence that the shells were bunched together when first discovered.

Oh, I see that the chronic xxxx named Roger Craig has you hypnotized, eh?

Can't you see the idiocy of Craig's statement about the shells being only about an inch apart and all pointing the same direction?

Who would even WANT to plant shells in such an obvious "THESE SHELLS WERE PLACED HERE, THEY DIDN'T FALL THIS WAY ON THEIR OWN AFTER BEING FIRED FROM RIFLE C2766" fashion?

Just how stupid were those patsy-framers anyway? I'd really like to know.

Let's take a quick "How Stupid Were These Plotters?" inventory:

They supposedly planted a bullet on the WRONG stretcher at Parkland (per some CTers).

They planted shells in the Sniper's Nest in such a manner to make it look like they were placed there by hand (per some CTers).

They wait until Sunday, Nov. 24th to shoot Lee Oswald, so that their "hit man" named Ruby could perform the murder on live television in front of millions of people.

They allow their one and only patsy to wander around on the lower floors of the Book Depository at the exact time they desperately need him upstairs on the sixth floor firing a gun at the President. (This one is momumentally stupid on the part of the unknown and unseen "they".)

They go to the immense trouble of impersonating LHO all over God's Creation PRIOR to Nov. 22, and they take the time to "fake" the backyard photos (and then they got Marina to lie about them by getting her to say for the rest of her life that she, herself, took those pictures of her late husband) -- and yet when Game Day (11/22) rolls around, what do "they" do? --- They start popping away at JFK from several different directions in Dealey Plaza, even though they are supposed to be framing just ONE guy in the TSBD.

These bumbling patsy-framers must have all attended "Idiots 'R Us University" before commencing their Let's Frame Oswald project.

If we are to accept CE399 on face value then we must also accept other testimony that appears as evidence in the WCR, right?

If it's the testimony of a known xxxx such as Roger Dean Craig, then no.

As far as the JFK murder case goes, there was no bigger and more blatant PROVABLE xxxx than Roger D. Craig. No question about that fact. And anyone who places a single ounce of faith in anything that xxxx says in connection with the JFK assassination is nothing but a fool.

Edited September 21, 2010 by David Von Pein

[Michael Hogan]

Conspiracy theorists sound so incredibly silly when they start talking about the physical evidence in the JFK case. And what makes it so incredibly silly, of course, is the fact that none of this stupid crap they think happened with the bullet evidence ever really happened at all. Nor COULD it possibly have happened--unless all of the plotters and conspirators had the same talents and abilities as magician David Copperfield.

David has demonstrated that he lacks a complete understanding of the physical evidence in the JFK case. In the CTKA thread he posted a snippet

of testimony from Dr. Charles Gregory and tried to pawn off the idea that Dr. Gregory supported Specter's silly theory that one bullet passed through

President Kennedy and caused all of Governor Connally's wounds. David was shown Dr. Gregory's testimony after Gregory had the chance to see

CE399 and Dr. Gregory's stated skepticism that one bullet caused all the wounds being discussed by Specter.

When confronted with this David's response was to ignore it, as he chooses to do with many things that challenge his belief system.

A few members noted that if the discussion between David and Jim D were a fight, the referee would have stopped it. Truth is, a prizefight would have

never been sanctioned in the first place. Vastly different weight classes. When it comes to the physical evidence David has proven he's a lightweight.

Edited September 21, 2010 by Michael Hogan

[David Von Pein]

How did CE 399 ballistically match the MC rifle? Well maybe because it was fired from it sometime? But certainly not by Oswald.

Oh, certainly not, Jim! If it leads to LHO, then forget it. Right?

You're hilarious. As I said earlier, Jimbo has become the poster boy for "JFK Conspiracy Caricatures". And he's basking in all its glory.....from still supporting a fraud named Jim Garrison, to supporting a person who is silly enough to write a book claiming there were TWO Lee Oswalds and TWO Marguerites.....to purporting the outlandish idea that Buell Frazier and Linnie Randle just MADE UP the paper bag.....to accusing Ruth Paine of being a CIA agent who was "up to [her] neck" in framing Lee Harvey Oswald.....to the totally absurd assertion that there's virtually no evidence at all for any sniper being in the sixth-floor Sniper's Nest at all on 11/22/63.....to the even more ridiculous assertion that Oswald was innocent of shooting J.D. Tippit.

The above things represent the typical type of conspiracy crackpottery that Jimbo enjoys wallowing in on a daily basis.

You're a howl, Jim. But please continue. I love watching you spill your conspiracy guts with the vast heaps of impossible-to-prove CT garbage that you spew daily.

That is an impossibility on too many counts to measure here. Although I did outline some of them in my Impossible Journey article at ctka.net.

Which is an article riddled with speculation, half-truths, and misrepresentations (as usual).

DiEugenio hasn't come close to proving CE399 wasn't fired at JFK on Nov. 22. And the chain of possession is perfectly intact, despite DiEugenio's constant whining about it.

As John McAdams has correctly stated, an officer/agent does not need to physically MARK a piece of evidence in order for the chain of custody to be established.

And, btw, Elmer Todd's initials ARE somewhere on that bullet. And DiEugenio will apparently never tire of misrepresenting the things that John Hunt did for his CE399 examination. Hunt didn't use the ACTUAL BULLET for his 2006 CE399 article. Hunt used the NARA photos. DiEugenio can't seem to distinguish the difference.

The shells are a joke. When Jeremy Gunn tried to find out exactly how many were there at the time of discovery, he ran into a road block. Since he found out he could not find the first guy who handled them. The DPD is real good at hiding chain of possession.

And then of course there is good ole CE 543, which proves the other two were planted since it could not have been fired that day.

So, your stupid, ever-bumbling Patsy Framers are at it again, I see. They "plant" a shell that could have never been fired that day in an effort to frame Oswald as the lone gunman. Brilliant.

DiEugenio, as he always does, totally misrepresents CE543 and its capabilities. SEVERAL people have gotten "dented" shells after firing them in MC rifles. DiEugenio doesn't like that fact, so he will ignore it.

It's true, I ignore lots and lots of DiEugenio's nonsensical bullxxxx too....so there's no need for Jimbo to come back at me with that 'pot/kettle' retort. I admit I ignore lots of DiEugenio's arguments. Most of them are just too off-the-wall and silly to even respond to.

And I will admit that I know far less about the Garrison debacle than Jimbo does. But a person I trust much more than DiEugenio has said this recently about a couple of Jimmy's arguments re the Garrison case:

"My, is this silly:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=16450&st=465&p=204804entry204804

[Quoting DiEugenio:]

The idea that somehow Clay Shaw lost something important over this is a myth promulgated by his backers like James Kirkwood and Warren Rogers etc. It makes me wonder what DVP reads besides McAdams and VB. The minute JG indicted Shaw, the CIA began an illegal and covert campaign to make sure he would not be convicted. Because Jim Angleton's Garrison Group had decided that if things were left as is, JG would convict Shaw-and we have that in writing.

In fact, the "Garrison group" first met on 20 September 1967, long after the Garrison "investigation" took off.

[Quoting DiEugenio:]

It began with the team of Phelan, Aynseworth and Sheridan coming into town and using bribery and extortion to wreck the DA's case. It then continued for two years--it actually increased in numbers and intensity and scope-- to be sure Shaw was acquitted. This was partly financed with secret funds sent through the local law office of Monroe and Lehmann.

Silly. Anybody have any idea what Jim's source on this is?

[Quoting DiEugenio:]

When Shaw was acquitted, he then went on a speaking tour to deride Garrison. And if you check out his will, which I did, he was fine at the time of his death. A former Army Intelligence officer was sent in while he was ill to take care of him.

Was fine at the time of his death??!!

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/death9.htm

Jimmy D. simply doesn't know what he's talking about." -- John McAdams; 09/20/10

Source Link:

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/b0fd04d8a9ee47a9

Edited September 22, 2010 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

David [Von Pein] has demonstrated that he lacks a complete understanding of the physical evidence in the JFK case.

You're hysterical, Mike.

[Michael Hogan]

Conspiracy theorists sound so incredibly silly when they start talking about the physical evidence in the JFK case. And what makes it so incredibly silly, of course, is the fact that none of this stupid crap they think happened with the bullet evidence ever really happened at all. Nor COULD it possibly have happened--unless all of the plotters and conspirators had the same talents and abilities as magician David Copperfield.

David has demonstrated that he lacks a complete understanding of the physical evidence in the JFK case. In the CTKA thread he posted a snippet

of testimony from Dr. Charles Gregory and tried to pawn off the idea that Dr. Gregory supported Specter's silly theory that one bullet passed through

President Kennedy and caused all of Governor Connally's wounds. David was shown Dr. Gregory's testimony after Gregory had the chance to see

CE399 and Dr. Gregory's stated skepticism that one bullet caused all the wounds being discussed by Specter.

When confronted with this David's response was to ignore it, as he chooses to do with many things that challenge his belief system.

A few members noted that if the discussion between David and Jim D were a fight, the referee would have stopped it. Truth is, a prizefight would have

never been sanctioned in the first place. Vastly different weight classes. When it comes to the physical evidence David has proven he's a lightweight.

You're hysterical, Mike.

Didn't want to talk about Dr. Gregory's testimony, did you David?

[David Andrews]

He [John Connally] didn't die - so he could lie!

Oh, naturally. If you didn't die, you must have lied.

Right, David Andrews?

Hilarious.

Come, my dear man - in this our world, there are many who require far less persuading.

Edited September 22, 2010 by David Andrews

[David Von Pein]

Gregory's skepticism is understandable, Michael. I admit that.

But what other option is there, given the bullet evidence in this case (including the LACK of bullets that SHOULD BE THERE if the SBT is not correct)?

Answer: None.

[Cliff Varnell]

Gregory's skepticism is understandable, Michael. I admit that.

But what other option is there, given the bullet evidence in this case (including the LACK of bullets that SHOULD BE THERE if the SBT is not correct)?

Answer: None.

Factually incorrect.

There are three possibilities:

1) The rounds which created the back and throat wounds remained in the

body, indicating fakery of the neck x-ray and the incompetence of the

autopsists (the least likely, in my view).

2) The rounds which created the back and throat wounds were removed

prior to the autopsy (unlikely, in my view).

3) The suspicion held by the prosectors upon completion of the autopsy

that JFK was hit with rounds which "dissolve after contact" was right

on the money (highly likely, in my view).

Given JFK's provable T3 back wound the SBT is impossible, period.

[Michael Hogan]

Conspiracy theorists sound so incredibly silly when they start talking about the physical evidence in the JFK case. And what makes it so incredibly silly, of course, is the fact that none of this stupid crap they think happened with the bullet evidence ever really happened at all. Nor COULD it possibly have happened--unless all of the plotters and conspirators had the same talents and abilities as magician David Copperfield.

David has demonstrated that he lacks a complete understanding of the physical evidence in the JFK case. In the CTKA thread he posted a snippet

of testimony from Dr. Charles Gregory and tried to pawn off the idea that Dr. Gregory supported Specter's silly theory that one bullet passed through

President Kennedy and caused all of Governor Connally's wounds. David was shown Dr. Gregory's testimony after Gregory had the chance to see

CE399 and Dr. Gregory's stated skepticism that one bullet caused all the wounds being discussed by Specter.

When confronted with this David's response was to ignore it, as he chooses to do with many things that challenge his belief system.

A few members noted that if the discussion between David and Jim D were a fight, the referee would have stopped it. Truth is, a prizefight would have

never been sanctioned in the first place. Vastly different weight classes. When it comes to the physical evidence David has proven he's a lightweight.

You're hysterical, Mike.

Didn't want to talk about Dr. Gregory's testimony, did you David?

Gregory's skepticism is understandable, Michael. I admit that.

It is you that posted an incomplete portion of his testimony to make it seem as if Dr. Gregory had bought into Specter's theory, when his later testimony indicated exactly the opposite.

Your mistake was shown to you, and you ignored it. It was shown to you again and you managed some barely intelligible sarcastic two or three word reply.

Of course Dr. Gregory's skepticism that CE 399 did what Specter was trying so hard to get him to say is understandable. Your admission of that is a day late and a dollar short.