Jump to content
The Education Forum

Where is the CHECK/MO for Oswald's $10

David Josephs

Recommended Posts

Those that actually came out in support of a conspiracy could be counted on one hand.

Yes, Mel Ayton used the wrong term in his book review, IMO, because the "mainstream media" (CBS, ABC, NBC, etc.) is certainly overwhelmingly in favor of Oswald's lone guilt, which is obviously the correct conclusion, of course.

What Mel probably should have said instead of "mainstream" media is just "media" in general, plus book writers, movie producers, documentary filmmakers, and the Internet. Given those parameters, Mel's comment that I quoted earlier would be spot-on correct.

It's interesting that you cited that quote and responded the way you did, Greg, because just yesterday I added that same quote of Mr. Ayton's to my "Quoting Common Sense" website, but I left out the part about the "mainstream media", because I agree with you on that point--the MSM isn't pro-conspiracy at all.

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 210
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Mainstream is actually better than simply Media.

Since AM Radio, Books, Magazines, and some Television are PRO-Conspiracy at least on the JFK assassination, that would imply the NY Times, ABC, CBS, NBC's of the world are the mainstream and thus anti-conspiracy.

Eastern power brokers are not into the business of ratting on their friends, or even shining a light in their general direction.

That would be my distinction between the two.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

...this thread is HOT!

No, this thread (as I mentioned before) is useless and worthless. Merely started to cast doubt about something of which there is NO DOUBT -- Oswald took possession of Revolver V510210. We KNOW he did, because that SAME gun was in his hands in the theater.

Why this stuff is even debated is a mystery to me. (Well, really it's not much of a mystery after you've hung around CT boards like this one for a while. CTers want LHO to be innocent of ALL murders he committed on 11/22. Simple as that.)

Maybe DiEugenio missed this one:


"John McAdams’ book is the final nail in the coffin of conspiracy theorists who have grabbed the attention of the mainstream media for far too long—mainly because the media understands all too well how the public loves a mystery. If John McAdams’ book is read in conjunction with the excellent books mentioned earlier in this review the JFK assassination will be no mystery at all." -- Mel Ayton


Speaking of nails my neighbour can drive a 6 inch nail through his left eyeball and not leave a mark.

This however does not show up in a picture and it will not work if you point a camera at it.

Please could you give me some advice on how to market this phenomenon,You are so good at punting your Illware that I thought you might help the chap raise his profile.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your logic goes something like this; we know Oswald shot Tippit because he was caught with the revolver in his hand at the Theater, and if we know he shot Tippit then we know he shot him between 1:14-1:15 because any sooner and he wouldn't have been humanly able to get there, and we know he got there because we know he shot him, and if we know he shot him then we know that Helen Markham's regular bus didn't take her to work every day at 1:12pm.

You are the one who is "full of crap", Lee Farley.

Mrs. Helen Markham wasn't due at work at her job at the "Eat Well Restaurant" until 2:30 PM on 11/22/63.

2:30 PM, Lee. That gave her plenty of time to get to work on time even if she missed the bus at 1:12. The busses left every ten minutes along that route on Jefferson Boulevard. So she could have easily gotten on the 1:22 bus and had ample time to get to her job before 2:30 (even if she normally did want to make the 1:12 bus each day).

And I'd be willing to bet you my next disinfo check that I regularly receive from Vince Bugliosi and John McAdams that Mrs. Markham didn't always make the 1:12 bus every day.

Why do I say that?

Because the fact is -- She simply didn't NEED to make the specific 1:12 bus in order to get to work by 2:30.

I'd wager that were many days when she had to settle for the 1:22 bus, or the 1:32....which would still give her plenty of time to get to work by 2:30 (even if the bus was practically crawling every step of the way).


HELEN MARKHAM -- "Eat Well Restaurant, 1404 Main Street, Dallas, Tex."

JOE BALL -- "Were you working there on November 22, 1963?"

MARKHAM -- "I was."

BALL -- "What hours did you work?"

MARKHAM -- "I was due at work from 2:30 in the evening until 10:30 at night." *

* = Markham really meant to say "2:30 in the afternoon", of course, since 2:30 PM is far from being "in the evening". But I would imagine that some conspiracy theorists want to bite her head off for making that simple error.



Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do you know she [Helen L. Markham] didn't mean to say she was due at work at 1:30 in the afternoon? Do you have the Dobb's timekeeping records under your pillow? But don't worry. It's irrelevant. She told us what time she left for work. A little after 1:00pm.

And "a little after 1:00" perfectly fits with Markham witnessing Oswald killing Tippit at 1:14-1:15.

And if she really meant "1:30", then her "in the evening" comment is even more absurd, because 1:30 is even further away from "evening" than is 2:30. (Maybe Farley didn't think of that angle, though.)

It's interesting that it doesn't bother CTers like Lee Farley that Markham's positive IDing of LHO is corroborated by the PHYSICAL EVIDENCE (the bullet shells from LHO's gun, which are shells that prove LHO was the killer, since he still had that same gun on him 35 minutes later).

So, what do the CT clowns do (as always) -- they'll blame the DPD, and say they switched the shells. And they'll even go so far down Patsy Avenue as to pretend that the cops PLANTED Revolver V510210 on Oswald (or just entered that gun into the evidence chain later on).

That's how off the rails a person needs to go in order to buy into the notion that Lee Oswald was innocent of killing Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit.

But Lee Farley is perfectly willing to go that far off the rails. And he has. (What a surprise.)

Keep what you believe to yourself.

It'd be nice if you would follow that same advice. Because the things you believe should, indeed, to be kept to yourself (due to their built-in silliness).

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The best evidence mean zilch to you conspiracy mongers (the bullet shells and the murder weapon being in LHO's hands when he was arrested, while trying to kill still more policemen with it, not to mention all the various witnesses either AT or NEAR the murder scene who positively IDed Lee Oswald).

But CTers have a built-in excuse -- It's all faked.

Incredible silliness. Does it ever end?

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To James DiEugenio,

I just thought of something interesting....

Since you are of the incredibly wrong opinion that Oswald wasn't even at Tenth & Patton on 11/22/63, then you most certainly have no choice but to believe that witness Ted Callaway was either mistaken or an outright l-i-a-r when he IDed LHO as the man he saw running from the murder site with a gun in his hands. Right, Jimmy?

Now, by all accounts (except to perhaps an Anybody-But-Oswald conspiracy buff like Mr. DiEugenio), Ted Callaway was a very good witness (and a very brave one too).

As far as I am aware, Callaway never ever changed his story one bit since Day #1 on November 22, 1963. He always maintained he heard FIVE pistol shots (which might very well be true, accounting for the mismatch in the brands of bullets and shells recovered), and Callaway always maintained from Day 1 that the gunman he saw just seconds after Tippit was killed was Lee Harvey Oswald.

Now, Jim D., how do you explain Callaway's observations in your theory that Oswald wasn't even at the Tippit murder scene at all on 11/22/63?


Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I am aware, Callaway never ever changed his story one bit since Day #1 on November 22, 1963.

David, correct me if I'm wrong, but the only reason for saying this would be to indicate that changes in a story over time is indicative of someone lying (here, I am referring only to substantial changes that give an entirely different picture to that originally stated). Is that about how you see it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's absolutely NO question marks hanging over the 2 shells found by the Davis girls on 11/22. They each found a shell and turned it over to a different DPD detective (Doughty & Dhority), who, in turn, marked the shell they each received.

You can't slip away from this one, Jimbo. For, even WITH a question mark hanging above the two Poe shells, you have nowhere to run regarding the OTHER TWO SHELLS, which are shells that are positively from Oswald's gun, and we also know that ALL of the shells being dumped at 10th & Patton were being dumped there by just one single gunman.

You surely don't deny my last statement about "one gunman" being seen dumping shells out of a revolver by BOTH of the Davis girls (Barbara and Virginia), do you?

Are both of the Davis girls liars, too, when they said they saw a man they both IDed as Oswald cutting across their yard dumping shells from a gun (which couldn't have been an AUTOMATIC, of course, because an automatic would eject the shells by itself)?

Keep fighting City Hall, Jimbo. I love watching conspiracy clowns continually trying to exonerate a proven double-killer. (It's sad and pathetic to watch, but fun.)

[still waiting for Jimbo's brilliant "Oswald's Innocent" explanation when factoring in the observations and testimony of Ted Callaway. Maybe Jimbo can use the pathetic excuse that conspiracy kook Tom Rossley utilized on a radio debate, where he casually decided to toss aside the testimony of Callaway just because he was a car salesman. I guess anybody who sells used cars cannot possibly make a decent eyewitness.]

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

David, correct me if I'm wrong, but the only reason for saying this would be to indicate that changes in a story over time is indicative of someone lying (here, I am referring only to substantial changes that give an entirely different picture to that originally stated). Is that about how you see it?

Essentially, yes, I think that would be an accurate way to put it, Greg. And Jean Hill and Roger Craig are probably the two best examples of such behavior you'll find in the JFK case. There's no question that both Craig and J. Hill were outright liars when it came to some of the things they said in later years.

The people who love to cite Roger Craig's "7.65 Mauser" story have no choice but to totally ignore Craig's 1968 interview with the L.A. Free Press, where he specifically said that he had no idea WHAT KIND of gun the rifle was that was found on the sixth floor of the TSBD.

QUESTION: "Did you handle that rifle [found on the sixth floor of the TSBD]?"

ROGER CRAIG: "Yes, I did. I couldn't give its name because I don't know foreign rifles."

This '68 L.A. Free Press article (with "RC" being Roger Craig) is the proof that Craig was a bald-faced xxxx when he later insisted in the Mark Lane video "Two Men In Dallas" that he had seen (with his own eyes) the words "7.65 Mauser" stamped on the barrel of the gun.

Craig also claimed to have "handled" the rifle after it was found on 11/22/63. That very likely is another lie told by Craig.


But getting back to Ted Callaway -- He was always very consistent in his story, from 1963 and onward. And he IDed LHO on the day of the assassination, not at some later point in time. (And yes, you can now throw Howard Brennan up in my face if you like--because he did not ID Oswald on 11/22. But, IMO, his reason for not doing so on 11/22 makes a great deal of sense to me. YMMV.)

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Robert Morrow
And we have Lee Farley and Robert Morrow to prove that for us.


I do not know what you are smiling about.

THey are both much taller than Oswald and neither could make it to 10th and Patton even power walking at Bewley's time. :huh:

I powerwalked from Oswald's boarding home on North Beckley to 10th and Patton; I cut corners, walked through traffic, did not stop for any red lights - I made the trip the first time in 11 minutes and 5 seconds. Then I decided to go backwards from 10th and Patten - the scene of the Tippit murder - to Oswald's boarding home and it took me 10 minutes and 25 seconds blasting as fast as I can walk. I was not running or jogging - I was powerblast walking as fast as I could.

Oswald was seen at about 1:02 PM wait for a bus going in the opposite direction from the Tippit murder scene. And didn't Helen Markham who was on the way to her 1:12PM bus ride, didn't she say she thought the Tippit killing occurred at 1:06PM. If that is true there is NO WAY Oswald was there. Even if he caught a ride by car he probably could have not made it by then.

In 2010 I was in the area of 10th and Patton and one of the old timer neighbors - an Hispanic man who actually lived in the neighborhood in 1963 - told me that there were TWO killers of Tippit. He told me this unprodded; I asked him no leading questions, just what do you know about the Tippit slaying?

And that is what he told me: 2 killers of Tippit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

McAdams said that there were two types of handgun bullets found on Oswald after his arrest. Wrong. There were only Remingtons. But guess what? When the police frisked Oswald at the Texas Theater, they found nothing--no bullets. The only place Oswald ever went after was the police station. So we can guess where those came from. The most corrupt police force in America at the time.

Dead wrong. Both Remington-Peters bullets and Winchester-Western bullets were in the possession of Oswald when he was arrested.

Sure, only one brand was in LHO's pocket, but HIS GUN was loaded with an even mix of both Remingtons & Winchesters. (Which, of course, is what McAdams meant. And it's unbelievable that DiEugenio wouldn't realize that that is what McAdams meant.)

And why on Earth you think the cops would have wanted to pluck the unfired bullets from Oswald's pants pocket during the so-called "fast frisk" is anybody's guess. That's just stupid. The initial frisk of Oswald was obviously to make sure he didn't have any other WEAPONS on his person. Why would they care if he had any extra BULLETS in his pocket at that moment in time? Answer: They wouldn't.

Do you think the cops should have been worried about Oswald having some loose bullets in his pocket AFTER he had been disarmed? Was he going to throw the bullets at the cops in an attempt to kill them or something (even after he was handcuffed)?

The five unfired bullets being in Oswald's pocket after he was stripped of his gun were about as much of a concern to the DPD at that time as the thirteen dollars and eighty-seven cents that was also in his pocket at the same time. The $13.87 was just about as dangerous.

Hence, the bullets in Oswald's pocket weren't removed until later (along with the $13.87 and other items). And the cops probably didn't even realize he had any unfired bullets in his pocket during the initial frisk anyway, because (as mentioned) they were frisking him for GUNS -- not small bullets.

Smell that stench Davy.

Yeah, the stench is pretty potent. And it's all coming from your computer. The way you will twist the facts to pretend LHO didn't kill Tippit stinks to high heaven. And always has. Your delusional paranoia has reached its zenith.

And I'll ask again --- What about Callaway, Jimmy? You still want to ignore him? Or call him a xxxx? (Bet ya do. Because to accept Callaway is to admit that Oswald was a gunman at the Tippit murder scene. And that would never do, would it Jimmy?)

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If David doesn't thank you for the 'rehash' let me.

Thank you Jim.

"6 days after the undetermined bullet came back", I'm guessing, would be 2 days after it was sent?

Cunningham retrieved three more on 03/13/64 Warren Commission Volume III, page 474

They were entered into the FBI lab on March 16 and then examined on the 17th of 1964.

The DPD sent the first bullet (and claimed it was the only one from Tippit's body) on 11-22-63.

Boggs said it best himself:

"I know - We are not following the exact rules of evidence around here"


Now wait!

As Cunningham states the first bullet sent was the 'Button Bullet' Q13 as it was sent with the button and was said to have been inside Tippit.

First that is the WORST piece of evidence to send!!! The most mangled bullet that would surely be harder to ID than any of the others to hit Tippit.

Boggs was right.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

Sign In Now

  • Create New...