Oswald's Coke

[David Von Pein]

Here's a schematic which includes the bench, Bill. It's marked "bench", just east of

the Grassy Knoll steps:

Larger view --- http://jfkfacts.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/DP-schematic001_3.jpg

Edited September 29, 2013 by David Von Pein

[William Kelly]

In the above drawing, there are two benches marked by squares, one at the top and one at the bottom, with the bottom one the one which I believe that the black couple was sitting.

But that position appears to be along the walk that leads to the steps and the street where the three men were standing, including Hudson, and that bench would be facing east, not south as the bench the cops are inspecting appears to be facing.

Which way was the bench facing, east or south?

And David, I don't think seeing the president's brains being blown out was a frightening as seeing a policeman with a rifle behind the fence, and the terror of telling that story to the Dallas Police, who refused to take that statement.

BK

[Robert Prudhomme]

In the above drawing, there are two benches marked by squares, one at the top and one at the bottom, with the bottom one the one which I believe that the black couple was sitting.

But that position appears to be along the walk that leads to the steps and the street where the three men were standing, including Hudson, and that bench would be facing east, not south as the bench the cops are inspecting appears to be facing.

Which way was the bench facing, east or south?

And David, I don't think seeing the president's brains being blown out was a frightening as seeing a policeman with a rifle behind the fence, and the terror of telling that story to the Dallas Police, who refused to take that statement.

BK

DVP has been under a lot of stress lately. I have volunteered to help him out and relieve his load by answering the odd post for him. Like this one.

--------------------------------------------------------

SERIOUSLY, Bill, you can't possibly tell me that there are STILL people who believe there was a man with a rifle behind the fence. The evidence just doesn't support it!

That woman was

a) lying

confused

c) "mis-remembering" (my personal favourite)

d) seeking her fifteen minutes of fame

e) misquoted by some malcontent unpatriotic CT

Edited September 30, 2013 by Robert Prudhomme

[William Kelly]

In the above drawing, there are two benches marked by squares, one at the top and one at the bottom, with the bottom one the one which I believe that the black couple was sitting.

But that position appears to be along the walk that leads to the steps and the street where the three men were standing, including Hudson, and that bench would be facing east, not south as the bench the cops are inspecting appears to be facing.

Which way was the bench facing, east or south?

And David, I don't think seeing the president's brains being blown out was a frightening as seeing a policeman with a rifle behind the fence, and the terror of telling that story to the Dallas Police, who refused to take that statement.

BK

DVP has been under a lot of stress lately. I have volunteered to help him out and relieve his load by answering the odd post for him. Like this one.

--------------------------------------------------------

SERIOUSLY, Bill, you can't possibly tell me that there are STILL people who believe there was a man with a rifle behind the fence. The evidence just doesn't support it!

That woman was

a) lying

confused

c) "mis-remembering" (my personal favourite)

d) seeking her fifteen minutes of fame

e) misquoted by some malcontent unpatriotic CT

That's a good imitation of DVP Robert, you get brownie points for being funny.

If the bench is situated on the east side of the walkway, near where Groden sets up, then it would be facing east, away from the walkway and they indeed would have a good view of all the proceedings. Front row seat.

But they would have had to turn around in order to see anyone behind the picket fence.

Edited September 30, 2013 by William Kelly

[Robert Prudhomme]

In the above drawing, there are two benches marked by squares, one at the top and one at the bottom, with the bottom one the one which I believe that the black couple was sitting.

But that position appears to be along the walk that leads to the steps and the street where the three men were standing, including Hudson, and that bench would be facing east, not south as the bench the cops are inspecting appears to be facing.

Which way was the bench facing, east or south?

And David, I don't think seeing the president's brains being blown out was a frightening as seeing a policeman with a rifle behind the fence, and the terror of telling that story to the Dallas Police, who refused to take that statement.

BK

DVP has been under a lot of stress lately. I have volunteered to help him out and relieve his load by answering the odd post for him. Like this one.

--------------------------------------------------------

SERIOUSLY, Bill, you can't possibly tell me that there are STILL people who believe there was a man with a rifle behind the fence. The evidence just doesn't support it!

That woman was

a) lying

confused

c) "mis-remembering" (my personal favourite)

d) seeking her fifteen minutes of fame

e) misquoted by some malcontent unpatriotic CT

That's a good imitation of DVP Robert, you get brownie points for being funny.

If the bench is situated on the east side of the walkway, near where Groden sets up, then it would be facing east, away from the walkway and they indeed would have a good view of all the proceedings. Front row seat.

But they would have had to turn around in order to see anyone behind the picket fence.

Rifle shots at under 50 feet have a tendency to make people turn their heads.

[David Von Pein]

Great. Now the CTers are going to pretend that the "young black couple" on the bench positively saw a gunman behind the fence on the Knoll, even though this young couple has never been identified and never said a word about anything. Typical CTer speculation.

Edited September 30, 2013 by David Von Pein

[Robert Prudhomme]

Great. Now the CTers are going to pretend that the "young black couple" on the bench positively saw a gunman behind the fence on the Knoll, even though this young couple has never been identified and never said a word about anything. Typical CTer speculation.

Relax, Dave, I took care of this one for you already.

Remember what the doctor said about trying to keep yourself from getting all worked up??

[David Von Pein]

Relax, Dave, I took care of this one for you already.

By doing what?

[Robert Prudhomme]

Why, I gave him what I thought was a standard LN response, designed to make the other poster feel foolish and inadequate.

[David Von Pein]

Oh, okay, Bobby.

Sorry, I must've missed that one.

Edited September 30, 2013 by David Von Pein

[Robert Prudhomme]

No problem. And watch that blood pressure, eh?

[William Kelly]

Rifle shots at under 50 feet have a tendency to make people turn their heads.

Bump for DVP to appreciate how Richard will take care of the typical silly CTs statements while he's away

[David Von Pein]

Who's Richard?

[William Kelly]

Who's Richard?

Excuse me, I meant Robert. That was a good imitation of DVP Robert.

If you want Dave, we can just create some automatic pop ups to post whenever a silly conspiracy theory comes up.

BK

[David Von Pein]

If you want Dave, we can just create some automatic pop ups to post whenever a silly conspiracy theory comes up.

Nah, you'd better not do that, Bill. Because, since every JFK conspiracy theory ever invented is silly to start with, I wouldn't be able to keep up with the onslaught of pop-ups.

Just make my site below "pop up" instead. That should do the trick....

"If there is absolutely no evidence against Oswald (as many conspiracy theorists seem to think), then what made the Dallas Police Department decide to charge Lee Harvey Oswald with two murders before midnight on November 22, 1963? Do people usually get officially charged with TWO murders by the police department if there is absolutely no evidence against them whatsoever?" -- David Von Pein; September 28, 2013

------------

"The Warren Commission critics and conspiracy theorists display an astonishing inability to see the vast forest of evidence proving Oswald's guilt because of their penchant for obsessing over the branches, even the leaves of individual trees. And, because virtually all of them have no background in criminal investigation, they look at each leaf (piece of evidence) by itself, hardly ever in relation to, and in the context of, all the other evidence." -- Vince Bugliosi

------------

"Coming up with a believable and reasonable conspiracy-endorsing alternative to the Warren Commission's single-bullet conclusion is something that simply cannot be done. And that's mainly because the SBT is obviously the truth. And when you try to dismantle the truth and replace it with some kind of half-baked, incoherent "alternative theory" (such as the "TWO BULLETS WENT INTO JFK AND NEVER EXITED AND THEN DISAPPEARED" claptrap), you're not likely to find the alternative to be nearly as compelling (or reasonable) as the truth." -- David Von Pein; September 1, 2010

More examples:

JFK-Archives.blogspot.com / JFK Assassination Arguments (Part 432)

Edited September 30, 2013 by David Von Pein