Jump to content
The Education Forum

LBP strikes again (Amazon JFK assassination book reviews), yet is unusually kind this time


Recommended Posts

Whoever LBP is, he is renowned for soul-wrenching JFK assassination book reviews. Witness the one he gave for Alan Dale's new book-yikes!  I was forewarned by a couple researchers that he will have his eyes on your work and it won't be pretty. Like Patrick Collins, another lone-nut reviewer, one gets the distinct impression that he is out to scuttle sales or opinion about new pro-conspiracy books.

That said, he gave my new one three stars and was actually not too scathing overall. Hope springs eternal! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't this the Arizona Lawyer?

The guy who used to frequent these pages?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Lance Payette 

THAT is the one! I was even forewarned about him [name not known at the time] "he is going to tear you a new one-be prepared; it is what he does." Then he drops a mild 3 star review-I was surprised in a good way...kind of. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lance is a real card isn't he?

I don't know how to take that endorsement VInce.  But I will read the book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Lance is a real card isn't he?

I don't know how to take that endorsement VInce.  But I will read the book.

Don't get me wrong-he was critical. That said, he gave it 3 stars (not one or two) and was begrudgingly nice in a few respects. I find it weird that he was even a little gracious LOL!

Thanks, Jim!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He wasn't banned I don't think Ron.

As I recall, I just got so sick of his penny ante stuff--and him calling us demented-- that I confronted him with what any lawyer would have to admit would be the major problem in the JFK case: chain of custody. So i asked him several questions about this issue.

And for whatever reason, that really set him off. And he had  a rather elongated exit. But as I noted later, in looking up some stuff about him, this is what he does down there in Arizona.  He advises police on how to treat evidence in drug raids so it does not get thrown out at a pre trial hearing!  In other words he was very familiar with the whole issue of what we call in California, pre trial  evidentiary 402 hearings.  Can you imagine the 402 over CE 399?  The judge would end up on the floor laughing.

Which, by the way, is what happened in New Orleans.  Shaw's lawyers tried to get the WC volumes into evidence.  They literally brought it in in a wheelbarrow. The judge said, words to the effect, What is this?  Shaw's lawyers said this subsumes Garrison's case against Shaw. The judge said words to the effect, You want me to place that collection of hearsay piled on hearsay with no adversary system into this court?  You can't be serious?

They were not of course.  They were just trying to waste more time. BTW, I don't recall that in Litwin's piece of crap book.

 

Edited by James DiEugenio
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...