Safety Month botysf16 Amazon Fashion Learn more Discover it $5 Albums Explore Premium Audio Fire TV Stick Subscribe & Save Patriotic Picks STEM Amazon Cash Back Offer AnnedroidsS3 AnnedroidsS3 AnnedroidsS3  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Introducing new colors All-New Kindle Oasis AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl Segway miniPro
Profile for David Von Pein > Reviews

Browse

David Von Pein's Profile

Customer Reviews: 553
Top Reviewer Ranking: 187,153
Helpful Votes: 7182


Community Features
Review Discussion Boards
Top Reviewers

Guidelines: Learn more about the ins and outs of Your Profile.

Reviews Written by
David Von Pein RSS Feed (Mooresville, Indiana; USA)

Show:  
Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11-20
pixel
Biography - Garrison, Jim (C.) (1921-1992): An article from: Contemporary Authors
Biography - Garrison, Jim (C.) (1921-1992): An article from: Contemporary Authors
by Gale Reference Team
Edition: Digital
Price: $9.95

4.0 out of 5 stars Text Excerpts From The 1968 Jim Garrison/Johnny Carson Interview, November 13, 2006
On January 31, 1968, on NBC-TV's "The Tonight Show", Johnny Carson conducted a lengthy interview with New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison. The purpose of the special interview was to discuss the JFK assassination.

Mr. Garrison, as of that date in early 1968, was in the process of putting together his extremely-lightweight case against Clay Shaw (who was arrested by Garrison's office on the bogus charge of conspiring to murder President John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963).

When the Shaw trial finally took place in 1969, the jury took less than an hour to arrive at the only possible (and reasonable) verdict in the case against Mr. Shaw -- Not Guilty.

I'd advise anyone interested in the details of JFK's assassination to watch (or just listen to) the 1968 Garrison/Carson interview, which lasts for about an hour and consumes the bulk of the 01/31/68 "Tonight Show" broadcast.

It's a fascinating glimpse into history -- and, to put it quite bluntly, it's also a rather fascinating glimpse into the mind and inner conspiratorial thoughts of a total kook by the name of Earling Carothers ("Jim") Garrison.

Mr. Garrison, I will admit, handles himself quite well on the NBC broadcast with Johnny Carson....he doesn't lose his cool (even though Mr. Carson interrupts Garrison's theory-spouting on numerous occasions, and it becomes very evident that Johnny isn't buying one single thing that Jim is telling him during the entire program).

After the interview, Johnny Carson was accused of being overly rough and rude toward Garrison. But, IMO, Johnny did not exhibit those characteristics at all. John was very low key and, in my view, handled himself exceedingly well under the circumstances (i.e., the circumstances of being placed in a position where he had to act as an investigative reporter for the evening, instead of the late-night comedian and witty interviewer of movie stars that America had become accustomed to seeing since Carson began hosting "The Tonight Show" in October of 1962).

Johnny asked Mr. Garrison some hard-hitting questions, some of which I'm going to write out in word-for-word fashion in just a moment. Carson displayed a good deal of knowledge about many of the details surrounding the JFK murder case, and (IMO) deserves nothing but applause for his actions during the Garrison interview.

The main reason I applaud Mr. Carson so loudly with respect to this particular interview is because I was glad to see John ask such hard questions which cast doubt on the notion of conspiracy in the JFK case, instead of merely nodding in agreement with everything this fruitcake named Garrison had to say. (Which were all things, by the way, that haven't a shred of truth to them whatsoever re. the vast "Let's Frame Lee Harvey Oswald As A Patsy" conspiracy plot that Garrison said was afoot in Dealey Plaza in '63.)

The audio portion of the Garrison/Carson interview is available to listen to (for free) at various locations on the Internet. Again, I'd recommend looking it up. It's worth a listen.

Allow me now to print out some interesting excerpts and snippets from that Jim Garrison interview (interjections by this author will be denoted by the initials "DVP")......

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

JG (Jim Garrison) -- "We have found that the Central Intelligence Agency, without any question, had individuals who were connected with it involved {in the assassination of JFK}."

JC (Johnny Carson) -- "You have absolute facts and proof of that?"

JG -- "Without any question. I wouldn't say so otherwise."

~~~~~~

DVP -- Mr. Garrison had no "proof" of the above allegation re. the CIA. He was merely theorizing. He was good at theorizing about murky, unverifiable conspiracy plots, such as the one involving Clay Shaw, Guy Banister, and David Ferrie. But "proving" these crackpot theories was another matter. In short, he couldn't do it. And a jury in 1969 "proved" that Garrison couldn't do it in a court of law.

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

JG -- "They {the Warren Commission} concluded that Lee Oswald was the lone assassin....and the evidence is clear that Oswald never fired a shot....never fired a shot."

~~~~~~

DVP -- The above comment by Mr. Garrison is totally laughable. Such an asinine remark by a person in Garrison's position at the time (that of a District Attorney) deserves nothing but utter contempt from anyone who has looked even superficially into the facts surrounding John Kennedy's tragic murder.

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

JG -- "There was never an investigation. .... I'm not at all impressed with the fact that they {the Warren Commission} could find no evidence of a conspiracy. After going through their inquiry, I doubt if they could find a streetcar if they had a transfer in their hands and it was pointed out to them."

~~~~~~

DVP -- The above comment by Jimbo was indeed humorous, and elicited a chuckle from Mr. Carson's studio audience. I kind of wish, though, that Carson had followed up Jim's witticism with a comment about Mr. Garrison not being able to locate his 'common sense'....because it's fairly obvious that Jim had very little of that particular trait when it came to his absurd theories concerning the JFK case.

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

JC -- "Now, you say 'the fact remains' again....as if it IS a fact. You keep saying 'we know' and 'the fact is'....but that's not a fact, is it?"

JG -- "Yes."

JC -- "What makes it a fact? Because you say so?"

~~~~~~

DVP -- A great retort by Johnny above. I loved it!

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

JC -- "Jim, aren't you taking inconsistencies in testimony during the emotional time, even self-contradictory testimony, from even sometimes the most truthful of witnesses....and using THAT as tainting everything else that is very well explained?"

~~~~~~

DVP -- An excellent observation by Mr. Carson. And also a correct one, IMO. Conspiracy theorists are experts at using selective pieces of seemingly-contradictory evidence or witness statements and then twisting those things into their own unique brand of "proof" that a conpiracy had taken place on 11/22/63.

But the fact is that the things mentioned by Garrison (which I didn't print out verbatim, but which prompted Johnny's comment above) were, as John said, being used by Mr. Garrison to attempt to taint the overall Lone-Assassin conclusion.

One thing, in particular, that Garrison is certainly dead-wrong about (that he mentioned in the Carson interview) involves the actions and observations of Roy Truly and Marrion Baker (who both saw Lee Oswald on the 2nd Floor of the Book Depository approx. 90 seconds after Oswald shot JFK from a 6th-Floor window).

Garrison erroneously assumes that since Truly and Baker saw Oswald on the second floor shortly after the shooting, this therefore must indicate that Oswald was innocent. But what Jim didn't tell the audience that night in 1968 is that the Warren Commission conducted multiple "re-enactments" of Oswald's alleged movements from the 6th to the 2nd Floor of the building, and those re-creations proved beyond any doubt that a person WAS capable of travelling that distance in less than 80 seconds. Which indicates that the assassin (Oswald) could very well have been on the 6th Floor at 12:30 PM and also on the 2nd Floor by approx. 12:31:30 PM.

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

JG -- "There is no 'overwhelming' evidence that Oswald shot from the Book Depository. The only evidence available indicates that he did NOT."

~~~~~~

DVP -- That last line deserves a replay (just to emphasize the sheer size of Garrison's gall at having spouted such nonsense) -- "The only evidence available indicates that he did NOT".

Incredible, isn't it? Both times.

Mr. Garrison thinks the "ONLY evidence available" suggests that Lee Oswald did NOT fire any shots from the TSBD. About the only thing left to do after hearing (or reading) such total garbage from JG is to throw up one's hands and scream "WTF?!". I think I'll go do that now. Excuse me.

:)

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

JC -- "You are asking us and the American public to believe that a team of seven gunmen carried this out with precision, firing from various points that day in Dallas, which is a remarkable feat in itself, and disappeared into thin air, with no witnesses who ever saw any other gunmen or getaway vehicles....and a gigantic conspiracy in which nobody seems to have yet proved anything....you ask us to believe that....I find that a much larger fairy tale than to accept the findings of the Warren Report."

~~~~~~

DVP -- Bravo, Mr. Carson! Well said! I applaud ye (again). I couldn't have said that better myself.

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

JG -- "Having gone through the twenty-six volumes, Johnny, I CAN say that it is not possible for a reasonable man to conclude that the Warren Commission was right."

~~~~~~

DVP -- Another outlandishly-ludicrous statement by Jim G. in my opinion, and also in the opinion of a JFK assassination expert/author who possesses probably more common sense and reasoned-thinking skills than anybody I can personally think of -- former Deputy D.A. Vincent Bugliosi, who made the following bold (but spot-on accurate) declaration many years ago:

"Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in the assassination of President Kennedy. The evidence is absolutely overwhelming that he carried out the tragic shooting all by himself. In fact, you could throw 80 percent of the evidence against him out the window and there would still be more than enough left to convince any reasonable person of his sole role in the crime. The Warren Commission looked at a tremendous amount of evidence and concluded that Oswald acted alone. I've studied the evidence, and I agree." -- VB; 1986

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

Some Additional Observations Concerning The Garrison/Carson Interview......

Mr. Garrison attempted to make huge conspiracy-flavored mountains out of things that can just as easily be explained in non-hinky ways. For example -- The differing eyewitness accounts regarding the color of the Depository sniper's clothing. Garrison wanted Carson's audience to believe that just because a certain witness described a "blue shirt" (vs. another color garment), this therefore is absolute PROOF that it wasn't Lee Harvey Oswald in the window.

That type of argument is nonsense for several reasons, of course....not the least of which is the fact that eyewitness accounts with respect to "clothing" and "hair color" and "height", etc., are almost always (in any criminal case) going to differ whenever you get several witnesses together to compare these things. People, in general, just do not recall details like this very well (especially under conditions when they have no real NEED to notice these mundane things at the time they are seeing them).

The same goes for "timelines", which are hardly EVER exactly the same from one witness to the next. In the JFK case for example, the witnesses told of the shooting taking anywhere from 5 seconds to 5 MINUTES to complete. (One witness actually thought the shots were a total of FIVE MINUTES apart; photographer James Altgens thought the 8-second shooting lasted up to thirty seconds, illustrating how people don't measure increments of "time" very well when they are asked to do so.)

But the bottom line is that the whole case against Oswald can't be simply tossed into Garrison's trash bin just because of conflicting descriptions of the color of the assassin's shirt.

Plus, there's the possibility (however remote) that Oswald DID have on a different shirt when he was shooting JFK, and then changed to the brown shirt in flight (just after leaving the Sniper's Nest), possibly putting on the brown shirt hastily as he descended the four floors to the lunchroom. Why was that simplistic clothes-changing activity not possible in Mr. Garrison's mind?

Granted, I don't think any other shirt was found discarded in the TSBD that day. But, the more I think of this shirt-changing scenario, the more sense it makes from Oswald's POV. For, it probably WOULD have been a smart move on Oswald's behalf to want to change his outward appearance somewhat after having just shot the President. Right? (Similar to what he did to change his appearance when he tossed aside his windbreaker jacket after shooting Officer Tippit.)

Another very real possibility is that Oswald shot JFK in his white T-shirt ONLY....and then (after the shooting) hurriedly threw on his brown shirt over the top of the T-shirt (hence, Officer Baker sees Oswald with an untucked brown shirt that Baker thinks is a "jacket"). That seems the most likely "clothing discrepancy" scenario to me....and is a scenario which does not require Oswald to ditch a second shirt someplace. He merely puts on one shirt over another to change his appearance slightly from 12:30 to 12:32.

A witness that Mr. Garrison spends a good deal of time discussing during the Carson interview is Julia Ann Mercer (who claimed to have seen Jack Ruby behind the wheel of a parked green pick-up truck in Dealey Plaza about an hour before the assassination).

It's quite interesting to take note of Mercer's apparent verbiage that she used (as relayed by Garrison). Per those words of Mercer (as read by Garrison), it would seem as if Mercer was actually claiming she could RECOGNIZE Jack Ruby via facial features (et al) as Ruby was killing Oswald on 11/24/63.

That I.D.'ing of Ruby DURING the shooting of Lee Oswald is, of course, a virtual impossibility, since Ruby was on camera for a mere fleeting instant (with his back to the live TV cameras as well), and then Ruby was wrestled to the ground by police and was thereafter out of sight of the cameras.

But does Garrison point out that apparent impossibility/discrepancy concerning Mercer's statement? Of course not. Because he wants America to believe Mercer's entire account -- including the preposterous part that has a batch of brain-dead assassins actually being stupid enough to take a rifle from the back of a pick-up truck in front of a gob of potential witnesses who were stalled in a traffic jam near the Triple Underpass.

A brilliant "professional" assassination plan there, huh? They might as well have hung a big sign on the truck too, with this message printed on it for all to see:

"Ruby & Company: Presidential Assassins For Hire, Inc. -- We're Here To Unload The JFK Murder Weapon And We Don't Give A Damn How Many Dallas Motorists See Us With This Rifle!"

And Mercer has the pick-up truck being driven by Jack Ruby, no less. How convenient there too. Mr. Ruby, per the various witnesses, was EVERYWHERE it seems on November 22nd. Everywhere the "conspiracy plot" requires him to be, at any rate -- e.g., planting a bullet at Parkland Hospital, or running around the Grassy Knoll, or possibly waiting outside the Depository to knock off Oswald.

If the plot is short of henchmen at any given time, just stick Jack Ruby into the conspiracy puzzle at any point in the proceedings (to play virtually ANY part) and the CTers seem to be happy. ~grin~

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

Allow me to close this essay with the following remarks (which I think aptly apply here, since I've been discussing a conspiracy kook named Jim Garrison, a man who disbelieved virtually all of the actual, documented evidence in the John F. Kennedy and J.D. Tippit murder investigations).....

The physical evidence surrounding President Kennedy's assassination positively supports just one single gunman by the name of Lee Harvey Oswald. And this physical evidence (plus a boatload of circumstantial evidence as well) is just too overpowering in size and scope to merely be arbitrarily tossed into the trash can (as Mr. Garrison seemed to want to do every step of the way in his so-called "investigation" of the case in the 1960s).

And the act of casting doubt upon the validity of ALL of the "Oswald Is Guilty" evidence, sans proof of a large amount of foul play, is merely the cowardly act of hardened conspiracy buffs (such as the late Mr. Garrison) who simply cannot face the raw fact that the totality of evidence in the JFK murder case hangs Lee Harvey Oswald as surely as the Pope is Catholic.

David Von Pein

November 2006
Comment Comment | Permalink


Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK.
Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK.
by Gerald Posner
Edition: Hardcover
11 used & new from $3.98

6 of 13 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars "I Thought He Was A Psycho -- I Really Did", November 8, 2006
Gerald Posner's 1993 best seller "Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald And The Assassination Of JFK" is an excellent piece of work....and is a book that arrives at the truth with respect to President Kennedy's death in 1963.

Like Mr. Posner, I firmly believe that Oswald, by himself, was responsible for the murders of JFK and policeman J.D. Tippit. And while re-reading this publication recently, I came across many outstanding hunks of fascinating text, including a good collection of direct quotes from various individuals that were placed into this volume by author Posner in his efforts to provide the reader with a complete picture of Lee Harvey Oswald, the man who was charged with killing America's 35th President in Dallas.

I've listed some of what I think are this book's most intriguing passages and quotes below, which give a good general indication as to the type of person Lee Oswald truly was (i.e., a strange, disconnected, secretive, violent, and abusive young man who embraced Communism and hated the American society he was living in).

In other words -- Lee Harvey Oswald was the exact type of individual who might just have had an urge to take his mail-order rifle with him to work one day (a day when the President's motorcade was scheduled to pass right in front of the building he worked in) and fire a few shots at JFK from a secluded sixth-story perch.

The evidence in the John F. Kennedy murder case, in fact, tells the world that Mr. Oswald did that very thing on Friday, November 22, 1963.

"Case Closed" Excerpts......

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

Lillian Murret (LHO's aunt; sister of Lee's mother, Marguerite Oswald) said:

"She {Marguerite} told me that she had trained Lee to stay in the house, to stay close to home when she wasn't there. .... He just got in the habit of staying alone like that." -- Page 9 of "Case Closed"

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

"Otis Carlton, a neighbor in Benbrook {Texas}, was in the Oswalds' living room one evening when {eight-year-old} Lee , gripping a butcher knife, ran through chasing {his half-brother} John Pic. Lee hurled the knife at Pic, in front of a startled Carlton, but it missed and struck the wall." -- Page 10

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

Dr. Renatus Hartogs (a psychiatrist who once evaluated Lee Oswald) said:

"He {Lee} came to us on a charge of truancy from school, and yet when I examined him, I found him to have definite traits of dangerousness. In other words, this child had a potential for explosive, aggressive, assaultive acting out, which was rather unusual to find in a child who was sent to the Youth House on such a mild charge as truancy from school." -- Page 12

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

Julian Evans (who knew Oswald when Lee was a youth) said:

"Nobody could figure him {Lee} out. .... He didn't want you to get too close to him. .... I thought he was a psycho; I really did." -- Page 15

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

William E. Wulf (a schoolmate of Oswald's) said:

"His {Lee's} beliefs seemed to be warped but strong. .... He seemed to me a boy that was looking for something to belong to. .... He impressed me as a boy who could get violent over Communism." -- Page 16

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

"Oswald bristled that Ike {President Dwight Eisenhower} "was exploiting the working people" and that if he had the opportunity, he would like to kill Eisenhower." -- Page 17

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

"He {Lee} seemed to hit her {Lee's wife Marina} harder and with greater anger than ever before. .... Oswald flew into a rage over Marina's inability to cook a Southern dish, red beans and rice, which he demanded for dinner. The fight ended in their bedroom, with Oswald choking her and threatening {her}." -- Page 101

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

"Oswald increasingly spent time locked in his small study. There, unknown to Marina, he compiled a blue looseleaf folder, an operations manual for an action he was planning against {Retired General Edwin} Walker. It was filled with photographs of the general's house and a safe place to stash a rifle, as well as maps of a carefully-designed escape route." -- Page 104

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

On Pages 105 and 106:

"On Sunday afternoon, March 31 {1963}, Marina was in the small fenced-in backyard {of the Oswalds' residence on Neely Street in Dallas} hanging up diapers when Lee asked her to take a picture. .... He returned to the apartment and in a few minutes emerged dressed all in black, a revolver tucked into the waist of his pants, a rifle held in one hand, and a camera and some newspapers in the other hand. Marina broke into laughter."

Marina said:

"I asked him then why he had dressed himself up like that. .... I thought he had gone crazy, and he said he wanted to send that to a newspaper. .... It was quite embarrassing the way he was dressed."

Marina also told Mr. Posner the following:

"I was very nervous that day when I took the pictures. I can't remember how many I took, but I know I took them and that is what is important. It would be easier if I said I never took them, but that is not the truth."

(So much for the "Faked Backyard Photos", huh?)

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

"Linnie Mae Randle, Buell Frazier's sister, was at her kitchen sink when she glanced out the window at 7:15 Friday morning, November 22. She saw Oswald walk across the street toward her house, carrying a long package parallel to his body." -- Page 223

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

"The three empty shells {found beneath the sniper's window in the Texas School Book Depository after the assassination}...were fired from Oswald's rifle, to the exclusion of any other gun." -- Page 269

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

"Ten minutes after the shells were found, Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone and Deputy Constable Seymour Weitzman were near the northwest corner of the sixth floor when they spotted {Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano bolt-action} rifle, hidden between boxes." -- Pages 269-270

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

Less than an hour after JFK was shot.....

"As {Dallas Police Officer J.D.} Tippit reached the front left tire {of his patrol car}, Oswald whipped out his revolver and began shooting. Tippit was killed instantly. Oswald then began running back toward Patton Avenue, emptying shells from the revolver along the way." -- Page 272

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

"After the theater scuffle, in which Oswald unsuccessfully tried to shoot another policeman, he {Lee Oswald} was arrested." -- Page 280

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

"There is no credible evidence that Oswald knew Guy Banister or had any association with David Ferrie during the critical months preceding the assassination. Marina cannot visualize him working with an accomplice.

{Quoting Marina:} "I am not a psychiatrist...but living with a person for a few years you at least have some kind of intuition about what he might do or might not. He was not a trustworthy and open person. So, personally, I seriously doubt that he will confide in someone." -- Pages 147-148*

* = NOTES: The above comments made by Marina Oswald (appearing on pages 147 and 148 of "Case Closed") came directly from her HSCA testimony in the late 1970s. Many of the other direct quotes I have mentioned within this review can also be cross-referenced in the official Government records of the JFK murder investigation, mainly via the Warren Commission witness transcripts. All page numbers shown above refer to the paperback edition of "Case Closed", published in 1994 by Anchor Books.
Comment Comments (5) | Permalink | Most recent comment: Dec 17, 2009 6:59 PM PST


The LBJ Tapes, Vol. 1: Hello, Mr. President [VHS]
The LBJ Tapes, Vol. 1: Hello, Mr. President [VHS]
VHS
Offered by turtles with books
Price: $3.38
2 used & new from $3.38

4.0 out of 5 stars Why In The World Didn't The FBI See The Logic Of The Single-Bullet Theory? In My Opinion, They Certainly Should Have Seen It, November 2, 2006
"The LBJ Tapes: Volume 1" (subtitled "Hello, Mr. President") is the first in a four-part documentary series that features many of the White House telephone conversations that were secretly recorded by the 36th U.S. President, Lyndon B. Johnson.

This first 50-minute volume in the series contains snippets of several phone calls made by LBJ during his first days as President, following the assassination of his predecessor, John F. Kennedy, in late 1963.

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

Re.: LBJ, J. Edgar Hoover, the FBI, and the assassination of President Kennedy......

President Johnson was told several incorrect things in the days that immediately followed the murder of JFK. Such as when FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover (for some reason) told Johnson that the "Stretcher Bullet" connected to JFK's murder was found on KENNEDY'S stretcher....when, in fact, that was impossible, since JFK's stretcher was never in the area of Parkland Hospital where that bullet ("CE399") was found by hospital employee Darrell Tomlinson.

In the taped telephone conversations between Hoover and LBJ shortly after the 11/22/63 assassination of JFK (which are tape recordings that have been made available via various means, including some of them being placed on VHS video, DVD, and on Audio-CD as well), several other errors can also be detected, including Hoover telling LBJ that the shots from the Texas School Book Depository Building had come from the "fifth" floor, instead of the sixth.

Hoover's FBI took control of most of the physical evidence in the JFK murder investigation late on the night of November 22nd....taking it out of the hands of the Dallas Police Department, which is the organization that collected virtually all of the physical evidence in the case -- which is evidence that all points to Lee Harvey Oswald as the one and only killer of President Kennedy and policeman J.D. Tippit.

In hindsight, it would have been nice if Hoover's boys could have found a way to transfer Oswald himself back to Washington, too, along with LHO's rifle, the bullet fragments in the car, the President's car itself, the bullet shells from the Book Depository, and all the rest of that mile-high mountain of stuff that proves it was Lee Oswald who killed President Kennedy that day in Dallas.

But the assassin himself remained in Dallas during that dark weekend in '63....with the tragic result being: a dead Mr. Oswald two days later, thanks to a well-aimed bullet fired from the gun of Dallas nightclub operator Jack Ruby.

Upon listening to the November 29, 1963, taped phone call between J. Edgar Hoover and President Lyndon Johnson (which was a 20-minute-long call that took place on the very same day that LBJ created the Warren Commission panel), a decent-sized number of significant errors crop up as Mr. Hoover is relaying what he says are the facts surrounding various elements of the JFK assassination which had taken place exactly one week earlier.

Allow me now to examine that 11/29/63 phone call and point out some of the obvious mistakes uttered by Mr. Hoover -- mistakes that were later corrected by the WC during that Commission's nearly ten-month probe into the events of November 22. (The text wrapped in quotation marks are the verbatim words spoken by FBI Director Hoover and by President Johnson on 11/29/63.).......

~~~~~~

LBJ -- "How many shots were fired?"

JEH -- "Three."

LBJ -- "Any of 'em fired at me?"

JEH -- "No."

LBJ -- "All three at the President?"

JEH -- "All three at the President....and we have them."

~~~~~~

I'm surprised more conspiracy theorists don't do more hollering about the above obviously-erroneous statement made by Mr. Hoover, wherein he claims that the FBI had in its possession ALL THREE of the rifle bullets fired by Oswald's Carcano rifle during the Presidential shooting.

When, of course, in reality, only two of the three bullets were recovered, because one of the shots (as later determined by the WC) missed the car entirely and was unrecoverable.

It seems fairly obvious that Mr. Hoover (as of 11/29/63) was under the impression that the two bullet fragments found in the front seat of JFK's car represented the remains of two separate bullets.

Later detailed examination, however, would determine that the two front-seat fragments were almost certainly portions of just one single bullet, not two. (With one of the front-seat fragments being a "nose" section of a bullet; while the other fragment was the "base" portion of a FMJ 6.5-mm. MC/WCC missile.)

~~~~~~

JEH -- "He {JFK} was hit by the first and the third {shots}. The second shot hit the Governor. The third shot is a complete bullet, and wasn't shattered; and that rolled out of the President's head, and tore a large part of the President's head off. And in trying to massage his heart at the hospital, they apparently loosened that, and it fell onto the stretcher."

~~~~~~

The above paragraph uttered by Mr. Hoover is simply amazing -- amazing, that is, in terms of the number of errors contained in that paragraph.

To say that the THIRD shot (which was the JFK "head shot") was the "complete bullet" (which would be CE399, the Stretcher Bullet), and that it "rolled out of the President's head" in a whole, nearly-undamaged condition, is utterly crazy.

In that conversation with President Johnson, Mr. Hoover had his bullets mixed up, to say the least.

~~~~~~

JEH -- "Those three shots were fired within three seconds."

~~~~~~

The above is yet another error-filled statement spoken by Mr. Hoover. Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle was unable to fire three shots "within three seconds". That, in fact, is an absurd comment by Hoover....and I haven't the foggiest of notions where he arrived at such a conclusion.

Per the WC test firings, Oswald's rifle had a minimum mechanical firing time of 2.295 seconds between EACH shot (and that doesn't count any aim time; it only includes the time required to work the bolt and squeeze the trigger again).

But the Zapruder Film of the entire assassination proves beyond very much doubt at all (at least I have no doubts) that one gunman most certainly fired all the shots that resulted in each of the two victims' wounds -- with the entire shooting timeline taking approx. 8.2 seconds from start to finish, with ample space between the three shots for Oswald to work the bolt on his rifle and to aim and fire again.

Of course, Hoover was talking to LBJ just a week after the awful shooting in Dallas, which I suppose resulted in some of these errors in judgment on Mr. Hoover's behalf. But the "3 shots within 3 seconds from LHO's rifle" business is just simply crazy (and impossible).

And here's another very strange Hoover statement from that same November 29th phone call......

~~~~~~

LBJ -- "If Connally hadn't been in his way..."

JEH -- "Oh yes....yes. The President no doubt would have been hit {a third time}."

LBJ -- "He {JFK} would have been hit three times."

JEH -- "He would have been hit three times."

~~~~~~

Now, yes, it was a mere seven days after JFK's terrible murder, and a lot of facts had not yet been researched and verified concerning the full events in Dallas -- but the above quote from the FBI head man is just absolutely nutty.

Because even by November 29th, it was surely common FBI knowledge as to WHERE on Elm Street the shooting began and ended. Via photos, films, and witness accounts, it was very obvious that the ENTIRE shooting occurred while both JFK and John Connally had their backs to the assassin. And JFK was sitting behind Connally in the limousine. Which means that at no time was Connally blocking Oswald's view of President Kennedy.

And yet Hoover misinforms Johnson with these words: "He would have been hit three times" had Connally not been "in the way".

Just....amazing. I think even long-time conspiracy advocates would agree with me that the above quote from J. Edgar can't really be taken as a "shady" or "conspiratorial" comment in any fashion (even though many conspiracists do, indeed, firmly believe that Mr. Hoover was a rotten liar and started covering up the true facts in the JFK case from the get-go) -- but the above comment about the victims' positions in the car relative to the gunman (Oswald) is just plain ignorance on the part of the FBI Director. How can it be anything else? It's just flat-out wrong....even, as I said, if you're a conspiracy theorist.

And, of course, Hoover's agency got the shooting scenario all fouled up as well, as we all know....when the FBI said that each of Oswald's three shots resulted in a "hit" to one of the victims. Hoover's men came to this "3 Hits" conclusion even though they should have known full well that such a three-hits scenario was utterly impossible just by glancing at the Autopsy Report (which states that a bullet came out of JFK's throat).

Unless the FBI did no checking at all with respect to Robert Frazier's detailed study of the limousine on the night of 11/22 (which was a limo examination that was performed by one of their OWN FBI AGENTS, which verified the fact that the bullet that exited JFK's throat did NOT hit the limousine and did not cause any limo damage whatsoever) -- the Bureau SHOULD have been able to put 2 and 2 together before even submitting its December 9, 1963, report to the Warren Commission ---

i.e.:

The FBI investigators should have been able to conclude that bullets rarely, if ever, vanish into thin air after entering a vehicle on a 17-degree downward trajectory from a 60-foot-high source, and that the JFK "SBT" back-thru-throat bullet HAD to have gone into the man sitting directly in front of the President in the limousine (John B. Connally).

I've long wondered why the Federal Bureau of Investigation itself didn't propose the Single-Bullet Theory to account for the double-man wounding of President Kennedy and Governor Connally. They should probably have done so, in my opinion.

Because -- Given the lack of limo damage to the back-seat and jump-seat areas of the car....plus the Autopsy Report verifying the fact that a whole bullet came out of Kennedy's neck on a downward angle from a 6th-Floor window and went SOMEPLACE....and knowing the location where Connally was injured on his back -- how is ANY other solution even possible, other than to conclude that the first bullet that struck JFK (which, per the autopsy, is hanging in mid-air between JFK and Connally and proceeding, obviously, toward the front of the limo) went into the only other injured victim in that car?

Did Hoover's men not even study ANY of this evidence before arriving at a "3 Shots & 3 Hits" scenario? If they didn't know these basic hunks of information -- why didn't they? That'd be my first question to them?

I'm not accusing the FBI of being involved in any kind of massive cover-up operation...because I don't think they were. And, along those same lines, I certainly don't believe for a moment that LBJ was a part of some crooked conspiracy and cover-up following JFK's death.

Because if Johnson had been involved in some type of cover-up plot, would he have voluntarily taped some of the phone calls that he made sure were recorded in the days and weeks following such a "cover-up" operation? Particularly a phone conversation in September 1964 with WC member Richard Russell, during which Johnson and Russell each say they do not believe the Single-Bullet Theory is true. Would LBJ want that comment on tape if he had a desire to squelch all talk of conspiracy? I kinda doubt it.

A whole lot of people have doubts about the Single-Bullet Theory. But their doubts don't make the SBT any less true. The SBT, in my view, is THE best explanation for the injuries to both JFK and JBC (not counting the JFK head shot, that is).

The Single-Bullet Conclusion perfectly aligns with all of the physical evidence....from the (one) whole bullet recovered in the hospital where the victims were taken....to the wound patterns on the victims....to the "timing" visible on Abraham Zapruder's film....and right on into Lee Harvey Oswald's rifle (which was found in the TSBD shortly after the shooting). The SBT fits -- to an absolute "T".

Believing in ANY other anti-SBT solution only adds numerous layers of mystery and "unexplainables" to the mix. And is THAT type of thinking more logical than the completely-within-reason (and "within the evidence") Single-Bullet Conclusion?

If you look up "Occam's Razor" in the dictionary, I think you'll find the answer to that last question.

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

Final comments re. the FBI's initial errors in the JFK case:

I think the FBI was merely rushed to get a report out to the newly-created Warren Commission as soon as humanly possible, and therefore they very likely didn't dig deep enough to resolve all of the questions surrounding the murder of JFK. Hence, some inaccuracies were bound to result.

But the basic, raw information was there for Hoover's agency to use, even via a somewhat-rushed-to-press report that was issued just 17 days after an event that had many, many things to sort out, including THREE separate murders (John Kennedy's, J.D. Tippit's, and Lee Harvey Oswald's) and all of the various issues that went with each of those three killings.

But, possibly, in this "rushed" state to get some kind of "final report" to the Warren Commission members, Mr. Hoover and the FBI missed a lot of important info. Obviously, in hindsight, that's precisely what did occur. Hindsight, of course, is almost always 20/20.

David Von Pein

November 2006


The Assassination of John F. Kennedy: Death of the New Frontier (Point of Impact)
The Assassination of John F. Kennedy: Death of the New Frontier (Point of Impact)
by Karen Price Hossell
Edition: Paperback
5 used & new from $2.73

3 of 7 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars "The Evidence Is Absolutely Overwhelming That He {Lee Oswald} Carried Out The Tragic Shooting All By Himself" -- Vince Bugliosi, November 1, 2006
LET'S PRETEND FOR JUST A MOMENT OR TWO...........

It's the year 1964, and Lee Harvey Oswald (the accused assassin of President John F. Kennedy), instead of being shot and killed by Jack Ruby on November 24, 1963, is sitting in a courtroom, as his murder trial draws to a close.

The lead prosecuting attorney, attempting to convince the jury of Oswald's sole guilt in the murders of both JFK and Dallas policeman J.D. Tippit, is Vincent T. Bugliosi.

Here's a portion of what just might have been part of Vincent's Closing Arguments to that jury in 1964.

Let's listen in (just for fun).......

=========================================

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury....the defense lawyers in this case have argued to you that a massive conspiracy took place on Friday, November 22nd, 1963, the day when President John F. Kennedy was brutally cut down by a sniper's bullets in Dallas, Texas.

The defense has placed on the table the totally-unsupportable theory that someone "planted" that bullet (Warren Commission Exhibit #399) on a Parkland Hospital stretcher, as part of a devious plot to frame this man -- Lee Harvey Oswald -- for President Kennedy's murder.

But, folks, think about the "logic" of doing such a thing at the point in time when these defense attorneys are insisting it actually did occur. Let's examine that type of "logic" for a moment......

There is no way on this Earth, ladies and gentlemen, that any "Patsy-Framing" conspirators are going to risk the whole ballgame by wanting to plant that bullet on a hospital stretcher before 2:00 PM on November the 22nd, 1963....a point in time which could very well have been SUICIDE for those same so-called conspirators!

Why could it possibly have been a suicidal act? Because that bullet, after having been found by Parkland employee Darrell Tomlinson and after also having been seen and handled by O.P. Wright, was handed over (by Wright) to Secret Service agent Richard Johnsen at approximately 1:55 PM (CST) on November 22nd.

Which means that if it had been "planted" on or near Governor John Connally's stretcher (as Mr. Oswald's team of defense attorneys is implying), it must have been planted there prior to 1:55 PM on the day of the President's assassination -- which was a time when Governor Connally was still in the operating room at Parkland undergoing life-saving surgery.

Which also has to mean that at such a time, no evil bullet-planting "conspirators" could have possibly had full knowledge of exactly where ALL of the "real" bullets that hit the victims were located.

For, how could these ace plotters have possibly known at 1:55 PM (or thereabouts) that Bullet CE399 would even be a bullet that could be worked into the official record of this murder case?!

Or did this band of wretched plotters and assassination-planning henchmen simply say to themselves the following (in the days leading up to November 22nd)? ----

Oh, what the hell, guys....everything is going to be taken care of by the dutiful and ever-efficient Government cover-up agents later on anyway....so we'll just go ahead and plant this possibly-extra bullet in the hospital and just throw up our collective patsy-creating hands and hope that everything comes out okay in the long run.

Is that what these defense lawyers want you good folks of this jury to swallow -- hook, line, and planted bullet?!!

You can see how silly and utterly preposterous so much of this kind of "evidence-planting" talk really is by simply applying just a small dose of common sense and logic to the allegations being made by these defense attorneys -- attorneys who, it would seem, have never met a conspiracy theory they didn't immediately accept with a broad smile and wide-open arms.

But, it's not that easy, folks. Not by a long shot is it that easy. Picking assorted unsupportable conspiracy theories out of a hat just isn't gonna cut it! And with your verdict of "Guilty" at this trial, ladies and gentlemen, you're going to be telling this Scheme Team of lawyers that it's simply NOT THAT EASY!

Plus, let me add this regarding bullet CE399 -- Why would any so-called "conspirators" even WANT to plant that bullet in Parkland Hospital in the first place? There was ALREADY Oswald-incriminating bullet evidence in the limousine that ties the so-called "Patsy" to the crime!

And not only do we have those two front-seat bullet fragments from Oswald's very own rifle to tie this defendant to the President's murder....but there is also a veritable Mount Everest of additional Oswald-implicating evidence elsewhere in Dealey Plaza as well -- such as those three spent cartridge cases found in the Texas School Book Depository. Cartridge cases which we KNOW came from Lee Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano bolt-action rifle TO THE EXCLUSION OF EVERY OTHER WEAPON EVER MADE!!

And those three bullet cartridge cases were found directly underneath the sniper's window in the southeast corner on the Book Depository's sixth floor! And that just happens to be the EXACT window from where this defendant -- Lee Harvey Oswald -- was physically seen by an eyewitness aiming a rifle at the President's car!

Other witnesses testified that they saw a man who looked generally like Mr. Oswald in that very same sniper's window just minutes (perhaps even seconds) before the three shots rang out in Dealey Plaza that day.

And there is also that brown paper bag....which was ALSO found in the Sniper's Nest. And it's a paper bag that just happens to have two of Lee Harvey Oswald's prints on it -- a fingerprint, plus what amounts to an extremely-incriminating RIGHT PALMPRINT at the bottom (or closed end) of that bag.

That palmprint is devastating physical evidence of Mr. Oswald guilt -- because it's a print that perfectly aligns with the testimony of witness Buell Wesley Frazier. You remember that nice young man, don't you ladies and gentlemen? He was Oswald's 19-year-old co-worker at the Book Depository who gave Lee Harvey a ride to work on the morning of the assassination, remember?

And remember what Mr. Frazier testified to with regards to a certain brown paper package that Oswald had with him that morning (a bag that the defendant said contained "curtain rods")?

Mr. Frazier said that Oswald carried the bag "cupped" in his right hand, so that the weight of whatever was in that bag would be pressing down against Oswald's right hand.

And, lo and behold, on the sixth floor, in the same sniper's area with the bullet shells and Oswald's other prints, what was found by police? --- Yes indeed....an empty brown paper bag with Lee Oswald's RIGHT PALMPRINT on the closed end of the bag!

Just an innocent coincidence of some kind, ladies and gentlemen? Nonsense! It's as obvious as the nose on Jimmy Durante's face that the empty bag found by police after the assassination is the very same bag that Wesley Frazier saw Oswald carry into the Book Depository Building on November 22nd. How could it BE any more obvious?!

And if anyone thinks for a single second (as the defense has suggested) that the empty paper sack was "created" and then "planted" by the Dallas Police Department (due to the fact that no photograph exists in the official record of the paper bag within the Sniper's Nest) -- they'd better think twice about that absurd allegation.

Because if that bag had been "manufactured" by the police, how on this Earth did the cops manage that perfect "Oswald palmprint" fakery? How did they manage, in fairly short order, to produce a bag that ALSO happened to have Lee Oswald's prints on it? And a certain palmprint that perfectly MATCHES the testimony of how Wesley Frazier said Oswald carried the bag in his right "cupped" hand?

How was such a beautifully-coordinated piece of deception carried out? How COULD it have been? Was Mr. Frazier lying about the "cupped right hand" business? I'm doubting the defense would claim Frazier is a liar....because they used his testimony at this trial to attempt to bolster their own defense case with respect to the "under the armpit" testimony, remember? So, was Mr. Frazier supposedly telling lies one minute; and then telling the truth the next?

But Frazier told you folks during the prosecution's re-direct examination of him that the bag might very well have been protruding out in front of Oswald's body and Mr. Frazier would not have been able to see such a protrusion, due to Oswald having his back to Frazier during the entire lengthy walk toward the back entrance of the Book Depository. Mr. Frazier admitted that to this jury right here in open court!

So, as anyone with just one bad eye can easily see, the police did not, and furthermore (given the evidence in this case), COULD NOT have "faked" and "planted" that brown paper bag in the Book Depository on the day of the President's death. That theory is preposterous on EVERY level -- and everybody knows it!

Getting back to the REAL evidence once again.....

There is also, of course, the biggest piece of evidence of them all -- Oswald's own Mannlicher-Carcano rifle....the very weapon conclusively proven to have been the gun that fired the two bullets which struck President Kennedy....and the very same rifle that was found by the police just fifty-two minutes after the assassination. And WHERE was it found? --- It was found on that very same sixth floor of the Book Depository Building, ladies and gentlemen -- that's where!

And that rifle, which was found behind some boxes near the stairs on the sixth floor, was conclusively proven to be the rifle owned by the defendant in this case -- a Mr. Lee Harvey Oswald.

He didn't use the name "Oswald" to purchase the rifle....no, no. Instead, he used the fake name -- "A. Hidell" -- to order the rifle by mail-order, in March of 1963, from Klein's Sporting Goods....a company in Chicago, Illinois.

But the testimony of handwriting experts at this trial confirm -- without a shred of a doubt, ladies and gentlemen -- that the Klein's order form for rifle number C2766 was filled out in Lee Harvey Oswald's very own handwriting. So we KNOW that it was Oswald himself who ordered the weapon that murdered President Kennedy.

And we also know, without any doubt whatsoever, that that 6.5-millimeter Mannlicher-Carcano rifle was shipped by Klein's to P.O. Box number 2915 in Dallas, Texas, USA. And WHO was the person who used that exact post-office box as a mailing address? You guessed it -- it was Lee Harvey Oswald who used that box to receive mail. That's who.

And we also know, without a doubt, that the serial number that is stamped on Oswald's rifle -- the number "C2766" -- was determined by the Warren Commission to be a unique serial number....that is to say, it was unique to this one particular rifle that was shipped to Lee Oswald in March 1963. In other words, there were not two separate weapons that possessed this same C2766 serial number, as the defense has suggested at this trial.

Therefore -- as we now get back to talking about the ridiculous allegations of evidence-planting in this case -- why would any conspirators want to risk planting additional, possibly-needless bullets in the hospital when there's so much other stuff elsewhere that shows Oswald to be a guilty assassin?

Or would the defense like to now purport that the two large bullet fragments found in the front seat of JFK's limousine were ALSO "planted" there by these unknown/unseen/unidentified "evidence manipulators"? Or that those shells found up on the sixth floor were also "planted"? And was Lee's rifle ALSO "planted" on that same sixth floor too?

And were the defendant's fingerprints also "planted" on those boxes that JUST HAPPENED to be boxes that were found deep within the Sniper's Nest on November 22nd?

And I'm not talking about just the outer Sniper's-Nest boxes that served to shield the assassin from view. No. I'm talking about Lee Harvey Oswald's fingerprint and palmprints being found on two boxes that were INSIDE that Sniper's Perch -- with Lee's palmprint being discovered on the box that the killer almost certainly used as a chair, to sit on, as he waited for his Presidential prey to round the corner of Elm and Houston Streets on that fateful Friday afternoon in 1963.

And there were two of Oswald's prints located on one of the boxes that almost certainly was positioned by the gunman to serve as a potential "rifle rest" as he aimed his weapon toward the southwest, looking toward the Triple Underpass in Dealey Plaza.

The positioning of those boxes in that window, ladies and gentlemen, also tends to answer another of the conspiracy theorists' favorite questions -- the question of why Oswald didn't take the "best shot", per the theorists, while the President's car was on Houston Street.

In addition to the fact that by waiting until both JFK's car and the Secret Service follow-up vehicle had turned the corner onto Elm Street (thereby making sure that the majority of the "firepower" in the Plaza, possessed by the Secret Service agents, all had their BACKS to the assassin) -- there's also that pre-arranging of book cartons in the sniper's window.

The cartons were placed in the window in such a way that we can pretty much KNOW that the killer (Mr. Oswald) had every intention from the GET-GO of only firing shots at the President AFTER the limousine had turned onto Elm Street.

And I think it's fairly logical to assume that those book cartons were PRE-positioned in such a "Rifle Will Always Point West" fashion prior to the motorcade ever coming into Oswald's line of sight. For, Oswald surely didn't want to have to deal with arranging his rifle rest AFTER the President's car had already come into view, when seconds were precious to him. Did he? Of course not, ladies and gentlemen. That's a silly notion on its face.

So, was ALL of this other stuff I've been talking about "planted" by some group of tireless, unidentified conspirators too (as the defense seems to believe)? Or, perhaps as an alternative theory, the defense thinks that it was merely a miraculous "coincidence" that Lee Harvey Oswald's relatively-FRESH fingerprints, in the course of his everyday Book Depository duties, just HAPPENED to show up on the VERY BOXES that certainly must have been utilized by the killer of President Kennedy?! His FRESH prints remember!

Or maybe the defense should go one rung higher on the "planting" ladder and contend that Oswald's prints were planted on the boxes in the Sniper's Nest too.

In addition -- Does the defense also want to claim that all of the evidence showing Oswald to be guilty of killing Officer Tippit was somehow "planted" as well? Including the more than ONE DOZEN WITNESSES who identified Lee Oswald as either the one lone murderer of J.D. Tippit, or who saw Oswald running away from the scene of that crime, gun in hand?!

Just exactly how far off the deep end of this "Evidence-Planting" pool do these defense lawyers think they can lead you folks here on the jury?! How far??!! The notion that all of this Oswald-incriminating evidence was magically "planted" there by evil conspirators is utter nonsense! And it always has been nonsense!

The defense uses that convenient word "planted" only because there is nothing else TO argue to the members of this jury! They have no other choice BUT to argue the evidence was "planted", "faked", "manipulated", or otherwise "tampered with" in some fashion. Because, let's face facts, if all of this stuff WASN'T planted or monkeyed-around with -- then Lee Harvey Oswald is as guilty as Hitler....and even these defense lawyers must surely realize that basic of all facts.

The defense allegations of evidence-planting and police misconduct and of how everybody under the sun covered-up the truth of the Kennedy assassination are classic signs of a very weak, anemic case on the part of Oswald's defense Scheme Team of attorneys!

It's merely a smokescreen that's being utilized by this "Anybody But Oswald" defense team in an attempt to confuse this jury, and is an attempt to muddy the nature of the true evidence in this case. And it's simply nonsense of the first order!

For, surely you realize, ladies and gentlemen, that if that team of brilliant minds over there at that defense counsel table had even ONE piece of solid, physical evidence to back up their claims of a multi-gun conspiracy in this case, everyone here in this courtroom would have seen it! Can there be any DOUBT of that fact, ladies and gentlemen?!!

But the defense has produced nothing in the way of ballistics evidence in this case to back up the notion that any guns other than Oswald's guns were being fired at anyone in Dealey Plaza or on Tenth Street in Oak Cliff (where Police Officer J.D. Tippit was killed) on November the 22nd, 1963.

And the defense has failed (miserably) in their attempts to provide, in general, any substantial physical evidence whatsoever in this case to show that other killers were involved in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, or in the savage second murder so obviously committed by Lee Harvey Oswald on November 22nd -- that being the slaying of Dallas Police Patrolman J.D. Tippit.

As you men and women of the jury begin to deliberate and to consider the evidence presented at this trial, please ask yourself this one very important question --- Has the defense come even remotely close to PROVING that ANY of the evidence presented by the prosecution in this case -- evidence which unquestionably shows Lee Harvey Oswald to be a double-murderer -- has been faked in any way whatsoever?!

The undeniable answer to the above inquiry, ladies and gentlemen, is a resounding and reverberating "No". No -- they have not! There has not been one speck of proof presented at this trial to back up the defense's allegations of evidence-tampering surrounding John F. Kennedy's murder!

The bullet evidence in this case leads in only one single direction -- and it's not toward multiple shooters firing from a number of directions in Dealey Plaza. It leads, instead, to one man's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, #C2766, which just happened to be found in the very same building where the gun's owner was located when John F. Kennedy was being shot and killed one Friday afternoon in late nineteen sixty-three!!

And if there HAD been a multi-gun conspiracy afoot on that autumn day in '63 -- ask yourself this additional logical question, ladies and gentlemen --- WHERE ARE THE OTHER BULLETS?? WHERE ARE ALL OF THOSE "OTHER" BULLETS FROM ALL OF THOSE "OTHER" GUNS THAT WERE SUPPOSEDLY USED TO SHOOT PRESIDENT KENNEDY?? WHERE???

The answer is -- None exist. No other bullets, fragments, or cartridge cases exist except those that either conclusively came from Lee Harvey Oswald's Carcano rifle, or were consistent with having come from that very rifle! Why is this? And HOW can this be if several different shooters took aim at JFK's body on November 22nd??! Were all of these "other" killers aiming at the sky?! Or at each other, instead of the intended target of John F. Kennedy?! It makes no sense, ladies and gentlemen!

But what DOES make the most sense is this: Lee Harvey Oswald, by himself, with his own gun, murdered President Kennedy. Oswald then slipped out of the Book Depository Building after being detained briefly by police officer Marrion Baker on the 2nd Floor. Oswald then proceeded to kill a policeman in Oak Cliff while in desperate flight from the murder he had just committed less than one hour earlier in Dealey Plaza!

The evidence isn't lying to you, ladies and gentlemen. It's the rabid conspiracy theorists like these unscrupulous defense attorneys who have been spoon-feeding you lies, half-truths, and distortions ever since these two murders were committed by Lee Oswald in 1963.

But regardless of what Mr. Conspiracy over there at the defense table wants you to believe -- the evidence surrounding this case is rock-solid. And that evidence is telling any reasonable person that the man sitting over there across the room from you -- Lee Harvey Oswald -- is guilty as sin of murdering two human beings in the fall of 1963!

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury......

John Fitzgerald Kennedy....only 46 years of age when he was killed....born in Brookline, Massachusetts, on May 29th in the year 1917....the 35th President of these United States....

And:

J.D. Tippit....39-year-old police officer....born in Texas on September 18th, 1924....an 11-year veteran of the Dallas Police Department when his life was so abruptly ended via four gunshot wounds on November 22nd, 1963....

Those two men are not with us here in this courtroom today -- BUT FROM THEIR GRAVES....THEY CRY OUT FOR JUSTICE!

And justice can only be served by your coming back into this courtroom with a verdict of guilty.

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. *

=========================================

* = Footnotes/Disclaimers -- The above is a David Von Pein-authored summation, presented in a Vince-like manner; Mr. Bugliosi's actual verbiage to an actual jury may vary.

Shake twice before opening.

Enlarged to show product texture.

May contain peanuts (or may contain too much common sense for some conspiracists to fully grasp). ;)

David Von Pein

April 2006

October 2006
Comment Comment (1) | Permalink | Most recent comment: Apr 24, 2007 5:15 PM PDT


No Title Available

4.0 out of 5 stars If A Multi-Gun Conspiracy Ended The Life Of U.S. President John F. Kennedy -- Where Are The Bullets? Where?!, October 31, 2006
The totality of evidence in the JFK murder case favors the "Lone Gunman" (Lee Harvey Oswald) shooting scenario. There can be no argument about that fact. Anything else pales by comparison...and is laughable by comparison as well.

Many critics of the Warren Commission's single-assassin conclusion think that such a conclusion just doesn't make any sense whatsoever. But here are the things that really make no good, logical sense.....

1.) The conspiracy-slanted version of the shooting, where THREE bullet wounds in two victims line up so nicely to form what could later be deemed the "Single-Bullet Theory".

2.) Two bullets that go into JFK's body and never come out the other side (while causing no major internal damage at all). How? Why?

3.) Every unwanted piece of non-Oswald-implicating evidence in the case (including J.D. Tippit's murder) suddenly goes AWOL immediately, including every last freaking bullet and fragment and shell casing from all non-LHO weapons. How? Just....how?

4.) A pre-arranged One-Patsy plot that features more than just one shooter firing from Oswald's perch in the School Book Depository (where the one patsy is presumably going to be implicated in the shooting). How? And, moreover -- WHY would anyone pre-arrange such a loopy, complicated plot? Were they just bored with the more-conventional ways of setting up their patsies?

5.) A plot that involves virtually all levels of law enforcement and officialdom....from LBJ, to the FBI, to the CIA, to the SS, to the DPD. How? And why did all of these people want to participate in this wretched affair? Did Hoover & Johnson put a gun to every one of their heads?

~~~~~~

The LACK of any evidence to undercut and debunk the LHO/LN/SBT scenario is crucial. For, if the Lone-Nut assassination scenario is wrong -- where is the verifiable physical proof of OTHER shooters and other non-Oswald bullets and other ballistics evidence?

Yes, I fully realize the "burden of proof" is on the prosecution (i.e., Oswald's prosecution), but let's face facts --- if it wasn't ALL OSWALD, where in the world are the bullets that make things add up to "conspiracy"? Where oh where are the bullets? (And WHERE are the frontal entry wounds on the victims to verify non-Oswald shots?)

IMO, the LACK of definitive "It Was A Multi-Gun Conspiracy" evidence is just about as telling as the LHO evidence that exists in the case. For, these two men (JFK and John Connally) WERE wounded by gunfire in some fashion on November 22, 1963. And to think that all of the non-Oswald-favoring stuff just evaporated conveniently for conspiracy promoters is just flat-out silly.

Think a jury would buy the "disappearing" act with respect to so much evidence that really SHOULD exist in this case if multiple rifles had wounded the victims in Dealey Plaza? Wouldn't a jury be asking the exact same question I've been asking -- i.e., WHERE ARE THE BULLETS?

Also (re. the Dealey Plaza witnesses) -- More witnesses actually back up the single-shooter conclusion than contradict it. Far more witnesses heard exactly three shots than heard any other number (equalling the exact number of shells in the Depository where Lee Oswald was seen firing a rifle).

Some witnesses contradict the exact shooting timeline, sure. But many, many witnesses can be used to debunk the conspiracy scenarios as well. So what? Obviously, witness stuff is going to be hit-and-miss for both sides (CT or LN). It's always been that way. Always will be.

But what CTers lack (and always have) is solid factual evidence of a hard nature that supports the notion that more than just one gun was responsible for JFK's demise.

As Mr. Vincent T. Bugliosi has said in the past when discussing the O.J. Simpson murder case (and I truly believe it also applies to the JFK assassination as well -- perhaps even more so), the idea of a conspiracy in the JFK case is probably more "in the air" than anywhere else. It's more of a "gut feeling" for most of the approx. 70%-75% of people who favor conspiracy in the case (with most of those people probably never even having read a single word of testimony or a single book on the case at all). But they still think something hinky occurred on 11/22/63 (and 11/24/63, the day Oswald was shot dead).

Heck, I'd probably feel the same way too if I'd never studied the case any further. Holy smokes, Jack Ruby shoots the accused assassin in a police station??!! That's enough to make ANY layman cry "Plot". It's only natural that many people feel that way.

But, again....WHERE ARE THOSE DAMN BULLETS? Where?

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

From the ever-logical, truth-seeking, and witty mind of former prosecutor Vince Bugliosi, I offer up the following passages......

"Based on the Himalayan mountain of evidence against him, anyone who would believe he {Lee Harvey Oswald} was innocent would believe someone who told them they had heard a cow speaking Spanish." -- Vincent Bugliosi; November 1986

~~~~~~

"Though there are some notable exceptions, for the most part the persistent rantings of the Warren Commission critics remind me of dogs barking idiotically through endless nights." -- Vincent Bugliosi; November 1986

~~~~~~

"The American people are simply misinformed. They think they know what happened....but there's an enormous amount of material in this case they have no idea about." -- Vincent Bugliosi; 2004


Alfred Hitchcock Presents - Season Two
Alfred Hitchcock Presents - Season Two
DVD ~ Alfred Hitchcock
Offered by twilightmedia
Price: $18.29
38 used & new from $10.92

43 of 46 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars One-Sided Discs, Chapter Breaks, Quicker Episode Access, And David Wayne's Dilemma All Help Make This A Dang Good Set Of DVDs, October 28, 2006
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
I was very pleased to be able to add "Alfred Hitchcock Presents: Season Two" to my TV-DVD collection on October 17, 2006, when Universal Studios Home Entertainment officially put this 5-Disc set into circulation. And the video quality looks very nice here too, in my opinion. These black-and-white prints for this second "AHP" season (from 1956-1957) have survived in admirable shape.

This set includes all 39 second-year "AHP" episodes on five single-sided, dual-layered discs (which is a nice change from the first-season set, which has thirty-nine shows placed onto three double-sided DVDs). These 2nd-season shows appear to be uncut for the most part too.

A few seconds of Hitchcock's dialogue may possibly have been trimmed here and there (leading into what were the commercials breaks when the shows originally aired), but nothing of a substantive nature has been cut out from what I can detect. And the running times would tend to back up that conclusion as well. In sampling a few episodes from Disc #1, I found running times of 26:11, 26:21, 25:28, and 25:33 for the first four programs.

I, personally, have experienced very little difficulty at all while playing any two-sided discs from Universal, but I still like the fact that USHE now seems to be utilizing the one-sided DVD format for most of its television catalog. The single-sided discs look nicer too....they aren't as plain-looking, in that the single-siders include a label on each DVD, complete with photos, show title, and of course an easy-to-read disc number.

The same photo of Mr. Hitchcock (holding a hangman's noose, which seems fairly appropriate) is displayed on each of the five disc labels in this AHP-2 collection. It might have been nicer to have a different picture adorning each of the discs....but the redundant photo doesn't bother me at all. Heck, I just like opening this package and seeing SOME type of label on the DVDs, period.

Other than the switch to the single-sided discs, this set is almost identical to the Season-One release in most respects (such as the packaging and the DVD menu design and layout).

The Main Menu provides choices for "Episode Index", "Subtitles", and a "Play All" option. (The "Play All" can be accessed from any of the "Episode Index" menu screens as well.)

Eight shows occupy each disc (except Disc #5, which has seven). English subtitles are available for each program. The "Episode List" (title only) text screens that were a part of the first-season release have not been included in this second-season boxed set.

Universal has also elected to omit the episode description text screens from the S.2 menus. A wise move too, because a lot of "spoilers" were revealed in the S.1 show summaries. For Season Two, when an individual episode is selected, you're taken straight to the episode (without going to a sub-menu first).

Unlike Season One, chapter breaks have been inserted for all 39 of these year-two episodes, which I like a lot. There are four total chapters (scenes) per program. Advancing past the first "chapter" takes the viewer directly to Act 1 of the episode, while skipping the opening credits as well as bypassing Hitchcock's prologue/introduction.

Alfred's droll intros are fun to see....but being able to get right to the beginning of the body of the program with one quick click is quite handy too. That's a very nice chaptering option to have.

I haven't seen many of these Hitchcock episodes for quite some time, so some pleasant memories were rekindled when I watched some of the AHP shows on these DVDs -- including the following impressive entries:

"Fog Closing In", "None Are So Blind", "De Mortuis", "Vicious Circle", "Father And Son", "Nightmare In 4-D", "Kill With Kindness", "The Night The World Ended", "Mr. Blanchard's Secret", and the three-part story starring frequent AHP guest star John Williams entitled "I Killed The Count".

In addition to the above-mentioned installments, the Season-Two episode I enjoy the most is "One More Mile To Go" (first aired on April 7, 1957). I actually had no idea that this episode was even going to be a part of the S.2 collection, so it was a real treat indeed to see this one pop up in the Episode Index on Disc #4. It is also one of the very few episodes directed by Mr. Hitchcock himself during this second season of his television series.

"One More Mile To Go" stars David Wayne and is an episode filled with tension, suspense, and the one thing that frightened the daylights out of Director Alfred Hitchcock more than anything else -- the police. According to Mr. Hitchcock's daughter (Pat), and via interviews with Hitch himself in the years prior to his death at age 80 on April 29, 1980, Alfred very much feared the police.

Perhaps that fear of "men in blue" was the springboard for episodes like "One More Mile", which has a script that features a motorcycle cop trailing after David Wayne throughout the program. And, according to what Pat Hitchcock has said in the past about her father, "nothing could be more menacing than that" (i.e., being pursued relentlessly by a policeman) -- especially if the person being chased (in this case Wayne) has a terrible secret he wants to hide....a "secret" in the form of something that Wayne stuffed into the trunk of his car shortly before being pulled over by that menacing man in the blue uniform.

"One More Mile To Go" has been compared in some ways to the movie "Psycho" (which Hitchcock directed three years later). I hadn't really thought about the "Psycho" comparisons in the past, but the AHP episode does mirror that iconic Hitch film in several ways, including the part of a policeman tailing the car being driven by the story's main character.

I could probably watch "One More Mile" every day of the week and not tire of it. It's an episode that has an eerie and mysterious quality that, for me, makes each repeat viewing just as satisfying as the one that preceded it.

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

More "AHP-Season 2" DVD Details:

Video -- Full Frame (original 1.33:1 TV ratio).

Audio -- Dolby Digital Mono (2.0).

Subtitles? -- Yes (English only).

Bonus Features -- None (except for some ads for other Universal DVDs).

Packaging -- A three-panel folding Digipak case with an outer slipcover/box.

Paper Insert? -- No.

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

The "Alfred Hitchcock Presents: Season 2" DVD collection is another excellent reason to start building a "Classic TV On DVD" library (if you haven't already started building one, that is). With 39 gorgeous and well-written half-hour B&W teleplays available in one convenient and affordable DVD package, "AHP-2" earns a "Very Much Recommended" label from this reviewer.
Comment Comment (1) | Permalink | Most recent comment: Oct 28, 2006 12:52 PM PDT


Biography - Bugliosi, Vincent (T.) (1934-): An article from: Contemporary Authors
Biography - Bugliosi, Vincent (T.) (1934-): An article from: Contemporary Authors
by Gale Reference Team
Edition: Digital
Price: $9.95

1 of 2 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars Excerpts From "On Trial: Lee Harvey Oswald", The 1986 Television Docu-Trial Featuring Vincent Bugliosi As Prosecuting Attorney, October 26, 2006
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
In late November of 1986, the cable television network "Showtime" aired a two-part, five-and-a-half-hour special program -- "ON TRIAL: LEE HARVEY OSWALD" -- which represented a first-of-its-kind JFK assassination "mock" courtroom trial, with the accused assassin of President John F. Kennedy as the defendant. (There was no actor used to play the now-deceased Oswald, however; the defendant's chair was left empty during the trial.)

A real sworn-in jury of twelve Dallas citizens was flown to London, England, to sit in judgment of the man whom the Warren Commission (22 years earlier) had deemed guilty of killing President Kennedy and Dallas police officer J.D. Tippit on November 22, 1963.

An actual judge was also used in the 1986 "docu-trial", and two of the finest lawyers in America were employed to serve as the attorneys in this important landmark case. Highly-successful defense lawyer Gerry Spence of Wyoming acted in defense of his "client" (Oswald); and Spence had not lost a case in front of a jury in the last 17 years leading up to the LHO mock trial.

Former Los Angeles Deputy District Attorney Vincent Bugliosi served as the lawyer for the prosecution (representing the "U.S. Government"). Bugliosi had a nearly-perfect 105-1 record in felony jury trials while employed with the L.A. DA's office.

Many of the actual witnesses surrounding the assassination of JFK were called to the witness stand during the trial, as well as police officers, photo and medical experts, and members of the HSCA panel who investigated the case in the late 1970s.

The end result of the 21-hour-long docu-trial (which was edited down to 5.5 hours for the "Showtime" TV broadcast) was a "Guilty" verdict being reached by the jury, with Oswald pronounced guilty of murdering both John Kennedy and Officer Tippit.

Below I've typed out some verbatim excerpts and highlights from this fascinating court proceeding known as "ON TRIAL: LEE HARVEY OSWALD". These excerpts provide a pretty good example of the massive amount of evidence that Mr. Bugliosi had to work with as he successfully attempted, albeit in mock-trial form only, to convict Lee Oswald for the two murders Oswald so obviously committed on 11/22/63 in Dallas, Texas......

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

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

Vincent Bugliosi's Opening Statement to the jury:

"Mr. Spence, Judge Bunton, ladies and gentlemen of the jury -- I don't have to tell you that you have been called upon to sit on the jury of perhaps the most important murder case ever tried in this country.

In any political assassination, ladies and gentlemen, almost as inevitably as death and taxes, there is always a chorus of critics screaming the word 'conspiracy' before the fatal bullet has even come to rest.

The evidence that will be presented at this trial will show that there is no substance to the persistent charge by these critics that Lee Harvey Oswald was just a patsy, set up to take the fall by some elaborate conspiracy.

We expect the evidence -- ALL of the evidence -- to show that Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone, was responsible for the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

We expect the defense -- in an anemic effort to deflect suspicion away from Mr. Oswald -- to offer theory, speculation, conjecture, but not one speck of credible evidence that any other person or group murdered President Kennedy and framed Lee Harvey Oswald for the murder that they committed. As this trial unfolds, you will see how utterly preposterous the allegation of a frame-up is.

The evidence at this trial will produce a vivid, and a rather stark, psychological portrait of Oswald as a deeply-disturbed and maladjusted man. It will show him to be a fanatical Marxist, who restlessly searched for a country to embody the Marxist dream.

The evidence will show that on the morning of the assassination -- November the 22nd, 1963 -- Oswald carried his weapon, a 6.5-millimeter Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, into his place of employment at the Texas School Book Depository Building. The Presidential motorcade was scheduled to pass right in front of that building that very noon.

At 12:30 PM, as the President's limousine drove slowly by, three shots rang out from the southeasternmost window on the sixth floor of that building....one of which penetrated President Kennedy's upper-right back, exited the front of his throat....another entering the right-rear of his head, and exiting and shattering the right-frontal area of his head.

As the Presidential limousine screeched away to Parkland Memorial Hospital, where he was pronounced dead -- the President, his life blood gushing from his body, lay mortally wounded in his wife Jacqueline's lap.

Within minutes of the assassination, Oswald's rifle was found on the same sixth floor -- the floor from which Oswald had brutally cut down, at the age of only forty-six, the thirty-fifth President of these United States.

The evidence will show that Oswald's rifle, to the exclusion of all other weapons, was determined by firearms experts to be the rifle that fired the two bullets that struck down President Kennedy.

The evidence will further show that just forty-five minutes after the assassination, Oswald, in frantic flight from what he had just done, shot and killed Dallas police officer J.D. Tippit....running from the scene of the murder to a theater, where he was arrested and subdued after drawing his revolver on one of the arresting officers.

Much more evidence, ladies and gentlemen, much more, will be produced at this trial irresistibly connecting Oswald and no other person or group to the assassination.

I have every confidence that after you folks fairly and objectively evaluate all of the evidence in this case you will find that Lee Harvey Oswald, and Lee Harvey Oswald alone, was responsible for the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen."

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

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

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Did you recall how he {Oswald} was carrying the bag?"

BUELL WESLEY FRAZIER (Oswald's co-worker; he drove LHO to work on 11/22/63 and watched Lee carry a paper package into the Book Depository that morning) -- "Yes sir. He was carrying it parallel to his body."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Okay, so he carried the bag right next to his body....on the right side?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes sir. On the right side."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Was it cupped in his hand and under his armpit? I think you've said that in the past."

MR. FRAZIER -- "Yes sir."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Mr. Frazier, is it true that you paid hardly any attention to this bag?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "That is true."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "So the bag could have been protruding out in front of his body, and you wouldn't have been able to see it, is that correct?"

MR. FRAZIER -- "That is true."

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

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

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Mr. Boone, did the FBI ever show you a rifle which they said was the rifle found on the sixth floor?"

EUGENE BOONE (Dallas County Deputy Sheriff who discovered a rifle in the TSBD on 11/22/63) -- "Yes sir."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "And what did you say when you looked at that rifle?"

MR. BOONE -- "It appears to be the rifle that I saw on the sixth floor of the School Book Depository."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Well, didn't you just tell Mr. Spence that you could not identify it?"

MR. BOONE -- "I could not identify it positively because I did not have an identifying mark on the weapon."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Okay. But it appeared to be the same rifle?"

MR. BOONE -- "It appeared to be the same weapon."

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

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

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "What was the conclusion your panel came to as to how many bullets struck the President, their point of entry, and the path they took through the President's body?"

DR. CHARLES PETTY (one of 9 forensic pathologists who served on the autopsy panel {aka the "FPP"} for the HSCA) -- "My conclusion, and the conclusion of the panel, was that the President was struck by two bullets -- one entering the right-upper back and exiting in the front of the neck; the other entering the right back of the head, and exiting what we call the right-frontal area, that is the front and side of the head."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Is there any doubt in your mind, Doctor, whatsoever that both bullets that struck the President came from the rear and no bullets struck him from the front?"

DR. PETTY -- "None whatsoever."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Let me ask you this, Dr. Petty .... assuming the President HAD been struck by a bullet from the front -- make that assumption -- could the transference of momentum from that bullet have thrown the President backward as is shown in frames 315 to 320 of the Zapruder Film?"

DR. PETTY -- "No sir, not in my opinion."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "And why is that?"

DR. PETTY -- "Because the head is too heavy. There's too much muscular resistance to movement."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "So the killings that people see on television and in the movies, which is the only type of killings most people ever see, where the person struck by the bullet very frequently, visibly, and dramatically is propelled backward by the force of the bullet -- that's not what actually happens in life when a bullet hits a human being?"

DR. PETTY -- "No, of course not."

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

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

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "What you're saying is that from your Neutron Activation Analysis, there may have been fifty people firing at President Kennedy that day....but if there were, they all missed....ONLY bullets fired from Oswald's Carcano rifle hit the President. Is that correct?"

DR. VINCENT P. GUINN (NAA Expert) -- "That's a correct statement; yes."

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

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

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Mr. Delgado, I believe you testified before the Warren Commission, that on the rifle range Oswald was kind of a joke, a pretty big joke."

NELSON DELGADO (served with Oswald in Marine Corps) -- "Yes, he was."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "You're aware that at the time Oswald was doing poorly on the range, he was about to be released from the Marines, is that correct?"

MR. DELGADO -- "Yes, he was."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Are you aware that in 1956, when Oswald first joined the Marines, and was going through Basic Training, he fired a 212 on the rifle range with an M-1 rifle, which made him a 'sharpshooter' at that time -- are you aware of that?"

MR. DELGADO -- "Yes."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Given the fact that Oswald was about to get out of the Marines when he was in your unit, and the fact that he showed no interest in firing on the range -- you don't attribute his poor showing on the range to his being a poor shot?"

MR. DELGADO -- "No."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "He could have done better, you felt, if he tried?"

MR. DELGADO -- "Certainly."

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

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

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "While he {Lee Oswald} was at your home did he ask you for any curtain rods?"

RUTH PAINE (acquaintance of Lee and Marina Oswald) -- "No, he didn't."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Did he ever, at ANY time, ask you for curtain rods?"

MRS. PAINE -- "No."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Was there any discussion between you and him, or you and Marina, about curtain rods?"

MRS. PAINE -- "No."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Now you, in fact, DID have some curtain rods in the garage, is that correct?"

MRS. PAINE -- "In the garage...yes."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "After the assassination, they were still there."

MRS. PAINE -- "Yes, that's right."

~~~~~~~~~~~~

MRS. PAINE -- "I do think for the historical record it's important that people understand that Lee was a very ordinary person -- that people can kill a President without that being something that shows on them in advance."

MR. GERRY SPENCE -- "Is it really your purpose here to try to defame this man in some way?"

MRS. PAINE -- "I'd like a FULL picture -- I think it's really important for history that a FULL picture of the man be seen."

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

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

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Now, Mr. O'Connor, if the President's brain being missing from his head is one of the most shocking things that you've ever seen in your entire life, a matter that you think should have been investigated, certainly....and if they {the HSCA investigators} spoke to you for one-and-a-half hours about your observations that night, why wasn't it important enough for you to tell these people about it?"

PAUL O'CONNOR (technician who assisted at JFK's autopsy at Bethesda Naval Medical Center) -- "I was under orders not to talk until that time."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "What?"

MR. O'CONNOR -- "I was under orders not to talk to anybody..."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "By whom?"

MR. O'CONNOR -- "By....the United States military brought in orders a couple days after the autopsy, and we were to remain silent."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "But you talked to them for an hour-and-a-half. You told them all types of things in that document."

MR. O'CONNOR -- "I received permission from the Select Committee on Assassinations to talk to the Secretary of the Navy and Secretary of Defense."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Paul, when I first asked you this question over the phone, did you tell me -- 'the reason I never told them is....they never asked me'?"

MR. O'CONNOR -- "Well, they didn't ask me."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "So, in other words, Mr. O'Connor, even though this is one of the most shocking things that you've ever seen, and you're going to remember it till the day you die....and you feel this matter should have been investigated....if those investigators for the House Select Committee didn't ask you the magic question -- by golly you're not about to tell 'em!! Is that correct?"

MR. O'CONNOR -- "No sir. I only answered what I was asked....and that was it."

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

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

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Now, Doctor, if the bullet was coming on a downward path as it entered the Presidential limousine, as you say it was, is that correct?"

DR. CYRIL H. WECHT (forensic pathologist who served on the HSCA's FPP panel; has always believed a conspiracy existed with respect to JFK's murder) -- "Yes."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Alright....and it MISSED Governor Connally....is that correct...?"

DR. WECHT -- "Yes."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "...Why didn't it hit the driver of the car or do any damage to the car, Doctor?"

DR. WECHT -- "A couple of things. The straight line in that open limousine could have taken it over the left side of the car; and as the line shows*, it would have and could have indeed missed the driver."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Wait a minute....it's coming on a DOWNWARD path, Cyril! It's coming on a downward path into the Presidential limousine, goes through the President's body, misses Governor Connally, and magically also misses the driver and doesn't do any damage to the Presidential limousine."

DR. WECHT -- "Wait, just a moment! I did not say that THAT bullet missed all of these people completely or that it missed the car! You KNOW that there were fragments found in the car, Mr. Bugliosi!"

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "You said the bullet passed on a straight line through the President's body..."

DR. WECHT -- "Absolutely."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "...Passed through soft tissue. So that bullet came out pristine..."

DR. WECHT -- "That's right."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "The bullet fragments found in the front seat of this car, Doctor, were bullet fragments....very, very damaged....very, very small. What happened to that pristine bullet when it came through President Kennedy's body?!! Who did it hit?!!"

DR. WECHT -- "What happened to the third bullet under the Warren Commission theory, Mr. Bugliosi?!! Where is it?! You're asking ME to be responsible for the bullets?!"

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "I want to know what happened to YOUR bullet, Doctor."

~~~~~~~~~~~~

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "Well, Doctor, by definition, it seems to me that you are saying, that if the other eight pathologists disagreed with you -- and they did -- is that correct...?"

DR. WECHT -- "Yes."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "...Okay. Seems to me, Doctor, that by necessary implication they are either hopelessly and utterly incompetent, or they deliberately suppressed the truth from the American public. Is that correct?"

DR. WECHT -- "There is a third alternative, which would be a hybrid to some extent of the deliberate suppression, sir..."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "So, of the nine pathologists, Dr. Wecht, you're the only one that had the honor and the integrity and the professional responsibility to tell the truth to the American people....is that correct, Doctor?"

DR. WECHT -- "I'll prefer to put it this way....I'm the only one who had the courage to say that the King was nude, and had no clothes on....yes."

MR. BUGLIOSI -- "No further questions."

* = NOTE RE. DR. WECHT'S TESTIMONY -- The diagram that was used by Dr. Wecht at the mock trial (purporting what Wecht thinks was the trajectory of the bullet path from the TSBD to the limousine) was laughably askew and inaccurate as far as the "right-to-left" trajectory line drawn in on that schematic was concerned. The angle from the Sniper's Nest in the TSBD to the car (at approx. the SBT bullet strike at Zapruder Frame #224) was not nearly as sharp an angle as purported in Wecht's chart/diagram. The diagram also does not account for Governor Connally's being turned to his right in his jump seat when struck with the SBT bullet.

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

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

Vincent Bugliosi's Closing Arguments/Final Summation to the jury:

Mr. Bugliosi's initial Closing Arguments:

"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, in the brief time I have to address you in this historic trial, I want to point out what must already be obvious to you....that Lee Harvey Oswald and Lee Harvey Oswald alone is responsible for the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, our young and vigorous leader whose Presidency stirred the hopes of millions of Americans for a better world, and whose shocking death grieved and anguished an entire nation.

But before I summarize that evidence for you....against Mr. Oswald....evidence that conclusively proves his guilt beyond all reasonable doubt....I want to discuss several issues with you which the defense has raised during this trial.

Several factors make it clear that Kennedy and Connally WERE struck by the same bullet. There's absolutely no evidence of the existence of any separate bullet hitting Connally.

With respect to whether or not any shots were fired from the Grassy Knoll, I want to make the following observations -- firstly, it is perfectly understandable that the witnesses were confused as to the origin of fire. Not only does Dealey Plaza resound with echoes, but here you have a situation of completely-unexpected shots over just a matter of a few moments.

When you compound all of that with the fact that the witnesses were focusing their attention on the President of the United States driving by, a mesmerizing event for many of them....and the chaos, the hysteria, the bedlam that engulfed the assassination scene....it's remarkable that there was any coherence at all to what they thought they saw and heard.

Human observation, notoriously unreliable under even the most optimum situation, HAS to give way to hard, scientific evidence. And we do have indisputable, scientific evidence in this case that the bullets which struck President Kennedy came from his rear, not his front.

If EITHER of the two bullets that struck President Kennedy came from the front, why weren't there any entrance wounds to the front of the President's body, nor any exit wounds to the rear of his body?

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, it couldn't be more obvious that there was no gunman at the Grassy Knoll. No one SAW anybody with a rifle in that area. No weapon nor expended cartridges from a weapon were found there. It didn't happen.

With respect to Ruby killing Oswald, the evidence is overwhelming that he was a very emotional man. When we couple the fact that Ruby cared deeply for Kennedy with the fact that he probably thought that he would be viewed as a hero, Ruby's killing of Oswald has all of the earmarks of a very personal killing, completely devoid of any outside influence.

In the short time I have left, I want to summarize the evidence of guilt against Mr. Oswald....

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, within minutes of the assassination, a 6.5-millimeter Mannlicher-Carcano rifle -- serial number C dash 2766 -- was found on the sixth floor of the Book Depository Building. Oswald ordered the rifle under the name 'A. Hidell' -- we know that.

We know from the testimony of Monty Lutz, the firearms expert, that the two large bullet fragments found inside the Presidential limousine were parts of a bullet fired from Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all other weapons.

We also know from the firearms people that the three expended cartridge casings found on the floor, right beneath that sixth-floor window -- undoubtedly the same casings that Mr. Norman heard fall from above -- were fired in, and ejected from, Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all other weapons.

So we KNOW, not just beyond a reasonable doubt, we know beyond ALL doubt THAT OSWALD'S RIFLE WAS THE MURDER WEAPON....that caused that terrible, terrible spray of brain matter to the front! The worst sight that I have ever seen in my entire life!

And it's obvious that Oswald carried that rifle into the building that day in that large brown paper bag. It couldn't be more obvious. As far as Mr. Frazier's testimony about Oswald carrying the bag under his armpit, he conceded he never paid close attention to just how Oswald was carrying that bag. He didn't have any reason to.

At this point if we had nothing else....nothing else....how much do you need?....if we had NOTHING else....this would be enough to prove Oswald's guilt beyond all REASONABLE doubt. But there's so much more.

Let's look at Oswald's conduct .... November the 22nd, 1963, the day of the assassination, was a Friday. Whenever Oswald would go to visit his wife in Irving, he'd go on a Friday evening....come back on a Monday morning.

On the week of the assassination, however, for the very first time, he goes there on a THURSDAY evening....obviously to get his rifle for the following day.

After the assassination, all the other employees of the Book Depository Building return to work. There's a roll call. They're accounted for. Not Oswald. He takes off. The ONLY employee who leaves the building.

Just forty-five minutes after the assassination....out of the five hundred thousand or so people in Dallas....Lee Harvey Oswald is the one out of those five hundred thousand people who just happens to murder Officer J.D. Tippit.

Oswald's responsibility for President Kennedy's assassination explains....EXPLAINS....why he was driven to murder Officer Tippit. The murder bore the signature of a man in desperate flight from some awful deed. What other reason under the moon would he have had to kill Officer Tippit?

Normally, ladies and gentlemen, in a murder case, a verdict of guilty brings about a certain measure of justice....obviously a limited amount of justice....but a certain measure of justice for the victim and his or her surviving loved ones. But here, the effect of this assassination went far beyond President Kennedy and his family. This was an enormous offense against the American people. And no justice could ever be achieved.

I respectfully ask you to return a swift verdict of guilty against Lee Harvey Oswald....simply because it is the only verdict that is consistent with the evidence -- evidence which conclusively proves Oswald's guilt beyond all reasonable doubt.

Thank you, ladies and gentlemen."

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mr. Bugliosi's Final Closing Arguments (which followed Mr. Spence's Closing Arguments for the defense):

"Based on the evidence in this case, Lee Harvey Oswald is as guilty as sin, and there's NOTHING that Mr. Spence can do about it.

I have yet to see the man who can convince twelve reasonable men and women as you folks are....that black is white....and white is black.

Mr. Spence, in his argument to you, no more desired to look at the evidence in this case than one would have a desire to look directly into the noonday sun. And I can't really blame him, because if I were he, I wouldn't want to either.

Because there's not one tiny grain of evidence....not one microscopic speck of evidence that ANYONE -- other than Lee Harvey Oswald -- was responsible for the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

Mr. Spence did say this....it was kind of a subtle, very clever argument....it took me a while to grasp exactly what he was doing....I THINK he said this, and if I misrepresent you, sir, I'm sorry, but I think he said that Lee Harvey Oswald was the exact type of person to set up as a patsy. Or words to that effect. I'm just paraphrasing. A Marxist, a defector to Soviet Russia.

Actually, he was the exact type of person to murder the President. And my colleague very cleverly turned it around and said he's the exact type of person to make as a patsy.

Let's take a look at Oswald .... Can anyone fail to see how utterly and completely crazy this man here was? Utterly and completely nuts. Bonkers. And you have to be bonkers to commit a Presidential murder; you gotta be crazy; nuts.

One example, among many -- How many Americans, how many people anywhere in the WORLD defect to the Soviet Union? That alone shows how completely and utterly mentally-unhinged this man was. Again, that's the exact type of person to kill the President.

Though he may or may not have had any personal dislike for Kennedy, we don't know that. For all we know maybe he didn't think Kennedy was that bad a person....everything is relative in life. However, I think one thing is pretty obvious, Kennedy almost undoubtedly would have represented to Oswald the ultimate, quintessential representative -- that's the key word, 'representative' -- of a society for which he had a grinding contempt.

On the issue of conspiracy, Mr. Spence {VB chuckles} -- I'm paraphrasing him -- he certainly didn't say who specifically murdered the President....but he certainly implied to you that it was some nebula, some powerful group -- he never put the hat on anyone, he kept the hat on his table here; I thought he was going to put it on someone's head, but he didn't.

Some mysterious group....powerful group....murdered the President and framed Lee Harvey Oswald. But he didn't say who these people were. He did say the CIA covered-up here; he said the FBI covered-up there.

In which case, if the FBI and CIA were covering-up -- they'd be the ones who murdered the President, right? Why doesn't Mr. Spence come right out and say it? Why doesn't he accuse the CIA and the FBI of murdering the President? One thing you can say about Mr. Spence, he's not a shy man. He knows how to exercise his First-Amendment freedom of speech....but he doesn't SAY it. Because he's very intelligent; very wise.

I'll tell you why he doesn't say it -- because he KNOWS that if he said that the FBI murdered the President, or the CIA murdered the President....it would sound downright SILLY! You'd LAUGH at him!

But even though neither the CIA nor organized crime would have any productive motive whatsoever to kill the President, let's make the unwarranted assumption that they did....that they had such a motive, and let's go on and discuss Mr. Spence's next point about Ruby killing Oswald.

Mafia contract killers are always selected with utmost care. I mean the one chosen to kill Oswald would be everything that Jack Ruby was not. He'd be someone who had a long track record of effectively carrying out murder contracts before for them. It would be a precise, unemotional, business-like, and above all, tight-lipped, killer for hire.

The whole notion of sophisticated groups -- like organized crime, U.S. Intelligence -- getting Jack Ruby, of all people, to accomplish a job which, if he talked, would prove fatal to their existence is just downright laughable.

When Mr. Spence argued that Oswald was just a patsy and was framed, he conveniently neglected to be specific. HOW was Lee Harvey Oswald framed? When we look at the mechanics of such a possible conspiracy in this case -- how COULD he have been framed?

Let's get into the mechanics .... Who was this other gunman who, on the day of the assassination, made his way into the Book Depository Building, carrying a rifle....went up to the sixth floor....shot and killed the President....made his way back down to the first floor....and escaped without leaving a trace?

How, in fact, if Oswald were innocent, did they GET Oswald, within forty-five minutes of the assassination, to murder Officer Tippit? Or was he framed for that murder too?!

Mr. Spence can't have it both ways. If the people who set Oswald up were so sophisticated to come up with this incredible, elaborate conspiracy -- I mean to the point they had people, according to Mr. Spence, who can superimpose this man's head on someone else's body, and imposters down in Mexico City -- if they were THAT bright, why weren't they intelligent enough to know the most obvious thing of all....

That you don't attempt to frame a man of questionable marksmanship ability who possesses a nineteen-dollar mail-order rifle!

As surely as I am standing here, and surely as night follows day, Lee Harvey Oswald -- acting alone -- was responsible for the murder of President John F. Kennedy.

You are twelve reasonable men and women, and that is why I have every confidence that you will confirm this fact for the pages of history by your verdict of guilty.

Thank you so very much, ladies and gentlemen."

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

[END TRIAL EXCERPTS]

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

After the Showtime mock LHO trial, Gerry Spence had this to say about his courtroom opponent, Mr. Bugliosi:

"There is only one Vince Bugliosi. He's the best. No other lawyer in America could have done what Vince did in this case."

There were also these comments made by Vince Bugliosi following the docu-trial:

"The majority of the American people now believe, polls have shown, that there was a conspiracy in this case....and the reason for that is that the side of the Government has never been presented. It's been presented, it's in the Warren Report; but that's 27 volumes. Who's gone out and purchased 27 volumes? They haven't done that.

The only books that have come out on this case are by conspiracy buffs; and these are the people that have gone on talk shows throughout the country, and they finally convinced the American people.

So the importance of this case is that we finally now gave the American people, and the people around the world, the prosecution's viewpoint." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi; November 1986
Comment Comment (1) | Permalink | Most recent comment: Apr 19, 2007 12:00 AM PDT


No Title Available

0 of 1 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars Re.: The Murder Of Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit (Lee Harvey Oswald's Second Victim On November 22nd, 1963), October 25, 2006
A double-murderer by the name of Lee Harvey Oswald (alias Alek James Hidell) shot and killed President John Kennedy and Dallas policeman J.D. Tippit in the year 1963. The evidence of Oswald's guilt in these crimes is wide and far-reaching.

But many people refuse to buy into the official version of these killings as declared by the Warren Commission in late 1964. The naysayers think that the evidence against Mr. Oswald has been manipulated to falsely implicate only LHO in these heinous acts of violence.

With respect to the murder of Officer Tippit specifically, many conspiracy theorists feel that the 39-year-old Dallas patrolman was killed by a gunman (not Oswald, naturally) who was using an "automatic" weapon, instead of a "revolver". (Oswald was arrested a short distance from the Tippit crime scene with a .38 revolver on him as he attempted to use it on officers in the theater itself.)

But the "automatic" vs. "revolver" controversy has been thoroughly explained many times since 1963, including by one of the Dallas policemen who was directly involved in this controversy on the day of the Tippit murder (11/22/63), Gerald L. Hill.

Sergeant Hill had originally put out a broadcast over the DPD police radio stating that the killer was probably carrying an "automatic" type of weapon. But in 1986, Hill tried to clear up the confusion about the gun with these comments:

"I assumed that it was an automatic simply because we had found all the hulls in one little general area. .... If you find a cluster of shells, you have to assume that they were fired from an automatic." -- Gerald Hill quote (Via Dale K. Myers' book, "With Malice: Lee Harvey Oswald And The Murder Of Officer J.D. Tippit"; Pp. 260-261)

Also -- As pointed out in Mr. Myers' first-rate book which probes every last nook and cranny of the Tippit murder (and thoroughly verifies Oswald's guilt in the crime from every angle), the very first indication that Tippit's killer might have had an automatic weapon actually came not from a policeman, but from used-car salesman (and eyewitness) Ted Callaway.

From Page 258 of "With Malice":

"All things considered, it appears the initial reference to an 'automatic' weapon stemmed from Callaway's mistaken impression that the gunman was pushing a fresh magazine into the handle of an automatic weapon. The Davis women {witnesses Barbara Davis and Virginia Davis} had a close-up view of the reality of the situation; the gunman had both arms up, his right hand shaking shells from an open revolver into his left {hand}."

Another thing that makes no sense whatsoever (if a person wants to believe that an automatic gun was used to kill Tippit) is the fact that the 3rd and 4th bullet shells that were recovered that day (the ones found by the two Davis ladies) were found in the Davis' SIDE YARD on Patton Avenue; i.e., in a location where a gunman firing an automatic at J.D. Tippit couldn't possibly have even SEEN Officer Tippit (who was located around the corner and many yards up 10th Street). The Davis apartment building was blocking the view of any such gunman who would have dropped shells from a gun WHILE FIRING from that location.*

* = See Page 266 of "With Malice" for a good photographic example of how silly the "Automatic" theory is when looking at where these two shells were found. Do CTers think the gunman kicked the automatic shells into the Davis' side yard?

Or, in a "They Were Planted/Switched By The Police" theory -- why would the police plant the two shells in the Davis' yard and just leave them for the Davis women to find? Why wouldn't the crooked cops pick up the shells themselves after conveniently planting them?

Or, the crooked shell-switching cops could merely SAY they found two more Oswald shells in the Davis' yard, instead of allowing one or more non-conspirators (like the two Davis women) to pick them up and do anything they wanted to with them...even keep them, as is purported in Myers' book with regard to a possible fifth bullet shell.

It's rumored that the Davis' father-in-law might have, indeed, picked up a 5th shell in the Davis yard and kept it for a souvenir. That sounds kind of crazy, I guess. But it would explain some loose ends quite nicely, including the mis-match of the bullets and shells at the Tippit scene, and the "5 pistol shots" that Ted Callaway always adamantly maintained he heard on 11/22/63 from his nearby car lot.

It burns me up greatly when conspiracy kooks have the nerve to imply that Oswald wasn't even at the Tippit murder scene, when virtually every single piece of physical and circumstantial evidence surrounding this particular murder indicates just the opposite.

The "All The Evidence Is Worthless" dodge is nothing but a big cop-out, plain and simple. If the evidence is really tainted, CTers need to provide some semblance of solid proof of that sinister allegation. Tell the world WHO exactly it was who faked the evidence (with a dose of verifiable proof too, which would be a refreshing change-of-pace). And tell the world if there was even one person on the planet who witnessed any "switching" of bullet shells at the murder scene (or elsewhere).

Alas, nobody can do that, because nothing shady like that occurred at all, except in a CTer's theory-laden mind. We're about as likely to get some verifiable proof of a police "cover-up" with respect to the JFK and J.D. Tippit murders as we are to witness the sun crashing into the Earth a week from Thursday.

Just having Lee Oswald in the general area of the crime, with a gun, and acting "funny" and obviously avoiding the police is a good hunk of circumstantial evidence leading to his guilt right there.

Where does the road of common sense take a reasonable person when JUST the above after-the-shooting activity of Lee Harvey Oswald is examined objectively? It sure doesn't lead to total innocence, I'll tell ya that right now. (Especially when the stuff that went on inside the movie theater is factored in as well.)

In a nutshell -- If Oswald didn't kill Tippit....then Tippit wasn't killed at all. It must have been some kind of "Bobby Was In The Shower" dream or something.


No Title Available

5.0 out of 5 stars "You Guys Don't Deserve A Locker Room!! You Should Be Playing Without Uniforms!! You Should Be Playing In Your Jock Straps!!", October 21, 2006
Nick Nolte stars as college basketball coach "Pete Bell" in 1994's excellent sports movie, "Blue Chips", which includes some of the best and most realistic on-the-court hoops action ever filmed. This one and 1986's "Hoosiers" are my two personal favorites in this "basketball" genre.

Pete Bell is the head coach for the struggling basketball squad of "Western University"; and Bell does not enjoy the "struggling" part of that equation...at all. He does not like losing one little bit. Therefore, Bell lowers himself to engaging in shady, under-the-table tactics in order to stock his anemic roster with star-caliber players (played by real-life basketball stars Shaquille O'Neal and Anfernee "Penny" Hardaway).

Many other famous faces from the world of basketball put in appearances in "Blue Chips" too, including famed Indiana University coach Bobby Knight, which is a bit ironic, because Nolte's character is quite obviously patterned a great deal after Knight's coaching style and explosive temperament. Coach Rick Pitino and legendary former players Larry Bird and Bob Cousy also put in cameos.

Nolte is outstanding as Coach Pete Bell. Other solid performances are turned in by Mary McDonnell and J.T. Walsh. Walsh, who died in 1998, was always a favorite of mine. He was excellent in everything I've ever seen him in, including this movie.

I find myself watching the opening scene of this film over and over again, which is a scene that has Nolte (Bell) storming into the locker room (multiple times) and throwing a series of hissy fits and tantrums as he chews out his inept team -- and this is BEFORE that night's game even begins! The quote shown in my review title is part of the fun stuff to be found in that opening scene. (I couldn't print out a lot of it here....Amazon's a family-oriented site, after all.) ;)

While verbally abusing his players during the film-opening sequence, Coach Bell proceeds to also wreak havoc on the water cooler and whatever else happens to be within arm's reach. It's a great beginning to the film and sets the loud, argumentative tone for the movie. (And I love the sound of the sturdy and "heavy"-sounding locker-room door as Bell repeatedly slams it closed with all his might during this opening scene. It's a good piece of physical {door} realism that was put into the movie by the filmmakers that wasn't lost on this writer.)

The "tantrum" scene in the locker room is followed by the main-title opening credits for the movie, which are accompanied by some great-sounding band music.

Some people probably find this movie's ending to be somewhat contrived and unrealistic. But I, myself, like the end of the film very much. I think it "fits" Coach Bell's persona and utter love for the game of basketball quite well. It's a simple and pure love for the game that won't be defeated (even by what occurs just prior to that closing act in the movie).

I had not even realized that one of my favorite movie directors, William Friedkin ("The Exorcist" and "The French Connection"), had directed this movie until I watched a biography on Friedkin's career a few years ago. When I learned of that news, I knew I wanted to see "Blue Chips". And I'm glad I did.

Anyone who likes sports movies will almost certainly enjoy this film. Coach Bell's water cooler-destroying scene and his on-the-court tirades are things that, all by themselves, make "Blue Chips" a worthy (and fun) motion-picture experience.


No Title Available

5.0 out of 5 stars How To Frame A Lone "Patsy" For JFK's Assassination -- How Would YOU Go About Accomplishing That Tricky Task?, October 18, 2006
This attractive 17x22 Wall Poster is a nice JFK keepsake. It serves as a tasteful (yet sad) reminder of America's 35th President.

Regarding JFK's assassination.......

Many conspiracy theorists ("CTers") favor the idea that President John F. Kennedy's killer (Lee Harvey Oswald) was "set up" from the beginning, and framed as the "Patsy" to take the blame (alone) for the President's murder in Dallas, Texas, on November 22nd, 1963.

Such a complicated Patsy scheme might seem like a reasonable solution to some Warren Commission disbelievers when looking at selected pieces of evidence in hindsight, many years after the event. But I'm just wondering how many of those same people (if given the wretched responsibility of "setting up" Oswald as the one lone fall guy) would really have chosen to frame Mr. Oswald in the manner that is so widely believed by CTers?

Now, if I was a rotten, dirty, lowlife killer who was planning the assassination of an American President in a large U.S. city with many witnesses potentially watching (and filming) my every move -- and also wanting to pin this crime on ONE LONE PATSY named Lee H. Oswald, who worked in a building to the rear of the President's vehicle (after that vehicle had made its turn from Houston St. onto Elm St., that is)......

I would:

1.) Use only one shooter. I most certainly would NOT, under any circumstances, use gobs of extra gunmen located at various places throughout Dealey Plaza. That multi-gun idea is just plain nutty to begin with.

2.) Shoot from where my one and only "Patsy" is supposed to be located -- the southeast corner window on the 6th Floor of the Texas School Book Depository Building on Elm Street.

3.) Use Lee Harvey Oswald's own Mannlicher-Carcano rifle (Serial #C2766).

4.) Fire three shots (or however many this single shooter could squeeze off in the allotted time while Kennedy was in his sights; then place a corresponding number of spent hulls/shells below the "Sniper's Nest" window -- of course, these really won't be "planted" shells near the window; because, via this plan, Oswald's own gun IS being utilized; therefore, the appropriate number of shells will drop to the floor accordingly).

5.) To reiterate the obvious -- Absolutely no frontal shots can be fired. Frontal shots striking the target would have been suicide for me and my other lowlife, conspiratorial plotters/cohorts/kooky henchmen.

6.) I'd find a way to keep my Patsy on the "floor of death" during the shooting, thereby ensuring the fact that Mr. Oswald (my one and only Patsy) does not have a viable and supportable alibi at precisely 12:30 PM on November 22nd when the President is being mowed down in broad daylight in front of 250+ eyewitnesses.

7.) I'd probably then also shoot and kill Oswald dead right there on the 6th Floor of the Depository, and "stage" this Oswald murder as a "suicide". By doing this, there's certainly no need for Jack Ruby's intervention two days later. Letting the "Patsy" stay alive for even an hour after the assassination just does not make any sense in the overall "Patsy" plot.

Because if there's going to be a need to "rub him out", waiting until November 24th (AFTER he's had a chance to spill his guts to a National TV audience for two solid days) is simply a foolhardy plan on the part of the plotters. Kill him immediately (in the Depository) and be done with it.

In my opinion, the above scenario is the only conceivable way such a "Frame The Lone Patsy" plot could have possibly been pulled off successfully (and the only type plan of this sort that any sane and non-suicidal plotters/conspirators would have considered utilizing on 11/22/63).

The originators and developers of any "Frame The Patsy" scheme that involves multiple shooters firing weapons at the same target at the very same time would have been better off if they had attempted to frame TWO different "Patsies" that day in Dallas (Oswald plus a second fall guy firing from the front). Because trying to hide the obvious evidence from 3 or 4 shooters (and 5 to 10 potential bullet wounds from all of these missiles) is a task that even Superman wouldn't want to tackle.

More contradictory "CT" brilliance.........

Many conspiracists seem to feel that if the hidden plotters had gotten a "JFK Kill Shot" from the REAR immediately after the shooting started, then no frontal shots would have been needed (or fired) -- and therefore the "Frame Oswald" plan would have proceeded in a more orderly manner.

However, it seems that many of these same CTers ALSO favor the likelihood that Shot #1 was a shot from the front (that hit President Kennedy in the throat).

This first shot from the front totally destroys the other theory that has the first shot definitely coming from the REAR (which many theorists feel also served as a "diversionary" shot to get everyone looking toward the Sniper's Nest, where the "Patsy" is supposed to be located).

That is yet another example of conspiracy theorists not knowing which "theory" to follow. For, how can a person who believes that the first shot was the proverbial "Diversionary & Hopefully 'Kill' Shot from the Rear" also believe that the first shot came from the front and hit JFK in the throat?

So many conspiracy theories -- so little sense do any of them make.


Page: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11-20