The JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate
How Do LNers Deal With Givens?
John Corbett:
--- Quote from: Dan O'meara on September 04, 2026, 12:26:54 AM ---Do some actual research.
You can start with the links I gave you.
You too will be convinced that the Givens story is a fabrication.
And if you think that the WC Sham fabricating testimony is a nothing burger...
Meanwhile - ROLL UP, ROLL UP NUTTERS. LET'S HEAR WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY. DON'T LEAVE POOR OLD CORBETT FLAPPING AROUND ON HIS OWN!
--- End quote ---
Pat Speer is an idiot and anyone who believes him must be as well.
It wouldn't surprise me if the other LNs already know what an idiot you are and not worth the time it takes to respond to your moronic posts.
Dan O'meara:
--- Quote from: John Corbett on September 04, 2026, 12:35:33 AM ---Pat Speer is an idiot and anyone who believes him must be as well.
It wouldn't surprise me if the other LNs already know what an idiot you are and not worth the time it takes to respond to your moronic posts.
--- End quote ---
:D :D :D
Do some research and stop making a fool out of yourself.
John Corbett:
--- Quote from: Jarrett Smith on September 03, 2026, 11:14:40 PM ---Another Fairy tale. There is zero proof Oswald was in that window. Givens was a fraud.
--- End quote ---
You're nuts. 'nuff said.
Dan O'meara:
Returning to the conclusion of the WC Report:
"Fingerprint and palmprint evidence establishes that Oswald handled two of the four cartons next to the window and also handled a paper bag which was found near the cartons. Oswald was seen in the vicinity of the southeast corner of the sixth floor approximately 35 minutes before the assassination and no one could be found who saw Oswald anywhere else in the building until after the shooting. An eyewitness to the shooting immediately provided a description of the man in the window which was similar to Oswald's actual appearance. This witness identified Oswald in a lineup as the man most nearly resembling the man he saw and later identified Oswald as the man he observed. Oswald's known actions in the building immediately after the assassination are consistent with his having been at the southeast corner window of the sixth floor at 12:30 p.m. On the basis of these findings the Commission has concluded that. Oswald, at the time of the assassination, was present at the window from which the shots were fired."[WC Report pg156]
The report states that " no one could be found who saw Oswald anywhere else in the building until after the shooting.". This is an out-and-out lie. A deliberate falsehood. The last person to see Oswald was Eddie Piper. His testimony was deliberately omitted and replaced with the fabricated Givens story.
On the day of the assassination Piper began work at 10:00am and broke for lunch at 12:00. In his WC testimony Piper states that as he was breaking for lunch he spoke to Oswald He is asked twice what time this happened:
Mr. BALL. And, did you see Oswald that morning?
Mr. PIPER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Where?
Mr. PIPER. Down on the first floor filling orders.
Mr. BALL. Did you ever see him again that day?
Mr. PIPER. You mean all day-the rest of the day?
Mr. BALL. Yes, sir.
Mr. PIPER. No.
Mr. BALL. Was that the last time you saw him?
Mr. PIPER. Just at 12 o’clock.
Mr. BALL. Where were you at 12 o’clock?
Mr. PIPER. Down on the first floor.
Mr. BALL. What time was it that you spoke to Oswald and said you thought you would have your lunch?
Mr. PIPER. Just about 12 o’clock.
Why would the WC use Givens' clearly fake story yet deliberately omit Piper's testimony?
David Von Pein:
--- Quote from: Dan O'meara on September 03, 2026, 10:43:02 AM ---One of the more blatant fabrications of the Warren Commission Sham was the introduction of Charles Givens' fictional account of going back up to the 6th floor and seeing Oswald coming from the southeast corner. How do LNers deal with this fabrication? How do they explain it away?
--- End quote ---
Just because Charles Givens didn't mention seeing Oswald in his earlier statements, you think that means he "fabricated" his later statements and during his testimony in front of the Warren Commission?
Silly.
Givens merely didn't mention his brief encounter with Oswald when Givens wrote his affidavit. Such an omission certainly doesn't mean that Givens' sixth-floor encounter with Lee Oswald never happened. Only a conspiracy theorist would possibly believe such a thing.
Plus, we know that there's no good reason for the authorities to start putting words into Givens' mouth about seeing Oswald on the sixth floor, because even WITHOUT Givens' account of seeing LHO on the sixth floor at approximately 11:55 AM, there is still ample witness testimony from other Depository employees who said they saw (and heard) Oswald on an UPPER FLOOR (either the fifth or sixth floor) shortly before noon. Those other employees are Billy Lovelady, Bonnie Ray Williams, and Danny Arce. And even Givens HIMSELF, in this FBI report, talks about hearing Oswald shout down the elevator shaft.
There is some confusion surrounding some of Charles Givens' statements with respect to Oswald asking to have the elevator sent back upstairs to him, which I talk about in this article.
But even if conspiracists wish to toss Charlie Givens under the bus and deem him a totally worthless liar (which many CTers have done), what do they do with Lovelady and Williams and Arce with respect to their individual observations about seeing (and hearing) Lee Oswald on an upper floor of the TSBD shortly before 12:00 noon on 11/22/63?
With those three witnesses saying what they each said, why would the FBI or the Warren Commission (or anyone else) have felt the need to coerce Charlie Givens to tell some wild tale about seeing Oswald in just about the VERY SAME PLACE at just about the VERY SAME TIME that those three other men saw him?
Many CTers think the FBI (and later the Warren Commission) desperately needed a witness on the inside of the TSBD building to place Oswald on the sixth floor to firm up the FBI's and WC's framing of poor innocent Lee Harvey Oswald. Therefore, per CTers, they got the easily-coerced Givens to add a lie to his story about going back up to the sixth floor to get his cigarettes and then seeing Oswald up there.
But if the goal of the FBI and Warren Commission was to shore up their "case" against Oswald, why wouldn't they have made Givens' lies even BETTER? They could have gotten Givens to say he saw Oswald moving boxes in the southeast corner of the sixth floor. Or they could have gotten Givens to say he actually saw Oswald with a long brown package too.
But instead, Givens' "cigarettes and jacket" story pretty much amounts to nothing more than the testimony given by Lovelady, Arce, and Williams -- i.e., Givens sees Oswald on an upper floor without a package, and without a gun. The biggest difference would be that Givens did place a definitive floor number on Oswald's whereabouts--the sixth floor (the Floor Of Death), whereas some of the other witnesses I mentioned were not quite sure whether Oswald was shouting down his request for an elevator from the FIFTH floor or the SIXTH Floor.
But if Givens' "going to get cigarettes" story was nothing but a fabrication invented by the authorities, it amounted to very little more than what other witnesses were also providing (or would very soon be providing to the Warren Commission).
In addition, I'll also add that Charles Givens' 11/22/63 affidavit is one that is very brief. It's a very short statement made voluntarily by Givens within hours of the assassination. Givens uses short, to-the-point sentences, not elaborating on anything at all--not even the shooting. He merely says "I think I heard three shots".
So it's fairly obvious to me when looking at Givens' 11/22 affidavit that it wasn't Givens' purpose at that time to go into very much detail about anything that happened on November 22. He was obviously making it as short as he could. And just because he did not mention his encounter with Oswald on the sixth floor in that very brief statement, that certainly does not mean such an encounter never took place.
Givens' statement given to the FBI on November 22nd is another matter for discussion. It's true that Givens didn't say anything about going back up to the sixth floor to get his jacket and cigarettes in that November 22nd interview with two FBI agents. But Givens did mention hearing Oswald shout down to have the elevator sent back up "so that he (LEE) could have the elevator returned to the SIXTH FLOOR" (DVP's emphasis).
So it's fairly clear from that FBI statement that Givens was saying he thought Oswald was on the SIXTH FLOOR and wanted an elevator to be sent back up to the SIXTH floor.
With such detail coming from Charles Givens himself about Oswald being on the SIXTH FLOOR shortly before noon on the day of the assassination, why on Earth would the FBI (or anyone else) feel the need to then coerce Givens to add an additional layer of lies to his story, which would be a fabricated layer of lies that essentially ADDS NOTHING NEW to the story Charlie Givens had already told the two FBI agents who interviewed him on November 22, 1963?
Also....
The conspiracy theorists who think Charles Givens just MADE UP his sixth-floor encounter with Lee Oswald due to the fact that Givens said nothing about such an encounter in his original November 22nd affidavit are going to have to accuse Billy Lovelady of pretty much the very same thing (i.e., leaving out important "I heard Oswald shout down the elevator shaft from an upper floor around noontime" information in his affidavit), because in Lovelady's 11/22/63 affidavit, he never says a thing about such an occurrence.
More here:
https://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/search?q=Charles+Givens
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version