David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed

Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed  (Read 5678 times)

Online Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5773
Re: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed
« Reply #220 on: June 20, 2022, 05:52:34 PM »
Yes it is “apples and oranges”, however, Walter E. Craig, then president of the American bar association, represented LHO. He was given access to ALL of the WC’s records, hearings, etc.

"represented Oswald"... What does that mean exactly?

For what purpose exactly did he have access to all WC files etc?

Was he allowed to cross examine witnesses?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed
« Reply #220 on: June 20, 2022, 05:52:34 PM »

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2603
Re: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed
« Reply #221 on: June 20, 2022, 06:24:12 PM »
The man y’all love to hate tells it like it is. Again, I am providing information. No argument intended. Just correcting the claim by Paul J Cummings.


“Rather belatedly, on February 25, 1964, the Commission, wanting to ensure the fairness of its inquiry to the alleged assassin and his family, requested Walter E. Craig, president of the American Bar Association, to participate in the hearings and investigation and advise the Commission whether the proceedings “conformed to the basic principles of American justice.” In effect, he was to look after Oswald’s interests and was even authorized to question witnesses if he desired. Marina Oswald agreed with the arrangement. Craig accepted the appointment but he (and two associates of his who attended the hearings whenever he was absent) was virtually a nonexistent presence at the hearings, asking very few questions (and those innocuous and non-adversarial) of very few witnesses. In no way could they be considered conventional cross-examination. He could have performed the function of a responsible devil’s advocate, asking key Warren Commission witnesses questions that a competent defense attorney would have, but he failed abysmally in this effort and, through no fault of the Warren Commission, turned out to be mere window dressing for the expressed goal of helping to guarantee that a deceased accused be treated fairly and objectively.”  Vince Bugliosi - Reclaiming History

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed
« Reply #221 on: June 20, 2022, 06:24:12 PM »

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9790
Re: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed
« Reply #222 on: June 20, 2022, 07:24:54 PM »
So basically he didn’t “represent” Oswald at all…

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed
« Reply #222 on: June 20, 2022, 07:24:54 PM »

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2603
Re: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed
« Reply #223 on: June 20, 2022, 08:18:38 PM »
So basically he didn’t “represent” Oswald at all…

As Paul J Cummings said, this wasn’t a trial.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed
« Reply #223 on: June 20, 2022, 08:18:38 PM »

Offline Paul J Cummings

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
Re: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed
« Reply #224 on: June 20, 2022, 09:25:05 PM »
He didn't have representation. period. Why would provide him or his family representation when they started off with Oswald being the perpetrator?

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed
« Reply #224 on: June 20, 2022, 09:25:05 PM »

Offline Michael Walton

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 401
Re: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed
« Reply #225 on: June 20, 2022, 09:46:29 PM »
I guess because all people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. I mean, you people here are all over the place with this. You claim the WC wasn't a trial, yet you want to have this Cummings guy fairly representing Oswald. And Cummings, by the way, is a joke - he sure did put up a vigorous fight on behalf of Lee didn't he? Where the hell was this guy when they came up with the ridiculous single bullet theory, ranting and raving? Why the hell have I never even heard of him? And many others either? But of course, you people will throw it up on here like, "Sure, sure...Lee had someone there to make sure things were fair...yet, this was not even a trial."

The WC was a sham. Testimony was given in secret. How many times gas that happened in a court of law? But, but, but - it wasn't a court of law. Uh huh.

Four of the seven members - the people you people hold in such high esteem and in your mind are unimpeachable - disagreed with the conclusions. The HSCA said there was a conspiracy. So which esteemed body was right - the WC or the HSCA? You people can't have it both ways.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Commission#Skepticism




JFK Assassination Forum

Re: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed
« Reply #225 on: June 20, 2022, 09:46:29 PM »

Online Charles Collins

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2603
Re: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed
« Reply #226 on: June 20, 2022, 09:54:42 PM »
I guess because all people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. I mean, you people here are all over the place with this. You claim the WC wasn't a trial, yet you want to have this Cummings guy fairly representing Oswald. And Cummings, by the way, is a joke - he sure did put up a vigorous fight on behalf of Lee didn't he? Where the hell was this guy when they came up with the ridiculous single bullet theory, ranting and raving? Why the hell have I never even heard of him? And many others either? But of course, you people will throw it up on here like, "Sure, sure...Lee had someone there to make sure things were fair...yet, this was not even a trial."

The WC was a sham. Testimony was given in secret. How many times gas that happened in a court of law? But, but, but - it wasn't a court of law. Uh huh.

Four of the seven members - the people you people hold in such high esteem and in your mind are unimpeachable - disagreed with the conclusions. The HSCA said there was a conspiracy. So which esteemed body was right - the WC or the HSCA? You people can't have it both ways.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Commission#Skepticism


LOL.  :D


I think that the only thing that you got right is that Cummings is a joke.

However, Walter E. Craig was the man involved with the Warren Commission proceedings. Not Cummings.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed
« Reply #226 on: June 20, 2022, 09:54:42 PM »

Offline Paul J Cummings

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
Re: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed
« Reply #227 on: June 21, 2022, 02:57:55 AM »
What were you drinking when you wrote this. Be honest.

I guess because all people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. I mean, you people here are all over the place with this. You claim the WC wasn't a trial, yet you want to have this Cummings guy fairly representing Oswald. And Cummings, by the way, is a joke - he sure did put up a vigorous fight on behalf of Lee didn't he? Where the hell was this guy when they came up with the ridiculous single bullet theory, ranting and raving? Why the hell have I never even heard of him? And many others either? But of course, you people will throw it up on here like, "Sure, sure...Lee had someone there to make sure things were fair...yet, this was not even a trial."

The WC was a sham. Testimony was given in secret. How many times gas that happened in a court of law? But, but, but - it wasn't a court of law. Uh huh.

Four of the seven members - the people you people hold in such high esteem and in your mind are unimpeachable - disagreed with the conclusions. The HSCA said there was a conspiracy. So which esteemed body was right - the WC or the HSCA? You people can't have it both ways.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Commission#Skepticism

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed
« Reply #227 on: June 21, 2022, 02:57:55 AM »

Offline Alan J. Ford

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 426
    • JFK Act
Re: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed
« Reply #228 on: June 28, 2022, 04:54:49 PM »
I guess because all people are supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. I mean, you people here are all over the place with this. You claim the WC wasn't a trial, yet you want to have this Cummings guy fairly representing Oswald. And Cummings, by the way, is a joke - he sure did put up a vigorous fight on behalf of Lee didn't he? Where the hell was this guy when they came up with the ridiculous single bullet theory, ranting and raving? Why the hell have I never even heard of him? And many others either? But of course, you people will throw it up on here like, "Sure, sure...Lee had someone there to make sure things were fair...yet, this was not even a trial."

The WC was a sham. Testimony was given in secret. How many times gas that happened in a court of law? But, but, but - it wasn't a court of law. Uh huh.

Four of the seven members - the people you people hold in such high esteem and in your mind are unimpeachable - disagreed with the conclusions. The HSCA said there was a conspiracy. So which esteemed body was right - the WC or the HSCA? You people can't have it both ways.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Commission#Skepticism

Words of wisdom, Mr. Walton, thanks for sharing them.

The wrongly accused did not shoot anybody. Anybody.

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed
« Reply #228 on: June 28, 2022, 04:54:49 PM »

Offline Alan J. Ford

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 426
    • JFK Act
Re: David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed
« Reply #229 on: June 28, 2022, 04:59:31 PM »
David Von Pein, in another thread on a different subject, claimed that the following list of "evidence" proves that Oswald murdered Kennedy.  Not only does it do nothing of the kind, but most of it is not evidence at all, but rather rhetoric.  Let's take a look.

"1.) Lee Harvey Oswald owned the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository on Friday afternoon, November 22, 1963."

This is a claim made about the evidence, not evidence itself.  And the claim that he owned the C2766 rifle is merely an assumption, based on an argument that he ordered the weapon from Klein's.  And this argument relies on unscientific and biased handwriting "analysis" of two block-written letters on a photo of a microfilm copy of a 2-inch order coupon (from microfilm that is now "missing").

"2.) Oswald owned the handgun that was shown to have been used in the murder of Dallas Police Officer J.D. Tippit."

See above.  And the CE143 revolver was not shown to have been used in the murder of Tippit.  The bullets removed from Tippit lacked sufficient characteristics to identify the weapon used.

"3.) Oswald was positively identified by witness Howard L. Brennan as the person firing a rifle at JFK on 11/22/63."

This is misleading.  Brennan testified that he did not see the rifle discharge or recoil.  He merely stated that he saw the person "taking aim" for the last shot.  This person would necessarily have been crouched down and obscured by boxes, so it's rather remarkable that Brennan somehow managed to see him "from the belt up" and was able to estimate his height, weight, age, and clothing.  It's also important to note that Brennan did not make a positive ID at the lineup he attended, despite already having seen Oswald's picture on TV.  He came forward several days later after intense pressure from the FBI with a story that he didn't do so because he feared for his family's safety because Oswald might have confederates at large.  However, he gave his name to reporters that day, he didn't bother to tell his wife about his fears, and this fear of possible confederates somehow disappeared after Oswald's death.

Meanwhile, witness Amos Euins told a reporter that day that the man he saw was "colored".  He also described that the man he saw had a bald spot.  Other witnesses including Arnold Rowland,  Carolyn Walther, Ruby Henderson, Norman Similas, and Johnny Powell described seeing two men.  So why is DVP cherry-picking Brennan?  I think we all know the answer to that.

"4.) Marina Oswald admits to having taken pictures of Lee with these weapons on his person"

False.  Marina wouldn't (and didn't) know that he had these particular weapons.  Marina also said that she took her photos in late February with a camera that is held up to the face.  She also initially said she only took one photo, then two.  Her story is all over the map.  In any case, these photos are not evidence of murder -- even if you could somehow uniquely identify the firearms in them, which you cannot.

"5.) Buell Wesley Frazier observed Oswald take a package into the Book Depository Building on the morning of November 22nd, 1963."

Frazier lated admitted to Tom Meros in an interview that he had been so far behind Oswald that he could no longer see the package at the time Oswald entered the door to the north annex (not the TSBD building itself, BTW).  Jack Dougherty saw Oswald enter the TSBD and said he was empty-handed.  Frazier also described the bag he saw as being 2-feet long, give or take, and made out of flimsy paper.  According to the Anderton memo, Frazier was shown the alleged sniper's nest "bag" on the night of the assassination and said it was not the same package.  The package that Frazier described would have been too short to hold the Carcano rifle.  In fact there is no evidence whatsoever that either the CE142 bag or the package that Frazier described had a rifle inside it.

"6.) Oswald's claim of "curtain rods" within the package cannot be supported at all. His room needed no curtains, nor rods, and no such rods were ever found in the TSBD or at his residence at 1026 N. Beckley Avenue in Oak Cliff."

We don't know what Oswald claimed about the package.  It's hearsay from Frazier.  We also don't know they would have been for his room.  Oswald was talking about renting an apartment for Marina the night before.  Furthermore, a photo exists of Mrs. Johnson putting up a curtain rod in Oswald's room after the assassination.

"7.) Oswald was seen working on the Depository's sixth floor that morning."

Even DVP admits this isn't evidence of anything.  So why is it even on the list?  Givens' story about going back to get his cigarettes from his "jacket" (even though he testified to hanging up his coat in the domino room when he arrived) didn't emerge until April, 1964 -- after Lt. Revill told FBI agent Gemberling that Givens had been previously handled by the Special Services Bureau on a marijuana charge and he believes that Givens would change his story for money.  Givens originally said that he saw Oswald at 11:50 in the domino room reading a paper. By noon, Givens was at Record and Main watching the motorcade with Edward Shields.

"8.) Oswald's palmprint [Warren Commission Exhibit #637] is found on his Mannlicher-Carcano rifle after the assassination."

Correction:  a partial palmprint turned up a week later on an index card.  Carl Day didn't turn it over to the FBI with the other evidence that night, nor did he even tell FBI agent Drain of its existence.  He didn't photograph it in place or cover it with cellophane.  Furthermore, Sebastian Latona examined the rifle and said that area didn't look like it had been processed at all.  He found no traces of ridges there.

"9.) Not ONE SPECK of any bullets/bullet fragments/bullet shells OTHER THAN THOSE COMING FROM OSWALD'S 6.5-MILLIMETER MANNLICHER-CARCANO RIFLE were discovered anywhere in Dealey Plaza, the limousine, the TSBD, Parkland Hospital, or in the victims."

Highly misleading.  Not only is this not evidence for who pulled the trigger, it ignores the fact that none of the identifiable fragments have a valid documented chain of custody.  Nor is there any evidence that any of them came from any bullet that struck Kennedy or Connally.

"10.) The majority of Dealey Plaza witnesses said shots came from behind the President", in the direction of the School Book Depository Building.

This is not evidence for who did the shooting, or even exactly where the shots came from.

"11.) Oswald makes an unusual trip to Irving on Thursday, November 21, 1963, to retrieve his "curtain rods". His rifle is found missing from Ruth Paine's garage the following day."

There is no evidence whatsoever that any rifle, much less C2766, was in the Paine garage on November 21.  As for this trip being unusual, he had only worked at the TSBD for 6 weeks.  One of those weeks he came on a Saturday, and one week he didn't come at all.

Interestingly, the curtain rods that the WC "found" in the garage were somehow submitted into evidence via a CSSS form 8 days before they were found in the garage by the WC.

But, again, how is this evidence of murder?

"12.) Oswald left behind, presumably for wife Marina, his wedding ring and just about every dime he had to his name ($170), on the morning of 11/22/63. Logic dictates that he felt he may not return."

That's confirmation bias and rhetoric, not evidence of murder.  And you don't know that was "just about every dime he had to his name".

"13.) Oswald was the only Depository employee known to have been INSIDE the Depository Building at the time of the assassination to leave work prematurely on Friday, November 22nd. Why do you suppose this was? The day was only half over."

ALL of the employees left work prematurely on Friday, November 22nd.  Several never returned after the motorcade.  We know that Shelley told his employees to go home.  Just because he said he didn't tell Oswald that directly doesn't mean that Oswald didn't hear him saying it.  Asking "why do you suppose" does not constitute evidence.

"14.) Oswald, in flight, shoots and kills Dallas patrolman J.D. Tippit on 10th Street in the Dallas suburb of Oak Cliff. Multiple witnesses confirm it was Oswald who shot Officer Tippit."

Impossible since only one witness, Helen Markham, saw Tippit being shot.  The lineups were unfair and biased by any reasonable standard and hence unreliable.  Besides, this is a separate claim which must be proven independently.  It doesn't tell you anything about who killed Kennedy.

"15.) WHY does Oswald kill Officer Tippit IF he's innocent of another crime just 45 minutes earlier in Dealey Plaza?"

That's not evidence -- it's a hypothetical question.  You haven't demonstrated that Oswald did kill Officer Tippit, but even if you could, that's not evidence for who killed Kennedy.

"16.) Oswald, just days after acquiring his Carcano weapon, attempts to murder retired General Edwin Walker in Dallas, on April 10, 1963. Marina Oswald herself testifies that "He [Lee]...told me that he had shot at General Walker.""

That's also not evidence, it's yet another unsubstantiated claim.  Hearsay from Marina notwithstanding.

"17.) It was PROVEN, no matter what anybody wants to believe to the contrary, that three shots could be fired in the allotted timeframe from Oswald's rifle (and with good accuracy). The probability that Oswald had, in fact, approx. 8.4 seconds to accomplish the shooting further increases the likelihood that Lee could have performed the deed."

a) you don't know what the timespan of the shots were
b) what other people are able to do in experiments that don't exactly match the same situation don't tell you what Oswald could or could not do
c) "could be" doesn't mean "did"

"18.) Try as the conspiracy kooks might, the Single-Bullet Theory [SBT] has still not been proven to be an impossibility."

It also hasn't been proven to have happened.  Regardless, that tells you nothing about who did the shooting.

19.) While viewing the Zapruder Film, I cannot see how anybody can say that the BACK of President Kennedy's head is blown away as a result of the head shot. It seems quite obvious while watching and freezing the film at various post-Z313 frames, that the entire rear portion of JFK's head remains intact throughout the shooting."

What is "obvious" to you is subjective and irrelevant.  Regardless, this also tells you nothing about who did the shooting.

"20.) It was also proven that Oswald could have indeed travelled, in 90 seconds or less, the distance across the sixth floor of the TSBD and descended the four flights of stairs in time to have been seen by policeman Marrion L. Baker on the building's second floor."

Again, "could have" doesn't mean "did".  If Oswald made such a trip in the required 75-90 second timeframe, he somehow managed to do it without being seen or heard by Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles who were in the same stairwell at the time, or by Dorothy Garner who heard Adams and Styles go down before Truly and Baker came up, or by any of the other 9 people who were on floors 4 and 5.

"21.) And then there are the several lies told by Lee Harvey Oswald during the two days he was being held in custody by the Dallas Police Department."

This one is particularly comical because some of your examples of his "lies" are that he said he didn't shoot the President and he said he didn't kill anybody.  That's a blatantly circular argument that pre-assumes that the thing you're attempting to prove is true.  But even if you could prove that these were lies, it's not evidence for who killed Kennedy.

To recap:  out of 21 items, 19 are not evidence at all.  Of the remaining two, one is the very questionable and tainted partial palmprint on an index card, and the other is Brennan's questionable and tainted change of heart "identification" several days later.

An excellent summation, Mr. Iacoletti, encouraging to see astute researchers on the side of truth, light and justice expose the big lie for what it is.

The wrongly accused did not shoot anybody. Anybody.

 

Mobile View