David Von Pein's "evidence" deconstructed

[Andrew Mason]

I think you just need one? <g>. Right, mistrial.

You need enough to persuade 12 to acquit.

None of this, not a lick of it, makes sense on any level. But this is JFK conspiracy land where nonsense is all around.

I agree. If the victim had been someone other than the President, there would be no issue.  The idea that a nobody like Oswald could change history does not sit well with some people.

[Martin Weidmann]

What a blizzard of contrarian nonsense.  So the revolver in evidence is the one used to kill Tippit?  You have previously indicated that it was and then argued it was not.  But now it is again.  And it has the same serial number as the pistol sent to Oswald's PO Box (as confirmed by third party documentation that preexisted the murder).  What an astounding coincidence.  The real murderer somehow used Oswald's revolver, Oswald had some different revolver when arrested, and the someone was able to find the revolver used to kill Tippit (Oswald's revolver) and then switch it.  Simple.  HA HA HA.  No one can believe such nonsense.

So the revolver in evidence is the one used to kill Tippit?  You have previously indicated that it was and then argued it was not.  But now it is again.

Hey fool, the thing you keep on misunderstanding is that I am merely discussing possibilities. I'm not making, nor have I ever made, any claims. It's not my problem that you don't understand this.

And it has the same serial number as the pistol sent to Oswald's PO Box (as confirmed by third party documentation that preexisted the murder).  What an astounding coincidence.  The real murderer somehow used Oswald's revolver, Oswald had some different revolver when arrested, and the someone was able to find the revolver used to kill Tippit (Oswald's revolver) and then switch it.  Simple.  HA HA HA.  No one can believe such nonsense.

Another example of your complete ignorance. If Oswald was set up, then it may well have been part of the plan to have him meet somebody at the Texas Theater after Kennedy's murder and bring his revolver. Knowing that he would be there, Tippit would subsequently be killed and the two revolvers were switched just after Oswald's arrest. All it would take was one dirty cop. The fact that you can't figure something like this out as a possibility shows us just how naive you really are.

And before you go of an another pathetic rant, this was hypothetical to offer a possible explanation of what could have happened and thus not a claim about what actually happened. because unlike you I don't pretend to know what happened. I'm just merely trying to find out what likely did happen.

[Martin Weidmann]

You need enough to persuade 12 to acquit.
I agree. If the victim had been someone other than the President, there would be no issue.  The idea that a nobody like Oswald could change history does not sit well with some people.

I agree. If the victim had been someone other than the President, there would be no issue.  The idea that a nobody like Oswald could change history does not sit well with some people.

Not everybody is that shallow. I don't care either way. Oswald either killed Kennedy or there was a conspiracy (in which Oswald must have played some part) to kill the President. It's water under the bridge. If Oswald was indeed the lone killer, then so be it, but I want to see the conclusive evidence that confirms it and I don't see it. There are way too many unanswered questions, too many "mistakes" by investigators, too many problems with physical evidence that are ignored and too many assumptions not supported by any evidence whatsoever.

So, don't give me any crap about being an Oswald defender, just because I can't believe he could have changed history. That's complete BS. I frequently play devil's advocate to scrutinize the evidence and the silly claims made by LNs and what I get back is just as frequently disappointing and unconvincing.

If I remember correctly, it was Former Deputy Chief Counsel of the HSCA, Robert Tanenbaum, who once said that if you had taken this evidence into court, Oswald would never have been convicted. Based on what I know now, I think he was right.

Btw, I could just as easily argue that some can't handle the possibility that, in America, there could be a conspiracy to murder a President. I can practically hear them say it; something like that happens in third world countries but never in America.

[Richard Smith]

So the revolver in evidence is the one used to kill Tippit?  You have previously indicated that it was and then argued it was not.  But now it is again.

Hey fool, the thing you keep on misunderstanding is that I am merely discussing possibilities. I'm not making, nor have I ever made, any claims. It's not my problem that you don't understand this.

And it has the same serial number as the pistol sent to Oswald's PO Box (as confirmed by third party documentation that preexisted the murder).  What an astounding coincidence.  The real murderer somehow used Oswald's revolver, Oswald had some different revolver when arrested, and the someone was able to find the revolver used to kill Tippit (Oswald's revolver) and then switch it.  Simple.  HA HA HA.  No one can believe such nonsense.

Another example of your complete ignorance. If Oswald was set up, then it may well have been part of the plan to have him meet somebody at the Texas Theater after Kennedy's murder and bring his revolver. Knowing that he would be there, Tippit would subsequently be killed and the two revolvers were switched just after Oswald's arrest. All it would take was one dirty cop. The fact that you can't figure something like this out as a possibility shows us just how naive you really are.

And before you go of an another pathetic rant, this was hypothetical to offer a possible explanation of what could have happened and thus not a claim about what actually happened. because unlike you I don't pretend to know what happened. I'm just merely trying to find out what likely did happen.

What is with the endless hostility and calling folks "fool"?  It a real shame that is allowed to go on.  Get a grip on your emotions.  Now it's just a "possibility" again that the revolver in evidence is the gun used to kill Tippit.  You are all over the place.  Why would someone plant another revolver on him that had nothing to do with the Tippit murder if the intent was to frame him for that crime?  This fantasy makes even less sense.  You are twisting like a pretzel.

[John Iacoletti]

And it has the same serial number as the pistol sent to Oswald's PO Box (as confirmed by third party documentation that preexisted the murder).

  There’s no documentation showing that any pistol was sent to Oswald’s PO box.

[John Iacoletti]

It has been shown that Oswald purchased a revolver with the same description and serial no.

Bull. What’s actually been shown is that unscientific and biased handwriting “analysis” of a few letters on a copy of an order coupon purports that he filled out the coupon.

The bullets used to kill Tippit were the same kind of bullet

There were literally millions of .38 special bullets. These particular ones did not have sufficient characteristics to identify the weapon.

and the four .38 calibre shells found at the scene of his murder had firing pin marks that exactly matched the highly irregular profile of the gun's firing pin.

Too bad the evidence was so mishandled that you cannot demonstrate those particular shells were found at the crime scene or had anything to do with Tippit.

FBI ballistics officers noted that the bullets from Tippit and those known to have been fired by CE143 had the same class characteristics - five lands and five grooves twisting to the right.

All .38 bullets have 5 lands and grooves with a right twist.

This was not conclusive because the bullets were a tad smaller than the barrel and the bullet did not rifle properly. But  the bullets recovered from Tippit did carry evidence of erosion resulting from barrel gases escaping through the space between the bullet and the barrel.

This was a very commonly done modification.

Here’s where the giant leap occurs:

So it was the gun used to kill Officer Tippit. 

Sorry, no. That doesn’t just follow.

[John Iacoletti]

So they acquire it somehow and then go to the theater and know the person there was the shooter? Was Oswald specifically? Or someone? What exactly? And they, who Carroll? Hill?, just decided to plant it on this person in the theater? Knowing absolutely nothing about him? He could be anyone, he could have an alibi. The witnesses at the scene could all say: "No, that's not the man I saw." But they just planted it on this unknown person seen sneaking (supposedly) into the theater? Meanwhile the real shooter is out there? Why didn't they plant it on the first suspect they grabbed? The person who worked at the library? On and on and on....

None of this, not a lick of it, makes sense on any level.

There’s a good reason for that. It’s a ridiculous strawman that no real person has ever suggested.

[John Iacoletti]

You need enough to persuade 12 to acquit.
I agree. If the victim had been someone other than the President, there would be no issue.  The idea that a nobody like Oswald could change history does not sit well with some people.

Jumping to unsubstantiated conclusions doesn’t sit well with people who are interested in the truth.