my review of lemminos video the kennedy assassination : inside the depository

[fobrien1]

firstly i have to say here that i must applaud lemmino . he has allowed all comers to come and comment about his video , be that people that accept the views of the video or those such as my self that are critical of the official version of events . ive had my comments deleted by lone nut advocates that uploaded jfk assassination videos . and they have blocked / banned me for nothing more than proving them wrong or proving they had posted false claims .lemmino allows everyone to air their views . and that is a great attitude . ive posted a review on sean mungers oswald acted alone part 2 video , he has deleted all most all my comments . i posted links to my online review of his video , he deletes those also . this is a guy that calls himself a historian and he with his above attitude akin to a dictator who accepts no criticism what so ever is a man that teaches young people , that is scary , i am happy my children are not in his grasp . so lemmino unlike sean munger is to be applauded for his fair and honest approach to those that comment on his video .


ok so lets look at my review of lemminos video , its not as in depth as my sean munger video because lemmino covered only events inside the depository . but i can add to it should i need to . so here goes .


part 2 curtain rods  (i had no comments about part 1 so moved straight to part 2 .)

several things are said here that need addressing .


oswald deviated from his usual routine .yes on the thursday he did .but we know he did so to reconcile with marina but failed to do so . also oswald gone to the paines house on other occasions other than the friday before this , for example on public hollidays .

oswald said goodbye to marina and left his wedding ring . that is assumption . he could have taken the ring off the  night before .

oswald rushed ahead into building leaving frazier behind . this is lies and absolute nonsense and easily disproven .

here is a segment of fraziers testimony .


Mr. BALL - When you got to the parking lot who got out of the car first?
Mr. FRAZIER - He did.
Mr. BALL - You didn't get out immediately then?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; I was sitting there, say, looked at my watch and somewhere around 7 or 8 minutes until and I saw we had a few minutes and I sat there, and as I say you can see the Freeway, Stemmons Freeway, from the warehouse and also the trains coming back and forth and I was sitting there.
What I was doing--glanced up and watching cars for a minute but I was letting my engine run and getting to charge up my battery, because when you stop and start you have to charge up your battery.
Mr. BALL - Did you have your lunch beside you?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; I did.
Mr. BALL - Did you notice whether or not Lee had a package that looked like a lunch package that morning?
Mr. FRAZIER - You know like I told you earlier, I say, he didn't take his lunch because I remember right when I got in the car I asked him where was his lunch and he said he was going to buy his lunch that day.
Mr. BALL - He told you that that day, did he?
Mr. FRAZIER - Right. That is right. So, I assumed he was going to buy it, you know, from that catering service man like a lot of the boys do. They don't bring their lunch but they go out and buy their lunch there.
Mr. BALL - What did he do about the package in the back seat when he got out of the car?
Mr. FRAZIER - Like I say, I was watching the gages and watched the car for a few minutes before I cut it off.
Mr. BALL - Yes.
Mr. FRAZIER - He got out of the car and he was wearing the jacket that has the big sleeves in them and he put the package that he had, you know, that he told me was curtain rods up under his arm, you know, and so he walked down behind the car and standing over there at the end of the cyclone fence waiting for me to get out of the car, and so quick as I cut the engine off and started out of the car, shut the door just as I was starting out just like getting out of the car, he started walking off and so I followed him in.
So, eventually there he kept getting a little further ahead of me and I noticed we had plenty of time to get there because it is not too far from the Depository and usually I walk around and watch them switching the trains because you have to watch where you are going if you have to cross the tracks.


so we can see that frazier was in no great hurry , he had upwards of 8 minutes so he sat in his car .there is no way he didnt know that oswald had left the car , he knew , yet he just sat there burning up time . then he says he noticed lee STANDING BY THE CYCLONE FENCE WAITING FOR HIM . so then he jumps out of the car , but by then lee decides to walk off . frazier made zero effort to catch him up . there was no mad quick dash by oswald to leave frazier , HE WAITED FOR FRAZIER . buglioisi is in large part responsible for the lie that oswald rushed off . its repeated too much now and needs to stop ITS NOT TRUE . so i hope this puts it to bed for good now . plus the fact that oswald WAITED for frazier indicates that contrary to what bugliosi or others said that oswald was not trying to hard to conceal the sack he carried .

part 3 motorcade route

motorcade only mentioned november 16 . inference is that cant be
conspiracy then . but there is a vast difference between what is known by the public and what is known behind closed doors. these trips are planned weeks to months in advance .

in the video its said by marina that lee showed no interest in talking about jfks visit . but marina said she did not want to talk or reconcile with him that evening . he tried and tried to talk to her but found it pointless . and ended up going too bed earlier on his own .

part 4  the 6th floor

this segment relies on the word of charles givens , and makes no mention of his contradictory statements . makes no mention of the fact that the police on record said he would lie to make money . makes no mention of the fact that givens lied and said he saw oswald on the 6th floor at 11.55pm plus when we know as fact oswald was seen down on the 1st floor by multiple witnesses , one of whom edddie piper spoke to oswald on the 1st floor at midday .

part 5 the shooting

it was claimed in the video that williams would have seen anyone stood along the window line  . if williams was the negro inside the snipers nest leaning out the window he had no view of the other man on the oppsoite end of the floor .
so he does not contradict rowland

when were the pictures in the video of williams supposed unobstructed view taken ? . because the floor laying staff had moved all boxes in that area over
in front of the windows in order to lay new plywood floor .

james worrell said he watched a man leave quickly from the building . worrell was one of those mentioned convenient deaths .

amos euins originally said he saw a dark skinned man , then changed his story .

brennan gave a height and weight description of a man whom he only saw from the waist up .

[fobrien1]

part 6  the men in the windows

barbara rowland saw nothing . her testimony cited in the video is  not normal testimony of a wife in a marriage she is happy with . there is clearly an issue there between them
and its unfair to use this to attempt to discredit rowland . attempts to discredit as oppose to investigate only prove a bias . then the video maker adds in SCHOOL stuff to discredit
rowland .just as lone nuts use oswalds truancy as a kid as a means to say he had mental issues and thus use that to infer he is guilty . all this and the video uploader used the
word of charles givens while failing to mention that the police said he would lie if he thought he could make money from it . that is on record .

multiples of witnesses saw either a man other than oswald or two men in the so called snipers nest window . barbara rowlnad by her own admission saw no one in the window , yet her word seemingly is taken over that of other witnesses who did see someone .


chapter 7 the gunshots .

the video maker appears to try to discredit a witness in one segment while using them to aid his argument in another segment . such examples are vicky adams and roger craig .

witnesses are used and VITAL info they gave is omitted . for example the video uploader used lee bowers as a means to assert that there were no shots / shooters on or near the knoll , that people merely heard ECHOS . yet bowers went on record stating that SOMETHING OCCURRED THERE , SOMETHING HE COULD NOT EXPLAIN , A FLASH OF LIGHT , A PUFF OF SMOKE , SOMETHING HE COULD NOT EXPLAIN .

in fact bowers is just one of atleast 10 witnesses who saw a puff of smoke under the trees at the knoll . 3 of them who have gone completely unmentioned so far as ive seen were up on the overpass , holland , symons and dodds all 3 of whom said a shot came from the knoll area and that they saw a puff of smoke come out under the trees there .

do echos tend to fly around and leave puffs of smoke behind ? .

zapruders testimony was used yet in his testimony while saying he could not be certain he did say that he felt like a shot /s CAME FROM IN BACK OF HIM . when he was looking UP ELM STREET filming the knoll was in back of him .this is important yet it was OMITTED from this video .

ive always had an issue with jarmin , norman and williams on the 5th floor . i mean in the sense that they say a guy is above them a nut , loosing off lead and they decide to not only stay in the building but to stay on the 5th floor . what did they do ? (again omitted in this video) they went to the end of the building nearest the knoll and looked out the windows there watching goings on down there in the knoll / car park area . not one of them even once shouting down to cops to say HEY GUYS NO YOU ARE LOOKING IN THE WRONG PLACE , HE IS UP ABOVE US HERE ON THE 6TH FLOOR .

there is zero mention that witnesses INCLUDING POLICE smelled gun powder on lower elm street and in the general area of the knoll and parking area behind . there was a very strong wind that day blowing up elm street towards the depository . the smell of gun powder can not travel against a strong wind from the depository and down to lower elm . there is no mention that a cop up on the overpass said that he saw a shot strike down near the manhole cover that was situated on the south side of elm street on the grass . that caused dirt or concrete to fly up . all this is important stuff and none is mentioned . i do appreciate that there is too much to mention all of it in one video , but when its important info vital to the point the video maker is trying to make well then it must be mentioned . this stuff above is vital to the point that the video uploader was trying to make in this chapter .

the chapter titled the escape at 44 minutes mentions oswald encountering one of two men and directing them to a phone . this is pure speculation and unproven . there is zero proof that this was oswald . one of the men never even said it was oswald , it was simply that he had heard / been told the man he spoke to may have been oswald . this stuff is just an exercise / method to get oswald out that front door and in the time laid out by the commission . this segment is very short at 5 minutes and im sorry but it leaves much to be desired . wes frazier was on the steps outside the building . he told gary mack that he saw oswald clearly having come out the rear doors at the loading bay . now frazier was at the front door so he obviously could not see the rear doors . but there were no side doors opening out on to houston street just opposite the daltex building . there was a fire escape there back then but no door at street level .and oswald never exited the front door in front of frazier . so that only left frazier with the belief that oswald must have came out the loading bay doors at the rear . frazier watched as oswald walked across houston and turned left at the daltex building and walked east along upper elm street .

no witness has ever stated categorically that oswald came out the front door 3 minutes or so after the shots . that area was awash with people and cops . yet not one person could say they oswald walk out that door .

none of this is mentioned in this segment . and it needs to be .

[fobrien1]

ok next the snipers nest chapter . there are some problems there , the video maker seems to be adding some good details but leaving out detail that should be there .

he mentions charles givens and says SHORTLY BEFORE MIDDAY meaning 11.55 AM  on the 6th floor . what is not really mentioned is that givens gave multiples of statements and none of the original statements mentioned seeing oswald at all .in fact he never originally even mentioned going up to the 6th floor for his cigarettes . the police said givens would not hesitate to lie if he thought he could make money . atleast 3 people saw oswald and atleast one spoke to him on the 1st floor between 11.45 and 12.00 midday .so we cant rely on givens or his statement about seeing oswald , especially as 3 witnesses make a liar of him .

the ,mention of oswald asking for the gate to the elevator to be closed was not at 11.55 or midday , it was made at about 11.40am .when all staff broke for lunch they rode down on the two elevators having a race and as they did one said oswald shouted out SEND THE ELEVATOR BACK .meaning close the elevator gate and the elevator will return to oswalds floor .or it can be called by him atleast .givens for sure could have heard that but not at 12.pm .

however the video maker mentions givens changing stories so i must applaud him for that bit of honesty .

in regard the man that rowland saw in a west 6th floor window here is his testimony on that for clarity

Mr. SPECTER - Was he a white man or a Negro or what?
Mr. ROWLAND - Seemed, well, I can't state definitely from my position because it was more or less not fully light or bright in the room. He appeared to be fair complexioned, not fair, but light complexioned, but dark hair.

Mr. SPECTER - What race was he then?
Mr. ROWLAND - I would say either a light Latin or a Caucasian.
Mr. SPECTER - And were you able to observe any characteristics of his hair?
Mr. ROWLAND - No; except that it was dark, probably black.
Mr. SPECTER - Were you able to observe whether he had a full head of hair or any characteristic as to quantity of hair?
Mr. ROWLAND - It didn't appear as if he had a receding hairline but I know he didn't have it hanging on his shoulders. Probably a close cut from--you know it appeared to me it was either well-combed or close cut.

in regard seymore wietzman he gave a very very detailed description of the rifle he saw right down to the texture of the wood , the color of the strap etc .and he was specific about the 7.35 caliber  so no one is going to tell me IT WAS ONLY A MERE GLANCE sorry , that just is not accurate .

eugene boon also said the rifle was a mauser based on the word of weitzman because seymore had owned or ran a sporting goods store and was looked upon as an expert on weapons . weitzman was signing statements as late as november 24 saying mauser .

in regards the roof top mauser , there was no such weapon . craig had simply been told a story and accepted it as true and mentioned it while talking for the article cited in the video here . sat next to him was his friend penn jones who corrected him saying NO THAT WAS NOT CORRECT THAT IS WAS AN OFFICERS WEAPON MISTAKEN AS THE SNIPERS WEAPON . in the archives an envelope was found saying mauser shell found in dealey plaza november 22 1963 DESTROYED . the envelope was empty .

ok still with the snipers nest segment . yes the police did say prints were found on the rifle . but here is the full story . day of the DPD brought the rifle to the police station to test it for prints etc . he did not have long before he was informed that the fbi were seizing all evidence collected and were taking the case away from the DPD .

he stated that he found a print on the rifle stock , half of which was in the open , the other half of which was covered by a part of the weapon , and that ALL THE PRINT was there  but partially covered .if such a print did exist it was NOT left there on november 22 1963 , it was left there while the rifle was broken down .day said the print was dry and so as such could have been there weeks or even months .so this print does not put oswald in the snipers nest day that day at 12.30 .but it can be viewed as circumstantial evidence .

but lets look at the rifle and the prints .day did not have time to fully process the rifle . he said he lifted HALF of the print that was on the stock . and he said he found other prints near the left hand side of the trigger guard . the FBI then come  and take the evidence and take over the case . day no longer had the rifle after that to process it .

after this the rifle was taken by FBI agents and moved to FBI headquarters . where IT WAS thoroughly processed . the FBI did find a cluster of prints near the left side of the trigger guard , this is a problem as it tends to indicate a left handed shooter , oswald was most certainly right handed . this led to the warren commission questioning robert oswald etc asking if lee was left handed or had ever shot left handed .they had another reason of course , they knew the rifle had to be fired , bolt opened , shell expelled , bolt closed again and recycled and then re aguire the target , and a shot fired .this takes a certain amount of time . this slows down a right hander as they naturally must take their hand off the trigger , move it to the bolt and open and close it , etc etc .where as a left hander could aim and fire with the left hand while using the right hand to open and close the bolt . but they could find not one witness to say oswald ever used his left hand to fire  a weapon .

the fbi said the prints on the left side of the trigger guard were USELESS for identification purposes .

they thoroughly processed the ENTIRE weapon , they found the trigger guard prints and some fibers . but they found no print on the stock and no evidence a print was ever there .this is very strange . now lone nut advocates have argued that the fbi must have accidentally wiped away the print when packing the rifle and when in transit .this is a nonsense .WHY ? because the other unlifted half of the stock print was according to day under another part of the weapon . and should have been 100% safe . the part of the rifle in question would have had to have  been removed in order to wipe away that half of the print . and that was not done .

so when the FBI processed the rifle that half of the print SHOULD have been there .

lone nut advocates actually say that the FBI testified that a print found on the rifle was oswalds . yes they were GIVEN  A PRINT (they never found any on the rifle ) they checked that print against oswald prints and found it matched . but the way the way lone nut advocates word , they word it in such a way to infer that the fbi found a print and it matched oswalds prints . but that is not so . the FBI found no prints of oswald on that rifle , and any prints found were useless for identification purposes . all that happened was the fbi were given / sent a print along with oswalds known prints and asked if they matched , THEY DID .

day said that after he lifted the exposed half of the print that even that half left enough residue on the stock that he could still see remains off that half of the print by eye . and even that was not found .

the warren commission were very uncomfortable with this . they said they wanted agents to go to day and get him to give a statement and sign it stating he found a palm print on the rifle stock . DAY REFUSED TO SIGN IT .

as always in this case NOTHING IS QUITE AS IT SEEMS .

[fobrien1]

the final segment titled the line up is seriously lacking and lends far too much credibility to howard brennan . we must start by stating the FACT that even the warren commission who were not fussy about whos testimony they accepted (WHEN IT SUITED THE VERSION OF EVENTS THEY WANTED TO PUSH ) had the good sense to distance them selves from mr brennan . and they said that brennan saw SOMEONE , whom he later came to believe was oswald .but they declined to rely upon brennan or any supposed identification by him .

the line ups could fill a video all on its own .

in fact we have a list of all people who attended or  took part in the line ups . that is police , line up participants , oswald of course , witnesses etc etc . brennans name appears NOWHERE on that list . we know he claimed to have attended a specific line up . we know what witnesses were there at that line up . and the witnesses were allowed to stand near each other , which is a no no as that can lead to one witness corrupting another .the witnesses that were at the specific line up said they never saw brennan there .

brennan said he attended the line up with captain will fritz . fritz disputed that .

brennan never went to any of the official line ups , its that simple .

the conduct of the police at the line ups was at best highly dishonest .

an example of how close witnesses were together was that cab driver whalley was there with cab driver scoggins , just feet away from each other . the davis girls likewise .we now this from testimony .this should never happen as one witness can corrupt the others .

whalley witnessed no crime . he just said he had oswald in his cab .the line up that whalley witnessed was an interesting one . they put oswald in the line up with 3 young teenage boys . oswald looked about 30 , and they put him in a line up with young boys . that is not the worst thing . one of them was latino DARK SKINNED . oswald naturally was angry about this and let the cops know .whalley testified that ANYONE WOULD HAVE PICKED OSWALD , it was patently obvious he was the accused . he went further , he testified that they WERE RAILROADING OSWALD and that oswald knew it . scoggins view of the killing was obscured by bushes , he then hid behind his cab , and by his own admission in his testimony only saw who he saw from distance and from the rear as he made his escape .yet scoggins also picks oswald , but we know now that it was made patently clear who the accused was .

they dallas cops stooped even lower by having oswald speak and give his name and place of work . lee oswald , texas school book depository .this was early evening and the world and their dogs knew by then that shots were reported fired from that building and that an employee of that building was arrested .whalley himself admitted to having seen oswalds picture in a newspaper before he attended the line ups .

in another line up oswald was put in with 3 cops / detectives , who were taller and broader than oswald , all be it one bore a bit of a resemblance . one was big and tall and BLONDE .

the line ups were conducted in a dishonest AT BEST manner .and in fact were in my view conducted illegally . had oswald lived i believe his lawyers would have had a field day on this matter alone , and then with the witnesses .that is of course only if the judge allowed these line ups to be used in his court .

so the above video is severely lacking when it comes to reporting on these line ups .



ok the chapter titled the alibis . this starts by simply stating that oswald arrived home , quickly left and that tippit encountered him some 45 minutes after the shooting which is 1.25 to 1.16 and that is the official time . its not the actual time . we need to examine the actual timing and see how it differs from the official timing .

we know that oswald arrived at his rooming house at about 1.01 . because his landlady (actually she worked for his landlady ) earlene roberts had heard about the shooting and switched on her tv set to get the tv news . normal programming was interrupted and news was on and we know when that happened . it was at about 1pm .oswald arrived shortly after . so oswald arrived home about 1.01 pm .

mrs roberts then said in testimony that he stayed in his room some 3 to 4 minutes and then left . she watched tv a bit more , and then a moment or so later got up , walked to her window and saw oswald still outside at the bus stop .ok so lets take the lesser 3 minute time and add that to the 1.01 time , that means oswald was still on north beckley at 1.04  . roberts said that after watching oswald for a short time she decided to go back to her tv , she left the window with oswald still at the bus stop .so its not unreasonable to state that oswald was still on north beckley atleast at 1.04 to 1.05 pm .

TIME LINE OF EVENTS BASED ON WITNESSES PRESENT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
so oswald STILL ON NORTH BECKLEY : 1.04 TO 1.05 :
markham said shooting occurred at 1.06 to 1.07 pm :
BOWLEY SEES TIPPIT DOWN AT 1.10 PM :
other witnesses place the time of the shots at a time in and around 1.05 to 1.10 PM :
oswald proposed route 1 to 10th and patton (short route )takes 12 minutes plus :
oswald official route to 10th and patton takes 16 minutes plus :

DO THE MATH . IT DOES NOT WORK



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

we will add to the above time line as we go .

helen markham leaves her home at her usual time just after 1pm to go to catch her usual 1.12 bus on jefferson to work . she walks approx one block . where she witnessed the shooting . she did not look at a watch etc but said that SHE WOULD NOT MIND BETTING IT WAS 1.06 OR 1.07 (based on this being her usual time going to her bus to work ) , so ,lets add that to our time line above . now we must here mention that markham proved herself in some instances to be unreliable .

T F BOWLEY is in his car . a man who observed the time a lot and who was reliable . he arrives at 10th and patton , sees tippit is already down , he looks at his watch (the only official witness to do so ) and he said it was 1.10 . lets add that to our above time line .

we are already now seeing a very different story to the official story . other witnesses down on the lower end of patton where it joins jefferson had been on their lunch break and had returned to work at 1pm and said that the shooting occurred not very long after 1pm . from statements given that is between 1.05 to 1.10 . so lets add that to our time line .

OFFICIALLY THE CALL FOR HELP WAS MADE ON TIPPITS RADIO AT 1.16 PM BY DOMINGO BENAVIDES . this is where the official time of 1.16pm for the shooting came from . benavides did not make the 1.16pm call and tippit was not shot at 1.16 pm , i think that should be clear by now .

benavides by his own admission ducked down in his vehicle at the start of the shooting and did not move from it for several minutes till he felt safe to leave . meaning after the shooter / s had left . after that he left his vehicle , went to tippits aid , then he decides to go and try and make a call for help on tippits radio . he tried and failed as he could not use the radio correctly . at some point after that bowley arrived at tppits car and took over and used the radio and made the call . even well researched lone nut advocates (warren commission devotees ) have been forced to admit that tippit was shot atleast 3 minutes before the official 1.16 pm time . in truth he was shot nearer to 1.10pm.

there are two proposed routes from beckley to 10th and patton . the official route that was tested by the warren commission takes 16 minutes plus .
the second route takes 12 minutes plus .

lone nut advocates are aware that the time scale is a serious problem for them . i mean that is why they try to give oswald more time . they usually have him leaving at 1pm when he was only coming home about 1.01pm . in fact some have tried to push it back even earlier to 12.50 or 12.55 . and that is a nonsense .by having him leave at 1pm or earlier they can of course get him to 10th street quicker and by the 1.16 time . but they cant do this without deception .

oswald was still on north beckley at the bus stop at 1.04 or 1.05 pm .the shooting of tippit occurred at some time near to 1.10 .

no matter if you take the short route or the long route (BOTH ARE ADDED TO THE TIME LINE IN MY COMMENT ABOVE ) to 10th and patton the problems are clear . oswald would only have 5 to 8 minutes max to walk both a near 13 minute route and a near 17 minute route . the math does not work .well not with oswald going there on foot .

and we must mention that witness placed oswald in the theater a time in and around 1.10 .