The debate about what constitutes a DC-3 is one that I would like to stay away from, but I think that you may be able to score a couple of points on the Junkers front. You say that the problem lies in the fact that the BEA Ju52s were known as 'Jupiters', but that was only a name that the marketing department (if they had anything like that in those days) stuck on the type. It did not change anything about the designation of the type. The page from Woodley's BEA book shows a photo of Ju.52/3m G-AHOC, if you look at the original registry entry for this airframe:
https://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/Hi...ial/G-AHOC.pdf you will see that this is still a Junkers Ju.52, no matter what the marketing name for the type was.
With that in mind, the Woodley book provides enough information to disprove at least two of his claims if you ask me.