JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[FISHY1118]

A large skull fragment can be seen exploding downward in the Z-film, and, sure enough, a large skull fragment was found on the floor of the limo. As it exploded forward, while still attached to the scalp, it could very well have torn the scalp in the direction it traveled. Unfortunately, they failed to take photos of this fragment.

But a number of witnesses viewing a large fragment claimed it had hair on it.



On 11-30-63, Secret Service Agent Clint Hill, who'd climbed onto the back of Kennedy's limo just after the fatal shot was fired, wrote a report that included an often-overlooked detail. He wrote: "As I lay over the top of the back seat I noticed a portion of the President's head on the right rear side was missing and he was bleeding profusely. Part of his brain was gone. I saw a part of his skull with hair on it lieing in the seat."

And Hill wasn't the only one to see this hairy fragment. Motorcycle Officer Bobby Joe Dale arrived upon the scene just as the President's body was rushed into the emergency room. He failed to get a look at the President. He did, however, get a look at the back seat of the limo. Here's what he told Larry Sneed, as published in No More Silence (1998): "Blood and matter was everywhere inside the car including a bone fragment which was oblong shaped, probably an inch to an inch and a half long by three-quarters of an inch wide. As I turned it over and looked at it, I determined that it came from some part of the forehead because there was hair on it which appeared to be near the hairline."

And Dale wasn't the only motorcycle officer to make such a statement. When interviewed for the 2008 Discovery Channel program Inside the Target Car, H.B. McClain related: "When I raised her up (he means Mrs. Kennedy)...I could see it on the floor. That's pieces of skull with the hair on it."


Thanks Clint Hill , Bobby Joe Dale H.B. McClain. for proving the Autopsy photo id a fake .



MORE ''Actual Evidence ''.

[FISHY1118]

What did Oswald take to work on the morning of Nov 22, 1963?


CURTAIN RODS ANYONE ?


A first fact is that Oswald removed his rifle from the Ruth Paine garage on the morning of Nov 11, 1963 when Ruth was gone that morning, borrowed Michael Paine's blue-and-white Olds parked in front of Ruth's house, and Lee drove himself and Marina with their two children to a gunsmith to have the scope, which had come with the rifle and then had been removed by Oswald, reinstalled on it. The gunsmith trip was necessary because the threads were stripped requiring retapping, best done by a gunsmith. The reason for the scope installation was not for his personal use but because he was preparing the rifle for a conveyance. See the argument and evidence for this at https://www.scrollery.com/wp-content...op-109-pdf.pdf.

A second fact is that the rifle on the sixth floor of the TSBD on Nov 22, 1963 had been Oswald's, and Oswald was the next-to-last party in possession of that rifle prior to the assassination. (Oswald will not have been the last party in possession of the rifle before the assassination if his intention on Nov 11 to prepare the rifle for a conveyance was accomplished.)

A third fact is that the rifle went from Oswald's scope reinstallation on Nov 11 and the rifle's removal from the garage on that date, to being on the 6th floor of the TSBD implicated in the assassination of JFK, by Nov 22, possibly by means of the party to whom Oswald conveyed the rifle.

A fourth fact is that Oswald routinely took paper bags with him to work whenever Buell Frazier drove him from Irving. He did so to carry his lunch. Therefore that he did so on Fri Nov 22 is not in itself unusual. What was different was the paper bag's length, but not his carrying a paper bag to work.

A fifth fact is Oswald's paper bag on Nov 22 was longer than normal for carrying his lunch. This is established from the testimonies of Buell and Linnie Mae Frazier. They told what they saw--Oswald carrying a paper bag of a certain length.

A sixth fact is that unanimous testimony of those who saw the bag that Oswald carried rules out that that paper bag could have carried the rifle, which is 34" even if disassembled. This point on the length of the bag has been underestimated but is strong. There are the estimates of Buell and Linnie Mae as to lengths; the manner Linnie Mae saw Oswald carrying it holding it at the top and the bottom not hitting the ground; the way Buell saw him carry it cupped in his right hand with the top under his right shoulder; the FBI measurement of how far on Frazier's car's back seat Frazier marked its length when seeing it laying there (FBI measurement by the rear car seat method: 27"); the DPD both having Buell and Linnie Mae estimate with their hands, and also by making physical paper replicas, reconstructions of the bag's length, over and over and over the DPD had them do this (according to Buell) ... ca. 25-27", not 38".

A seventh fact is that Buell Frazier's testimony in particular is so firm and so steadfast that it is either correct or he has been dishonest, but it is not reasonable that he was mistaken by that magnitude of error (of mistaking a 38" bag for a 25-27" length which Frazier has said from day one is accurate to within about an inch on his estimate).

In other words, in addition to no non-circular positive evidence for identifying the paper bag Oswald carried to work that morning with the 38" paper bag of TSBD paper found in the TSBD--and unanimous opposing witness testimony as to its length and rejection of such an identification--if one holds to an identification of the two paper bags it also is difficult to avoid the necessity to assume Buell Frazier actually lied at the outset, and was not simply mistaken, to insist and describe a 38" length was only 25-27" as he did. (The simpler solution is they simply are not the same paper bags, and Frazier was not lying but truthful.)

An eighth fact is that there was a large paper bag, 38" long, made from TSBD wrapping paper, noticed and found near the shell hulls at the 6th floor of the TSBD, which was associated with the rifle (by apparent fibers association with the blanket of Oswald in Ruth Paine's garage in which the rifle had been stored), and associated with Oswald (by a palm print and a fingerprint). So the FBI lab.

But a ninth fact is there is no evidence whatsoever that identifies the smaller bag of ca. 25-27" length (Buell Frazier), or ca. 27" length (Linnie Mae Randle), with the larger 38" TSBD-wrapping paper bag. The lengths were significantly different from testimony of every witness who saw the paper bag Oswald carried that morning, with no witness and no forensic evidence testifying to an identification of those two bags. And Buell Frazier repeatedly said the paper bag Oswald brought with him in the car that morning looked like a lightweight retail store bag, not the 38" handmade one from heavier-duty TSBD wrapping paper.

(To emphasize this ninth point: there has been some controversy over the find circumstances and chain of custody of the large, 38", TSBD-wrapping paper bag believed associated with the rifle. That entire set of issues is bypassed here, because no relevance is established in terms of grounds for identifying that 38" bag as the paper bag Oswald brought to work that morning, which is the subject under discussion. The testimonies of both witnesses who saw the bag Oswald brought to work that morning are opposed to such an identification, and no witness or forensic evidence identifies them. It is not an argument that the identification is necessary to account for how the rifle got into the TSBD building, since there were 11 days and a possible if not likely further party intervening between Oswald's removal of the rifle on Nov 11 from Ruth Paine's garage, to prepare it for a conveyance, and the date of the assassination. If Oswald remains a possibility for the means of entrance of that rifle into the TSBD, given that he was the next-to-last in possession and worked in the TSBD, the Nov 11 date for Oswald's preparation of the rifle for conveyance means neither Oswald nor Nov 22 are the only possibilities for how the rifle got there. The rifle could have been brought in any of those eleven days, by a possessor of that rifle after Oswald.)

And a tenth fact is that in all likelihood it can be excluded that Oswald's paper bag on Nov 22 contained curtain rods either, no matter what he may have told Buell Frazier. Oswald himself under interrogation denied that it contained curtain rods. He said that bag contained his lunch. The only reason for curtain rods entering the Oswald paper bag discussion at all is solely Buell Frazier who said that is what Oswald told him the bag contained (and he may have told that to Linnie Mae the night of Thu Nov 21), plus the plausibility that a ca. 27" paper bag is about the right length to carry curtain rods.

Note that the sole evidence that Oswald claimed curtain rods is the same witness whose testimony LNers resolutely reject concerning the length of that paper bag, Buell Frazier. On the basis of no witness or forensic testimony, some insist Frazier was mistaken on the length, but right (not mistaken) in claiming Oswald said it was curtain rods.

The evidence weighing against curtain rods in Oswald's paper bag from Irving that morning is: Oswald's room on N. Beckley had no need for curtain rods of a length that could be carried in a 25-27" paper bag (there was a bent super-long single curtain rod in Oswald's room photographed a day later, but that was a much longer length); Oswald never mentioned anything about curtain rods to Ruth Paine (Oswald is not known to have stolen property from Ruth otherwise); no curtain rods are known to have turned up at the TSBD; there is no corroboration that Oswald was carrying curtain rods; and if Oswald had carried curtain rods it makes sense that he would say so to his interrogators instead of denying it. And last but not least, an assumption of curtain rods is not necessary to account for the 25-27" length of the paper bag, or indicated from that length.

Synthesis

These ten points deliver a conclusion that what was in Oswald's paper bag from Irving that morning was, as he said to his interrogators, his lunch, full stop. Oswald denied it was curtain rods to his interrogators when asked. The only reason there is no record he directly denied it was a disassembled rifle in the paper bag is because there is no record he was asked that question.

(Side point: Is it even clear that Oswald ever was told that any rifle, let alone his own, had been found on the 6th floor of his workplace? Marina was shown the rifle on Fri evening, and the entire world other than Oswald knew through news reporting about the rifle found in the TSBD and then reports that it had been traced to Oswald. But did Oswald know that during the two days before he was killed? He was not shown the rifle, and is there record in any interrogators' notes or news footage that Oswald was told that a rifle had been found on the 6th floor and traced to him? Oswald was asked if he had ever owned a rifle and he said he had neither owned nor possessed one since returning from the Soviet Union. He denied any mail-order purchase even in the case of the revolver which he did notdeny owning. In the case of the revolver, he gave a different story that he had obtained it from a retail store in Fort Worth in the spring of 1963. That particular prevarication is of interest because it was not for the motive of denying he had the handgun, but only of where he had obtained it. Why conceal that? Was a role as a government informant or sting operation, perhaps related to the Dodd Subcommittee investigation of mail-order firearms purchases, in the background and Oswald was preserving cover of that? If Oswald's case had gone to trial would he through an attorney have argued that he did not consider that rifle personally his, but a government agency's? And that he had dissembled about ordering it by mail on similar grounds as the government dissembling about involvement in plans to invade Cuba--to protect an undercover operation? Did Oswald even expect his case to come to trial, or did he anticipate release prior to trial from intervention which did not happen in time for him? Some things may never be known due to his untimely death.)

Neither rifle nor curtain rods: the lunch solution

The lunch explanation of the contents of his paper bag brought to work with him, which was Oswald's own answer to his interrogators, is plausible. Oswald never denied he had an over-size length paper bag for his lunch, but explained (reasonably) that bag sizes vary and one used what was available. Oswald said he had had a cheese sandwich, a banana and an apple for lunch. It would be unusual if Oswald had not brought his lunch with him. Never mind what Frazier said Oswald said, this is the reality: Oswald normally brought his lunch, said he did so that day, never told his interrogators otherwise, and the 25-27" x 6" (Buell) or x 8" (Linnie Mae) width paper bag is the size of paper bags for baguettes or certain kinds of bread such as Italian or French bread. Both the ways in which Linnie Mae and Buell saw him carrying it are consistent with how one would carry a lunch in such a bag--either holding it by the top and the bottom almost reaches the ground (what Linnie Mae saw in Irving), or, perhaps to avoid the bottom risking hitting the ground, carrying it with the right palm cupped under it and the upper part of the bag held by his upper arm against his upper body as he walked (what Buell saw in Dallas).

On whether Buell was truthful in telling of Oswald saying it was curtain rods, and that Oswald said curtain rods was the reason for his trip to Irving, that is a judgment call but I judge it is likely true. Buell asking Oswald the reason for the unexpected trip on a Thursday is a reasonable question of curiosity from a driver, and it is equally believable that Oswald might not wish to disclose his personal business so made up a reason: "curtain rods", perhaps drawing from some mention from an earlier time about curtains or curtain rods. (Note when Oswald was told Buell had said he said curtain rods, Oswald answered Buell must be confusing it with an earlier occasion, slightly different from a simple denial.) Buell on another occasion said the reason Oswald went out on Thursday night, not Friday, was because Oswald planned to take a driving test that weekend. Frazier would not have then known the real reason, in terms of innocent explanation unrelated to planning to kill JFK, was he had missed the previous weekend with his wife and children in Irving (due to Ruth Paine's girl's birthday party), and, separately, Marina was angry with him and apparently was not speaking to him over the phone. Oswald, described by Buell as not very talkative anyway, may have told Buell "curtain rods" rather than "Marina is angry with me and that is why I am going to try to work things out with her". There could even have been a further reason still: had Lee come into unexpected money? Marina in Irving had nearly $180, the equivalent of ca. $1800 in today's money, in cash in her room, from Lee, after the assassination. Had that $180 cash been saved over time, or given Marina the night before, or some combination of both?

Marina told of Lee having urged her to rent an apartment with him that weekend, promising to buy Marina a washing machine, etc.--things which involved immediate outlays of large sums of money--which would be consistent if Lee had come into money, and hoped to have his family reunited under one roof that weekend, to go out Thursday night, cash in hand, to arrange it with Marina.

In short, the timing of the trip to Irving, the reason for dissembling to Buell over the reason for the trip (the bogus "curtain rods" reason), and the variable size of the paper bag for his lunch, are all of those reasonably explained as coincidences and unrelated to the JFK assassination. It is not necessary to suppose Oswald was plotting to assassinate Kennedy in explanation of any of those three things which are amenable to mundane, everyday explanation.

The evasive leaving from the TSBD following the assassination, on the other hand, is not mundane, everyday behavior but is also not necessarily indicative of Oswald's guilt in the JFK assassination, as distinguished from an unusual reaction for other reason, such as, e.g. suspecting he had been set up or was in danger of being killed by the assassins of JFK (https://www.scrollery.com/wp-content...ackets-112.pdf).

Postscript on the 38" paper bag made from TSBD paper

On the 38" TSBD paper bag claimed to be associated with the rifle on the 6th floor, one possibility is that 38" paper bag was made by Oswald at an earlier time, perhaps toward the end of the week ending Fri Nov 8, and then taken to Irving with him on his person, for the purpose of holding what Oswald believed at that time was his 36" length Mannlicher-Carcano (not disassembled). Oswald had ordered a 36" Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, and is it possible he still had not noticed or realized that the one he had been shipped was actually 40", not 36"? Thinking it was 36" (the length he had ordered), he would make the bag 38" to fully enclose it. The FBI match of the paper of the 38" bag to the Nov 22 TSBD paper roll on the first floor TSBD (but not to TSBD paper sampled on Nov 26) can be accounted for if either the particular roll sampled on Nov 22 (there were four rolls in simultaneous use?) had also been in use Nov 8, or more than one roll was from the same batch of paper, across a time span of 14-15 or so days. There was a non-match of a sample of TSBD paper on Nov 26 to both the 38" bag and a sample of TSBD paper of Nov 22, but that does not necessarily mean a paper match was not possible from an earlier time over a duration longer than 4 days.

Oswald would have made the 38" bag at TSBD say around Thu or Frid Nov 7-8 in preparation for a planned removal of the rifle from the garage in Irving on Nov 11. He would have used TSBD wrapping paper and the 3" tape there since that was free and nothing else was easily available. He would have designed the paper bag to enclose the whole rifle, but he did not have the rifle in hand to check the size was right when making the bag. He would have discovered the 38" bag did not completely cover the 40" rifle only on Nov 11 in Irving. Since he was spending money for which he had worked hard for a reinstallation of a scope that he did not like or use, and since he never practiced shooting with the rifle after spending money to have the scope reinstalled and sighted, that is consistent with the purpose being a conveyance. How the logistics of such a conveyance might have worked is unknown--there is a black hole of information between Nov 11 and Nov 22 concerning whereabouts and custody of the rifle, after the rifle was removed from Oswald's belongings in Ruth Paine's garage on the morning of Nov 11. There is no knowledge the rifle was ever returned to Ruth Paine's garage after its removal from that garage on Nov 11.

In default of a better explanation (such as meeting someone for a handover that day), I assume after the scope reinstallation had been done and the rifle sighted-in by Dial Ryder at the Irving Sport Shop on Nov 11, that Oswald--who with Marina and their children was driving Michael Paine's second car (a blue-and-white Olds without either Michael's or Ruth Paine's knowledge)--drove to a bus station and put the rifle in a rented storage locker. The rifle would be in the 38" paper bag with the 40" rifle sticking out of the open top of the bag by 2".

The conveyance of the rifle could then occur by means of Oswald giving the key to the storage locker to someone.

Oswald could have told whoever was buying it from him, as an enhancement of value, that he had just had the rifle sighted in and told the person where, at the Irving Sport Shop. That could be the mechanism for the information that an anonymous caller called in to both the FBI and the press, the weekend of the assassination, with the anonymous tip that Oswald had had the rifle sighted-in at a gun shop in Irving (easily found by the FBI, and that tip is how Dial Ryder entered the story when the FBI made inquiries).

The rifle then went into the TSBD at some point prior to the morning of Nov 22, 1963, sighted-in and not disassembled, and the 38" paper bag entered with it, though not necessarily brought in by Oswald, but rather by the ones in last possession of the rifle, the one or ones to whom Oswald had sold it.

And naturally Oswald's fingerprints would be on the rifle since it had been his, and on the 38" paper bag under this reconstruction, even though Oswald may not have been responsible for either of those items going to the 6th floor of the TSBD.

For all we know the rifle sale or conveyance on the part of Oswald some time on or after Nov 11, 1963, could have been in continuation of informant or "sting" work being done by Oswald for an agency, that backfired in the assassination when Oswald found himself set up to be implicated by means of the rifle connection.

Again the key essential point, that which I regard as a fact established, is the scope reinstallation by Oswald on that rifle on the morning of Nov 11, 1963 (link again: https://www.scrollery.com/wp-content...op-109-pdf.pdf). In that article I wrote in the conclusion how Dial Ryder of the Irving Sport Shop was caught up in the saga by sheer accident.

But Dial Ryder is not the point, is beside the point. I should have brought out in that conclusion instead the point that actually matters: the rifle, the Mannlicher-Carcano, did not leave Ruth Paine's garage on Nov 22, but eleven days earlier on Nov 11. And Oswald was not the last possessor of that rifle prior to the assassination, but its next-to-last possessor.

It is possible the assassination was done by the last possessors of that rifle, not the next-to-last one.

That is the point that matters.

[OneRound]

HS,

I'm as guilty of amateur psychology as anyone else on here but I don't see that it offers a credible account of Oswald as lone gunman. I can fully understand why the WC wanted to depoliticise the crime but in the long term it has not served them well.

I read your account recently of Oswald's suspicious activities leading up to the assassination. From my CT standpoint I have to suspend disbelief at various points in the material evidence but allowing for that, I thought you set out a reasonable case. And if we leap forward to the Tippit murder and the subsequent arrest of Oswald in the Texas Theatre, that too hangs together for the most part.

However there are massive problems in between and afterwards. On shooting Kennedy, Oswald had two obvious options: hold his ground on the 6th floor and go down in a Cagneyesque blaze of glory with his Carcano; or get out of the building as fast as possible and head for Mexico en route to Cuba. (Rather than a hero's welcome I suspect a bullet in the back of his head would have been more likely in Havana but Oswald was perhaps young enough to believe differently.)

But he does neither of these. He walks (he did not 'flee') from the building, catches a bus and goes back to the very place he is known to live. Why? To collect his revolver possibly, but what good will that do when every police officer in the USA is literally gunning for him? If he wanted a shoot out he could have got that on the 6th floor. Why delay the martyrdom?

We are then told Oswald was walking (aimlessly it seems to me) around Oak Cliff and is apprehended by Tippit. So where was Oswald, now tooled up, going? No one seems to know. Was it really the Texas Theatre or was that a knee jerk response following the murder of Tippit? The psychological framework which was just about credible enough to place Oswald on the 6th floor with a Carcano in hand is now like wet tissue paper.

On arrest, Oswald had the greatest opportunity in history (given the development of live media) to announce his martyrdom, whether political, social or psychological. His words would ring through history. Instead, he says he is innocent despite his knowledge (according to later investigation) that there is a paper trail that tracks him and his palmprint to the gun used in the assassination.

So was Oswald on a suicide mission on 22 November? Did he strike lucky and then walk around bemused by his temporary good fortune? Did he have second thoughts and decide martyrdom was not his thing? Did he assassinate the POTUS because his marriage was failing and at the age of 24, with two young children, he saw no future? The psychological implications are inadequate in my view.

Hi cobalt and all,

In one of the early A6 threads, a poster of the time Victor commented that we will never know the full story as James Hanratty never explained his own starring role. I feel the same applies here to Lee Harvey Oswald.

Best regards,
OneRound

[Herlock Sholmes]

More pages of stuff cut and pasted from conspiracy theory websites which he classes as evidence and which George criticises me for mentioning.

Shall we all do this? Shall we see who can out-cut and out-paste each other?

In the lasting we have the ‘evidence’ of a bloke taking two rifles to work at the TSBD 2 days before the assassination. Clearly then he hid them on the sixth floor for an assassin to find them.

[GBinOz]

It is an easy one, but not in the way that you think.

Klein's Sporting Goods had run out of the 36-inch long (91 cm) Carcano model M91 TS carbines and sent Oswald a 40.1-inch Carcano M91/38.

The document you post appears to be an alteration of an order for Mannlicher Carcano M91TS to be replaced by Beretta Terni M98/38 placed by Kleins with Crescent Firearms. The order alteration is dated 15 Jan 1962. How does this relate to Klein's advertisement in the February 1963 issue of American Rifleman magazine for a C20-T750, for which Oswald allegedly placed his order using a coupon clipped from that advertisement?

[Herlock Sholmes]

A large skull fragment can be seen exploding downward in the Z-film, and, sure enough, a large skull fragment was found on the floor of the limo. As it exploded forward, while still attached to the scalp, it could very well have torn the scalp in the direction it traveled. Unfortunately, they failed to take photos of this fragment.

But a number of witnesses viewing a large fragment claimed it had hair on it.



On 11-30-63, Secret Service Agent Clint Hill, who'd climbed onto the back of Kennedy's limo just after the fatal shot was fired, wrote a report that included an often-overlooked detail. He wrote: "As I lay over the top of the back seat I noticed a portion of the President's head on the right rear side was missing and he was bleeding profusely. Part of his brain was gone. I saw a part of his skull with hair on it lieing in the seat."

And Hill wasn't the only one to see this hairy fragment. Motorcycle Officer Bobby Joe Dale arrived upon the scene just as the President's body was rushed into the emergency room. He failed to get a look at the President. He did, however, get a look at the back seat of the limo. Here's what he told Larry Sneed, as published in No More Silence (1998): "Blood and matter was everywhere inside the car including a bone fragment which was oblong shaped, probably an inch to an inch and a half long by three-quarters of an inch wide. As I turned it over and looked at it, I determined that it came from some part of the forehead because there was hair on it which appeared to be near the hairline."

And Dale wasn't the only motorcycle officer to make such a statement. When interviewed for the 2008 Discovery Channel program Inside the Target Car, H.B. McClain related: "When I raised her up (he means Mrs. Kennedy)...I could see it on the floor. That's pieces of skull with the hair on it."


Thanks Clint Hill , Bobby Joe Dale H.B. McClain. for proving the Autopsy photo id a fake .



MORE ''Actual Evidence ''.

That Zapruder film really is a buffet table for you isn’t it. It’s faked and not faked. You pick bits you like as evidence and bits that you don’t are faked or ignored. There is no recourse to reason or logic or common sense, it’s simply a conspiracy theorist beginning with an irrational assumption and then seeing everything in terms of confirmation bias.

The Zapruder films shows, in colour, in detail that cannot be mistaken……no great wound in the back of Kennedy’s head.

That is evidence Fishy.

Have you ever heard of a court case where cctv footage was dismissed as ‘faked?’ No, of course you haven’t because we our justice system doesn’t live down a rabbit hole.

Therefore, categorically in a court of law the Zapruder film would have been seen by a jury as unequivocal proof that there was no large wound to the back of Kennedy’s.

Have you ever heard of a court of law rejecting x-rays as faked? No, because we live in the real world not a conspiracy theorist fantasy. Therefore a jury would have seen the x-Ray of the Presidents head matching exactly with what the Zapruder films shows to come to only one conclusion…..guilty.

And no amount of cutting and pasting from conspiracy theorist websites will change that.

[Fiver]

So the proposal is that the perpetrator deliberately emptied the shells from a revolver and threw them on the ground for the police to use as evidence.

You saying that gives the strong impression that you haven't read any of the eyewitness testimony. Witness testimony makes it clear that Oswald was emptying the shells and reloading with live rounds.

But the first report was that the handgun involved was a 38 Auto, as were the shell casings, which would have been ejected and would have had to be picked up to avoid them being used as evidence. A 38ACP (auto) cannot be chambered in a 38 special revolver, and vice-versa.

Your source is being deceptive by showing full bullets instead o expended shells.

Officer Gerald Hill did call in that "The shells at the scene indicate that the suspect is armed with an automatic 38, rather than a pistol." Hill did not observe the shooting.

Mr. HILL. Right. And Poe showed me a Winston cigarette package that contained three spent jackets from shells that he said a citizen had pointed out to him where the suspect had reloaded his gun and dropped these in the grass, and that the citizen had picked them up and put them in the Winston package.
I told Poe to maintain the chain of evidence as small as possible, for him to retain these at that time, and to be sure and mark them for evidence, and then turn them over to the crime lab when he got there, or to homicide.

Mr. POE. I talked to a Spanish man, but I don't remember his name. Dominique, I believe.
Mr. BALL. Domingo Benavides?
Mr. POE. I believe that is correct; yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. What did he tell you?
Mr. POE. He told me, give me the same, or similar description of the man, and told me he was running out across this lawn. He was unloading his pistol as he ran, and he picked the shells up.
Mr. BALL. Domingo told you who was running across the lawn?
Mr. POE. A man, white man.
Mr. BALL. What was he doing?
Mr. POE. He was unloading his pistol as he ran.
Mr. BALL. And what did he say?
Mr. POE. He said he picked the two hulls up.
Mr. BALL. Did he hand you the hulls?
Mr. POE. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Did you put any markings on the hulls?
Mr. POE. I couldn't swear to it; no, sir.
Mr. BALL. What did you do with the hulls?
Mr. POE. I turned the hulls into the crime lab, which was at the scene.
Mr. BALL. Do you know the name of the man with the crime lab or from the crime lab?
Mr. POE. I couldn't swear to it. I believe Pete Barnes, but I wouldn't swear to it.

All four expended shells were recovered by civilians. All were for a 38 revolver, not a 38 automatic.

Which leaves two options:
* The Conspiracy used the wrong gun, but planted the right shell casings without being seen by over a dozen witnesses, and got several of these witnesses to lie about the shooter reloading in order to frame Oswald for a crime they didn't need to frame Oswald for.
* Or Officer Hill made a mistake.

[Fiver]

The Commission never considered that more than one rifle had been found in the building. They, as well as researchers over the decades, have considered the identification of the rifle found on the sixth floor as a Mauser just a simple error.
But other evidence indicates that might not be the case.

Your source claims the WC "never considered that more than one rifle had been found in the building? and yet it quote the WC doing just that.

But the evidence may say otherwise because two days before the assassination an employee in the building, Warren Caster, brought two rifles into the building, one a single shot .22 ( a Christmas gift for his son ) and the other, a 30.06 Mauser that had been sporterized.

Your source conveniently ignores that these rifles were also taken home, not left at the TSBD.

Mr. BALL. What did you do with the guns after that?
Mr. CASTER. I put them back in the carton and carried them up to my office.
Mr. BALL. And what did you do with them after that?
Mr. CASTER. I left at the end of the working day, oh, around 4 o'clock and took the guns in the cartons and carried them and put them in my car and carried them home.
Mr. BALL. Did you ever have them back in the Texas School Book Depository Building thereafter?
Mr. CASTER. They have never been back to the Texas School Book Depository Building since then.
Mr. BALL. Where were those guns on November 22, 1963?
Mr. CASTER. The guns were in my home, 3338 Merrell Road.

Your source also selectively quotes Shelly.

Mr. BALL. What happened to the guns?
Mr. SHELLEY. Well, we looked them over, like you do any new toy, and he putts them back in the box and goes out of the door.
Mr. BALL. And did you ever see them again?
Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir.
Mr. BALL. Had you ever seen any guns in that building before that date?
Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir.
Mr. BALL. Did you ever see any guns in that building between that date and the time the President was shot?
Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir.

November 22, 1963: An imported 30.06 in the window
Assassination witness Arnold Rowland was standing across the street from the TSBD and saw a man in the sixth floor window. He described the rifle he saw in the hands of the man:

Mr. SPECTER - Can you describe the rifle with any more particularity than you already have?
Mr. ROWLAND - No. In proportion to the scope it appeared to me to be a .30-odd size 6, a deer rifle with a fairly large or powerful scope.
Mr. SPECTER - When you say, .30-odd-6, exactly what did you mean by that?
Mr. ROWLAND - That is a rifle that is used quite frequently for deer hunting. It is an import. ( 2 H 170 )

So your Conspiracy
* Shot JFK with a 30.06.
* Planted expended shells from Oswald's Carcano in the sniper's nest.
* Planted a Mauser on the 6th floor,

Who is running this Conspiracy - Moe, Larry, and Curly?

An Argentine rifle
In a June 1964 interview with KSFO in San Francisco, Sgt. Gerald Hill said that he was told by another officer that the rifle found on the sixth floor of the TSBD "was made in Argentina".

So the Conspiracy switched between three different rifles of different calibers made on different continents, let them be filmed and photographed by the news and thought no one would notice the difference?

Who is running this Conspiracy - Moe, Larry, and Curly?

[Fiver]

The document you post appears to be an alteration of an order for Mannlicher Carcano M91TS to be replaced by Beretta Terni M98/38 placed by Kleins with Crescent Firearms. The order alteration is dated 15 Jan 1962. How does this relate to Klein's advertisement in the February 1963 issue of American Rifleman magazine for a C20-T750, for which Oswald allegedly placed his order using a coupon clipped from that advertisement?

It's an example of Klein's substituting when they were out of 91TS.

[Fiver]

A sporterized rifle firing at the President is what witness James Worrell described. He was standing in front of the TSBD when the shooting started and at the sound of the first shot he said he looked up and saw "12 inches of a gun barrel sticking out of a window of the building".

The 12" barrel he described could not have been belonged to the Mannlicher-Carcano ( CE 139 ), whose barrel only extended a few inches beyond the stock.

Your source appears to be lying again.

In his November 23 Affidavit, Worrell said "Yesterday afternoon at approximately 12:30 pm I was standing on the sidewalk against a building on the corner of Elm and Houston Streets watching the motorcade of the President. I heard loud noise like a fire cracker or gun shots. I looked around to see where the noise came from. I looked up and saw the barrel of a rifle sticking out of a window over my head about 5 or 6 stories up. While I was looking at the gun it was fired again. I looked back at Mr. Kennedy and he was slumping over. I got scared and ran from the location. While I was running I heard the gun fire two more times."

His Warren Commission testimony did not contradict his affidavit, nor did it contradict the appearance of a Carcano.

Mr. WORRELL - Well, when I heard the first shot it was to loud to be a firecracker, I knew that, because there was quite a big boom, and I don't know, just out of nowhere, I looked up like that, just straight up.
Mr. SPECTER - Indicating you looked straight back over your head, raising your head to look over your body at the 90 degree angle?
Mr. WORRELL - Yes; and I saw it for the second time and I looked back to the motorcade.
Mr. SPECTER - What did you observe at that time?
Mr. WORRELL - I saw about 6 inches of the gun, the rifle. It had - well it had a regular long barrel but it had a long stock and you can only see maybe 4 inches of the barrel, and I could see --
Mr. SPECTER - Were you able to observe any of the stock?
Mr. WORRELL - Oh, yes.
Mr. SPECTER - How much of the stock were you able to observe?
Mr. WORRELL - Just very little, just about 2 inches.
Mr. SPECTER - How many inches of the barrel then could you observe protruding beyond the stock?
Mr. WORRELL - About 4 inches, I would say, not very much.

[Herlock Sholmes]

The Rifle and the Shells


The three shells that were found on the 6th floor were tested by Robert A. Frazier (FBI’s Washington Lab) and Joseph D. Nicol (Superintendent of the Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation for the state of Illinois) for the Warren Commission. They compared all microscopic marks that the bolt face and the firing pin of the rifle had left on the expended cartridge cases and compared the with cartridges cases expended when they test fired the rifle (Oswald’s rifle).

They concluded that the cartridges had been fired from Oswald’s gun to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world. Fifteen years later a panel of firearms experts that sat for the HSCA reached an identical conclusion.


Conspiracy theorists, in their never ending obsession with exonerating the obviously guilty Oswald cite one of their huge ‘team’ of dodgy star witnesses, Deputy Sheriff Roger ‘looney’ Craig. He told the Press, five years after the assassination (as ever), that he’d seen the casings and that they were all facing in the same direction against the wall and that they were no more than three quarters of an inch apart. In 1971 however (in the manuscript of his unpublished book) and in true conspiracy mode, he claimed that they ‘looked’ as if they had been placed there and the three of them were no more than an inch apart. By 1975 Craig had increased the distance to ‘no more than two inches.’ A year later CT’s Gary Shaw and Larry Harris added on another inch so ‘about 3 inches apart). Craig’s nonsense (so beloved by CT’s) are easily exposed. We just need to see what he’d said to the Warren Commission in 1964. He heard someone call out that they had found shells and a couple of minutes later he went over for a look but he didn’t get too close. In the later interviews he’d claimed to have immediately gone over and examined them carefully. Asked if he recalled any of the shells being up against the wall he said “ No, I don’t. I didn’t look that close.”

Yup…we can dismiss this idiot without a second thought.


Fishy though tries to dismiss/smear Officer Weitzman when he changed his mind even though the circumstances were entirely understandable to anyone being remotely reasonable. He had looked into a gap between the boxes, not up close, and saw a rifle which looked like a Mauser; he heard someone else conclude the same so that’s the initial assumption that he made. He then found out that it wasn’t a Mauser. This was hardly error of the century because everyone agrees that the two weapons are easy confuse. But as Fiver has said, any error is leapt on by CT’s as being part of a plot. No one can make an honest mistake according to them. Frankly, it’s a more than a little childish approach. Craig, on the other hand, zigzags around like a looney and sees a mirage of Oswald 10 minutes after he’d left Dealey Plaza and yet this is the guy that Fishy prefers to support. Work that one out people. I can. It’s called confirmation bias. Incidentally, when the FBI tested where Carcano shells would have fallen they were found to have been entirely consistent with where the shells were actually found. So how lucky were our plotters when they planted them! In addition, Luke Mooney, who found the cartridges, said that it looked like they might have been ejected and then bounced off the cartons. Hardly consistent with Craig’s nonsense about planted cartridges all neatly lined up is it? And this is the same Craig who ‘saw’ Oswald get into a Nash Rambler in Dealey Plaza 10 minutes after he’d left. And who claimed that the police found a rifle on the roof (being guarded by a pink elephant called Gerald I believe) But of course, in their desperation to create a fictional plot conspiracy theorists don’t mind who they use. Proven liars and fantasists like Craig are welcomed. Ricky White, Ed Hoffman, Beverley Oliver all esteemed members.

And this guy is the source of the Mauser nonsense. There was no Mauser at the scene. End of story.

…………………………………….


The Bullet Fragments


Then we have the bullet fragments, two of which were found in the limousine on the night that Oswald killed Kennedy. A third set of fragments were found under Mrs Connally’s seat were too small to connect to Oswald’s rifle…more about these later.*

One of the larger pieces, recovered from the front seating compartment (on the driver’s seat, just to the right of the driver) was designated Exhibit No. 567. It was described as a piece of the copper metal jacket of a bullet with a part of the lead core still attached to it. It weighs 44.6 grains (a grain is a tenth of an ounce) which is less than a third of the weight of an intact Carcano bullet. Frazier and Nicol decided that there were sufficiently distinctive barrel markings for them to be compared using two microscopes side by side with one having on it the test bullets fired from Oswald’s rifle.

The experts identified the bullet fragments as having been fired in Oswald’s rifle to the exclusion of all other weapons. In 1978 a panel of 5 experts for the HSCA came to exactly the same conclusion.


The second fragment, designated Exhibit No. 569 was found on the floor to the right of the drivers seat. This one weighed just 21 grains and came from the base of a bullet. There was no lead core to this fragment, it was only jacket. Despite the fact that the bullet was badly mutilated, around a third of the surface was sufficiently undamaged to do a comparison test.

The experts concluded that the bullet came from Oswald’s rifle to the exclusion of all other weapons. And again, in 1978, the HSCA panel of 5 experts all arrived at exactly the same conclusion.


The experts had no way of finding out if the two fragments came from the same, or from two different bullets. What they did know for certain though was that bullets from Oswald’s rifle killed Kennedy without any possible doubt.

Exhibit No. 399, found on a stretcher at Parkland and fatuously labelled ‘the magic bullet’ by CT’s was also tested in exactly the same way.

It had been fired from Oswald’s rifle to the exclusion of all other rifles in the world. The HSCA’s 5 man panel of experts concluded 100% in agreement. (All ‘in on it’ no doubt.)


If Only Conspiracy Theorists Would Use A Dictionary.

And of course, with no. 399 we get the myth of the ‘pristine bullet.’ This came from the one single Warren Commission photograph. This word has been bandied around on here so let’s just remind people of the definition of pristine: “in its original condition; unspoilt.” Ok, does this actually describe no. 399? The public got their first good view of the bullet in 1978 on the televised HSCA hearing where they photographs depicting the bullet from 4 views (two sides, front and base) The base view shows the bullet badly smashed into an ovoid shape. It’s also clear that lead is protruding. Ballistics expert Larry Sturdivan told the HSCA that this is exactly what happens when a bullet begins to deform. Some of the lead was actually missing which took the bullets weight from 161 grains down to 158.6 grains. This is demonstrably not a ‘pristine’ bullet. Any use of the word ‘pristine’ is evidentially dishonest. Michael Baden of the HSCA labelled ‘pristine’ as a ‘media description.’ He went on to say: “It’s like being a little bit pregnant - it is either pristine or it is not pristine. This is a damaged bullet…not a pristine one. This is a bullet that is deformed. It would be very hard to take a hammer and flatten it to the degree that this is flattened.”


He went on to explain that in its course through the President and Connally it “did not strike much that would cause it to be damaged.” It passed through soft tissue until it struck Connally’s 5th rib, a glancing blow on a very thin bone. The panel agreed that the likeliest cause of the flattening of the bullet was when it came into contact with the Governor’s lower forearm. The radius in the wrist are not very hard and can damage some bullets but no others. Dr. Charles Petty, Chief Medical Examiner of Dallas and a member of the HSCA’s Forensic Pathology panel, after being shown the pictures of the bullet, was asked if that bullet could have emerged from both Kennedy and Connally as described in that condition. He replied: “Yes, of course.” He was also asked if he had seen a bullet causing the kind of damage to Kennedy and Connally emerging in a similar way to the one on screen. His reply? “Yes, of course.”


Conspiracy theorists love pointing out the faults in the Warren Commission and I’m happy to mention one. They fired a bullet directly into the wrist of a cadaver which came out more damaged than c399. People like Lane and Wecht loved this of course as they rubbed their conspiracist hands together with glee. Of course you know that there’s a huge BUT coming. But..the WC were mistaken in using this experiment. I don’t mind accepting that they made a mistake. Dr. John Lattimer, who did tests himself on the rifle, told Gerald Posner:” …the Warren Commission did not conduct the proper experiments. They fired a 6.5mm (bullet) travelling at over 2000 feet per second directly into a wrist bone. Of course you are going to get deformation of the bullet when it strikes a hard object at full speed.” Larry Sturdivan, a physical scientist and wound ballistics expert said the condition of c399 was: “…direct proof that the bullet that struck Governor Connally’s wrist was not at high velocity.” This shows that the bullet that struck Connally had struck something else first, to have resulted in it slowing down. We wonder what that could have been?

Just to conclude this section with Dr. Petty (who was probably ‘in on it’ of course) said: “This is the behaviour of a full metal jacketed bullet, a bullet in all areas except the base by means of the firm, hard, tough, not easy to deform jacket.”


So the conclusion is inescapable and was confirmed by independent experts..c399 and the fragments all came from Oswald’s Mannlicher-Carcano.

…………….

* The fragments found under Mrs Connally’s seat, in the Governor’s wrist and in Kennedy’s brain.

In May of 1964 FBI agent John F. Gallagher used neutron activation analysis to try and identify the origin of the fragments. This was the first time that the FBI had used this method (showing that even a year later these ‘in on it’ people were still trying to find more information) Two years later the FBI actually established their own NAA group. Gallagher went to a lab in Tennessee to carry out testing but, possibly in part due to inexperience, the results were inconclusive.

Dr. Nichols, who was a pathologist at the University of Kansas Medical Centre, tried for years to get Hoover and his successor Kelly to release the fragments for independent NAA testing but, even though he had Dr. Vincent Guinn, a professor of chemistry at the University of California’s Irvine campus on his side they had no luck. Where these two failed, the HSCA succeeded, and in 1977 they convinced the FBI to release the fragments for testing and for Guinn to try to determine whether c399 matched the fragments found in the limousine and those removed from Connally’s wrist.

Conspiracy time again - there were small differences in those minute samples (from the fragments) that were examined by Guinn compared to the samples examined by the FBI (which no longer existed because they were spectrographic analysis was partially destructive in nature and the minuscule remains were disposed of by the FBI.) CT’s almost boringly predictably cried ‘tampering.’ Vincent Bugliosi, being a proper investigator, found out from Guinn who had actually been in charge of the fragments. It was a James Geer of the National Archives in Washington. Bugliosi asked him: “What security measures were taken to guard the evidence while in the state of California?” Geer replied: “Well, all the time that I was working with the samples, every place that I went with samples in my possession, I had two armed guards (US Marshall’s) on either side of me.”


They were probably ‘in on it’ though of course.


Dr. Guinn found that Mannlicher-Carcano ammunition was quite unusual compared to others in that there was very little uniformity within a batch. This made the conditions more favourable for NAA testing compared to other ammunition which tended to be more uniform. Ten different samples were given to him for testing, all of which were identified by WC or FBI numbers. Three of these weren’t suitable for testing and the testing of another two provided only very basic information. The five specimens left were of much greater value though. They were - 1) c399, 2) c567 (one of the fragments from the front seat), 3) c843 (two fragments from Kennedy’s brain) 4) c842 (3 fragments from Connally’s wrist) 5) c840 (fragments found on the rug of the left jump seat)

All 5 samples, when subjected to NAA testing, produced a profile highly characteristic of the Western Cartridge Company’s Mannlicher-Carcano ammunition. More specifically, the results from the 5 fell into two very distinct groups. Two of those groups had a concentration of antimony of 800 parts per 1000000 while three had a concentration of 600 per 1000000. According to the experts this could only mean one thing…all five specimens had come from two bullets. There is no evidence of any more than two bullets according to science.

They concluded, through science, that the large fragment found in the limousine, the smaller fragment found on the rug and the fragments recovered from Kennedy’s brain all came from the same subject. THAT is proper evidence…not some junk clipped from the website of some conspiracy theorist. But it gets better….


The results also concluded that elemental composition and concentration of trace elements of the three fragments removed from Governor Connally wrist matched those of the second bullet….the bullet found on the stretcher. Proving, again by science, that conspiracist claims of planting are simply inventions, deliberately made to try and add weight to an invented conspiracy.

And as Fiver has often asked…if this bullet didn’t end up on Connally’s stretcher…where did it vanish too? No…science and reason kicks conspiracist inventions into the long grass.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Your source appears to be lying again.

In his November 23 Affidavit, Worrell said "Yesterday afternoon at approximately 12:30 pm I was standing on the sidewalk against a building on the corner of Elm and Houston Streets watching the motorcade of the President. I heard loud noise like a fire cracker or gun shots. I looked around to see where the noise came from. I looked up and saw the barrel of a rifle sticking out of a window over my head about 5 or 6 stories up. While I was looking at the gun it was fired again. I looked back at Mr. Kennedy and he was slumping over. I got scared and ran from the location. While I was running I heard the gun fire two more times."

His Warren Commission testimony did not contradict his affidavit, nor did it contradict the appearance of a Carcano.

Mr. WORRELL - Well, when I heard the first shot it was to loud to be a firecracker, I knew that, because there was quite a big boom, and I don't know, just out of nowhere, I looked up like that, just straight up.
Mr. SPECTER - Indicating you looked straight back over your head, raising your head to look over your body at the 90 degree angle?
Mr. WORRELL - Yes; and I saw it for the second time and I looked back to the motorcade.
Mr. SPECTER - What did you observe at that time?
Mr. WORRELL - I saw about 6 inches of the gun, the rifle. It had - well it had a regular long barrel but it had a long stock and you can only see maybe 4 inches of the barrel, and I could see --
Mr. SPECTER - Were you able to observe any of the stock?
Mr. WORRELL - Oh, yes.
Mr. SPECTER - How much of the stock were you able to observe?
Mr. WORRELL - Just very little, just about 2 inches.
Mr. SPECTER - How many inches of the barrel then could you observe protruding beyond the stock?
Mr. WORRELL - About 4 inches, I would say, not very much.

The so-called ‘evidence’ is easily exposed, as you’ve just done Fiver. With all of these dodgy CT witnesses one question always comes to mind first for me - did this person ever run into Mark Lane?

[Fiver]

In light of all this evidence, we must reconsider the descriptions given by the Deputy Constable Seymour Weitzman and Sheriff's Deputies Eugene Boone and Roger Craig of the rifle found on the sixth floor.
Warren Commission supporters have always relied on two things: 1.) that Seymour Weitzman was mistaken and 2.) that Roger Craig was a xxxx.

There are reasons to doubt anything that Roger Craig said, as he repeatedly contradicted others and himself. It's bad enough that some Conspiracists reject Craig as a witness.

Weitzman accepted that he could have been mistaken about the rifle.

[A P Tomlinson]

A strap is an accessory, not a permanent part of the weapon.

Oswald didn't buy a new rifle direct from the factory. He bought a used rifle mail order. Unlike some other rifles in that ad, the Mannlicher-Carcano is pictured without a sling and no sling is mentioned in the rifle's description.

THAT rifle came WITH the strap already bolted into place. It's not the sort with clips where you just easily remove and replace them. And even if there was a missing strap, the strap connectors were fixed on the side of the stock, not the bottom. So not only has he fabricated a strap, he has added two completely pointless connectors to the underside of the rifle, only to remove them to the point there is no evidence they ever existed in order to remove and replace the connectors to the side when he replaces his home made strap with a new carcano strap that he bought...? When it would have been far easier to tie his homemade affair to the existing connectors.
Yeah, dead simple...

On the subject of his mail order, and being accurate to the picture... the rifle found at the TSBD was an entirely different model to the one shown in the picture. He ordered a 36" model and the one they found was 40.2"

Not to mention how the rifle was allowed to be stored in Oswalds PO Box, which was listed under only his name. A J Hidell wasn't a signatory or listed on the PO Box, and Section 355.111b(4) of the US Postal Code dictated that "... mail addressed to a person at a post office box, who is not authorized to receive mail, shall be endorsed 'addressee unknown' and returned to the sender where possible."
But it was only a rifle being sent to some guy named Hidell, so they probably let that slide and allowed Oswald to take it.
I wonder how that conversation played out "I'm Oswald and I'm just looking after it for AJ." "I'm Hidell and Lee says I can use his box, you just have to trust me" or "Ah you see I'm BOTH... I use Hidell when I want to buy easily traceable weapons through the mail!"

[Fiver]

A large skull fragment can be seen exploding downward in the Z-film, and, sure enough, a large skull fragment was found on the floor of the limo. As it exploded forward, while still attached to the scalp, it could very well have torn the scalp in the direction it traveled. Unfortunately, they failed to take photos of this fragment.

But a number of witnesses viewing a large fragment claimed it had hair on it.



On 11-30-63, Secret Service Agent Clint Hill, who'd climbed onto the back of Kennedy's limo just after the fatal shot was fired, wrote a report that included an often-overlooked detail. He wrote: "As I lay over the top of the back seat I noticed a portion of the President's head on the right rear side was missing and he was bleeding profusely. Part of his brain was gone. I saw a part of his skull with hair on it lieing in the seat."

And Hill wasn't the only one to see this hairy fragment. Motorcycle Officer Bobby Joe Dale arrived upon the scene just as the President's body was rushed into the emergency room. He failed to get a look at the President. He did, however, get a look at the back seat of the limo. Here's what he told Larry Sneed, as published in No More Silence (1998): "Blood and matter was everywhere inside the car including a bone fragment which was oblong shaped, probably an inch to an inch and a half long by three-quarters of an inch wide. As I turned it over and looked at it, I determined that it came from some part of the forehead because there was hair on it which appeared to be near the hairline."

And Dale wasn't the only motorcycle officer to make such a statement. When interviewed for the 2008 Discovery Channel program Inside the Target Car, H.B. McClain related: "When I raised her up (he means Mrs. Kennedy)...I could see it on the floor. That's pieces of skull with the hair on it."


Thanks Clint Hill , Bobby Joe Dale H.B. McClain. for proving the Autopsy photo id a fake .

None of those statements prove that the autopsy photo was fake.