Roger Craig

[Mitch Todd]

Walt, I've agreed with many of your opinions, but can't do so here. It would be much easier to call Craig a liar if we didn't have the testimony of Seymour Weitzman. As a former owner of a sporting goods store and knowledgeable on firearms, when Weitzman identifies a weapon as a 7.65 Mauser with a 2.5 Weaver scope, I tend to believe him. Eugene Boone was also there. There was also a report of a British Enfield being found. I have no problem believing multiple weapons were found and I have grave doubts whether Oswald or the Carcano fired any shots that day.

Weitzman never claimed to have owned a "sporting goods store." While he did say that he "was in the sporting goods business awhile,"  this can only refer to his short stint as "general manager" of Lamont Corp. His only description of the the company is that it was a "discount operation" which ran a small chain of about a half-dozen stores in the South-central US. That sounds more like it was a dry goods or department store operation, with sporting goods (much less guns) being part of a larger product mix. Even then, he held this position for something less that a year, and his stewardship of the company ended with the whole operation being shut down and liquidated. I figure that he was hired by Lamont's owners specifically to wind down an already-ailing company. At any rate, there is noting about Weitzman's tenure with Lamont Corp that provides any confidence that he had any particular expertise in firearms useful in identifying a particular rifle.

[Walt Cakebread]

Weitzman never claimed to have owned a "sporting goods store." While he did say that he "was in the sporting goods business awhile,"  this can only refer to his short stint as "general manager" of Lamont Corp. His only description of the the company is that it was a "discount operation" which ran a small chain of about a half-dozen stores in the South-central US. That sounds more like it was a dry goods or department store operation, with sporting goods (much less guns) being part of a larger product mix. Even then, he held this position for something less that a year, and his stewardship of the company ended with the whole operation being shut down and liquidated. I figure that he was hired by Lamont's owners specifically to wind down an already-ailing company. At any rate, there is noting about Weitzman's tenure with Lamont Corp that provides any confidence that he had any particular expertise in firearms useful in identifying a particular rifle.

I agree completely,  Mitch..... But something I've read, Leads me to believe that Seymour Weitzman was familiar wit a 7.65 Mauser and the Carcano does resemble a 7.65 Mauser, thus it was an honest mistake when he speculated that the rifle they saw on the floor beneath the pallet of books was a mauser.    The problem arose when Roger Craig's ego got in the way....

[Jerry Freeman]

 

Mr. BALL - In the statement that you made to the Dallas Police Department that afternoon, you referred to the rifle as a 7.65 Mauser bolt action?
Mr. WEITZMAN - In a glance, that's what it looked like.
Mr. BALL - That's what it looked like did you say that or someone else say that?
Mr. WEITZMAN - No; I said that. I thought it was one.
Mr. BALL - Are you fairly familiar with rifles?
Mr. WEITZMAN - Fairly familiar because I was in the sporting goods business awhile.
Mr. BALL - What branch of service were you in?
Mr. WEITZMAN - U.S. Air Force.
Mr. BALL - Did you handle rifles?
Mr. WEITZMAN - Mostly Thompson machine guns and pistols.
Mr. BALL - I understand that. Now, in your statement to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, you gave a description of the rifle, how it looked.
Mr. WEITZMAN - I said it was a Mauser-type action, didn't I?

  What you see is what you get.

[Mitch Todd]

Mr. BALL - In the statement that you made to the Dallas Police Department that afternoon, you referred to the rifle as a 7.65 Mauser bolt action?
Mr. WEITZMAN - In a glance, that's what it looked like.
Mr. BALL - That's what it looked like did you say that or someone else say that?
Mr. WEITZMAN - No; I said that. I thought it was one.
Mr. BALL - Are you fairly familiar with rifles?
Mr. WEITZMAN - Fairly familiar because I was in the sporting goods business awhile.
Mr. BALL - What branch of service were you in?
Mr. WEITZMAN - U.S. Air Force.
Mr. BALL - Did you handle rifles?
Mr. WEITZMAN - Mostly Thompson machine guns and pistols.
Mr. BALL - I understand that. Now, in your statement to the Federal Bureau of Investigation, you gave a description of the rifle, how it looked.
Mr. WEITZMAN - I said it was a Mauser-type action, didn't I?

   What you see is what you get.

So what does "fairly familiar with rifles" mean, exactly? The lack of specificity in that statement inspires anything but confidence. And, as I've already pointed out, the "awhile" in "I was in the sporting goods business awhile" turns out to be something less than one year. And this less-than-a-year tenure was spend in the executive suite rather than the shop floor. Not a place to gain a lot of expertise regarding what a specific rifle would look like.

[Mitch Todd]

I agree completely,  Mitch..... But something I've read, Leads me to believe that Seymour Weitzman was familiar wit a 7.65 Mauser and the Carcano does resemble a 7.65 Mauser, thus it was an honest mistake when he speculated that the rifle they saw on the floor beneath the pallet of books was a mauser.    The problem arose when Roger Craig's ego got in the way....

I don't think it was Craig's ego. More like, his need for money. He fell into the Penn Jones orbit, which resulted in Craig losing his job as a Deputy. He never found a steady gig after that.

[Mitch Todd]

[...]
Roger Craig identified the rifle as a Mauser due to the stamp embedded on the rifle. That is a solid eyewitness account.

Weitzman also agreed it was a Mauser as well. He was an owner of a sporting goods store so he was familiar with rifles. When he testified later, he changed his story and claimed he only "glanced" at the rifle.

That's an absurd statement to make. Why would a Sheriff just "glance" at the potential murder weapon that just killed Kennedy? He would give it a thorough inspection.         

Weitzman changed his story and Roger Craig never did.

Whaddaya mean Craig never changed his story?

In '68, when he and Penn Jones were interviewed by the LA Free Press, Craig said that he didn't know what the rifle was.

In '69 at the Shaw trial, Craig was shown a Carcano and said that the rifle Boone found looked like it. He said nothing about seeing "Mauser" or "7.65" on the rifle, even though this was the perfect time to do it.

In '71, Craig wrote "When They Kill a President."  In it, he said nothing about seeing "Mauser" or "7.65" on the rifle, noting that it was identified by Weitzman.

Only after that, in the "Two Guns in Dallas" video, did Craig claim that he saw anything stamped in the rifle. This story is directly contradicted by what Craig said to the LA Free Press. It's also contradicted, though more subtly, by his Shaw trial testimony and his own magnum opus.
 

[Jerry Freeman]

So what does "fairly familiar with rifles" mean, exactly? 

Apparently something you know nothing about.