Was Craig asked about the Mauser stamp? No. Witnesses directly answered the questions they were asked under oath.
Witnesses are allowed to completely answer the questions put to them to the best of their ability. Had Craig actually seen the word "Mauser" stamped on the barrel of the rifle, there was nothing preventing him from saying so. Further, Craig was a prosecution witness at the trial, and had been working with Garrsion and NODA the staff for about a year before the trial. Had he told them then that he'd seen the word "Mauser" on the rifle, they would have asked him at the trial. It was exactly the sort of thing they wanted to present. So Craig's failure to mention seeing the stamp during his testimony at the Shaw trial is damning no matter how you slice it.
That's not true. In 1968, Criag stated there was a Mauser. So, how is that "changing his story"?
In the 68 interview, Craig said that he was told by Ft Worth Star Telegram reporter Thayer Waldo that a Mauser had been found on the roof. He did not claim to have seen this rifle himself, so it cannot be a rifle on the 6th floor.
Waldo, in turn, said that he was told of the roof Mauser by someone at Dallas City Hall the afternoon of the assassination. There is some variation as to exactly who was the original source. In the end, it's just hearsay hearing what hearsay says. Whatever it is, it's not Craig claiming to have seen a Mauser on November 22.
And Craig said he was fired for "knowing too much" and said "he was under a lot of pressure".
Non sequitur. What Craig claimed to be the rationale used to fire him has nothing to do with whether he saw "Mauser" stamped into the rifle barrel.
How do you know he wasn't told to "shut up about it" and waited to tell his story when he had the opportunity to?
How do you know that he'd been told to shut up about the rifle in his affidavit, FBI interviews, or WC testimony? He definitely didn't fail to talk about the rifle in the LAFP interview or in his cooperation with the Garrison investigation. And he certainly brought the rifle up in When they Kill a President. But not one peep about a seeing a Mauser stamp until after all of those opportunities had already passed by.
The fact is we have two law enforcement officers who both stated they witnessed a Mauser. Weitzman changed his story.
Craig changed his story, too. More than once. That's the point.
Wrong with a Mauser stamp embedded on the rifle? He changed his story.
Where did Weitzman claim that he saw a stamp on the rifle?
You're trying to turn Weitzman into a bumbling fool who had no idea what he was selling.
You have yet to show that Weitzman ever sold, handled, or had any substantial experience with 7.65mm Mauser rifles.
A law enforcement officer who handled these weapons in his own business would have a good idea of the rifles he was selling.
Where did Weitzman state that the business was "his" or that he "handled these weapons?"
Weitzman had an advantage over other law enforcement officers by handling these types of rifles in his business.
Again, where did Weitzman state that the business was "his" or that he "handled these weapons?"
No, you're trying to make us believe that Weitzman and law enforcement officers are like The Three Stooges and have no idea what they are doing.
No. What I'm saying is that law enforcement officers aren't firearms identification experts. And that Craig told mutually-contradictory stories about the rifle that undermine any claim he made about it.
Did two law enforcement officers state they witnessed a Mauser? Yes they did.
Which goes to prove that if you ignore the great bulk of information surrounding the discovery of the rifle, you can say something silly.
