Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: In 54 years has it ever been proven that CE399 is the bullet found at Parkland?  (Read 10156 times)

Online Ross Lidell

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 235
When a member resorts to insults it's certain that he is cornered and cannot respond to the challenge.

What was the challenge? I must have missed it.

I never tried to "prove" anything. I correctly explained that a "conclusion" is what is required with this difference of opinion about CE399.


Sorry I don't speak mambo jambo. I asked you to show that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital. If you set out never to prove anything, what are you doing in this thread?

I provided a list of reasons why I have "concluded" that CE399 is the bullet found at Parkland Hospital. I have not seen a list of reasons to support the alternative proposition: that CE399 was planted at Parkland Hospital but was fired somewhere else other than Dealey Plaza on Friday 22 November 1963 (12:30 pm CST). Alternately that the stretcher bullet was another missile fired in C2766 or some other gun

And round and round in circles we go.... I'm sorry you just don't get it.

You need to offer an opinion as to what you believe is the most logical explanation for a bullet being found by Daryl C. Tomlinson at Parkland Hospital. Either that or accept that you are committed contrarian not willing to follow through on where your question leads.



Pathetic! I don't need to do anything. I asked a question and you are unable to answer it. That about covers it! And that you don't get it won't be a surprise to anybody reading this.

I answered the question... but not in the way that you want it to be answered.

You're the one who does not seem to get it. Your "proof" demand is unreasonable. When presented with a puzzle: The reasonable, intelligent option is to consider the available facts and decide which alternative is more likely to be the truth. You do not want to make a decision as to what actually happened; because that would open your "speculative opinion" to scrutiny.

You duck and dodge "ad infinitum"... because you are unwilling to clearly and unequivocally state what you think actually occurred with the stretcher bullet found by Daryl C. Tomlinson at Parkland Hospital.

You are well aware of what the challenge is. State your opinion about Tomlinson and the stretcher bullet at Parkland Hospital.

None of my sentences are "mambo jumbo". If you think they are: explain why with examples.

Your frustration is understandable. I wont play your silly game with your rules. That's why you resort to name-calling and cliches.

You can stop wasting my time by giving your opinion. Either that or concede that you have no opinion.


Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2285
I answered the question... but not in the way that you want it to be answered.

You're the one who does not seem to get it. Your "proof" demand is unreasonable. When presented with a puzzle: The reasonable, intelligent option is to consider the available facts and decide which alternative is more likely to be the truth. You do not want to make a decision as to what actually happened; because that would open your "speculative opinion" to scrutiny.

You duck and dodge "ad infinitum"... because you are unwilling to clearly and unequivocally state what you think actually occurred with the stretcher bullet found by Daryl C. Tomlinson at Parkland Hospital.

You are well aware of what the challenge is. State your opinion about Tomlinson and the stretcher bullet at Parkland Hospital.

None of my sentences are "mambo jumbo". If you think they are: explain why with examples.

Your frustration is understandable. I wont play your silly game with your rules. That's why you resort to name-calling and cliches.

You can stop wasting my time by giving your opinion. Either that or concede that you have no opinion.

I answered the question... but not in the way that you want it to be answered.


No you didn't

You're the one who does not seem to get it. Your "proof" demand is unreasonable. When presented with a puzzle: The reasonable, intelligent option is to consider the available facts and decide which alternative is more likely to be the truth. You do not want to make a decision as to what actually happened; because that would open your "speculative opinion" to scrutiny.


Asking for evidence that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is the one Tomlinson found is "unreasonable"? Please tell me why?   

You do not want to make a decision as to what actually happened; because that would open your "speculative opinion" to scrutiny.

Why should I make a decision before all the facts are presented to me?

You duck and dodge "ad infinitum"... because you are unwilling to clearly and unequivocally state what you think actually occurred with the stretcher bullet found by Daryl C. Tomlinson at Parkland Hospital.


Oh boy, you really are not getting any of this..... I don't give a damn what bullet Tomlinson found at Parkland. Being in Texas, Parkland was known for treating gunshot wounds. Whatever bullet Tomlinson found - and it isn't even conclusive on which strecher he found the bullet - it could have come from anywhere. What I need you to show is that the bullet he found is the same one that's now in evidence as CE399. Well, can you?

You are well aware of what the challenge is. State your opinion about Tomlinson and the stretcher bullet at Parkland Hospital.


Already done

You can stop wasting my time by giving your opinion. Either that or concede that you have no opinion.


I have no opinion. That's why I asked the question. As far as wasting your time goes, nobody is forcing you to answer. You are the one who is wasting your (and my) time
« Last Edit: October 04, 2018, 04:12:04 AM by Martin Weidmann »

Online Ross Lidell

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 235
I answered the question... but not in the way that you want it to be answered.


No you didn't

You're the one who does not seem to get it. Your "proof" demand is unreasonable. When presented with a puzzle: The reasonable, intelligent option is to consider the available facts and decide which alternative is more likely to be the truth. You do not want to make a decision as to what actually happened; because that would open your "speculative opinion" to scrutiny.


Asking for evidence that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is the one Tomlinson found is "unreasonable"? Please tell me why?   

You do not want to make a decision as to what actually happened; because that would open your "speculative opinion" to scrutiny.

Why should I make a decusion before the facts are presented to me?

You duck and dodge "ad infinitum"... because you are unwilling to clearly and unequivocally state what you think actually occurred with the stretcher bullet found by Daryl C. Tomlinson at Parkland Hospital.


Oh boy, you really are not getting any of this..... I don't give a damn what bullet Tomlinson found at Parkland. Being in Texas, Parkland was known for treating gunshot wounds. Whatever bullet Tomlinson found - and there isn't even a conclusive answer on which strecher he found the bullet - it could have come from anywhere. What I need you to show is that the bullet he found is the same one that's now in evidence as CE399. Well, can you?

You are well aware of what the challenge is. State your opinion about Tomlinson and the stretcher bullet at Parkland Hospital.


Already done

You can stop wasting my time by giving your opinion. Either that or concede that you have no opinion.

I have no opinion. That's why I asked the question. As far as wasting your time goes, nobody is forcing you to answer. You are the one who is wasting your (and my) time

No you didn't


More information please... this statement is too vague.

Oh boy, you really are not getting any of this..... I don't give a damn what bullet Tomlinson found at Parkland. Being in Texas, Parkland was known for treating gunshot wounds. Whatever bullet Tomlinson found - and there isn't even a conclusive answer on which strecher he found the bullet - it could have come from anywhere. What I need you to show is that the bullet he found is the same one that's now in evidence as CE399. Well, can you?

Now we are getting somewhere. You believe that the bullet found by Daryl C. Tomlinson is from another gunshot victim (not Governor Connally) treated at Parkland Hospital. Why didn't you say that before instead of persisting with "being cute"?

It's extremely unlikely that the "Tomlinson bullet" was from another gunshot victim not Governor Connally's thigh.

1.) It would be an incredible coincidence that another gunshot victim hit by a rifle bullet was treated at Parkland Hospital around the same time as Governor Connally.

2.) If a gunshot victim was treated at Parkland a day or more before Connally: Is it unlikely that the bullet would not have been discovered promptly. Hygiene is paramount at hospitals. The sheets on "stretchers" would be changed frequently. The bullet would have been discovered by staff that change the sheets on stretchers.

I have no opinion. That's why I asked the question.

Actually you do have an opinion. It's inconceivable that you would not. It's just that you refused to reveal it until pressured to do so. Your opinion is that another gunshot victim was hit by a rifle bullet, treated at Parkland Hospital, and that missile is the one found by Tomlinson.

I don't believe your unfounded claim that the "Tomlinson bullet" is from another gunshot victim.

I conclude that the "Tomlinson bullet" was the one that was lodged in Governor Connally's thigh wound and is CE399. Why? The proximity factor.

-- The proximity in time between the assassination shots in Dealey Plaza and the bullet's discovery at Parkland Hospital: less than an hour.

-- The physical proximity (short distance) between the shooting location (Dealey Plaza) and the stretcher at Parkland Hospital. The bullet traveled in the Presidential limousine to Parkland Hospital and moved to the stretcher with Governor Connally. Daryl C. Tomlinson found a bullet after hearing it fall off a stretcher and hit the floor.

Now that you have presented an opinion (bullet from another gunshot victim) about the identity of "Tomlinson bullet": There remains the other options to "consider" and make a final decision as to which is more likely to be true.

1.) CE399 is the "Tomlinson bullet" and is the missile that lodged in Governor Connally's thigh. It was fired in C2766 at Dealey Plaza (12:30 pm CST).

2.) CE399 is not the "Tomlinson bullet". The latter was inadvertently lost by law enforcement. CE399 is a replacement for the "TB" and was fired in the rifle C2766 by an agent of the FBI sometime after 22 November 1963.

3.) CE399 is the "Tomlinson bullet" but was not fired in Dealey Plaza at 12:30 pm CST. It was fired in C2766 on the morning of 22 November 1963 (or on an earlier date) at an unknown location by an unknown person. Conspirators planted CE399 at Parkland Hospital to frame Lee Harvey Oswald.

There is no evidence for #2 or #3. Therefore by a process of elimination: #1 is the truth.

I'm keen to know what you now "conclude", Martin.

Oh another thing: How often do I have to keep doing work that should be your responsibility?
« Last Edit: October 04, 2018, 02:02:48 AM by Ross Lidell »

Offline David Von Pein

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 180
Even Hoover himself told LBJ that the fragments were useless as evidence that they fired from any particular gun.

When did J. Edgar Hoover ever say any such stupid thing about CE567/569 (the limo fragments)? (Although, given these incredibly dumb things uttered by Mr. Hoover in late November of 1963, I guess it is, indeed, quite possible that Hoover could have also been clueless with respect to the origin of the limo fragments as well.)

Anyway, those front-seat limousine fragments---both of them!---were positively determined by Hoover's FBI to have been fired from the C2766 Carcano rifle. No doubt about it. And it wasn't just the FBI's Robert Frazier who determined that fact. The independent firearms examiner from Illinois---Joseph Nicol---verified it as well....

Mr. NICOL -- "It is my opinion that the same weapon that fired Commission's Exhibit 572 [two test bullets fired from the C2766 rifle] also fired the projectiles in Commission's Exhibits 569, 567, and 399."

Also See:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/09/ce567-and-ce569.html

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/#Darrell-Tomlinson-And-CE399
« Last Edit: October 04, 2018, 02:27:53 AM by David Von Pein »

Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2285

No you didn't


More information please... this statement is too vague.

Oh boy, you really are not getting any of this..... I don't give a damn what bullet Tomlinson found at Parkland. Being in Texas, Parkland was known for treating gunshot wounds. Whatever bullet Tomlinson found - and there isn't even a conclusive answer on which strecher he found the bullet - it could have come from anywhere. What I need you to show is that the bullet he found is the same one that's now in evidence as CE399. Well, can you?

Now we are getting somewhere. You believe that the bullet found by Daryl C. Tomlinson is from another gunshot victim (not Governor Connally) treated at Parkland Hospital. Why didn't you say that before instead of persisting with "being cute"?

It's extremely unlikely that the "Tomlinson bullet" was from another gunshot victim not Governor Connally's thigh.

1.) It would be an incredible coincidence that another gunshot victim hit by a rifle bullet was treated at Parkland Hospital around the same time as Governor Connally.

2.) If a gunshot victim was treated at Parkland a day or more before Connally: Is it unlikely that the bullet would have been undiscovered at Parkland for a day or more. Hygiene is paramount at hospitals. The sheets on "stretchers" would be changed frequently. The bullet would have been discovered by staff that change the sheets on stretchers.

I have no opinion. That's why I asked the question.

Actually you do have an opinion. It's inconceivable that you would not. It's just that you refused to reveal it until pressured to do so. Your opinion is that another gunshot victim was hit by a rifle bullet, treated at Parkland Hospital, and that missile is the one found by Tomlinson.

I don't believe your unfounded claim that the "Tomlinson bullet" is from another gunshot victim.

I conclude that the "Tomlinson bullet" was the one that was lodged in Governor Connally's thigh wound and is CE399. Why? The proximity factor.

-- The proximity in time between the assassination shots in Dealey Plaza and the bullet's discovery at Parkland Hospital: less than an hour.

-- The physical proximity (short distance) between the shooting location (Dealey Plaza) and the stretcher at Parkland Hospital. The bullet traveled in the Presidential limousine to Parkland Hospital and moved to the stretcher with Governor Connally. Daryl C. Tomlinson found a bullet after hearing it fall off a stretcher and hit the floor.

Now that you have presented an opinion (bullet from another gunshot victim) about the identity of "Tomlinson bullet": There remains the other options to "consider" and make a final decision as to which is more likely to be true.

1.) CE399 is the "Tomlinson bullet" and is the missile that lodged in Governor Connally's thigh. It was fired in C2766 at Dealey Plaza (12:30 pm CST).

2.) CE399 is not the "Tomlinson bullet". The latter was inadvertently lost by law enforcement. CE399 is a replacement for the "TB" and was fired in the rifle C2766 by an agent of the FBI sometime after 22 November 1963.

3.) CE399 is the "Tomlinson bullet" but was not fired in Dealey Plaza at 12:30 pm CST. It was fired in C2766 on the morning of 22 November 1963 (or on an earlier date) at an unknown location by an unknown person. Conspirators planted CE399 at Parkland Hospital to frame Lee Harvey Oswald.

There is no evidence for #2 or #3. Therefore by a process of elimination: #1 is the truth.

I'm keen to know what you now "conclude", Martin.

Oh another thing: How often do I have to keep doing work that should be your responsibility?

More information please... this statement is too vague. 

Nothing vague about it. You did not answer my question and still haven't.

Now we are getting somewhere. You believe that the bullet found by Daryl C. Tomlinson is from another gunshot victim (not Governor Connally) treated at Parkland Hospital. Why didn't you say that before instead of persisting with "being cute"?


Wherever you think "we" are getting, you are actually getting there on your own. At times you seem to having a conversation with yourself rather than me. I didn't say that the bullet at Parkland was from another gunshot victum because at this time I simply don't necessarily accept or believe that option over all others, but-unlike you - I do keep an open mind for the possibility. There is a difference between believing something and considering several scenarios.


It's extremely unlikely that the "Tomlinson bullet" was from another gunshot victim not Governor Connally's thigh.

1.) It would be an incredible coincidence that another gunshot victim hit by a rifle bullet was treated at Parkland Hospital around the same time as Governor Connally.

2.) If a gunshot victim was treated at Parkland a day or more before Connally: Is it unlikely that the bullet would have been undiscovered at Parkland for a day or more. Hygiene is paramount at hospitals. The sheets on "stretchers" would be changed frequently. The bullet would have been discovered by staff that change the sheets on stretchers.


You do understand that your opinion isn't evidence, right?

Actually you do have an opinion. It's inconceivable that you would not. It's just that you refused to reveal it until pressured to do so. Your opinion is that another gunshot victim was hit by a rifle bullet, treated at Parkland Hospital, and that missile is the one found by Tomlinson.

I do indeed have an opinion and this is it: it is my opinion that you are trying to force an opinion on me so that you can attack something rather than having to answer my question. I find it highly remarkable that you think you can tell me what my opinion is.... And you are wrong of course!

I don't believe your unfounded claim that the "Tomlinson bullet" is from another gunshot victim.

Too bad that I never made such a claim. Makes you look somewhat foolish, doesn't it?

I conclude that the "Tomlinson bullet" was the one that was lodged in Governor Connally's thigh wound and is CE399. Why? The proximity factor. 

I didn't ask you for your conclusion. I asked you to answer my question. Can you show the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital or not?

Now that you have presented an opinion (bullet from another gunshot victim) about the identity of "Tomlinson bullet": There remains the other options to "consider" and make a final decision as to which is more likely to be true.

1.) CE399 is the "Tomlinson bullet" and is the missile that lodged in Governor Connally's thigh. It was fired in C2766 at Dealey Plaza (12:30 pm CST).

2.) CE399 is not the "Tomlinson bullet". The latter was inadvertently lost by law enforcement. CE399 is a replacement for the "TB" and was fired in the rifle C2766 by an agent of the FBI sometime after 22 November 1963.

3.) CE399 is the "Tomlinson bullet" but was not fired in Dealey Plaza at 12:30 pm CST. It was fired in C2766 on the morning of 22 November 1963 (or on an earlier date) at an unknown location by an unknown person. Conspirators planted CE399 at Parkland Hospital to frame Lee Harvey Oswald.



Once again; I have mentioned an option you previously failed to consider. I did not offer an opinion. I gave you another option to those you had offered earlier and you called it an opinion. I find it hard to believe that you don't understand the difference.

There is no evidence for #2 or #3. Therefore by a process of elimination: #1 is the truth.

I'm keen to know what you now "conclude", Martin.


What I conclude is that this is a very stupid thing to say. There is also no evidence for #1 which makes your entire exercise pointless and invalid. How do I know there is no evidence for #1? Simple... you would have answered my question and presented that evidence. You did not, ergo it doesn't exist!

Oh another thing: How often do I have to keep doing work that should be your responsibility?


You have never done and are not doing work that is my responsibility. All you do is huff and puff repeating selfserving strawman arguments so you can knock them down. You don't need to do my work.... all you need to do is answer my question!
« Last Edit: October 04, 2018, 04:14:49 AM by Martin Weidmann »

Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2285
When did J. Edgar Hoover ever say any such stupid thing about CE567/569 (the limo fragments)? (Although given these incredibly dumb things uttered by Mr. Hoover in late November of 1963, I guess it is, indeed, quite possible that Hoover could have also been clueless with respect to the limo fragments as well.)

Anyway, those front-seat limousine fragments---both of them!---were positively determined by Hoover's FBI to have been fired from the C2766 Carcano rifle. No doubt about it. And it wasn't just the FBI's Robert Frazier who determined that fact. The independent firearms examiner from Illinois---Joseph Nicol---verified it as well....

Mr. NICOL -- "It is my opinion that the same weapon that fired Commission's Exhibit 572 [two test bullets fired from the C2766 rifle] also fired the projectiles in Commission's Exhibits 569, 567, and 399."

Also See:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/09/ce567-and-ce569.html

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/#Darrell-Tomlinson-And-CE399

Did the FBI experts find these fragments in the limousine, when they examined the car at the Secret Service garage, David?

Offline David Von Pein

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 180
Did the FBI experts find these fragments in the limousine, when they examined the car at the Secret Service garage, David?

The Secret Service found the fragments when they searched the car at the White House garage, and then turned them over to Bob Frazier at the FBI.

Does that fact somehow make those fragments worthless as evidence in this case, Martin?
« Last Edit: October 04, 2018, 02:32:37 AM by David Von Pein »

Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2285

The Secret Service found them when they searched the car at the White House garage, and then turned them over to Bob Frazier at the FBI.

Does that fact somehow make those fragments worthless as evidence in this case, Martin?

I don't know, David. You tell me.....

I just find it a bit strange that a team of the FBI is directed to forensically examine the limousine only to find when they arrive at the garage that clearly unqualified Secret Service and White House personal has already gone through the crime scene and has allegedly removed from situ two vital pieces of evidence.

« Last Edit: October 04, 2018, 03:26:25 AM by Martin Weidmann »

Online John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7512
Now we are getting somewhere. You believe that the bullet found by Daryl C. Tomlinson is from another gunshot victim (not Governor Connally) treated at Parkland Hospital. Why didn't you say that before instead of persisting with "being cute"?

This is why it's so frustrating trying to have a conversation with most LNers.  You're asked for evidence that CE 399 was the bullet found at Parkland and you immediately try to shift the burden by creating a strawman position, "the bullet found by Tomlinson is from another gunshot victim" and demand proof for that instead.

Why is it so hard to just admit, "no, there is no evidence that CE399 is the bullet found at Parkland".  It would be nice if there was, but there isn't.

Offline Gary Craig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 635
When did J. Edgar Hoover ever say any such stupid thing about CE567/569 (the limo fragments)? (Although, given these incredibly dumb things uttered by Mr. Hoover in late November of 1963, I guess it is, indeed, quite possible that Hoover could have also been clueless with respect to the origin of the limo fragments as well.)

Anyway, those front-seat limousine fragments---both of them!---were positively determined by Hoover's FBI to have been fired from the C2766 Carcano rifle. No doubt about it. And it wasn't just the FBI's Robert Frazier who determined that fact. The independent firearms examiner from Illinois---Joseph Nicol---verified it as well....

Mr. NICOL -- "It is my opinion that the same weapon that fired Commission's Exhibit 572 [two test bullets fired from the C2766 rifle] also fired the projectiles in Commission's Exhibits 569, 567, and 399."

Also See:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/09/ce567-and-ce569.html

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/#Darrell-Tomlinson-And-CE399


When the defendant has no legal representation challenging the prosecution's (WC) expert witnesses they
can get away with saying whatever they want. That doesn't make their opinions correct. They wouldn't have been put on the stand if what they said didn't support the (WC) case.



11/23/63
J. Edgar Hoover:
I just wanted to let you know of a development which I think is very important in connection with this case - this man in Dallas (Lee Harvey Oswald). We, of course, charged him with the murder of the President. The evidence that they have at the present time is not very, very strong. We have just discovered the place where the gun was purchased and the shipment of the gun from Chicago to Dallas, to a post office box in Dallas, to a man - no, to a woman by the name of "A. Hidell."... We had it flown up last night, and our laboratory here is making an examination of it.

Lyndon B. Johnson: Yes, I told the Secret Service to see that that got taken care of.

J. Edgar Hoover: That's right. We have the gun and we have the bullet. There was only one full bullet that was found. That was on the stretcher that the President was on. It apparently had fallen out when they massaged his heart, and we have that one. We have what we call slivers, which are not very valuable in the identification. As soon as we finish the testing of the gun for fingerprints ... we will then be able to test the one bullet we have with the gun. But the important thing is that this gun was bought in Chicago on a money order. Cost twenty-one dollars, and it seems almost impossible to think that for twenty-one dollars you could kill the President of the United States.

 

Mobile View