BWF and LMR may not have been the only ones who saw LHO with a bag on 11/22/1963

[Alan Ford]

So my question is when was each piece of information written onto this document and what was done from notes or memory?

JohnM

Hello, Mr Mytton------------good of you to join us! 

Now!

9.45 a. m., 15 March 1964:

-------------Lieutenant Day receives from Agent Howlett 2 curtain rods for fingerprinting, and (with red pen) fills out (as he is required to do) the upper section of the Crime Scene Search Section form:



-------------Further down the form, Agent Howlett signs (as he is required to do) his name (with blue pen) beside the words 'SIGNATURE OF PERSON SUBMITTING SPECIMEN'; right under this, Lieutenant Day signs (as he is required to do) his name (still with red pen) beside the words 'SIGNATURE OF PERSON RECEIVING SPECIMEN':

Some point between Submission and Release of the Curtain Rods:

-------------Lieutenant Day, having tested the curtain rods for Mr Oswald's prints, notes (in red ink) at the bottom of the form the results:



-------------The rods will remain securely in the crime lab until Agent Howlett comes to pick them up.

7.50 a. m., 24 March 1964:

-------------Lieutenant Day hands back the 2 curtain rods to Agent Howlett, and formally records this fact (in blue pen this time) in the relevant field on the Crime Scene Search Section form:



-------------Agent Howlett signs (as he is required to do) his name (with what looks like the same blue pen he used 9 days ago) beside the words 'SPECIMEN RELEASED TO'; Lieutenant Day signs (as he is required to do) his name (in the same blue-like-Agent-Howlett's-but-slightly-darker-than-it ink he has just noted the date and time with) beside the word 'BY':



All-----------in short-----------very straightforward!

Reasonable grounds for believing any of the data on the Crime Scene Search Section form derived from 'notes or memory'? The Big Zilcho! 

[John Mytton]

Alan, for reasons of clarity, do you mind if I just cut to the very basics of your theory? If I understand correctly, you're suggesting that Jenner, agent Howlett and possibly others unknown, concocted the idea of staging a visit to RP's garage for the purpose of having it on record that 2no curtain rods were retrieved and sent to the police lab. Correct so far? The sole reason for this deception was to enable 2no curtain rods, previously found at the TSBD, to be in effect, 'lost'..yes?
Two obvious questions immediately begged to be asked; Why concoct and execute such a very complicated, not to say dangerous 'plot' in the first place? There was obviously no record of rods ever being found at the TSBD, if there was they must have been destroyed, so why not just destroy the TSBD rods as well? The next question is; Is it really feasible, that after going to such lengths to ''swape' the rods, agent Howell would be stupid enough to 'cock' everything up by submitting the TSBD rods nine days too early!! I'm sorry Alan, but IMO, the very basics of your theory don't make any sense, they just don't add up.
Alan, I'm very glad you brought this document to light, it was certainly something I'd missed, and it certainly needed to be addressed and answered. I'm afraid, at least in my humble opinion, it has been just that, addressed and answered. If you have anything new to substantiate your theory I'd be very happy to read it. Thank you.

Thanks Denis, you've saved me some time and yep this is just yet another crazy theory that doesn't pass any logic test.

JohnM

[John Mytton]

Amazingly, you will also find a photo/document, which shows the reverse side of rod 275, which is dated 3-25-64, one day after the release date!?!

https://texashistory.unt.edu/explore/collections/JFKDP/browse/?q=curtain&t=fulltext&sort=

Nice pickup, did Alan ever explain how this confliction of dates applies to his strict chronological theory?



JohnM

[Alan Ford]

Thanks Denis, you've saved me some time and yep this is just yet another crazy theory that doesn't pass any logic test.

JohnM

 

Ah yes, the dangers of jumping into a discussion without having done one's homework!

Mr Pointing's explanation of the Crime Scene Search Section form was as follows, Mr Mytton:

------------the dates & times on the form are accurate
------------Agent Howlett and Mr Jenner conspired to put on an elaborate (and illegal) hoax whereby they only pretended to find the 2 curtain rods in the Paine garage on 23 March.

As to why Agent Howlett and Mr Jenner would do all this just for the sake of a meaningless fingerprint test, Mr Pointing had no answer to offer.

You happy with Mr Pointing's explanation, Mr Mytton?

 

[Alan Ford]

Nice pickup, did Alan ever explain how this confliction of dates applies to his strict chronological theory?



JohnM

Where is the 'confliction of dates', Mr Mytton?

 

[John Mytton]

Ah yes, the dangers of jumping into a discussion without having done one's homework!

Mr Pointing's explanation of the Crime Scene Search Section form was as follows, Mr Mytton:

------------the dates & times on the form are accurate
------------Agent Howlett and Mr Jenner conspired to put on an elaborate (and illegal) hoax whereby they only pretended to find the 2 curtain rods in the Paine garage on 23 March.

As to why Agent Howlett and Mr Jenner would do all this just for the sake of a meaningless fingerprint test, Mr Pointing had no answer to offer.

You happy with Mr Pointing's explanation, Mr Mytton?

 

Ah yes, the dangers of jumping into a discussion without having done one's homework!

I said I never read the thread and simply made some observations, where's the danger in that?

Mr Pointing's explanation of the Crime Scene Search Section form was as follows, Mr Mytton:

------------the dates & times on the form are accurate
------------Agent Howlett and Mr Jenner conspired to put on an elaborate (and illegal) hoax whereby they only pretended to find the 2 curtain rods in the Paine garage on 23 March.

Didn't Denis say and emphasised that it was just another possibility?

As to why Agent Howlett and Mr Jenner would do all this just for the sake of a meaningless fingerprint test, Mr Pointing had no answer to offer.

I don't find it very plausible that after many months in probably the most focused on building in the country that "curtain rods" were suddenly found, but if you believe it then good luck to you. And btw if curtain rods were found it would most likely be a prank much like the souvenir shells put out for the gullibles behind the grassy knoll fence, as they say a sucker is born every minute.

JohnM

[John Mytton]

Where is the 'confliction of dates', Mr Mytton?

 

JohnM

[Alan Ford]

I said I never read the thread and simply made some observations, where's the danger in that?

Didn't Denis say and emphasised that it was just another possibility?

Yes! 

Unfortunately, however, countering a coherent hypothesis (2 curtain rods showing up the Depository and thus warranting testing for Mr Oswald's fingerprints) with an incoherent hypothesis (Agent Howlett and Mr Jenner conspiring to hoax the American people for no discernible reason whatsoever) is a rather unconvincing way to undermine the coherent hypothesis!

I don't find it very plausible that after many months in probably the most focused on building in the country that "curtain rods" were suddenly found,

Why not?

but if you believe it then good luck to you. And btw if curtain rods were found it would most likely be a prank much like the souvenir shells put out for the gullibles behind the grassy knoll fence, as they say a sucker i born every minute.

 

The pranksters thought to put the digits '275' and '276' on the prank white enameled rods many days before Mr Jenner elected to designate the Paine white enameled rods 'Ruth Paine Exhibit 275' and 'Ruth Paine Exhibit 276'?

If you believe that, Mr Mytton, then good luck to you!