A straight line

[Wesley Johnson]

Wesley, there's no need for you to borrow the photo from Martin. You'll find that photo and many more at the following site;

https://texashistory.unt.edu/explore/collections/JFKDP/browse/?q=boxes

Thanks Tim. I was just being sarcastic. 

[Tim Nickerson]

Thanks Tim. I was just being sarcastic. 

Well, cut it out. That's not permitted here.

[Jack Trojan]

Why would any LNs try to show that the Single Bullet entered at T1 and exited at C6?

That's just my contention. Sorry if it destroys your world view. Otherwise, do my laser experiment any way you like, then post the results to support your claim. If you don't, then you are just too lazy to care about the truth. So get on it.

[John Iacoletti]

It is really not essential to the case that Oswald owned the gun.

I agree.  The case against Oswald needs to prove that he did the shooting.

The evidence may not persuade you. But I would venture to say that if you picked any jury and asked them, based on the evidence, whether it had been proven that Oswald owned the gun, they would find that it had.

Why would you venture to say that?  Just because you think he did?  You have to actually examine the evidentiary basis for that conclusion and you're left with an unscientific handwriting "analysis" of a couple of block letters on a photo of a microfilm copy of a 2-inch order coupon and an "order blank" printed from microfilm that is now "missing" showing a PO box box number that Oswald had access to with a serial number handwritten on the form at some indeterminate time.  And a photo with a rifle that (despite what Mytton claims) cannot be proven to be be the same rifle.

Evidence?  Sure.  Evidence beyond a reasonable doubt?  Hardly.  But even if it was, you've already pointed out the problem.  Showing that somebody owned a gun doesn't tell you anything about who fired it at the president.

[Alice Thorton]

You have a good point and observation. I believe that maybe there was more than one gunman but at the same time no one has proof of that and people heard the shots from the building that Oswald was in. But I believe Oswald was only a decoy. Take a look at this article before I say any more to make my point. I have more evidence as well. Skip down to where it talks about the assassination with Kennedy. There is fingerprint evidence mentioned in this article as well.

http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKwallaceM.htm

[Bill Chapman]

You have a good point and observation. I believe that maybe there was more than one gunman but at the same time no one has proof of that and people heard the shots from the building that Oswald was in. But I believe Oswald was only a decoy. Take a look at this article before I say any more to make my point. I have more evidence as well. Skip down to where it talks about the assassination with Kennedy. There is fingerprint evidence mentioned in this article as well.

http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKwallaceM.htm

The Mac Wallace myth
From Faustian Bargains
by Joan Mellen

JFKFacts
October 12, 2016

[Excerpt]

Fingerprint

Mellen?s biggest service is to revisit the story of an unidentified fingerprint found on a box on the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository. Numerous JFK researchers have repeated the claim that the fingerprint was that of Mac Wallace, an LBJ associate who apparently murdered a man whom he believed to have slept with his wife. As Mellen shows with a careful reconstruction of the case, Wallace escaped punishment for the crime thanks to legal machinations of Texas politicos aligned with LBJ. From these events arose the hoary legend that Mac Wallace had something to do with JFK?s assassination.

Mellen kills the legend. She points out that the two ?experts? who said that fingerprint came from Wallace were not certified identification experts at the time of their claims. They also used a faulty image of the fingerprint. She notes that the JFK authors who repeated the story of the Mac Wallace fingerprint often used identical language without ever bothering verify the claim.

By contrast, Mellen did the due diligence. She obtained a quality fingerprint image from the National Archives and showed it to an accredited expert, Robert Garrett, without disclosing the issue at stake. Garrett stated, without qualification, that the fingerprint does not match Wallace?s. Mellen reproduces his methodology. The Mac Wallace fingerprint myth has now been definitively debunked.

 

[Alice Thorton]

What year did this person "debunk" the evidence because in 1998 an investigator by the name of Walt Brown identified it as Wallace's and he was a real investigator.