POLL. Is John Iacoletti right to separate the coupon from the envelope in CE773?

[Peter Kleinschmidt]

Where is it?

[John Mytton]

Where is it?

Wow you really don't get it do you!
I don't know where the microfilm is and I don't care, Waldman the Vice President of Kleins verified that the microfilm was genuine!
CASE CLOSED!

JohnM

[Denis Pointing]

Where is it?

If you're that interested do a little research and find out! You are familiar with that word I presume, r-e-s-e-a-r-c-h? Here's a clue to get you started; "Storage of the microfilm in a room with a controlled environment is extremely important."

[John Iacoletti]

"Unscientific"!  LOL.

Handwriting "analysis" is unscientific.  Deal with it.

  Let's see: there are prints,

What prints?

photos,

Photos of what?

an order form in Oswald's handwriting,

LOL.

serial number match,

Match to what?

Oswald's PO Box,

What about it?

an alias linked to Oswald

How is this alias "linked to Oswald"?

via a fake ID in his possession at the time of arrest,

Do you have any evidence that this ID was in his possession at the time of arrest -- beyond "cop said so after he was dead"?

the rifle is found at his place of work,

Lots of people worked there.

there is no accounting for any other rifle in Oswald's possession.

There is no accounting for THAT rifle in Oswald's possession either.

  Whew.

Whew indeed.  Your rhetoric overfloweth.

  It's hard to imagine what more evidence there could be.

Rhetoric and unsupported claims aren't evidence.

  I wonder what constitutes "scientific" evidence if all of this does not do the trick.

Do you have any understanding of the scientific method?  Handwriting "analysis" is not a hard science.  Especially in 1964.  No standards, no tests, no demonstration of accuracy, not measurable, not repeatable, not falsifiable.  And even more unreliable on a tiny sample from a copy.

How much such evidence is there to link John Wilkes Booth the gun he used to kill Lincoln?

Not this false analogy again.  There is much better evidence against Booth than "who may have bought the gun".

[John Iacoletti]

I don't know where the microfilm is and I don't care, Waldman the Vice President of Kleins verified that the microfilm was genuine!

How would Waldman know this?

[Richard Smith]

When it is noted that Oswald is linked to the alias used to order the rifle via an ID found in his possession upon arrest, the dishonest contrarian suggests further proof of this is necessary by dismissing the word of those who arrested Oswald (i.e. the very people who were there).  That is asking for a time machine and implying nothing can ever be proven.  The direct implication is that those present lied about the ID since they confirmed it was found on Oswald.  The only explanation given for them to lie is they were "cops" and "Oswald was dead."  Perplexing how that raises any doubt whatsoever about the confirmation of Oswald being in possession of the fake ID.  If there were any doubt whatsoever (and there is not), the same alias is also found on a PO Box form linked to Oswald.  Let me guess, we need a time machine to go back and confirm the post office didn't forge that form.  It's a slam dunk that the alias used to order the rifle can be linked to Oswald. There is zero doubt.

Another example.  The serial number is a match - to which the dishonest contrarian asks "a match to what?"  Hmm. Let's think about that one.  According to Klein's, a rifle with a unique serial number was mailed to Oswald's PO Box.  A rifle with that same serial number was found at the TSBD (Oswald's place of employment).  Now think real hard about where the match is.  When it is noted that the rifle was found at Oswald's place of employment, the response is that "lots of people worked there."  LOL.  It is mind boggling to understand how that is relevant since none of these other employees have any link whatsoever to the rifle.  How many of these "other people" who worked there had this particular rifle sent to their PO Box under an alias that could be linked to them?  How many left their prints on that rifle? How many were photographed holding it?  How many carried a long package that morning that could never be accounted for then lied about it?  It wouldn't matter if a million people worked there because there is not a single other person who worked there that has even one iota of evidence that links them to the rifle and yet that is what the contrarian suggests could be the explanation for the rifle's presence while dismissing a mountain of evidence linking the rifle to Oswald.  Good grief. 

[John Iacoletti]

When it is noted that Oswald is linked to the alias used to order the rifle via an ID found in his possession upon arrest, the dishonest contrarian suggests further proof of this is necessary by dismissing the word of those who arrested Oswald (i.e. the very people who were there).

Disingenuous.  You discount "people who were there" all the time when it doesn't fit your narrative.  Just to name a few:

Arnold Rowland
Roger Craig
Carolyn Walther
Jean Hill
Vickie Adams
Ed Hoffman
Julia Ann Mercer
Acquilla Clemons
Bernard Haire
Sylvia Odio
O.P. Wright
Seth Kantor
Butch Burroughs
W.R. (Dub) Stark
Louis Cortinas
Carolyn Arnold

The question is, was there any mention of this ID in any statement, document, or report made before the Klein's order turned up?

The only explanation given for them to lie is they were "cops" and "Oswald was dead."  Perplexing how that raises any doubt whatsoever about the confirmation of Oswald being in possession of the fake ID.

There no special credibility conferred upon the word of a cop as opposed to anyone else.  On the contrary, cops can and do lie to railroad suspects and to protect their own.  There are hundreds of examples.  Once the Klein's order turned up, they had incentive to connect Oswald to "A. Hidell".  If you can find any record of this ID existing prior to then, I'd sure like to see it.

  If there were any doubt whatsoever (and there is not), the same alias is also found on a PO Box form linked to Oswald.

You mean the form that was supposed to have been destroyed per postal regulations?  And how does this make "Hidell" an alias for Oswald?

  Let me guess, we need a time machine to go back and confirm the post office didn't forge that form.  It's a slam dunk that the alias used to order the rifle can be linked to Oswald. There is zero doubt.

So your argument then is that because there is no good evidence that Oswald killed Kennedy, then we should just believe that's true based on weak circumstantial evidence and conjecture instead?  "Zero doubt" is just LN-speak for "in my opinion".  For one thing, how do you know Hidell is an alias at all?

Another example.  The serial number is a match - to which the dishonest contrarian asks "a match to what?"  Hmm. Let's think about that one.  According to Klein's, a rifle with a unique serial number was mailed to Oswald's PO Box.

False claim.  According to a Klein's VP who had nothing to do with processing the orders, a copy of a microfilm order blank had "PP" circled, which means that the order was supposedly sent via "Parcel post", but there is no record whatsoever of any such shipment.

  A rifle with that same serial number was found at the TSBD (Oswald's place of employment).  Now think real hard about where the match is.

What is this, proof by sarcasm?  For one thing, there is good reason to think that the serial number may not have even been unique.  And it's more correct to say that the perhaps not unique serial number on a rifle allegedly found in the TSBD (but reported by three deputies to have been a 7.65 Mauser) matched the serial number handwritten in on a photo of a microfilm copy of a Klein's order blank from microfilm that is now missing.

  When it is noted that the rifle was found at Oswald's place of employment, the response is that "lots of people worked there."  LOL.  It is mind boggling to understand how that is relevant since none of these other employees have any link whatsoever to the rifle.

You're the one putting "found at his place of employment" forward as a relevant piece of evidence that he shot the president.  It's not.

  How many of these "other people" who worked there had this particular rifle sent to their PO Box under an alias that could be linked to them?

You haven't even demonstrated that Oswald had this particular rifle sent to his PO Box under an alias that could be linked to him.

  How many left their prints on that rifle?

What prints on that rifle?  The ones that were useless for identification purposes?  Surely not the partial palmprint that turned up a week later on an index card.

How many were photographed holding it?

You haven't demonstrated that Oswald was photographed holding it.

  How many carried a long package that morning that could never be accounted for then lied about it?

You mean how many carried a package too short to have held the alleged murder weapon?  What difference does it make?  You don't know he lied about it.  You're assuming he lied about it because it conflicts with your baseless assumption that he carried in a rifle.

  It wouldn't matter if a million people worked there because there is not a single other person who worked there that has even one iota of evidence that links them to the rifle and yet that is what the contrarian suggests could be the explanation for the rifle's presence while dismissing a mountain of evidence linking the rifle to Oswald.  Good grief.

Then you've just admitted that "found at his place of employment" is just redundant rhetoric for the purposes of padding actual evidence and nothing else. 

If you were actually characterizing the other evidence correctly, but the rifle had been found somewhere else (like in the Trinity River for example) would you suddenly say "oh, well it wasn't found at his place of employment, so I guess that exonerates him"?  Of course you wouldn't.  It's only "evidence" because you have contrived it to be evidence.