Oswald's sack in the Sniper's nest.

[Jerry Freeman]

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Cadigan, did you notice when you looked at the bag whether there were---that is the bag found on the sixth floor, Exhibit 142--whether it had any bulges or unusual creases?
Mr. CADIGAN. I was also requested at that time to examine the bag to determine if there were any significant markings or scratches or abrasions or anything by which it could be associated with the rifle, Commission Exhibit 139, that is, could I find any markings that I could tie to that rifle.
Mr. EISENBERG. Yes?
Mr. CADIGAN. And I couldn't find any such markings.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/cadigan1.htm

Did Mr Jim Cadigan special agent of the FBI blow his lines there?
Also I was wrong about 6 lb of alleged hardware in this bag...it was some 8 lbs that left no bulge marks or creases according to SA Cadigen.
Still not answered....How could Oswald have walked willy nilly into the building and yet no one at all inside noticed him carrying anything?

[Walt Cakebread]

I have no doubt the bag was on the sixth floor Jack. I propose that the picture shows the bag at some time around 2pm or so. The rifle was found about 1.22pm (from memory). As for using Johnson to claim that Biffle's claim the bag wa found before the rifle I have already said that Johnson indicates this happened after Studebaker had returned from assisting Day with the rifle. After he had finished processing evidence where Johnson was (pop bottle and chicken lunch).


So you have no corroboration of Biffle seeing the bag before the gun was found. No one said there was a reporter there and Biffle did not name anyone. An unconfirmed, uncorroborated anecdote not offered as an official statement or under oath.

And as for using Johnson.....

Mr. BELIN. Your testimony then is that all the sack would have been east of the pipes. Is that correct?
Mr. JOHNSON. I would say that the sack was folded up here and it was east of the pipes in the corner. To the best of my memory, that is where my partner picked it up. I was standing there when he picked it up.
Mr. BELIN. You were standing there when he picked it up?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, because the Crime Lab was already finished where I was, and I had already walked off to where he was.

Johnson gave us the best indication when this occurred. He was assigned an area west of the SN, essentially guarding the chicken lunch remnants, outside the arranged boxes. Once Studebaker returned following the departure of Day with the rifle, Studebaker processed the bottle and lunch sack. Johnson then moved to where Montgomery was inside the SN. This is when Montgomery "discovered" the bag.

The bag was used to cover the inital wooden strip removed from a SN window. The bag was originally made to transport the rifle back to City Hall. That plan was abandoned by Carl Day. He hints at the use of paper to protect crime evidence for transport. The Crime Scene guy routinely bring bags etc with them for transporting evidence to the lab for processing. They had no such bag big enough to do so. There are pictures of the rifle and other evidence sitting on a large sheet of paper. Why do you think they put paper under the evidence to photograph it?

Did Day initially think it was a good idea to wrap the rifle up and then abandon the idea?

"Just looking at it I thought the chances were slim that we’d find any prints on the rifle itself. It had what we call a wartime
finish on the barrel which would lift out of the stock. That type of surface didn’t take prints well, nor did the wood stock which was too course or rough. You’ve got to have a smooth, fairly clean surface before the ridges will leave an impression. If it’s rougher than the ridges of the finger, you’re not going to find anything there.

At that time, just through casual observation, it didn’t look too promising. It wasn’t the place to try to do any fingerprint work since it’s a rather lengthy process and we had other things to do. So I decided to carry the gun back to the office at City Hall, store it under lock and key, examine it under ideal conditions, and get to it when I could. I didn’t have anything to wrap it up with at the time, so I carried it out making sure that I didn’t touch anything other than the strap. Besides, you had to be careful in wrapping stuff because if there were any prints, you’re liable to smear them just from the wrapping."

Carl Day from No More Silence

It had what we call a wartime finish on the barrel

Detective Liar Day could get away with blatant lies like this because most folks were ignorant and didn't know that what he was saying was a lie.

A "war time finish" is a dull non reflective finish.....  The process to create that finish was called "Parkerizing"    and the Mannlicher Carcano did not have a parkerized finish.   The carcano has a blued steel finish like many hunting rifles.    And that surface does in fact take and hold fingerprints.

[Walt Cakebread]

Non sequitur: A conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement.

In other words: Because some members of the Dallas PD allegedly "broke the law" in a case sometime previous to the tragic events of 22 November 1963: It does not follow that they (the same ones or others) would become accessories before, during or after the fact to the murder of John F. Kennedy.

The consequences of the latter are many orders of magnitude greater than the former. Therefore you need to suggest a motive for Dallas PD officers risking the possibility of being prosecuted and convicted for a capital crime. Police officers would be aware of the terror experienced by those criminals who have been executed in the electric chair and not want to suffer that fate.

In other words: Because some members of the Dallas PD allegedly "broke the law" in a case sometime previous to the tragic events of 22 November 1963: It does not follow that they (the same ones or others) would become accessories before, during or after the fact to the murder of John F. Kennedy.

The facts are....Randall Adams was arrested for the murder of DPD Officer Alvin Moore on  November 13, 1976.......   I believe that even  you will be compelled to agree that November 1976 is NOT previous to November 1963.

[James Hackerott]

If you post the picture that you believe reads 2.19 would be happy to review it. The evidence was entered by Montgomery and Johnson in a document stating 3.20pm. You think it likely took them an hour to write up?

One of our shadow experts should be able to clear it up surely from the Allen photos.

The timing of 3:00 pm is correct within just a few minutes, based on the doorway shadows in this Allen photograph compared with my 3D model. The simulation runs from 2:45 to 3:15.

[Walt Cakebread]

The timing of 3:00 pm is correct within just a few minutes, based on the doorway shadows in this Allen photograph compared with my 3D model. The simulation runs from 2:45 to 3:15.

Thanks James....  It certainly appears that the time that Montgomery and Johnson departed the TSBD with that huge paper sack was around 3:00pm.

I wonder if you've used the shadows to determine what time Detective Day left the TSBD with the carcano.     I believe that Day departed at about 2:10 and returned to the TSBD about an hour later.....  Or around 3:15.....  If that is true, then Montgomery left with the paper sack before Day returned, and Day never saw this bag in the imaginary "Sniper's Nest"

[Colin Crow]

Thanks James....  It certainly appears that the time that Montgomery and Johnson departed the TSBD with that huge paper sack was around 3:00pm.

I wonder if you've used the shadows to determine what time Detective Day left the TSBD with the carcano.     I believe that Day departed at about 2:10 and returned to the TSBD about an hour later.....  Or around 3:15.....  If that is true, then Montgomery left with the paper sack before Day returned, and Day never saw this bag in the imaginary "Sniper's Nest"

Thanks from me too James. Agree Walt it would be interesting to find out more about Day's movements. Hicks claimed to have arrived on the sixth floor about 3pm and claimed to have seen Day and Studebaker processing the SN. There is a statement from Day that suggests when he returned to the TSBD he went up the stairs to the second floor offices via the front stairs and me Truly. It is not definitive however. If, as some have suggested Day saw Montgomery leaving with the bag on the first floor and then took it to the wrapping table how do they explain the presence of Studebaker at that time. Studebaker was processing the SN on the sixth floor why would he come down with Montgomery and Johnson? Also Day claimed he left the bag with Hicks and Studebaker. Hicks did not present until after 3pm and Day was on the sixth floor then.

[Colin Crow]

I found it. From No More Silence, Carl Day.

"Also found on the sixth floor, as I recall, near the shell area, was a paper bag. It should have been photographed, but for some reason, apparently wasn’t. The story that I received later was that when this man came to work that morning he was carrying something wrapped in shipping or wrapping paper or brown roll paper. In the shipping room on the first floor, there were one or
two rolls of that paper. We took the end pieces off those rolls for possible comparison with the bag that was found. It would have been a tedious job, but on other cases I’ve had occasion to match the ends of two pieces of paper. If you can find the right place, they’ll match up, even if it’s torn off. We had possession of that bag, but I didn’t have a chance to work with it due to events that later occurred."

Sounds like they took a sample to match ends. He claimed "end pieces" but only one roll sample was removed. Did he really think the end would match up with the bag? Or did he know that the roll they used to make the bag would have a matching end?

Does this statement mean that Day felt the sample taken could be used to align with and end of the paper bag? Does that seem the way he felt the FBI was going to analyse it? To see it it was torn/cut from the same roll?