Then went inside with the curtain rods

[Martin Weidmann]

Bumped for Mr Weidmann in response to his accusation: "You can not explain why curtain rods, allegedly found at the TSBD, were already marked 275 and 276 nor do you say who marked them, when they were marked and why."

I admit I missed that remark. But if the curtain rods were marked with those numbers by the manufacturer, then the WC could have given them any exhibit number, so who would the need to give them the same two evidence numbers? They could have just explained it by saying that the DPD document shows the manufacturer markings and not the CE numbers. It doesn't make sense.

But have you seen the actual curtain rods with those manufacturer markings on them? And if so, can you show them to us?

[Alan Ford]

I admit I missed that remark. But if the curtain rods were marked with those numbers by the manufacturer, then the WC could have given them any exhibit number, so who would the need to give them the same two evidence numbers?

Already answered above:

The Depository employee who found the rods will have noted the numbers 275 and 276 marked on them, and could well go public about it at some point down the line. Having two different curtain rods----------formally taken from the Paine garage---------'marked' as exhibits 275 & 276 gave the 'investigating' authorities insurance against this eventuality: 'No, those are actually the exhibit numbers, this person is obviously fabricating a story based on information gleaned from the Warren Commission report.'

But have you seen the actual curtain rods with those manufacturer markings on them? And if so, can you show them to us?

No------------they were disappeared after Agent Howlett received them back off Lt Day 3/24. From this point forward, there were only two curtain rods 'marked 275 & 276' of relevance to the case. That was the point of the whole exercise: a switcheroo.

[Richard Smith]

Already answered above:

No------------they were disappeared after Agent Howlett received them back off Lt Day 3/24. From this point forward, there were only two curtain rods 'marked 275 & 276' of relevance to the case. That was the point of the whole exercise: a switcheroo.

Unreal.  So the authorities suppressed Oswald's curtain rod story to begin with, brought them to light on their own motion months later, only to suppress them once again.  I can only marvel at the logical inconsistencies of this bizarre narrative.

[Walt Cakebread]

Unreal.  So the authorities suppressed Oswald's curtain rod story to begin with, brought them to light on their own motion months later, only to suppress them once again.  I can only marvel at the logical inconsistencies of this bizarre narrative.

Geeeez! Watta revoltin development this is....I once again find myself agreeing with Mr "Smith"

I got a good belly laugh out of Mr Ford's statement that the manufacturer stamped the curtain rods with a "precise length"

How silly!....    Clearly Mr Ford doesn't even know what the curtain rods looked like....Because the curtain rods are NOT precision ....the length is adjustable from approximately two feet to four feet, by telescoping one rod inside the other.

[Alan Ford]

Unreal.  So the authorities suppressed Oswald's curtain rod story to begin with, brought them to light on their own motion months later,

Nope!

 

[Martin Weidmann]

Already answered above:

No------------they were disappeared after Agent Howlett received them back off Lt Day 3/24. From this point forward, there were only two curtain rods 'marked 275 & 276' of relevance to the case. That was the point of the whole exercise: a switcheroo.

So, you haven't seen and can not show the curtain rods with the markings from the manufacturer that were allegedly found at the TSBD by somebody you can not name. You have no evidence that the curtain rods Howlett gave the DPD on March 15th were actually found at the TSBD and you can't even show that the manufacturer did in fact mark the curtain rods they produced?

So, basically, all of this is nothing more than speculation on your part, right?

[Bill Chapman]

Unreal.  So the authorities suppressed Oswald's curtain rod story to begin with, brought them to light on their own motion months later, only to suppress them once again.  I can only marvel at the logical inconsistencies of this bizarre narrative.

on their own motion
>>> Of their own volition

You're welcome, "Richard" Richard.

[Alan Ford]

So, you haven't seen and can not show the curtain rods with the markings from the manufacturer that were allegedly found at the TSBD by somebody you can not name. You have no evidence that the curtain rods Howlett gave the DPD on March 15th were actually found at the TSBD and you can't even show that the manufacturer did in fact mark the curtain rods they produced?

Lol, these questions are about as potent as the LNer's 'So you say Oswald didn't do it but you can't show me a photograph of the real shooter taking aim, eh?'

So, basically, all of this is nothing more than speculation on your part, right?

Not remotely correct, Mr Weidmann:

--------------------It is not speculation but fact that two curtain rods were submitted to the Crime Scene Search Section eight days before two curtain rods were formally taken from the Paine garage (3/15 vs. 3/23)........ How do you account for this fact, Mr Weidmann?

--------------------It is not speculation but fact that these two curtain rods (the ones submitted 3/15) were submitted to be tested for Mr Oswald's fingerprints........ Other than their having been found in the Depository building, how would you account for this fact, Mr Weidmann?

--------------------It is not speculation but fact that numbering of the Ruth Paine exhibits began at the number 270..........  Can you offer a good reason why this number was chosen, Mr Weidmann?

--------------------It is not speculation but fact that the digits 2-7-5 match exactly the length of curtain rod (27.5 inches) taken from the Paine garage......... Are you seriously suggesting this is a coincidence, Mr Weidmann?

--------------------It is not speculation but fact that a variant version of the Crime Scene Search Section document, sans Howlett release signature and with different release date, went into the public record via the Warren volumes............ How do you account for this fact, Mr Weidmann?