Next to Oswald's Rifle

[Zeon Mason]

Walt  imo, , it’s not quite enough to prove beyond doubt that the MC rifle that Lt.Dau is lifting up from the floor was NOT fired at 12:30 pm 11/22/63.

However the WC does NOT prove beyond doubt that the rifle WAS fired at 12:30  on 11/22:/63.

So it seems that what remains is the question of why there’ was apparently no commentary offered by the expert)s) about gunpowder residue found in the breech/ camber and in the grooves of the bore that could prove the rifle was fired at 12:30 previous to its discovery by Boone at 1:22pm.

There does not appear to be any statement by the “experts” made about the residual odor of gunpowder  that should have been noticeable when the rifle was in proximity to the noses of Will Fritz and Lt Day as they were closely examining the rifle per the Aleya film.

the WC proposes that the shells found in the SN were matched exclusively to the MC rifle Lt. Day is lifting up in the Aleya’s film. IDK if this is true or if it proves those shells were fired at 12:30 11/22/63 or if they were fired a day or week or month earlier and simply left at the SN.

There is still the question if the CE 399 bullet matches with the worn corroded barrel grooves and firing pin of the MC rifle Lt Day lifted off the floor per Aleya film.

[Walt Cakebread]

Walt  imo, , it’s not quite enough to prove beyond doubt that the MC rifle that Lt.Dau is lifting up from the floor was NOT fired at 12:30 pm 11/22/63.

However the WC does NOT prove beyond doubt that the rifle WAS fired at 12:30  on 11/22:/63.

So it seems that what remains is the question of why there’ was apparently no commentary offered by the expert)s) about gunpowder residue found in the breech/ camber and in the grooves of the bore that could prove the rifle was fired at 12:30 previous to its discovery by Boone at 1:22pm.

There does not appear to be any statement by the “experts” made about the residual odor of gunpowder  that should have been noticeable when the rifle was in proximity to the noses of Will Fritz and Lt Day as they were closely examining the rifle per the Aleya film.

the WC proposes that the shells found in the SN were matched exclusively to the MC rifle Lt. Day is lifting up in the Aleya’s film. IDK if this is true or if it proves those shells were fired at 12:30 11/22/63 or if they were fired a day or week or month earlier and simply left at the SN.

There is still the question if the CE 399 bullet matches with the worn corroded barrel grooves and firing pin of the MC rifle Lt Day lifted off the floor per Aleya film.

There is still the question if the CE 399 bullet matches with the worn corroded barrel grooves

FBI agent Frazier testified that the lands in  the barrel of the TSBD Carcano, C2766 were WORN and the edges were ROUNDED....

The photo of CE 399 ( The Magic Bullet) shows that it was fired through a barrel the was in good condition and the edges of of the lands in that rifle were NOT worn and rounded.   




and firing pin of the MC rifle Lt Day lifted off the floor per Aleya film.

[Walt Cakebread]

There is still the question if the CE 399 bullet matches with the worn corroded barrel grooves

FBI agent Frazier testified that the lands in  the barrel of the TSBD Carcano, C2766 were WORN and the edges were ROUNDED....

The photo of CE 399 ( The Magic Bullet) shows that it was fired through a barrel the was in good condition and the edges of of the lands in that rifle were NOT worn and rounded.   

Mr. McCLOY - were the lands in good shape?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; the lands and the grooves were worn, the corners were worn

Photos of "The magic bullet" CE 399 clearly show that it was fired through a barrel that was in good condition and the corners of the lands were NOT worn or rounded....   

Mr. McCLOY - Was it what you would call pitted?,
Mr FRAZIER - the interior of the surface was roughened from corrosion or wear.

[Bill Brown]

My Apology to Bill Brown for using the word “rusty” instead of the word“corrosion”. There was some previous discussion of the condition of the barrel in another thread and I had asked the question if the word “corrosion” pertained only to pitting or could it also indicate a layer of oxidation was found.

Unless there is some other testimony specifically referencing “a layer of oxidation” which is a form of rust that COULD be removed from firing 3 rounds, then there does not appear to be a suitable rebuttal to Mr Browns posting of the FBI “expert” defining corrosion” as specifically pertaining to the pitting of the barrel.

No worries, Zeon.  Unlike many "mistakes" around here, I know yours was an honest one.

[Zeon Mason]

Walt, maybe you can offer some evidence to support that CE 399 could not possibly have fired from an MC rifle in the worn grooves  condition as described.

Or someone who
Had an MC rifle with worn grooves and pitting could put to the range and video record test firing some ball nosed MC bulliets of same tile as CE 399 and then compare the bullets.

[Walt Cakebread]

Walt, maybe you can offer some evidence to support that CE 399 could not possibly have fired from an MC rifle in the worn grooves  condition as described.

Or someone who
Had an MC rifle with worn grooves and pitting could put to the range and video record test firing some ball nosed MC bulliets of same tile as CE 399 and then compare the bullets.

maybe you can offer some evidence to support that CE 399 could not possibly have fired from an MC rifle in the worn grooves  condition as described.

Zeon I can see in photos of CE 399 ( the "Magic Bullet" ) that it was fired through a rifle barrel that was in good condition.  Anybody who wants to verify this observation merely has to take a good clear picture of CE 399 to any gunsmith or gun enthusiast  and ask their opinion about the condition of the rifle barrel through which CE 399 had been fired.

I guess I could fire a bullet through the barrel of one of my carcanos with a worn bore and then take a photo of the bullet but the naysayers (truth deniers) wouldn't believe me anyway so it would be a waste of time.
 

[Michael Walton]

So, you weren't joking??

Compare the shadow under Ruby's nose as compared to the original man and the man on the far left.
Compare the texture of the Ruby pasted insert.
Compare the lower resolution of the Ruby insert.
The outer ear of the original man wasn't removed in the Ruby version.
Just look at the edges of Ruby's face which was clipped out with garden shears.





JohnM

There is a shift between the Ruby face and the other person, which means you did not do a good job of aligning the genuine Ruby photo and the other person. The other person was pasted over the Ruby one and I'd appreciate it if you would stop trying to muddle the record creating very poorly done GIFs.

Dick and Jack were already planning the assassination back during this initiation meeting with Bush and Sturgis. Hence, the smiles and laughter.

[Dan O'meara]

There is a shift between the Ruby face and the other person, which means you did not do a good job of aligning the genuine Ruby photo and the other person. The other person was pasted over the Ruby one and I'd appreciate it if you would stop trying to muddle the record creating very poorly done GIFs.

Dick and Jack were already planning the assassination back during this initiation meeting with Bush and Sturgis. Hence, the smiles and laughter.

Someone needs help.