A time to receive and give (CE399)

[Dan O'meara]

You critics sure have adverse reactions to innocent questions.

You mean the ridiculous article where two Conspiracy Kooks prey on the memory of an 82-year-old man who left the Bureau decades before. He's asked to remember some minor request mission from decades ago he was tasked with while maintaining a full workload of pending criminal cases. CE399 wasn't the subject of notoriety it became in the aftermath of the Warren Report.

If Odum is so clear and alert, where are the full transcripts of the two interviews? Why does Odum allow that he might have actually went to Parkland but lost memory of it over the decades?

Just asking an innocent question. Is it some threat to your kooky conspiracy confirmation bias?

So Frazier wasn't surprised there was no blood or tissue on CE399 or seemed to harbour some expectation for such. Same with the HSCA. Is the absurd notion that FMJs always have blood and tissue stick on them something from Dr. Wecht? Or some other CT "medical expert"?

You critics sure have adverse reactions to innocent questions.
Who's had an adverse reaction?
I urge any reader to go through the comprehensive handling of the evidence and the arguments relating to the evidence, as far as CE399 is concerned, that I lay out in Reply#246.
Then look at Jerry's response to that post in Reply#247
Then, honestly answer this question - is my description of Jerry's response as being "stupendously piss-poor" an adverse reaction or a completely accurate assessment.
I felt I was actually being a little kind to Jerry when describing his efforts - and this is the thanks I get!

Jerry likes to think his toothless mumblings are some kind of "threat" to the arguments I have presented, but I would urge any reader to go through posts #246 and #247 and ask, who is the one feeling threatened by the arguments. Who is the one who can't deal with the issues being raised in this thread?

Why does Odum allow that he might have actually went to Parkland but lost memory of it over the decades?

Another sign that someone feels threatened by the arguments is when they start to twist the facts in order to create doubt.
Odum is certain he never saw CE399, never handled it and never showed it to Johnsen or Rowley. He then makes the point that, if he is somehow mistaken about it, then all they had to do was check the records and find the "302" that would have been raised by the interviews. After various archives have been scoured, no sign of the 302 can be found, supporting Odum's claims.

So Frazier wasn't surprised there was no blood or tissue on CE399 or seemed to harbour some expectation for such. Same with the HSCA. Is the absurd notion that FMJs always have blood and tissue stick on them something from Dr. Wecht? Or some other CT "medical expert"?

Yet another sign of feeling threatened is the creation of strawman arguments.
Nowhere has the "absurd notion that FMJs always have blood and tissue stick on them" ever been mentioned. Jerry has created this fictitious point in order create a point he can win.
An FMJ bullet is designed not to deform when passing through a body, it has a smooth and hard surface that is not conducive to having blood or tissue sticking to it. There is also the cavitation effect that takes place when a bullet passes through a body that might interfere with blood and tissue sticking to the surface. Lastly, there is the "wipe" effect - as the bullet passes through the material of the clothes worn by JFK and JBC the material wipes matter from the surface from the bullet.
This is the case for an FMJ bullet that passes through JFK and Connally.
However, this is not the full story with CE399. According to the official version of events CE399 ends up lodged in Connally's thigh from which it somehow works itself out. Think about that - CE399 is supposed to be lodged in a bloody, open wound from which it slowly slips out. How is it possible not to have blood or tissue on it in this scenario? How is it possible for the bullet to slip out clean?

There is also another aspect to this part of the official story that I have never heard anyone mention. It is a consideration that makes it seem incredibly unlikely that a bullet slipping out of Connally's leg could be found on his stretcher.
The key point is that this bullet would have to pass through Connally's trouser leg before entering his thigh. Obviously, it creates a hole in his trouser leg as it passes through.
It is surely the case that as the bullet works it way out of Connaly's leg it would simply fall inside his trouser leg.
In order to make it onto the stretcher the bullet would have to somehow work it's way out of the hole in his trouser leg as well.
What are the chances that the hole in his trouser leg lined up perfectly with the bullet in his leg as he lay on the stretcher. It's not like Connally was wearing cycle shorts. He was wearing loose fitting suit trousers. The chances that the hole in his trousers somehow lined up perfectly with the bullet as it worked his way out of his leg seem astronomically small.
The bullet would fall inside Connally's trouser leg and, as he was lying down, would stay pretty much where it was.
How could the bullet have found it's way on to the stretcher?

[Martin Weidmann]

More obsessive harking. You're becoming Arnold Rowland.

Remember, folks, the innocent question that provoked all this: "Did Tomlinson or Wright describe tissue and blood on the bullet they saw at Parkland?"

You mean the article's characterization of Odum's sharpness once after he's been cajoled by two Conspiracy Kooks. Why only one page of phone transcript? What actually went on with their treatment of Odum such that they had to go meet him in person? Imagine the Warren Commission taking testimony and publishing just the first page of each transcript.

You forget you were going on about it.

    "Let's forget the fact that, even though the bullet is supposed to
     have traveled through two men, smashing various bones on the
     way, by the time it reaches Frazier there is not a speck of human
     tissue or blood on the bullet. Maybe some nice agent
     decided Frazier would like a lovely, clean bullet to work with."

My, what drama and sarcasm.

So, you no longer think blood and tissue was picked up as the bullet "traveled through two men, smashing various bones on the way". OK.

You just mentioned "wipe". Blood might not have had time to dry in order to stick to the surface of the bullet. Presumably, during the ride to Parkland, the bullet was lodged in an area where there was little air. Connally's clothing was removed early-on. Could be a subject for experimentation, but you critics don't seem interested in that approach.

You're inventing silly roadblocks. Maybe the bullet didn't pass all the way through the trousers. Or the bullet hole in the clothing remained over the missile in-shoot for awhile. Have you seen the angle of knee bend required to sit in one of those jump-seats, that makes the upper part of the pants tight near the knees? And not much room to straighten the legs after he collapsed onto Nellie.



Here's a picture of Connally wearing dress pants. The right leg is down, showing the clothing was loose when upright. The left leg is partially up showing the clothing tight against the upper surface of the thigh near the knee. And the amount of leg bend in the car was much greater.

If not a bullet, what caused the injury to the thigh and left a small lead fragment behind?

Was Connally left unattended for a few minutes while a "conspirator" dug the bullet out of his thigh? Were the doctors and nurses who treated Connally in on the "conspiracy" when they took X-rays and said there was no bullet in his thigh?

You mean the article's characterization of Odum's sharpness once after he's been cajoled by two Conspiracy Kooks.

Where does it say that Odum was "cajoled" by anybody? Or did you just make that up out of thin air?

Rather than ignoring it, why don't you try to explain the absense of the FD 302's Odum said he would have produced (as was custom at the FBI) if he had spoken to Tomlinson and Wright?

And while you are at it, explain to us please why Tomlinson is on record, twice, saying that he was only shown a bullet once, about a week after the assassination, by SAC Shanklin at Parkland Hospital.
We know for certain this happened as it is also mentioned in a Secret Service report.

So, Tomlinson says only SAC Shanklin showed him a bullet, in december 1963, SA Odum denies he ever showed Tomlinson and Wright a bullet in june 1964 and there are no FD 302 reports that should have been on file if Odum had talked to both men.

[John Iacoletti]

You mean the article's characterization of Odum's sharpness once after he's been cajoled by two Conspiracy Kooks.

“Cajoled” LOL. This is another one for the Lame LN excuses file. And you prefer hearsay from an anonymously written “report”….why?

Because it’s what you want to hear.

Why only one page of phone transcript? What actually went on with their treatment of Odum such that they had to go meet him in person? Imagine the Warren Commission taking testimony and publishing just the first page of each transcript.

Imagine the Warren Commission “cajoling” witnesses with pre-interviews to see what they are going to say before taking their testimonies on the record.

If not a bullet, what caused the injury to the thigh and left a small lead fragment behind?

You’re missing the point. Just because a bullet did this doesn’t make CE399 that bullet.

[Martin Weidmann]

Well the authors aren't going to admit that's what happened. 

What's in the rest of the phone transcript of their call to Odum? Is there a transcript for their visit to Odum?

That doesn't answer my question. You claimed Odum was "cajoled", so you need to be able to show where you obtained this information. If you can't, you shouldn't use such a word.

Some requests from the Commission didn't warrant FD-302s. ( Link ) FD-302s are normally done for criminal cases that could lead to a trial; Odum probably had an active case load of such investigations. Which is why he later thought he would have prepared a 302 for the requests from the Commission, when he probably only relayed what he was told to the author of the AirTel.

So, Odum talks to Tomlinson and Wright. Both men fail to identify the bullet shown to them. Odum files no FD 302 reports, although he normally always does. Then suddenly SAC Shanklin writes in his Airtel message that both men could not identify the bullet. How did Shanklin know, without any report from Odum? Do you really think Shanklin is going to communicate to his superiors what an agent told him?

And then some anonymous person at the FBI in Washington writes CE2011 in which it suddenly says that (I paraphrase) although Tomlinson and Wright could not identify the bullet they still thought it could be the same one. Now where did that last part come from? All the FBI in Washington had was Shanklin's Airtel and that doesn't say both men thought it could be the same one? Are we to believe that somehow Odum passed on information to Washington, without writing anything down and passing by his superior officer Shanklin?

The WC asked the FBI to authenticate pieces of evidence that could link their prime suspect to the crime and the FBI just does away with normal procedures and doesn't document anything correctly. Really?

And then there is this; if Odum received CE399 and later returned it, his name or initial should be recorded in the chain of custody! It isn't... Go figure

Possible Tomlinson forgot about the July 1964 visit or thought the interviewer in 1966 wanted to know about the first time he was shown the bullet after the assassination.

And possibly Tomlinson did not forget at all and knew exactly what he was saying.

He clearly states to Marcus that he has been shown a bullet once, by Shanklin from the FBI. This encounter took place about a week after the assassination and is documented in at least one Secret Service report.

Odum said he couldn't remember.

One can gauge the primary motivation for Aguilar/Thompson's cajoling of Odum, with:

    "For not only was Odum’s name absent from the FBI’s once
     secret files, it was also it difficult to imagine a motive for
     him to besmirch the reputation of the agency he had
     worked for and admired."

The guy said he couldn't remember but that it might have happened. But the authors score it as a victory that "besmirches" the Bureau.

The AirTel has all the information and is formatted the same same as a FC-302. Odum was 82 and trying to remember some insignificant request mission from four decades ago (the "Magic Bullet" acquired most of its notoriety later). Odum might have thought they were talking about him having the bullet in hand on the day of the assassination. We'll never know because the authors' phone and visit transcripts are sealed until 2072.

The AirTel has all the information and is formatted the same same as a FC-302.

If the Airtel has all the information and was used as a subtitute for a FD 302, then why not simply let Odum write his reports as per usual instead of SAC Shanklin writing it for him?

Odum was 82 and trying to remember some insignificant request mission from four decades ago

Being old doesn't automatically mean you don't remember something that's part of the biggest case of the decade, if not century.
When he died, my father was 90 and even in his last days he could tell us about all sorts of things that actually happened when I was growing up.

Odum might have thought they were talking about him having the bullet in hand on the day of the assassination.

And he just might have remembered everything correctly.

You are twisting and turning in every direction to keep your favorite narrative alive. It isn't working!
 

[Martin Weidmann]

And then there is this; if Odum received CE399 and later returned it, his name or initial should be recorded in the chain of custody! It isn't... Go figure

Is this the question that got Andrew and Jerry running for cover?

[Andrew Mason]

And then there is this; if Odum received CE399 and later returned it, his name or initial should be recorded in the chain of custody! It isn't... Go figure

Is this the question that got Andrew and Jerry running for cover?

Only one person needs to initial the bullet.  Why would Odum add his initials to a bullet that already has been initialed by an FBI agent?

[Martin Weidmann]

Only one person needs to initial the bullet.  Why would Odum add his initials to a bullet that already has been initialed by an FBI agent?

Nobody said anything about adding his initials to the bullet, but the bullet was allegedly sent from Washington to Dallas and back in june 1964.
The chain of custody requires that it is recorded who had the bullet and when. There is no such registration for Odum receiving or returning the bullet.

Only one person needs to initial the bullet.

Really? Then why did Frazier mark it after Todd had already done so?