A time to receive and give (CE399)

[Martin Weidmann]

Martin, we appear to live in different universes. By your standard circumstantial evidence can never lead to a conclusion.

Evidence should be self explanatory. It may not be perfect but there should be at least a superficial basis to reach a conclusion.
As we have just seen in the Alex Murdaugh trial, circumstantial evidence can indeed lead to a conclusion but only when it is based on conclusive facts rather than mere assumptions.

The evidence against the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is sufficiently compelling that it can not be merely assumed that it was the bullet which went through both men. Should I perhaps just simply conclude that you don't have answers for my basic questions?

Now, rather than just coming up with a cop out, why don't you just simply try to answer my questions and we'll take it from there?
Or is that too far out of your comfort zone?

[Andrew Mason]

Evidence should be self explanatory. It may not be perfect but there should be at least a superficial basis to reach a conclusion.
As we have just seen in the Alex Murdaugh trial, circumstantial evidence can indeed lead to a conclusion but only when it is based on conclusive facts rather than mere assumptions.

The evidence against the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is sufficiently compelling that it can not be merely assumed that it was the bullet which went through both men. Should I perhaps just simply conclude that you don't have answers for my basic questions?

Now, rather than just coming up with a cop out, why don't you just simply try to answer my questions and we'll take it from there?
Or is that too far out of your comfort zone?

The main reason for believing that CE399 passed through JFK's neck is that I don't see a reason to believe that CE399 was, or could have been, planted.  The evidence is that it came from Oswald's gun, it was found on JBC's gurney at Parkland, that JBC was in front of JFK, that the bullet did not strike any bone in passing through JFK. That is more than enough evidence to conclude that the bullet passaed through JFK's neck exiting his midline on a right to left trajectory and struck JBC. I accept, on all the other evidence that Oswald fired all three shots as found by the WC. Unlike others who accept the WC conclusion, I disagree with the SBT.

[Martin Weidmann]

The main reason for believing that CE399 passed through JFK's neck is that I don't see a reason to believe that CE399 was, or could have been, planted.  The evidence is that it came from Oswald's gun, it was found on JBC's gurney at Parkland, that JBC was in front of JFK, that the bullet did not strike any bone in passing through JFK. That is more than enough evidence to conclude that the bullet passaed through JFK's neck exiting his midline on a right to left trajectory and struck JBC. I accept, on all the other evidence that Oswald fired all three shots as found by the WC. Unlike others who accept the WC conclusion, I disagree with the SBT.

The main reason for believing that CE399 passed through JFK's neck is that I don't see a reason to believe that CE399 was, or could have been, planted.

Who said anything about it being planted? You may not have noticed it, but there's something very strange (IMO at least) going on regarding the rifle and the bullets. As I said earlier, the chain of custody for CE399 started in the FBI lab in Washington after the bullet now in evidence was handed over to the FBI by the Chief of the Secret Service. The FBI was told this was the bullet that had been found in Parkland! Btw, when CE399 was introduced into evidence, during the testimony of Dr. Humes, Arlen Specter did so subject to later authentication of the bullet. Such authentication never came!

A little later that same night, Frazier and his men were supposed to examine the Presidential limo, which had been brought to the Secret Service garage in Washington. When the FBI got there, Frazier found out that two men, who were not forensic experts, had already searched the car (thus contaminating the crime scene) and they had allegedly found several bullet fragments which they handed to Frazier. They had taken no photographs of the fragments in situ and they simply told Frazier that these were the fragments they had found.

So now we go fast forward in time, to the HSCA hearings, which showed a bullet (or rather a photograph of a bullet) they said was fired from the same MC rifle and was recovered from the wall in General Walker's home. As soon as Walker saw that picture he instantly tried to contact the HSCA to tell them they had the wrong bullet, because the one in the photograph was not the one he had seen in April 1963. Now add to this that in all the reports about the Walker shooting, written prior to the assassination, a different type of bullet was mentioned than the one now in evidence.

Three different events with the same problem; bullets and fragments of bullets that were all fired by the same rifle but can not be authenticated as being the actual items that were recovered from the three locations involved. That doesn't strike you as odd?

Now let me give you an alternative scenario in which Kennedy was killed by a conspiracy involving men in high positions of the US Government. Men who were in a position to control the investigation and the evidence. Now let's assume for a second that the MC rifle and three shells were purposely left on the 6th floor because they could be tentatively traced back to Oswald. However, the bullet fragments found in Kennedy's body and the limo did not match that rifle as it simply wasn't used to shoot Kennedy and it didn't need to, because within less than 24 hours after the shooting the rifle and all the bullets and fragments were in Washington. All that needed to be done was to switch the actual bullets and fragments by those that had indeed been fired by the MC rifle prior to the assassination. In this scenario there wouldn't be a need to plant a bullet at Parkland. The fact that a bullet (not related to the crime) was found by Tomlinson was in fact an added bonus. Switch the bullet that was found with the one we now know as CE399 and nobody would be the wiser.

Is this a far fetched scenario? Maybe, but it is a possibility that needs to be eliminated by the investigators and it never was. It was never even considered despite the fact that it does one thing that the official narrative doesn't do; it answers a great deal of questions for which the FBI and WC could never provide an answer. 


The evidence is that it came from Oswald's gun, it was found on JBC's gurney at Parkland, that JBC was in front of JFK, that the bullet did not strike any bone in passing through JFK.

No, that's not what the evidence is. I won't go into the rifle allegedly belonging to Oswald, because that's another conversation entirely, but what the evidence doesn't say is that CE399 came from JBC's gurney at Parkland. That is in fact nothing more than an flawed assumption based on no factual evidence whatsoever. You have to ignore a whole set of circumstantial evidence to the contrary to reach that conclusion.

I accept, on all the other evidence that Oswald fired all three shots as found by the WC.

What is this "other evidence" that makes you accept this? There isn't even a shred of evidence placing Oswald on the 6th floor of the TSBD at the moment the shots were fired. The WC never provided any evidence for that. They just said he was and never provided any evidence for it.

[Andrew Mason]

The main reason for believing that CE399 passed through JFK's neck is that I don't see a reason to believe that CE399 was, or could have been, planted.

So now we go fast forward in time, to the HSCA hearings, which showed a bullet (or rather a photograph of a bullet) they said was fired from the same MC rifle and was recovered from the wall in General Walker's home. As soon as Walker saw that picture he instantly tried to contact the HSCA to tell them they had the wrong bullet, because the one in the photograph was not the one he had seen in April 1963. Now add to this that in all the reports about the Walker shooting, written prior to the assassination, a different type of bullet was mentioned than the one now in evidence.

It is interesting that he first objected 14 years after the assassination.  Did he have a photographic memory?  The bullet had been entered as CE573 before the WC:


How could it have come about that this bullet, which is consistent with all the lands and groves on bullets fired by Oswald's rifle, gotten mixed up with the Walker bullet?

Three different events with the same problem; bullets and fragments of bullets that were all fired by the same rifle but can not be authenticated as being the actual items that were recovered from the three locations involved. That doesn't strike you as odd?

Probably not back in 1963.

Switch the bullet that was found with the one we now know as CE399 and nobody would be the wiser.

That is called planting.  Switch=plant=falsifying evidence etc.

Is this a far fetched scenario? Maybe, but it is a possibility that needs to be eliminated by the investigators and it never was. It was never even considered despite the fact that it does one thing that the official narrative doesn't do; it answers a great deal of questions for which the FBI and WC could never provide an answer. 

It is only necessary to eliminate reasonable possibilities. They did not consider, for example, that aliens did it.

The evidence is that it came from Oswald's gun, it was found on JBC's gurney at Parkland, that JBC was in front of JFK, that the bullet did not strike any bone in passing through JFK.

No, that's not what the evidence is. I won't go into the rifle allegedly belonging to Oswald, because that's another conversation entirely, but what the evidence doesn't say is that CE399 came from JBC's gurney at Parkland. That is in fact nothing more than an flawed assumption based on no factual evidence whatsoever. You have to ignore a whole set of circumstantial evidence to the contrary to reach that conclusion.

So that bullet disappeared and did not end up in the car?

I accept, on all the other evidence that Oswald fired all three shots as found by the WC.

What is this "other evidence" that makes you accept this? There isn't even a shred of evidence placing Oswald on the 6th floor of the TSBD at the moment the shots were fired. The WC never provided any evidence for that. They just said he was and never provided any evidence for it.

You should read Bugliosi's book. It is circumstantial, but it is very compelling.  Leaving the TSBD without permission, hurrying home to pick up his revolver - the same one used to kill Tippit, punching the arresting officer in the face as he uttered "well, it's all over now" as he reached for his gun ......  Not difficult to draw an inference of there, even without the Walker shooting evidence.

[Martin Weidmann]

It is interesting that he first objected 14 years after the assassination.  Did he have a photographic memory?  The bullet had been entered as CE573 before the WC:


How could it have come about that this bullet, which is consistent with all the lands and groves on bullets fired by Oswald's rifle, gotten mixed up with the Walker bullet?

Probably not back in 1963.
That is called planting.  Switch=plant=falsifying evidence etc.
It is only necessary to eliminate reasonable possibilities. They did not consider, for example, that aliens did it.
So that bullet disappeared and did not end up in the car?
You should read Bugliosi's book. It is circumstantial, but it is very compelling.  Leaving the TSBD without permission, hurrying home to pick up his revolver - the same one used to kill Tippit, punching the arresting officer in the face as he uttered "well, it's all over now" as he reached for his gun ......  Not difficult to draw an inference of there, even without the Walker shooting evidence.

It is interesting that he first objected 14 years after the assassination.  Did he have a photographic memory?  The bullet had been entered as CE573 before the WC:

Walker wasn't aware of the problem until he saw the picture of the bullet during the HSCA hearings. Not really surprising because until the HSCA investigation all the evidence was locked away at the National Archives. He then instantly objected and was completely ignored by the HSCA. He may well have had a photographic memory. I don't know. What I do know is that all the DPD reports on the Walker shooting, written prior to the assassination, mention a different type of bullet. Are we really to believe that all the people who wrote those reports got the type of bullet wrong in exactly the same way?

How could it have come about that this bullet, which is consistent with all the lands and groves on bullets fired by Oswald's rifle, gotten mixed up with the Walker bullet?

Duh, if the scenario I proposed is correct, it was most likely switched on purpose so it could be used to argue that Oswald had a violent history.

Probably not back in 1963.

We are not in 1963! Doesn't it strike you as odd today?

It is only necessary to eliminate reasonable possibilities. They did not consider, for example, that aliens did it.

So, manipulation of evidence by law enforcement isn't a reasonable possibility to consider? Is that what you are saying?

So that bullet disappeared and did not end up in the car?

Are you purposely pretending not to understand what I have said? And if so, why?

If you are still talking about the bullet we now know as CE399 than the answer is, no it did disappear nor did it end up in the car. It's evidentiary life did not begin until it was delivered to the FBI lab in Washington. In my scenario CE399 was never in Dallas, wasn't found on a stretcher at Parkland and was not fired on 11/22/63

You should read Bugliosi's book. It is circumstantial, but it is very compelling.  Leaving the TSBD without permission, hurrying home to pick up his revolver - the same one used to kill Tippit, punching the arresting officer in the face as he uttered "well, it's all over now" as he reached for his gun ......  Not difficult to draw an inference of there, even without the Walker shooting evidence.

And open goes another Pandora's box....

Leaving the TSBD without permission

If that's what really happened, then I agree it's problematic. However, it's most certainly not conclusive as there are at least two possible reasons why Oswald left the TSBD so quickly. The first one is that he did the shooting and wanted to get out of there as quickly as he could. The second one is that, when he heard the shots and learned that Kennedy was hit, he understood that he had been set up for the murder and he simply panicked. The latter would of course also require him to be involved in what was going on, as it's highly unlikely that it would have been possible to set him up as a patsy without him being involved in some scheme or another.

Having said this, his behavior after he left the TSBD is also strange. Why would he get on a bus that would take him directly back to the crime scene? Why not take a bus in the other direction? And why would he offer his cab to a woman if he was truly in a rush to get out of there? It doesn't make any sense.

hurrying home to pick up his revolver

He apparently admitted to Fritz that he did pick up his revolver, which he said he had bought in Fort Worth some months earlier.

- the same one used to kill Tippit,

That's an assumption for which there is no evidence. Even worse, there is no chain of custody for the revolver they claimed belonged to Oswald. Hill carried it around with him for several hours before he had some officers in the DPD lunchroom put their mark on it, despite the fact that some were not even at the Texas Theater when Oswald was arrested.

punching the arresting officer in the face as he uttered "well, it's all over now" as he reached for his gun

Too bad that not one single witness inside the Texas Theater heard Oswald say those words or saw him reaching for his gun.

This is precisely the kind of thing why Bugliosi has very little credibility. In a strong case, even a strong circumstantial one, you don't need this kind of "evidence". The mere fact that he did use this kind of BS material in his prosecutorial brief (which is basically what his book is) exposes the weakness of his case.

[Andrew Mason]

It is interesting that he first objected 14 years after the assassination.  Did he have a photographic memory?  The bullet had been entered as CE573 before the WC:

Walker wasn't aware of the problem until he saw the picture of the bullet during the HSCA hearings. Not really surprising because until the HSCA investigation all the evidence was locked away at the National Archives. He then instantly objected and was completely ignored by the HSCA. He may well have had a photographic memory. I don't know. What I do know is that all the DPD reports on the Walker shooting, written prior to the assassination, mention a different type of bullet. Are we really to believe that all the people who wrote those reports got the type of bullet wrong in exactly the same way?

So you are saying that we should accept at face value the description of it by some unknown DPD officer in April 1963 that it was a steel jacketed bullet and ignore the evidence of a police officer (B.G. Norvall) who retrieved the bullet from Walker's wall and put his initials on it, and the evidence of the laboratory officer who examined the same bullet, noted the same initials, and took pictures of it and compared it to the bullets fired from Oswald's rifle (J. Nicol)?

How could it have come about that this bullet, which is consistent with all the lands and groves on bullets fired by Oswald's rifle, gotten mixed up with the Walker bullet?

Duh, if the scenario I proposed is correct, it was most likely switched on purpose so it could be used to argue that Oswald had a violent history.

Ok. So the Walker bullet was also planted, along with CE399?

Probably not back in 1963.

We are not in 1963! Doesn't it strike you as odd today?

The point is that this occurred in 1963 so one should look at the police practices at that time to assess how odd it might have been.

It is only necessary to eliminate reasonable possibilities. They did not consider, for example, that aliens did it.

So, manipulation of evidence by law enforcement isn't a reasonable possibility to consider? Is that what you are saying?

It might be if there was any evidence that law enforcement manipulated evidence in this case.

So that bullet disappeared and did not end up in the car?

Are you purposely pretending not to understand what I have said? And if so, why?

If you are still talking about the bullet we now know as CE399 than the answer is, no it did disappear nor did it end up in the car. It's evidentiary life did not begin until it was delivered to the FBI lab in Washington. In my scenario CE399 was never in Dallas, wasn't found on a stretcher at Parkland and was not fired on 11/22/63

So, you are saying that it was planted.

Leaving the TSBD without permission

If that's what really happened, then I agree it's problematic. However, it's most certainly not conclusive as there are at least two possible reasons why Oswald left the TSBD so quickly. The first one is that he did the shooting and wanted to get out of there as quickly as he could. The second one is that, when he heard the shots and learned that Kennedy was hit, he understood that he had been set up for the murder and he simply panicked. The latter would of course also require him to be involved in what was going on, as it's highly unlikely that it would have been possible to set him up as a patsy without him being involved in some scheme or another.

For starters, being a "patsy" would require involvement with someone who could have persuaded Oswald, for some innocent purpose, (on the very day that JFK was to pass beneath the window) to:
1. have Wesley Frazier drive him to Fort Worth the day before,
2. go into Ruth Paine's garage, get his rifle,
3. secretly take it with him in Wesley Frazier's car to the TSBD without raising suspicions
4. walk with it into the TSBD without anyone seeing the rifle,
5. place it on the 6th floor where the SN was located
6. make sure that he was not seen with anyone from 12:15 until the president passed by the TSBD

So what do you suppose the "innocent purpose" was that this phantom agent provocateur used to get Oswald to do all that?

Having said this, his behavior after he left the TSBD is also strange. Why would he get on a bus that would take him directly back to the crime scene? Why not take a bus in the other direction? And why would he offer his cab to a woman if he was truly in a rush to get out of there? It doesn't make any sense.

It wouldn't make sense if he had lots of money on him.  But he didn't.  He was broke.  He had only $13.87 on him when arrested and that was barely enough to buy a bus ticket to get out of town.

hurrying home to pick up his revolver

He apparently admitted to Fritz that he did pick up his revolver, which he said he had bought in Fort Worth some months earlier.

So he lied about buying it in Fort Worth.  Why would he do that? 

We know he ordered it from Seaport Traders of Los Angeles on January 27, 1963, that it was shipped to A. Hidell at Oswald's Dallas post office box No. 2915. The law required it to be picked up at the Railway Express Agency. The REA receipt shows that it was picked up by A. Hidell on March 20, 1963.

- the same one used to kill Tippit,

That's an assumption for which there is no evidence.

Plenty of evidence.  The shells that the shooter ejected after shooting Tippit had a unique firing pin mark that had all the unusual characteristics of shells fired from Oswald's revolver. For that reason, Joseph Nicol was able to positively conclude that the four shells found at the scene (CE 594) were fired from Oswald's revolver (3 H 511).  The shells were also consistent with shells of the six .38 Special cartridges (CE145 and CE518) still in Oswald's revolver and the four .38 Special cartridges (CE592) found in his pocket.

punching the arresting officer in the face as he uttered "well, it's all over now" as he reached for his gun

Too bad that not one single witness inside the Texas Theater heard Oswald say those words or saw him reaching for his gun.

The officer who was punched heard him: McDonald 3 H 300:

• "And just as I got to the row where the suspect was sitting, I stopped abruptly,
  and turned in and told him to get on his feet. He rose immediately, bringing
  up both hands. He got this hand about shoulder high, his left hand shoulder
  high, and he got his right hand about breast high. He said, “Well, it is all over
  now.”
  As he said this, I put my left hand on his waist and then his hand went to the
  waist. And this hand struck me between the eyes on the bridge of the nose.
  Mr. BALL. Did he cock his fist?
  Mr. MCDONALD. Yes, sir ; knocking my cap off.
  Mr. BALL. Which fist did he hit you with?
  Mr. MCDONALD. His left fist.
  Mr. BALL. What happened then?
  Mr. MCDONALD Well, whenever he knocked my hat off, any normal reaction
  was for me to go at him with this hand.
  Mr. BALL.. Right hand?
  Mr. MCDONALD. Yes. I went at him with this hand, and I believe I struck him
  on the face, but I don’t know where. And with my hand, that was on his hand over the pistol."

[Martin Weidmann]

So you are saying that we should accept at face value the description of it by some unknown DPD officer in April 1963 that it was a steel jacketed bullet and ignore the evidence of a police officer (B.G. Norvall) who retrieved the bullet from Walker's wall and put his initials on it, and the evidence of the laboratory officer who examined the same bullet, noted the same initials, and took pictures of it and compared it to the bullets fired from Oswald's rifle (J. Nicol)?
Ok. So the Walker bullet was also planted, along with CE399?
The point is that this occurred in 1963 so one should look at the police practices at that time to assess how odd it might have been.
It might be if there was any evidence that law enforcement manipulated evidence in this case.
So, you are saying that it was planted.

For starters, being a "patsy" would require involvement with someone who could have persuaded Oswald, for some innocent purpose, (on the very day that JFK was to pass beneath the window) to:
1. have Wesley Frazier drive him to Fort Worth the day before,
2. go into Ruth Paine's garage, get his rifle,
3. secretly take it with him in Wesley Frazier's car to the TSBD without raising suspicions
4. walk with it into the TSBD without anyone seeing the rifle,
5. place it on the 6th floor where the SN was located
6. make sure that he was not seen with anyone from 12:15 until the president passed by the TSBD

So what do you suppose the "innocent purpose" was that this phantom agent provocateur used to get Oswald to do all that?
It wouldn't make sense if he had lots of money on him.  But he didn't.  He was broke.  He had only $13.87 on him when arrested and that was barely enough to buy a bus ticket to get out of town.
So he lied about buying it in Fort Worth.  Why would he do that? 

We know he ordered it from Seaport Traders of Los Angeles on January 27, 1963, that it was shipped to A. Hidell at Oswald's Dallas post office box No. 2915. The law required it to be picked up at the Railway Express Agency. The REA receipt shows that it was picked up by A. Hidell on March 20, 1963.
Plenty of evidence.  The shells that the shooter ejected after shooting Tippit had a unique firing pin mark that had all the unusual characteristics of shells fired from Oswald's revolver. For that reason, Joseph Nicol was able to positively conclude that the four shells found at the scene (CE 594) were fired from Oswald's revolver (3 H 511).  The shells were also consistent with shells of the six .38 Special cartridges (CE145 and CE518) still in Oswald's revolver and the four .38 Special cartridges (CE592) found in his pocket.
The officer who was punched heard him: McDonald 3 H 300:

• "And just as I got to the row where the suspect was sitting, I stopped abruptly,
  and turned in and told him to get on his feet. He rose immediately, bringing
  up both hands. He got this hand about shoulder high, his left hand shoulder
  high, and he got his right hand about breast high. He said, “Well, it is all over
  now.”
  As he said this, I put my left hand on his waist and then his hand went to the
  waist. And this hand struck me between the eyes on the bridge of the nose.
  Mr. BALL. Did he cock his fist?
  Mr. MCDONALD. Yes, sir ; knocking my cap off.
  Mr. BALL. Which fist did he hit you with?
  Mr. MCDONALD. His left fist.
  Mr. BALL. What happened then?
  Mr. MCDONALD Well, whenever he knocked my hat off, any normal reaction
  was for me to go at him with this hand.
  Mr. BALL.. Right hand?
  Mr. MCDONALD. Yes. I went at him with this hand, and I believe I struck him
  on the face, but I don’t know where. And with my hand, that was on his hand over the pistol."

So you are saying that we should accept at face value the description of it by some unknown DPD officer in April 1963 that it was a steel jacketed bullet and ignore the evidence of a police officer (B.G. Norvall) who retrieved the bullet from Walker's wall and put his initials on it, and the evidence of the laboratory officer who examined the same bullet, noted the same initials, and took pictures of it and compared it to the bullets fired from Oswald's rifle (J. Nicol)?

Not so fast.... First of all, it was not one description by an "unknown DPD officer". If I recall correctly, there were at least six or seven reports which all described the bullet in the same way. The first of those reports was written on 4/10/63 by Detectives Van Cleave & McElroy. On the day of the crime, they described the bullet as a "steel jacket". They also say that the bullet was given, at the scene, to Dot. B.G. Brown of the CSSS. There is no mention of an officer named B.G. Norvall in that report and I couldn't find any document generated by Norvall about this matter. In his WC testimony, Joseph Nicol said nothing about finding initials on the bullet, except for his own. Nicol was also not able to positively identify the bullet as having been fired by the MC rifle. The best he could do was a "probable". So, I really wonder where you got the story of a police officer named Norvall initialling the bullet and Nicol confirming it was there. And then there is the memo written by Jevons to Conrad on 3/27/64 in which it says that SA Heiberger advised that "the lead alloy of the bullet recovered from the attempted shooting of General Walker was different from the lead alloy of a large bullet fragment recovered from the car in which President Kennedy was shot"

As far as Walker himself, he wrote to the U.S. Attorney General on 02/12/79 that the bullet shown by Robert Blakey's Committe is a ridiculous substitute for a bullet completely mutilated by such obstruction, baring no resemblance to any unfired bullet in shape or form. Walker actually described it as a "hunk of lead", which is clearly not what we see on the photographs of CE573.

Ok. So the Walker bullet was also planted, along with CE399?

Most likely, if the scenario I proposed is correct.

The point is that this occurred in 1963 so one should look at the police practices at that time to assess how odd it might have been.

You are missing the point. I asked you if you didn't think it was odd that all the bullets and fragments were given to the FBI by others who told the FBI lab where the items allegedly came from. It happened on three different occassions. Back in 1963 nobody, except perhaps for Frazier, would probably have known this and he wasn't talking to anybody. So, by today's standards do you consider this odd, yes or no?

It might be if there was any evidence that law enforcement manipulated evidence in this case.

Oh, but there is. Take for example the white jacket (that later turned gray) found under a car in Oak Cliff. It was found by an unidentified officer who pointed it out to Captain Westbrook. The latter then went to the Texas Theater and allegedly gave the jacket to yet another unidentified officer to take it to DPD HQ. The jacket then shows up, about two hours later, again in Westbrook's possession and it carries markings of officers who were not even near the parking lot where the jacket were found. Yet, they still marked it as if they were part of a chain of custody, which in reality simply did not exist.

Another example is the discovery of the BY photos. DPD officers first searched Ruth Paine's home on Friday afternoon. A day later they returned with a search warrant and this is when they claim they found the BY photos. The problem is that this second search took place in the afternoon and earlier that day Fritz had already shown Oswald a blow up of one of the photos. Even worse, Michael Paine testified that he was shown a BY photo by an FBI agent on Friday evening. This is confirmed by Fritz who told Oswald that he already knew where the photo was taken, which is information that could only have come from Michael Paine.

Add to this that the FBI told the Warren Commission in CE2011 that S.A. Odum had shown CE399 to Tomlinson and Wright and that both men could not positively identify the bullet but they thought it was the right one (I'm paraphrasing). This of course contradicts the Airtel written by SAC Shanklin in Dallas who merely said both men could not identify the bullet! And let's not forget that Odum is on record saying that he never had CE399 or showed it to anyone.

So, you are saying that it was planted.

Again, I'm saying that it must have been planted, if the scenario I proposed is correct. I'm merely stating that there is no solid chain of custody for the bullet now in evidence as CE399 and that it's evidentiary life started in Washington. There most certainly is circumstantial evidence to support the conclusion that the bullet found at Parkland was substituted for the one we now know as CE399. You may want to ignore that, but I won't.

For starters, being a "patsy" would require involvement with someone who could have persuaded Oswald, for some innocent purpose, (on the very day that JFK was to pass beneath the window) to:
1. have Wesley Frazier drive him to Fort Worth the day before,
2. go into Ruth Paine's garage, get his rifle,
3. secretly take it with him in Wesley Frazier's car to the TSBD without raising suspicions
4. walk with it into the TSBD without anyone seeing the rifle,
5. place it on the 6th floor where the SN was located
6. make sure that he was not seen with anyone from 12:15 until the president passed by the TSBD

You are going completely off the rails here. Oswald's trip to Irving may well have been an attempt to convince Marina to live with him again. Marina and Ruth Paine both believe that this was his reason for the trip. There is not a shred of evidence that there was a rifle in Ruth Paine's garage on 11/21/63 for Oswald to collect. There also is no evidence that Oswald brought a rifle into the TSBD. What there is, are two witnesses who actually saw the package he carried and they described it in such a way that it couldn't possibly have contained a broken down MC rifle.

So what do you suppose the "innocent purpose" was that this phantom agent provocateur used to get Oswald to do all that?
It wouldn't make sense if he had lots of money on him.  But he didn't.  He was broke.  He had only $13.87 on him when arrested and that was barely enough to buy a bus ticket to get out of town.
So he lied about buying it in Fort Worth.  Why would he do that? 

Why would you even think that there would have to be someone to persuade Oswald to do something? The mere fact that Oswald left most of his money, after Marina turned him down, points exactly in the direction of a man wanting to provide for his children. If he really planned to kill Kennedy, he would have kept the money as it could provide him the means to escape. And what makes you think that Oswald lied about buying a revolver in Fort Worth. They never checked if he was telling the truth. They visited some 400 dry-cleaners in the greater Dallas and New Orleans area to get more information about the jacket, but nobody ever bothered to check the gun dealers in Fort Worth. Go figure!

We know he ordered it from Seaport Traders of Los Angeles on January 27, 1963, that it was shipped to A. Hidell at Oswald's Dallas post office box No. 2915. The law required it to be picked up at the Railway Express Agency. The REA receipt shows that it was picked up by A. Hidell on March 20, 1963.

You are refering to Michaelis Exhibit 4? That document does indeed have the name A. Hidell on it, but I fail to see how you can conclude from it that Oswald collected the revolver. If you believe that Oswald used a false name to collect this revolver, you also must believe that anybody else could have done exactly the same, right? Remember, in the scenario I proposed Oswald was being set up. All that was really required to do so succesfully was to associate him somehow with the alleged murder weapons. Now, let's assume for a moment that, in early January 1963, he simply filled out the order form as a favor to somebody and allowed that person to use his p.o. box for the purchase. We don't know where and with whom Oswald was 24/7 for months prior to the assassination, so it can not be ruled out. There could very well have been somebody we know nothing about in the background who manipulated Oswald.

Plenty of evidence.  The shells that the shooter ejected after shooting Tippit had a unique firing pin mark that had all the unusual characteristics of shells fired from Oswald's revolver. For that reason, Joseph Nicol was able to positively conclude that the four shells found at the scene (CE 594) were fired from Oswald's revolver (3 H 511).  The shells were also consistent with shells of the six .38 Special cartridges (CE145 and CE518) still in Oswald's revolver and the four .38 Special cartridges (CE592) found in his pocket.

You mean the bullets they "found" in his pocket hours after he was arrested? There is no doubt in my mind that the revolver purchased at Seaport Traders was the one used to kill Tippit. The problem is, once again, that there is no chain of custody for the revolver they took from Oswald at the Texas Theater. The revolver was given to Hill when he got in the car that drove Oswald to DPD HQ. He was told this was the revolver taken from Oswald, but he had no way to check if this was true. He then walked around with that revolver for two hours before he took it to the DPD lunchroom where he had some officers (who were not involved in the chain of custody) mark it with their initials.

The officer who was punched heard him: McDonald 3 H 300:

• "And just as I got to the row where the suspect was sitting, I stopped abruptly,
  and turned in and told him to get on his feet. He rose immediately, bringing
  up both hands. He got this hand about shoulder high, his left hand shoulder
  high, and he got his right hand about breast high. He said, “Well, it is all over
  now.”
  As he said this, I put my left hand on his waist and then his hand went to the
  waist. And this hand struck me between the eyes on the bridge of the nose.
  Mr. BALL. Did he cock his fist?
  Mr. MCDONALD. Yes, sir ; knocking my cap off.
  Mr. BALL. Which fist did he hit you with?
  Mr. MCDONALD. His left fist.
  Mr. BALL. What happened then?
  Mr. MCDONALD Well, whenever he knocked my hat off, any normal reaction
  was for me to go at him with this hand.
  Mr. BALL.. Right hand?
  Mr. MCDONALD. Yes. I went at him with this hand, and I believe I struck him
  on the face, but I don’t know where. And with my hand, that was on his hand over the pistol."

[/b]

So it's another one of those "the cop said so" arguments? Where is the corroboration?

[Andrew Mason]

So you are saying that we should accept at face value the description of it by some unknown DPD officer in April 1963 that it was a steel jacketed bullet and ignore the evidence of a police officer (B.G. Norvall) who retrieved the bullet from Walker's wall and put his initials on it, and the evidence of the laboratory officer who examined the same bullet, noted the same initials, and took pictures of it and compared it to the bullets fired from Oswald's rifle (J. Nicol)?

Not so fast.... First of all, it was not one description by an "unknown DPD officer". If I recall correctly, there were at least six or seven reports which all described the bullet in the same way. The first of those reports was written on 4/10/63 by Detectives Van Cleave & McElroy. On the day of the crime, they described the bullet as a "steel jacket". They also say that the bullet was given, at the scene, to Dot. B.G. Brown of the CSSS. There is no mention of an officer named B.G. Norvall in that report and I couldn't find any document generated by Norvall about this matter.

In his WC testimony, Joseph Nicol said nothing about finding initials on the bullet, except for his own. Nicol was also not able to positively identify the bullet as having been fired by the MC rifle. The best he could do was a "probable". So, I really wonder where you got the story of a police officer named Norvall initialling the bullet and Nicol confirming it was there. And then there is the memo written by Jevons to Conrad on 3/27/64 in which it says that SA Heiberger advised that "the lead alloy of the bullet recovered from the attempted shooting of General Walker was different from the lead alloy of a large bullet fragment recovered from the car in which President Kennedy was shot"

The chain of custody of CE 573 (FBI Exhibit C148) is found in CE1953 (23 H 757ff) and also CE2011 (24 H 414). 

Officer B. G. Norvell found the bullet in the wall and scratched his initials on it. He then handed it either to Officer McElroy who handed it to Officer B. G. Brown who was assigned to the Crime Search Scene Section (CSSS), or he may have handed it to Brown directly. Either way, it ended up with Officer Brown and was part of the CSSS case file. On April 25, 1963 Lt. Day of CSSS took it to the Crime Lab at Parkland Hospital to see if they could identify the type of gun that fired it.  It remained there until December 2, 1963 when it was turned over to Agent Bardwell Odum of the FBI.  It was analysed by the FBI (Frazier/Nicol) and on March 21, 1964 it was turned over to the WC. On June 12, 1964 Odum showed the bullet to Norvell who confirmed that it was the same bullet that he had obtained from the Walker residence and identified his marking on it.

The bullet was too damaged to align lands and grooves with a known bullet but they were compared visually and there were no differences identified. Nicol put it this way:

• Mr. EISENBERG. As I understand your testimony, therefore, you feel that there are sufficient identical microscopic characteristics on 572 and 573 to say that they were probably fired from the same weapon, but not enough to say that they were definitely fired from the same weapon.
  Mr. NICOL. Yes. My opinion would be based upon the finding of families of lines that would be of the order of two to four fine striations on the burr that I referred to. For a stronger identification, I would want a larger group, I would want perhaps five or six in a given area, all matching in terms of contour as well as position. But this I did not find. And so for that reason, I would not want to express this as a positive finding. However, I would not want to be misunderstood or suggest that this could not have come from that particular gun.