Who Killed J.D. Tippit?

[John Mytton]

the way to reach a conclusion in a criminal case is to draw reasonable inferences from solid evidence.

So, the evidence needs to be solid... Did you get that part, John?

I certainly did Martin but using the above example, if a direct print out from Kleins very own Microfilm business records isn't absolute Rock Solid evidence then there is nothing that will convince the hardcore conspiracy theorist.

No offence but all you are doing is regurgitating the exact same arguments I was reading a decade ago from Caprio, Roger Collins, Miles Scull, David Josephs etc etc. And you all seem to think that every piece of evidence is required to meet some unobtainable standard of authentication, like the absurd authenticating writing on a warehouse order form.

Yesterday you were asking me to consider that A J Hidell was a real person which presumably explains the rifle order and Oswald's association with the name Hidell and today you are asking me to consider that Waldman 7 with Hidell's name isn't real because it wasn't authenticated and thus nullifying yesterday's theory. It must be nice to be so flexible in your journey of discovery.

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

It doesn't matter how much evidence is presented, you will continue your game of asking for evidence which you know doesn't exist and then claim some sort of hollow victory because you want evidence that doesn't need to exist. For instance your reason this time is that the writing on the order wasn't authenticated, give me a break.

At the end of the day Waldman was called into work and discovered Waldman 7 and CE773 in their eight month old microfilm business records and at his testimony he printed out Waldman 7 and CE773 directly from Kleins business records.

I'm not going to waste any more time with your little games. Let's agree to disagree and move on. Life is too short for this stupidity.

JohnM

Oops, the prosecutor is angry at the jury again because they want evidence from him he can't provide..... 

I get it, John. You would prefer it that instead of looking at actual evidence you just want people to take your word for it.

But I am glad that you now admit that no shipping documents for a rifle sent to Oswald's P.O. box exist. 

For instance your reason this time is that the writing on the order wasn't authenticated, give me a break.

If you don't understand that evidence should always be authenticated, you really have no business making claims about that evidence, John.
You may not consider it important that evidence is actually authentic but in the real world something like that actually matters. I can only hope that you will never find yourself in a position of being accused of something based on evidence that isn't authenticated.

At the end of the day Waldman was called into work and discovered Waldman 7 and CE773 in their eight month old microfilm business records and at his testimony he printed out Waldman 7 and CE773 directly from Kleins business records.

Yes, Waldman was called in to work on 11/22/63 and showed the FBI the microfilm. I can't find anywhere that they "discovered Waldman 7" but even if they did, the FBI took the microfilm that night and Waldman only got to see it once after that, during his testimony, on 05/20/64. Do you really he would remember what was on the form on 11/23/63? I doubt it. Early in his testimony Waldman identified Mitchell W. Westra as the person who actually filled the Hidell order. Btw, Westra worked under the supervision of Sam Kasper, the other VP at Kleins'. Kinda remarkable that they called Waldman, who had nothing to do with gun sales, instead of Kasper. But that aside, just how difficult would it have been to get Westra to confirm his handwriting on Waldman 7? Could the fact that they did not ask Westra perhaps have anything to do with the fact that Westra is on record saying that Kleins' did not send out 40" Carcanos with a scope?

I'm not going to waste any more time with your little games. Let's agree to disagree and move on. Life is too short for this stupidity.

What's the matter, John? Are you getting stuck already or is what I am telling you simply too complicated for you to deal with?

This is the third time you've thrown a temper tantrum because you can't get your way.... Are you alright?

[John Mytton]

Could the fact that they did not ask Westra perhaps have anything to do with the fact that Westra is on record saying that Kleins' did not send out 40" Carcanos with a scope?

Yet Kleins advertised the 40 inch rifle with a scope for many months? Go figure!



JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

I certainly did Martin but using the above example, if a direct print out from Kleins very own Microfilm business records isn't absolute Rock Solid evidence then there is nothing that will convince the hardcore conspiracy theorist.

No offence but all you are doing is regurgitating the exact same arguments I was reading a decade ago from Caprio, Roger Collins, Miles Scull, David Josephs etc etc. And you all seem to think that every piece of evidence is required to meet some unobtainable standard of authentication, like the absurd authenticating writing on a warehouse order form.

Yesterday you were asking me to consider that A J Hidell was a real person which presumably explains the rifle order and Oswald's association with the name Hidell and today you are asking me to consider that Waldman 7 with Hidell's name isn't real because it wasn't authenticated and thus nullifying yesterday's theory. It must be nice to be so flexible in your journey of discovery.

JohnM

I certainly did Martin but using the above example, if a direct print out from Kleins very own Microfilm business records isn't absolute Rock Solid evidence then there is nothing that will convince the hardcore conspiracy theorist.

If you consider a print taken in May 1964 from a microfilm that nobody has seen since 11/22/63 "absolute rock solid evidence" then you are probably right that you won't convince any kind of conspiracy theorist or a skeptic like me.

No offence but all you are doing is regurgitating the exact same arguments I was reading a decade ago from Caprio, Roger Collins, Miles Scull, David Josephs etc etc.

No offence taken. It's probably because in all that time you still haven't been able to provide the conclusive evidence to prove them wrong.

Yesterday you were asking me to consider that A J Hidell was a real person which presumably explains the rifle order and Oswald's association with the name Hidell and today you are asking me to consider that Waldman 7 with Hidell's name isn't real because it wasn't authenticated and thus nullifying yesterday's theory. It must be nice to be so flexible in your journey of discovery.

In yesterday's scenario it was about the possibility that Oswald had been manipulated by somebody he knew as Hidell. Today I am not asking you to consider that Waldman 7 isn't real. Waldman 7 was generated as result from the Hidell order, and we know that Kleins did receive the order. I'm merely asking you to authenticate Waldman 7, not because of the connection to the Hidell order but to make sure the link with the TSBD rifle by way of a handwritten serial number is solid. I'm sorry that you got confused.

[Martin Weidmann]

Yet Kleins advertised the 40 inch rifle with a scope for many months? Go figure!



JohnM

Wouldn't it have been nice to just ask Westra about that or, for that matter, his immediate superior, VP Sam Kasper?

[John Mytton]

merely asking you to authenticate Waldman 7, not because of the connection to the Hidell order but to make sure the link with the TSBD rifle by way of a handwritten serial number is solid. I'm sorry that you got confused.

C2766 was recorded coming from Crescent and C2766 was again recorded as being in Klein's inventory with a unique control number so please explain the necessity and/or the methodology of any deception after Waldman initially sighted the Hidell order on the microfilm?

JohnM

[Martin Weidmann]

C2766 was recorded coming from Crescent and C2766 was again recorded as being in Klein's inventory with a unique control number so please explain the necessity and/or the methodology of any deception after Waldman initially sighted the Hidell order on the microfilm?

JohnM

Without knowing precisely what was actually going on, back then, there is no way that I can explain to you what kind of necessity there would have been to manipulate Waldman 7, nor do I know if it happened. One thing I do know, however, is that a proper chain of custody for the microfilm and a sound authentication of the document would have seriously reduced the possibility of manipulation. Having said that, as such matters as chain of custody and evidence authentication didn't seem to matter much to the investigators it is beyond fair and reasonable to question the results of their investigation as well as the methods used.