The Walker Case

[Michael Capasse]

There is no problem with the argument. Tomlinson had only been interviewed once by the FBI when he testified in March 1964. And it is reasonable to believe that Tomlinson could have been mistaken about when he actually was shown the bullet, when he was interviewed by Marcus in 1966.

Actually, no it's not. "could have been mistaken", doesn't carry much weight against the two men that agreed Odum never showed Tomlinson the bullet.

[Walt Cakebread]

How would Carl Day know where CE573 came from?

Where's the PROOF that CE573  was fired by someone who intended to kill Walker?   Is there anybody who is such a poor shot that he couldn't hit Walker from the close range involved???  Isn't the idea that someoneone was trying to kill Walker just a tad absurd?   

[Walt Cakebread]

CE573 does indeed look copper-jacketed. Is there any good reason to believe that CE573 is the “steel-jacketed .30 caliber bullet” that was retrieved from the Walker home in April, 1963?

Is there any good reason to believe that CE573 is the “steel-jacketed .30 caliber bullet” that was retrieved from the Walker home in April, 1963?

C'mon John.....

We don't know where the reporter who reported that the bullet was 30 cal and steel jacked got his info.  But it's unreasonable to believe that the bullet (CE 573) was in fact a steel jacketed bullet , because steel jacked bullets were and are, quite rare outside the military. And if that bullet had been steel jacketed it would not have been mangled by passing through the soft substances of Walker's house. IOW if the bullet had been "steel Jacketed" it probably would have been as pristine as CE 399....and CE 399 is a damned lie.....   

[John Iacoletti]

The cop's radar gun was questionable. But it wasn't shown to be unreliable.

No, your example doesn’t help because IMO you are making the same error. The mere fact that the radar gun is of unknown calibration makes the cop’s claim of speeding unreliable. If you could demonstrate the device was incorrect, then it wouldn’t be unreliable — it would just be wrong. Unreliable means you can’t rely on what it says to be correct. It could still be correct, but you don’t know.

[Charles Collins]

No, your example doesn’t help because IMO you are making the same error. The mere fact that the radar gun is of unknown calibration makes the cop’s claim of speeding unreliable. If you could demonstrate the device was incorrect, then it wouldn’t be unreliable — it would just be wrong. Unreliable means you can’t rely on what it says to be correct. It could still be correct, but you don’t know.

For the radar gun to be declared unreliable, it would need to be shown that it cannot be relied upon to function accurately. The fact that the cop had no documentation with him indicating when it was last calibrated is not relevant to the radar gun’s actual performance reliabilities. The judge just chose expediency over truth-finding. It is that simple.

You are confusing “unknown reliability” with “unreliability.” You are jumping to a conclusion as to it’s reliability and stating that it cannot be relied upon to be accurate. When all you know is that there was no documentation brought to court by the cop that says when the radar gun was last calibrated.

So, lets apply this to what we have concerning CE2011. Documentation indicates that it does appear to have been generated in the Dallas, TX FBI office. It does appear that it came to the Warren Commission through the proper channels and therefore accepted by the WC as evidence. Therefore it does appear that only the typist is anonymous (not the entire document). Additionally, there is documentation indicating that CE399 was sent from Washington to Dallas in early June, 1964. We also find documentation indicating that Odum interviewed the two Parkland Hospital employees in question on June 12, 1964. However, we don’t find any documentation indicating that CE399 was sent to Dallas in late November 1963. Nor do we find any documentation indicating that Shanklin interviewed either one of the Parkland Hospital employees in question in late November 1963 (or ever).

Human memories are often fallible. This is why we document things. It is why I normally take a list with me to the grocery store. It is why we often-times develop routines regarding things we need to do; the routines help us to remember. And why, when those routines are interrupted, we sometimes forget to do the things we needed do.

Now, you are claiming that CE2011 is “unreliable” based upon the two Parkland Hospital employees’ ~2.5-year old and almost 39-year old “apparent memories”. Their “apparent memories” are indicated to us through hearsay by (at least two) interviewers who are demonstrably biased towards the conspiracy side.

I submit that the questionable reliability monicker properly belongs with the “apparent memories” that your claim is based upon. Therefore your claim is not in any way shown to be true. Only that you have questioned the reliability of CE2011; and that the basis for your question is based upon some very questionable hearsay.

[Zeon Mason]

Walt’s asks the correct question why Oswald did not aim accurately at Walker?

Following that question, why did Oswald not wait for a better shot of Walker , perhaps while Walker was outside the house?

IF it’s true that there was a conversation Oswald had with Marina in which Oswald justified a hypothetical shooting  of Walker comparable to shooting Hitler to prevent WW2, THEN if follows that if Oswald was the shooter ,he  would most probably have aimed accurately, and would have made SURE that Walker was hit and killed.

Either A. Oswald was the shooter or B. Some one else was the shooter.

If A. Either Oswald lost his nerve, or patience, or he was interrupted by some passing car or something , which caused him to shoot only ONE  shot inaccurately thru a window, instead of waiting for an easy kill shot of Walker outside the house.
If B. This other persons motive could be just a prank or it could be a serious attempt to kill Walker which also failed because of poor aim.

If B. There is a possibility also of intention just to have a bullet found in Walkers residence fired from a mail ordered MC rifle that would be used to later frame Oswald.

[Charles Collins]

Walt’s asks the correct question why Oswald did not aim accurately at Walker?

Following that question, why did Oswald not wait for a better shot of Walker , perhaps while Walker was outside the house?

IF it’s true that there was a conversation Oswald had with Marina in which Oswald justified a hypothetical shooting  of Walker comparable to shooting Hitler to prevent WW2, THEN if follows that if Oswald was the shooter ,he  would most probably have aimed accurately, and would have made SURE that Walker was hit and killed.

Either A. Oswald was the shooter or B. Some one else was the shooter.

If A. Either Oswald lost his nerve, or patience, or he was interrupted by some passing car or something , which caused him to shoot only ONE  shot inaccurately thru a window, instead of waiting for an easy kill shot of Walker outside the house.
If B. This other persons motive could be just a prank or it could be a serious attempt to kill Walker which also failed because of poor aim.

If B. There is a possibility also of intention just to have a bullet found in Walkers residence fired from a mail ordered MC rifle that would be used to later frame Oswald.

In a March 5 speech, Walker called on the American military to "liquidate the [communist] scourge that has descended upon the island of Cuba."


While initially skeptical about the photographic evidence provided by the FBI, the Warren Commission reported that Oswald photographed Walker's Dallas home on the weekend of March 9–10, 1963.


Seven days later [after the March 5 Walker speech, March 12, 1963], Lee Harvey Oswald ordered a Carcano rifle by mail using the alias A. Hidell.


On April 10, 1963, as Walker was sitting at a desk in his dining room, a bullet struck the wooden frame of his dining-room window. Walker was injured in the forearm by fragments. Marina Oswald later testified that her husband had told her that he traveled by bus to General Walker's house and shot at Walker with his rifle.[26][27] Marina said that Oswald considered Walker to be the leader of a "fascist organization."[28]

Police detective D. E. McElroy commented, "Whoever shot at the general was playing for keeps. The sniper wasn't trying to scare him. He was shooting to kill." The bullet was too badly damaged to provide conclusive ballistics tests, but neutron activation analysis tests later determined that it was "extremely likely" that the bullet was manufactured by the Western Cartridge Company and was the same type of ammunition as was used in the Kennedy assassination.[29]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Walker