Carroll gave the revolver to Hill. Hill and Carroll carried it with them to the third floor of the Dallas Municipal building, first to the Homicide Bureau office, then to the Personnel office. There, it was turned over to a detective from the Homicide squad who had been summoned to the Personnel office at Westbrook's request. Homicide forwarded the pistol to the ID Bureau via Davenport. The length of time Hill and Carroll had the pistol in the Personnel office with Hill and Carroll is simply a non issue.
Here we go again.
Yes, Carroll gave a revolver to Hill, as they were leaving the Texas Theater. By his own admission, Carroll didn't know who "gave" him that particular revolver, which means that he can only assume it was the revolver that Oswald was carrying.
Hill received a revolver from Carroll and was told by the latter that it was Oswald's, which, again, was merely an assumption on Carroll's part.
Now, you can argue that it's the most likely scenario that McDonald did in fact take a revolver from Oswald and gave it to Carroll and you can argue that Carroll's claim that it was Oswald's revolver was a reasonable assumption, but none of that is significant for the chain of custody as the sole purpose of a chain of custody is to guarantee that the item taken from the suspect is the same as the one later presented in court.
So, let's carry on with Hill, who is walking around with a revolver that was given to him while being told it belonged to the suspect without having any possible way to verify that information. Obviously, as he knows Carroll, he is going to trust him, but trusting isn't knowing!
Then, to make matters worse, Hill omitted to deliver the revolver to the evidence room directly after his arrival at the police station, which is another violation of the chain of custody rules. Instead he carried the revolver around with him for more than an hour, even showing it to reporters, and we only have his word for it that he took it to the Homicide Bureau office and then the Personnel office. All we really know for a fact is that Hill showed up at the Personnel office and told the people present there that this was Oswald's revolver. So, McDonald and Carroll just accepted what Hill said as the truth without being able to verify it.
In a previous reply to John Iacoletti, you wrote;
Martin's current positions is this: Hill made off with the revolver by himself for some period of time before it was turned into the Homicide squad. He hasn't provided any evidence for this happening,
I don't have to provide evidence for it, because it is a matter of fact. Hill arrived at the Police station at around 2 PM and the revolver wasn't submitted to the evidence room until 3.15 PM. It's really as simple as that. Where was Hill and the revolver for more than an hour? And before you go there.... I know what he said about where he was, but this "cop said" stuff is exactly why a chain of custody is required! Remember the O.J. Simpson trial and the vial of blood that Dennis Fung carried around with him?
But there is more. The next question is; McDonald was fighting with Oswald and suddenly had a revolver in his hand which he says he passed to Carroll. Carroll testified that he stuck the revolver in his belt and took it out again when he entered the car and gave it to Hill. There is no way IMO that McDonald and Carroll had a sufficiently good look at the revolver to be able to identify it more than an hour later. Ergo; McDonald and Carroll marked a revolver based on what Hill told them.
You failed to answer the second part of my question! How can we say with any certainty that the revolver submitted to the evidence room was the same one Hill received from Carroll or for that matter the same one McDonald claims to have taken from Oswald?
Let me gues.... because "a cop said so", right?
I'll start at the end this time, and skip around a bit before digging in:
MW: Let me guess.... because "a cop said so", right?Since the gun is in the possession of the police, any chain of custody testimony and documentation would necessarily come from police officers. It would, then, always be "because a cop said so." No matter what. I guess you thought that this was the some killing blow. If it was, it was a case of self-murder on your part.
MW: Remember the O.J. Simpson trial and the vial of blood that Dennis Fung carried around with himYou mean a vial of blood that was admitted as evidence and wasn't thrown out of court?
MW: I don't have to provide evidence for it, because it is a matter of factThe kicker is, you demand that I prove my point to a certainty, while at the same time you refuse to offer any evidence at all to support your assertions. I'll bet that the reality underlying your assertion is the realization that you've no evidence to support what is now your core claims. BTW, where is that photo of Hill with the revolver?
I'll add the requisite LOL here because Iacoletti totally missed this one.
For some reason.
MW: Hill arrived at the Police station at around 2 PM and the revolver wasn't submitted to the evidence room until 3:15 PM. It's really as simple as that.
So what? It doesn't matter if Hill, et al, have it for 10 minutes or 10 hours, so long as it stays with them? Why do I keep getting this feeling that you're back to demanding we apply some random "standard procedure" that is nothing more than a figment of your own invention?
....And lo! Right on cue! Like Boston, it's more than a feeling. Right here:
MW: Hill omitted to deliver the revolver to the evidence room directly after his arrival at the police station, which is another violation of the chain of custody rules.What set of "chain of custody rules" are you talking about? Other than maybe the ones that you invent as you go along?
Anyway, this is what happened, from the testimonies of the various particiants:
Hill shows up at the Municipal Building with Oswald, Carroll, Bentley, Lyons, Walker, and the gun. The five of them take Oswald up the elevator to the third floor and deposit him in an interrogation room in the Homicide department. Hill displays the pistol to the press while standing in the doorway of the interrogation room. After leaving the Homicide office, Hill, Carroll, Bentley, and Lyons accompany Hill to the Personnel office to write up one or more reports detailing various injuries suffered during the arrest. Walker stays behind in the interrogation room with Oswald until the Homicide detectives can take over the prisoner watch. He arrives at the Personnel office a few minutes after the rest. Westboork arrives back at Police HQ and goes to the Personnel office. McDonald also shows up at the Personel office after getting the injuries to his face photographed. At some point, Westbrook notices the gun sitting on the desk, goes to the Homicide office and has one of Frit'z detectives retrieve it from Personnel. That's where Carrol, Bentley, Hill, and McDonald initial the weapon before handing it over. At some point in all of this, Bentley and Lyons leave the Personnel office for the hospital seeking care for their twisted ankles.
Again, Carroll is with Hill at least until point that the pistol is turned over to Lt Baker, so he knew that the pistol he autographed was the same one that he handed Hill.
Also again, there is no point where Hill up and makes off with pistol. I still want to know where you got that idea from; just claiming that "it's a fact" won't cut it. And where is that photo you keep talking about?
Finally, there is this:
and...
MW: You failed to answer the second part of my question! How can we say with any certainty that the revolver submitted to the evidence room was the same one Hill received from Carroll or for that matter the same one McDonald claims to have taken from Oswald? I'm going by the evidence. This evidence supports McDonald -> Carroll --> Hill/Carroll --> Baker --> Davenport --> ID Bureau. You obvoiusly want to beleive something else happened, but have no evidence for it. Therefore, you demand that I prove a negative. That's all you have at this point, and it amounts to nothing.
