JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
The Warren Commission Sham
Royell Storing:
--- Quote from: Dan O'meara on April 03, 2025, 10:13:09 PM ---The Nutter approach to the glaring fact that CE399 was not the bullet found in Parkland is to cry about "who planted it and why".
Tomlinson, Wright, Johnsen and Rowley refused to identify CE399 as the bullet they handled that day.
O P Wright categorically denied that CE399 was the bullet he handled that day.
None of these men were asked to identify CE399 by the Warren Commission.
Wright and Johnsen were never asked to testify at all.
Rowley testified but was never asked about CE399.
Unbelievably, Tomlinson,the man who discovered the bullet in Parkland, testified AND WASN'T ASKED A SINGLE QUESTION ABOUT THE BULLET ITSELF!!
He wasn't shown the bullet to identify, he wasn't shown a picture of the bullet, he wasn't even asked to describe it!
FACT - CE399 was entered into evidence as the bullet found in Parkland without a single person vouching for it as such. NOBODY IDENTIFIED IT AS THE BULLET FOUND IN PARKLAND!
These facts will always come first.
These are the facts that must be addressed.
Rather than bleating on about how it couldn't possibly be this way.
Roll up! Roll up! Nutters.
Now is your chance for glory.
--- End quote ---
Outstanding post. Keep up the good work.
Dan O'meara:
--- Quote from: Tom Graves on April 03, 2025, 10:29:56 PM ---They refused to identify it after seven months, or, given the fact that they'd failed to put their initials on it, were unable to identify it after seven months?
PS Take some deep breaths.
In through the nose, out through the mouth . . .
--- End quote ---
;D
Well done Tom, that's right, they did refuse to identify CE399 as the bullet they handled that day.
Not one or two of them...ALL FOUR MEN refused to identify CE399 as the bullet they handled that day.
All four, Tom.
They were unable to identify it because it was a different bullet.
Rowley and Johnsen didn't put their initials on CE399 because they handled a different bullet that day.
Wright categorically denied that CE399 was the bullet he handled that day.
He received a pointed "hunting slug" from Tomlinson and he gave that bullet to Johnsen.
The WC Sham knew not to question any of these men about CE399, so they didn't.
Even Darrell Tomlinson - the man who discovered the bullet in Parkland - was not asked to identify the bullet when he gave testimony. Let that sink in, Tom.
In fact, he wasn't asked a single question about the bullet itself - the man who discovered this absolutely key piece of evidence for the Sham's fantasy.
Don't forget that CE399 was held up as the key to the Single Bullet Theory. It is one of the most important pieces of evidence in this case as far as the WC's story is concerned.
Yet this fundamental piece of evidence was entered into evidence without a single person identifying it as the bullet that was found in Parkland.
How was that possible Tom?
Why wasn't this questioned by the Sham.
Now that it has been established that CE399 was NOT the bullet found in Parkland, here is a question for the Nutters to answer - where did CE399 come from?
And the answer has nothing to do with missing initials.
Lance Payette:
--- Quote from: Tom Graves on April 03, 2025, 10:29:56 PM ---They refused to identify it after seven months, or, given the fact that they'd failed to put their initials on it, were unable to identify it after seven months?
PS Take some deep breaths.
In through the nose, out through the mouth . . .
--- End quote ---
I still am unable to fathom - really, I am quite dull - the central issue as to why, if CE 399 were in any sense a "plant," our dumbass conspirators would have used a bullet that raises as many obvious red flags as CE 399 and not had the various participants get their stories straight. If what was found at Parkland was actually nothing, or a 30.06 slug that you needed to make disappear because it didn't match Oswald's rifle, why would you substitute a bullet like CE 399 and coach your witnesses to tell a consistent story? And where did it come from in the first place? Was it always ready, "just in case?" How and why?
I can certainly appreciate that there would be very significant chain-of-custody issues if CE 399 were offered into evidence in a criminal trial. But in a criminal trial, you merely need to object that the chain of custody is insufficient to make reasonably certain that CE 399 is in fact the bullet found at Parkland. You don't need any rationale. But if you're asserting a conspiracy out here in the Real World, you DO need a coherent rationale as to why sane conspirators would have done what you are alleging they did.
CTers seem to miss this critical distinction. Out here in the Real World, you can't get by just by playing Oswald Defense Counsel and raising legal objections. The theory you are promoting has to make sense, or at least not blatantly Not Make Sense.
Tom Graves:
--- Quote from: Dan O'meara on April 03, 2025, 11:22:52 PM --- ;D
Well done Tom, that's right, they did refuse to identify CE399 as the bullet they handled that day.
Not one or two of them...ALL FOUR MEN refused to identify CE399 as the bullet they handled that day.
All four, Tom.
They were unable to identify it because it was a different bullet.
Rowley and Johnsen didn't put their initials on CE399 because they handled a different bullet that day.
Wright categorically denied that CE399 was the bullet he handled that day.
He received a pointed "hunting slug" from Tomlinson and he gave that bullet to Johnsen.
The WC Sham knew not to question any of these men about CE399, so they didn't.
Even Darrell Tomlinson - the man who discovered the bullet in Parkland - was not asked to identify the bullet when he gave testimony. Let that sink in, Tom.
In fact, he wasn't asked a single question about the bullet itself - the man who discovered this absolutely key piece of evidence for the Sham's fantasy.
Don't forget that CE399 was held up as the key to the Single Bullet Theory. It is one of the most important pieces of evidence in this case as far as the WC's story is concerned.
Yet this fundamental piece of evidence was entered into evidence without a single person identifying it as the bullet that was found in Parkland.
How was that possible Tom?
Why wasn't this questioned by the Sham.
Now that it has been established that CE399 was NOT the bullet found in Parkland, here is a question for the Nutters to answer - where did CE399 come from?
And the answer has nothing to do with missing initials.
--- End quote ---
O'meara,
You're willfully conflating someone's refusing to identify something they'd seen seven months earlier with his or her being unable to remember what they'd seen seven months earlier.
Dan O'meara:
--- Quote from: Tom Graves on April 04, 2025, 12:09:16 AM ---O'meara,
You're willfully conflating someone's refusing to identify something they'd seen seven months earlier with his or her being unable to remember what they'd seen seven months earlier.
--- End quote ---
And you are desperately avoiding all the evidence proving, beyond any reasonable doubt, that CE399 was not the bullet found in Parkland.
Doesn't it bother you that you can't point to a single piece of evidence supporting your "theory" that CE399 was the bullet found in Parkland.
You seem like an intelligent guy. How can you turn a blind eye to this issue? Aren't you genuinely interested in what happened?
Doesn't it bother you that the WC entered CE399 into evidence without a single person identifying it as such?
Doesn't it bother you that none of these men were asked by the WC to identify it?
Nutters like to go on about CTers being in denial or turning a blind eye to damning evidence.
Who's in denial now?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version