Marilyn Sitzman

[Charles Collins]

Forget the dented lip. This is not about the dented lip or the mark from the magazine follower. Wrong indentation and mark.

Read the book. Pages 140-146 and the foot notes to the chapter on page 178. This is about the "chamber mark" as noted by the FBI, nothing else, CE 543 lacks the "chamber mark" the 30+ others do not.

Funny Josiah knew of a key piece to the puzzle back in the mid 60’s, puts it into print in his book Six Seconds in Dallas, but apparently does not understand the relevance and significance of it because he cannot weave it into a conspiracy. In 1967, he felt it proved there was a shot from somewhere else that LHO only fired twice. He must have given up on that theory. Josiah giving up on his theory in no way diminishes the importance of his observation. He is the only person to view all these shells that were fired in the rifle, compare them, and write about them.

The bottom line based on his observations, CE 543 is the only shell that lacks the indentation referred to as the “chamber mark” by the FBI, whereas the next 30+ shell casings including the unfired cartridge all exhibit to some degree the “chamber mark”. The “Chamber Mark” is not the dented lip.  They are completely different, as is the mark from the magazine follower. READ THE BOOK.

On page two of the thread Josiah Thompson asked Thomas H. Purvisabout that chamber mark in the thread that Lance provided the link to. Here’s part of his answer:

Since CE543 did not show indications of the dent and the live round did, then this tended to serve as further circumstantial evidence that CE543 came from the first shot fired in the assassination shot sequence.


Thomas provides what seems to me to be a reasonable answer READ THE THREAD.

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/9276-an-unfired-cartridge/page/2/

[Jack Nessan]

On page two of the thread Josiah Thompson asked Thomas H. Purvisabout that chamber mark in the thread that Lance provided the link to. Here’s part of his answer:

Since CE543 did not show indications of the dent and the live round did, then this tended to serve as further circumstantial evidence that CE543 came from the first shot fired in the assassination shot sequence.


Thomas provides what seems to me to be a reasonable answer READ THE THREAD.

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/9276-an-unfired-cartridge/page/2/

I could care less about Thomas Whoever. Why would you care what that clueless dufus thinks instead of reading the pages in the book for yourself? Afraid to find out it is really that simple? After all the hype for 60 years it is a letdown to realize this is the answer, prepare yourself. If you will read the pages from his book. You will know why even the dumbest of people can figure out why that is not correct and is absolutely baseless, and by using his own analysis no less. Josiah, by chance, stumbled onto the answer to the JFK assassination 60 years ago, and proved it, but what he proved was that it was not a conspiracy with real live hard evidence, which is sadly lacking in the whole story. He was right about what he interpreted about the shells in his book. What he interpreted was verified by the FBI. Maybe the bigger question is how this escaped the HSCA firearms experts who supposedly examined everything collectively.

 There are at least 11 other first shot shells in the group of 30+ shells Josiah observed. Including CE557 which were the test shells fired by the FBI when they first received the rifle. His observation was the shells in CE 557 and all 30+ shells exhibited the chamber mark. No exceptions. The fact that CE 141, the unfired cartridge, has the chamber mark proves there is an anomaly in the chamber making the indentations. That was his point. Once you read and understand what he observed you will no longer want to spend time chasing your tail with all this other useless nonsense.   

I have the pages from his book that are relevant on a PDF but I do not think that I can just post them.  READ THE BOOK.

The book Phantom Shot proves what is in Six Seconds in Dallas and Six Seconds in Dallas proves what is in Phantom Shot.

[Charles Collins]

I could care less about Thomas Whoever. Why would you care what that clueless dufus thinks instead of reading the pages in the book for yourself? Afraid to find out it is really that simple? After all the hype for 60 years it is a letdown to realize this is the answer, prepare yourself. If you will read the pages from his book. You will know why even the dumbest of people can figure out why that is not correct and is absolutely baseless, and by using his own analysis no less. Josiah, by chance, stumbled onto the answer to the JFK assassination 60 years ago, and proved it, but what he proved was that it was not a conspiracy with real live hard evidence, which is sadly lacking in the whole story. He was right about what he interpreted about the shells in his book. What he interpreted was verified by the FBI. Maybe the bigger question is how this escaped the HSCA firearms experts who supposedly examined everything collectively.

 There are at least 11 other first shot shells in the group of 30+ shells Josiah observed. Including CE557 which were the test shells fired by the FBI when they first received the rifle. His observation was the shells in CE 557 and all 30+ shells exhibited the chamber mark. No exceptions. The fact that CE 141, the unfired cartridge, has the chamber mark proves there is an anomaly in the chamber making the indentations. That was his point. Once you read and understand what he observed you will no longer want to spend time chasing your tail with all this other useless nonsense.   

I have the pages from his book that are relevant on a PDF but I do not think that I can just post them.  READ THE BOOK.

The book Phantom Shot proves what is in Six Seconds in Dallas and Six Seconds in Dallas proves what is in Phantom Shot.

Thomas H. Purvis’ posts in that thread indicate to me that he is knowledgeable and his explanation makes good sense to me. I imagine that Josiah Thompson thought so too. Otherwise, why would Josiah bother to ask him the questions? You are welcome to your own opinions as far as I am concerned Jack. I just disagree. If we all thought alike we wouldn’t have much of anything to discuss. I will private message you with a place you can send me the pdf. I will read the relevant pages with an open mind if you do that.

[Lance Payette]

On page two of the thread Josiah Thompson asked Thomas H. Purvisabout that chamber mark in the thread that Lance provided the link to. Here’s part of his answer:

Since CE543 did not show indications of the dent and the live round did, then this tended to serve as further circumstantial evidence that CE543 came from the first shot fired in the assassination shot sequence.


Thomas provides what seems to me to be a reasonable answer READ THE THREAD.

https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/9276-an-unfired-cartridge/page/2/

Yes, Purvis seemed quite knowledgeable to me, although the late Robert Prudhomme dismissed his analysis as "bull crap." As I understood what Purvis was saying, the chamber marks (or lack thereof) would vary according to the thermal conditions in the chamber, with the first shot obviously being in the "coolest" chamber and thus the least likely to be marked by the chamber wall. I don't want to pretend to more expertise than I have (pretty much none!), but I did look at several online forensic discussions and manuals and they seemed consistent with what Purvis was saying. I would logically think that the possibility of reload ammunition being used and/or the quality of the rifle might also be significant.

FWIW, here is Michael Griffith's piece on CE 543, which quotes Thompson on the "chamber marks" issue: https://maryferrell.org/archive/essays/mgriffith/dent.pdf

As you seem to be, I am always skeptical of arguments that purport to be CONCLUSIVE when there are so many potential variables. This is true of both LN and CT arguments. Six Seconds in Dallas had been published more than ten years before the HSCA firearms panel examined CE 543, but they do not seem to have noted the chamber marks issue at all (they did discuss extractor marks, which are different).

[Jake Maxwell]

It bears repeating... "bang, bang" could not come from one bolt action rifle...

[Charles Collins]

Yes, Purvis seemed quite knowledgeable to me, although the late Robert Prudhomme dismissed his analysis as "bull crap." As I understood what Purvis was saying, the chamber marks (or lack thereof) would vary according to the thermal conditions in the chamber, with the first shot obviously being in the "coolest" chamber and thus the least likely to be marked by the chamber wall. I don't want to pretend to more expertise than I have (pretty much none!), but I did look at several online forensic discussions and manuals and they seemed consistent with what Purvis was saying. I would logically think that the possibility of reload ammunition being used and/or the quality of the rifle might also be significant.

FWIW, here is Michael Griffith's piece on CE 543, which quotes Thompson on the "chamber marks" issue: https://maryferrell.org/archive/essays/mgriffith/dent.pdf

As you seem to be, I am always skeptical of arguments that purport to be CONCLUSIVE when there are so many potential variables. This is true of both LN and CT arguments. Six Seconds in Dallas had been published more than ten years before the HSCA firearms panel examined CE 543, but they do not seem to have noted the chamber marks issue at all (they did discuss extractor marks, which are different).

Thanks Lance, I have seen Michael Griffith around this forum from time to time. So, I didn’t need to guess what his position would be. His piece does contain some information that I find helpful. I agree with your skepticism regarding “conclusive” arguments. Listening to reason is typically not a part of their arguments. At this point in time I want to continue to investigate some more. I might even have to obtain a Carcano rifle to experiment with before I can form a solid opinion. I have been wanting one for a while now. This discussion might just be the catalyst that makes it happen….