Was the Rifle that Lt. Day carried out of the TSBD the same as in evidence?

[Charles Collins]

Has to be this one.



It's easy enough to see in the photos of Day holding the rifle up for the press.



The question is whether the light spot in the same place in Alyea is the scrape or just a random reflection.

Thank you very much Mark. That’s a very interesting scrape. It looks to me like the Alyea image is showing the same scrape.

In trying to imagine how this might have occurred, my best guess is when LHO reportedly buried the rifle before/after the Walker attempt. If I remember correctly, it was supposed to have been near some railroad tracks. There is typically a lot of gravel used in railroad tracks. Gravel or some similar rough stone would be much harder than the aluminum alloy used for the scope. And so that might be when the scrape happened. LHO could have been excited enough to have hurriedly laid the rifle down onto a rock or some gravel. Either laying it down onto or picking it up off of a rough rock(s) haphazardly could have caused that scrape in my opinion.

[Mark Ulrik]

MU-

In the excellent images you have provided...it appears the slots in the two screws are not aligned in the same way. Especially the bottom screw. Not sure what this means, if anything.

This sort of stuff can probably be explained by the rifle having been taken apart and put back together again an unknown number of times. The head alignment can be somewhat unpredictable, I suspect, because it depends on how the screw connects with the wood (which can vary with age, wear, whether the screw has been oiled, etc.). Not to mention on how tightly you tighten the screw.

[Mark Ulrik]

Btw, I don't know how many are aware of this, but NARA in 2023 produced a set of 33 UHQ photos of CE 139 that is available for download (they are the ones numbered 13-45). Included are also 12 HQ photos from 2013.

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/305134?objectPage=45

[Mark Ulrik]

Thank you very much Mark. That’s a very interesting scrape. It looks to me like the Alyea image is showing the same scrape.

In trying to imagine how this might have occurred, my best guess is when LHO reportedly buried the rifle before/after the Walker attempt. If I remember correctly, it was supposed to have been near some railroad tracks. There is typically a lot of gravel used in railroad tracks. Gravel or some similar rough stone would be much harder than the aluminum alloy used for the scope. And so that might be when the scrape happened. LHO could have been excited enough to have hurriedly laid the rifle down onto a rock or some gravel. Either laying it down onto or picking it up off of a rough rock(s) haphazardly could have caused that scrape in my opinion.

Sounds plausible. Btw, and I'm just speculating freely here, I've always wondered if our sixth floor shooter knocked the scope out of alignment when/before he ditched the weapon, maybe on purpose, to sow the seed of doubt in the minds of our CT friends potential jurors.

Scrape not visible even in the best available scans of the backyard photos (but general likeness still pretty good).

[Charles Collins]

Btw, I don't know how many are aware of this, but NARA in 2023 produced a set of 33 UHQ photos of CE 139 that is available for download (they are the ones numbered 13-45). Included are also 12 HQ photos from 2013.

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/305134?objectPage=45

 

[Michael T. Griffith]

Thank you very much Mark. That’s a very interesting scrape. It looks to me like the Alyea image is showing the same scrape.

A scrape here. A scratch there. Not two of them clear and exactly alike. Yet, you folks continue to ignore obvious differences between Lt. Day's rifle and CE 139. Let's review them:

One, CE 139 has the markings "CAL" and "Made Italy" on it, but we can see from enlargements of the high-resolution picture of Lt. Day carrying the rifle outside the TSBD that the rifle he's holding does not have these markings. They're just not there. 

Two, the scope on Lt. Day's rifle is clearly different from the scope on CE 139. Is anyone seriously going to argue that the scopes are the same?

Three, the flange behind the "Made Italy" stamp under the scope is not the same as the one on CE139. CE 139's flange has a noticeable ridge, but the flange on Lt. Day's rifle does not. Is anyone going to say they do not see the ridge on CE 139's flange, and the fact that the flange on the Day rifle has no such ridge?

Four, the distance from the flange to the sight is different on the rifles. Isn't this readily apparent to anyone with decent eyesight?

We can all see these things. They are plainly visible. The problem is that you folks won't allow yourselves to process these undeniable visible facts because you are ideologically and emotionally committed to the belief that there was no evidence tampering and hence no cover-up.

[Richard Smith]

I gather some CT'ers believe in fact a Mauser, likely the true murder weapon, was first found on TSBD6, and then a M-C was subbed in, but not CE 139.

That is to say Lt. Day carried another M-C from TSBD to the DPD HQ, and then CE 139 was subbed in for the ersatz M-C inside the DPD.

That stretches credulity. Besides all that, the M-C was serviceable rifle (or carbine) at 70 yards.

And imagine the unnecessary complexity and risk of this as part of some conspiracy plan.  They shot Oswald with one rifle, frame Oswald with another rifle, do the old switcharoo but only after allowing the original rifle to be filmed and photographed.  It is very silly.  Anyone who goes down that rabbit hole is not series about the evidence but exercising some subjective theory that comports to their desired narrative.