Yet Another Bullet That the Lone-Gunman Theory Cannot Explain

[Tim Nickerson]

I can understand Young confusing the Queen Mary with JFK's limo. There were times during JFK's presidency when the Queen Mary was used instead of the Lincoln that was his primary limo. His recollections about a bullet having been recovered from either limo aren't credible at all.

BTW, thank you for posting the document regarding Mills finding the bullet fragment in JFK's limo, even though it showed one of my beliefs was wrong. I'm always glad to learn something I had not known before.

You're welcome. The wannabe Oswald legal defense team will object to those two fragments from being admitted into court as evidence.

[John Corbett]

You're welcome. The wannabe Oswald legal defense team will object to those two fragments from being admitted into court as evidence.

That is one of the reasons I found it strange that the Secret Service agents would allow a Navy NCO to assist in recovering evidence. If the fragment was found by someone other than a law enforcement officer, that could have tainted the discovery since they didn't have complete control of the limo during the search. Those are the kind of technicalities that arouse out of rulings by the Warren Court later in the decade so it's understandable why the Secret Service would not have been too uptight about having a Navy man assist in the search at the time.

I can picture Mills and Martinell showing up to collect the bone fragments that had already been found and the Secret Service was still going over the limo with a fine tooth comb. Maybe they just said, "Do you guys need any help looking for stuff" and the Secret Service saying, "Sure, why not".

[Mitch Todd]

Well then, it should be easy to find clarification in the official documents for such a major discrepancy.
Missile is a bullet, I'm not aware of any reference of other fragments found in this case called "missiles".
Even if "removed" Humes made no further reference to it, The document was hidden until 1972.

Find an official reference that missile means fragment would clarify it as not just another lame excuse

Since you are just going to repeat yourself, I'll respond with what I said the last time:

The "major discrepancy" exists only in your own head and nowhere else. "Missile" has a range of meanings, and the fragments exchanged for the receipt falls within that. For that matter, Sibert and O'Neil both talk about the fragments and the receipt exchanged therefore in their ARRB depositions.

Sibert and O'Neill also talked to the HSCA about the receipt. As in their HSCA depositions, they said the receipt was exchanged for fragments, not a bullet. Griffith and Corbett have already found this, but you are far, far behind everyone else.

[Zeon Mason]

So the SS agents that searched the limo 1st for some reason missed finding a whole intact bullet. Then 2 Navy Vets were sent to search the limo and Lo and Behold there’s some sort of bullet ( ball nosed or conical? What caliber?) in plain sight which was “recoved” and labeled as “missile”.

It’s that damn Mandela effect, I’m telling ya. It’s altering time in the quantum physics world due to the CERN particle accelerator experiment that discovered the “God” particle. 

[John Corbett]

You're welcome. The wannabe Oswald legal defense team will object to those two fragments from being admitted into court as evidence.

When I first read this, I thought you were being facetious but the more I thought about this, I wonder if that could have been a real problem. By allowing the Navy corpsman to assist in the search of the limo, it could be argued that the Secret Service had failed to secure the crime scene, and the limo was a crime scene. That could make any evidence collected from the limo inadmissible. Since the fragmented bullet was from the kill shot to the head, without those fragments being admitted, it could be problematic proving Oswald had caused the death of JFK. Henry Wade could have still prosecuted Oswald for Tippit's murder and that too was a capital crime, but it might not have been possible to convict Oswald for JFK's murder.

This might seem a bit farfetched but keep in mind this was before the Warren Court greatly expanding the exclusionary rule which allowed defense attorneys to get incriminating evidence dismissed on very technical grounds. I can't remember the exact case but I seem to remember a case where the police department had seized a car and taken it to a private garage to be searched for evidence. It turned out the city's contract with the private garage had expired so technically the car was no longer in possession of the police department and therefore all the evidence taken from the car was ruled inadmissible.

If there are any lawyers among our readers, I wonder if they could weigh in on this issue.

[Tim Nickerson]

When I first read this, I thought you were being facetious but the more I thought about this, I wonder if that could have been a real problem. By allowing the Navy corpsman to assist in the search of the limo, it could be argued that the Secret Service had failed to secure the crime scene, and the limo was a crime scene. That could make any evidence collected from the limo inadmissible. Since the fragmented bullet was from the kill shot to the head, without those fragments being admitted, it could be problematic proving Oswald had caused the death of JFK. Henry Wade could have still prosecuted Oswald for Tippit's murder and that too was a capital crime, but it might not have been possible to convict Oswald for JFK's murder.

This might seem a bit farfetched but keep in mind this was before the Warren Court greatly expanding the exclusionary rule which allowed defense attorneys to get incriminating evidence dismissed on very technical grounds. I can't remember the exact case but I seem to remember a case where the police department had seized a car and taken it to a private garage to be searched for evidence. It turned out the city's contract with the private garage had expired so technically the car was no longer in possession of the police department and therefore all the evidence taken from the car was ruled inadmissible.

If there are any lawyers among our readers, I wonder if they could weigh in on this issue.

There is no way that any of the evidence recovered from the limo would be ruled inadmissible. The limo was in the White House garage. It was secure. Read up on Case law.

[Tim Nickerson]

When I first read this, I thought you were being facetious but the more I thought about this, I wonder if that could have been a real problem. By allowing the Navy corpsman to assist in the search of the limo, it could be argued that the Secret Service had failed to secure the crime scene, and the limo was a crime scene. That could make any evidence collected from the limo inadmissible. Since the fragmented bullet was from the kill shot to the head, without those fragments being admitted, it could be problematic proving Oswald had caused the death of JFK. Henry Wade could have still prosecuted Oswald for Tippit's murder and that too was a capital crime, but it might not have been possible to convict Oswald for JFK's murder.

This might seem a bit farfetched but keep in mind this was before the Warren Court greatly expanding the exclusionary rule which allowed defense attorneys to get incriminating evidence dismissed on very technical grounds. I can't remember the exact case but I seem to remember a case where the police department had seized a car and taken it to a private garage to be searched for evidence. It turned out the city's contract with the private garage had expired so technically the car was no longer in possession of the police department and therefore all the evidence taken from the car was ruled inadmissible.

If there are any lawyers among our readers, I wonder if they could weigh in on this issue.

I know well the problem of inaccuracy with Ai, but Grok has a good record from my experience. Not perfect mind you. But the following is worth considering

https://x.com/i/grok/share/f4b0c295a9a446d880d81dd59cb3e15e