JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Martin Weidmann on September 27, 2018, 03:43:32 AM
-
John Mytton has been making a big deal about the lack of proof for evidence having been manufactured or planted.
This obviously also includes the bullet now in evidence as CE399, which according to John Mytton (and others) was found by Tomlinson at Parkland Hospital, but when I asked John to first show that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is in fact the same bullet that was found by Tomlinson, he became extremely evasive. I find this somewhat strange because before you can discuss the possibility of evidence being manufactured or planted, you need to establish if an item is actually evidence at all.
At the moment I am having serious doubts, for a number of reasons, that the bullet now in evidence CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital, but if anybody can show, with anything beyond mere assumption, it was, I'll be more than happy to be convinced otherwise?.
Please post your evidence to show the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is the same bullet Tomlinson found, so it can be discussed?.
-
Where are the SBT experts on this?
-
Maybe this man's argument is what you are looking for and why CE399 is not considered legitimate evidence. Basically chain of command of evidence was not followed!
https://hybridrogue1.wordpress.com/2016/03/28/forensics-ballistics-jfk/ (https://hybridrogue1.wordpress.com/2016/03/28/forensics-ballistics-jfk/)
"CHAINS OF CUSTODY"
?In this article I address the chain of custody for the so-called ?magic bullet,? otherwise known as Commission Exhibit 399 (or CE399). According to the Warren Commission, this bullet wounded both President Kennedy and Governor John Connally.
In fact, the chain of custody for this central piece of evidence is non-existent. The true and amazing story about the near-pristine ?magic bullet? found at Parkland Hospital shortly after JFK?s assassination has been carefully pieced together by analysts such as Sylvia Meagher in the ?60s and John Hunt in the past few years.
Although Secret Service agent Richard Johnsen received the bullet in Parkland Hospital by about 1:30 p.m., an hour after the assassination, Johnsen?s initials are nowhere on the magic bullet, despite regulations mandating Secret Service agents to initial forensic evidence.
Johnsen handed the bullet to the Secret Service Chief James Rowley at Andrews Air Force Base at about 7:30 p.m., who didn?t initial it either. Neither Johnsen nor Rowley could identify the bullet when shown it later." ......
Interesting discussion ensued about the hulls and then back to the CE399:
"Considering the time zones, it was between 90 minutes and 2 hours after the arrival of those fragments at the FBI labs, that Tomlinson was awakened by someone from the FBI, demanding that he ?keep his mouth shut? about the bullet he found at Parkland hospital. This is from the recorded 1967 interview of Tomlinson by Ray Marcus. The interview is also documented in the HSCA records.
Tomlinson: On Friday morning about 12:30 to 1 o?clock ? uh, excuse me, that?s Saturday morning ? after the assassination, the FBI woke me up on the phone and told me to to keep my mouth shut.
Marcus: About the circumstances of your finding the bullet?
Tomlinson: That is (one short word, unintelligible) what I found?
Marcus: I understand exactly what you mean, when they call you, it?s pretty authoritative. But the thing is this, did they say ? was there any particular thing about what they said or they just didn?t want you to talk about it period?
Tomlinson: Just don?t talk about it period.
[?]
In contrast to all of these very solid corroborations, we have 100% denial by the four men who examined the bullet that Tomlinson found, that it was CE399. Unlike many other issues related to the case, this one is not a tough call. It seems that J. Edgar Hoover agreed, because in recordings of telephone conversations between him and LBJ, he suggested that Connally was wounded because he came between the President and an assassin, and that if Connally had not come between them, JFK would have taken his bullet."
....(added as argument continues and comes back)
"Within an hour after the assassination, Johnsen was given the bullet by Parkland hospital security director O.P. Wright, after orderly Darrell Tomlinson found it by a stretcher. Like Johnsen and Rowley, neither Wright nor Tomlinson could identify the bullet.
_______________________________________________________________
The first 4 links in the chain of custody of the bullet found a Parkland are unable to identify it as CE399.
They are:
1. Orderly Darrell Tomlinson >>
2. Parkland hospital security director O.P. Wright >>
3. SS Agent Richard Johnsen >>
4. Agent Rowley (Secret Service Chief).
A break in the chain of custody at this proximate point proves that the bullet of record, CE399 is NOT the bullet found at parkland, and therefor CE399 is a planted bullet by the highest authorities themselves."
Footnote: Consider that SS Agent Dick Johnsen was the one assigned by Clint Hill to accompany JFK's body on the airplane. It seemed this was necessary to make sure no body switching conspiracy could ever have deemed to have happened! (Tippit was a look alike some have conjectured). Then, we also learn that this same Dick Johnsen is the one who also carries the magic bullet CE399 during its path to the crime lab. It seems also that Clint Hill (Mrs. Kennedy's SS body guard) takes control of the whole crime scene. Was not Emory Roberts the man in charge?
-
Maybe this man's argument is what you are looking for and why CE399 is not considered legitimate evidence. Basically chain of command of evidence was not followed!
https://hybridrogue1.wordpress.com/2016/03/28/forensics-ballistics-jfk/ (https://hybridrogue1.wordpress.com/2016/03/28/forensics-ballistics-jfk/)
"CHAINS OF CUSTODY"
?In this article I address the chain of custody for the so-called ?magic bullet,? otherwise known as Commission Exhibit 399 (or CE399). According to the Warren Commission, this bullet wounded both President Kennedy and Governor John Connally.
In fact, the chain of custody for this central piece of evidence is non-existent. The true and amazing story about the near-pristine ?magic bullet? found at Parkland Hospital shortly after JFK?s assassination has been carefully pieced together by analysts such as Sylvia Meagher in the ?60s and John Hunt in the past few years.
Although Secret Service agent Richard Johnsen received the bullet in Parkland Hospital by about 1:30 p.m., an hour after the assassination, Johnsen?s initials are nowhere on the magic bullet, despite regulations mandating Secret Service agents to initial forensic evidence.
Johnsen handed the bullet to the Secret Service Chief James Rowley at Andrews Air Force Base at about 7:30 p.m., who didn?t initial it either. Neither Johnsen nor Rowley could identify the bullet when shown it later." ......
Interesting discussion ensued about the hulls and then back to the CE399:
"Considering the time zones, it was between 90 minutes and 2 hours after the arrival of those fragments at the FBI labs, that Tomlinson was awakened by someone from the FBI, demanding that he ?keep his mouth shut? about the bullet he found at Parkland hospital. This is from the recorded 1967 interview of Tomlinson by Ray Marcus. The interview is also documented in the HSCA records.
Tomlinson: On Friday morning about 12:30 to 1 o?clock ? uh, excuse me, that?s Saturday morning ? after the assassination, the FBI woke me up on the phone and told me to to keep my mouth shut.
Marcus: About the circumstances of your finding the bullet?
Tomlinson: That is (one short word, unintelligible) what I found?
Marcus: I understand exactly what you mean, when they call you, it?s pretty authoritative. But the thing is this, did they say ? was there any particular thing about what they said or they just didn?t want you to talk about it period?
Tomlinson: Just don?t talk about it period.
[?]
In contrast to all of these very solid corroborations, we have 100% denial by the four men who examined the bullet that Tomlinson found, that it was CE399. Unlike many other issues related to the case, this one is not a tough call. It seems that J. Edgar Hoover agreed, because in recordings of telephone conversations between him and LBJ, he suggested that Connally was wounded because he came between the President and an assassin, and that if Connally had not come between them, JFK would have taken his bullet."
....(added as argument continues and comes back)
"Within an hour after the assassination, Johnsen was given the bullet by Parkland hospital security director O.P. Wright, after orderly Darrell Tomlinson found it by a stretcher. Like Johnsen and Rowley, neither Wright nor Tomlinson could identify the bullet.
_______________________________________________________________
The first 4 links in the chain of custody of the bullet found a Parkland are unable to identify it as CE399.
They are:
1. Orderly Darrell Tomlinson >>
2. Parkland hospital security director O.P. Wright >>
3. SS Agent Richard Johnsen >>
4. Agent Rowley (Secret Service Chief).
A break in the chain of custody at this proximate point proves that the bullet of record, CE399 is NOT the bullet found at parkland, and therefor CE399 is a planted bullet by the highest authorities themselves."
Footnote: Consider that SS Agent Dick Johnsen was the one assigned by Clint Hill to accompany JFK's body on the airplane. It seemed this was necessary to make sure no body switching conspiracy could ever have deemed to have happened! (Tippit was a look alike some have conjectured). Then, we also learn that this same Dick Johnsen is the one who also carries the magic bullet CE399 during its path to the crime lab. It seems also that Clint Hill (Mrs. Kennedy's SS body guard) takes control of the whole crime scene. Was not Emory Roberts the man in charge?
Thumb1:
-
Response from the "Oswald did it" crowd:
(https://i.giphy.com/media/HkyKoqokMDq1i/giphy.webp)
-
I don't doubt that CE399 is the bullet that was found at Parkland....but how it got there cannot be proven.
I don't doubt that it was fired from C2766....but when and where cannot be proven.
-
I don't doubt that CE399 is the bullet that was found at Parkland....but how it got there cannot be proven.
I don't doubt that it was fired from C2766....but when and where cannot be proven.
How would you deduce that conclusion (out of thin air?) when no one wants to vouch for it and say that it is the same one that they had their hands on? Everyone is washing their hands of it and has disassociated themselves with it. A better and more appropriate question to ask the authorities who broke with procedure: "Did you sign or initial any such bullet as evidence? Were there witnesses? Why not?" Answer this question and you KNOW that there was such a bullet other than the one shown at CE399! The procedure was not followed and they knew better about the evidence chain procedures if and when it was obtained - all law enforcement officers upholding the law are very aware of it - even in the 60s! You just can't place something in as evidence without paperwork!
You don't just file something in the evidence bin. There must be a system that is followed - otherwise you don't have a justice system and it becomes a "kangaroo" court where anyone can add and take away items from the "evidence folder" at will! Absolutely no one will vouch for CE399 - therefore not evidence at all of anything coming from Parkland. Even with the particles from the "CE 399 tumbling bullet", what chain of command did they go through? Were they initialed by the authorities dealing with hospital staff after removing from JC? Does someone have a signature on that evidence bag or paper trail and admit to introducing it? You need a witness of the transaction and someone vouching for the hand-off. Otherwise someone could scrape a little bit off the end of the bullet and claim this is what they found at the lab!
-
It's as much a truly sad state of affairs as highly revealing about their lack of confidence in their own arguments that, so far, no LN has had the guts to even try and show that the bullet now known as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital!
How can you have a SBT when you can't even demonstrate the authenticity of the most important bullet in that tale?
-
I don't doubt that CE399 is the bullet that was found at Parkland....but how it got there cannot be proven.
I don't doubt that it was fired from C2766....but when and where cannot be proven.
If you don't doubt that CE399 was fired from C2766: How was Oswald's Carcano rifle obtained from the Paine's garage and put back there?
Easy stuff like: Who, When etc?
-
Response from the "Oswald did it" crowd: (https://i.giphy.com/media/HkyKoqokMDq1i/giphy.webp)
That's a devil of a challenge, John. >:(
Good to see you are still using my "ODIA" acronym. Oswald did it... alone.
I know it's hard for you to accept this fact: The ballistic tests that link CE399 to C2766 "to the exclusion of all other weapons" is sufficient to confirm that the "almost whole" missile is one of the three shots fired from the SE corner of the TSBD at President Kennedy.
To successfully challenge that fact requires "supporting evidence". Some sort of plausible narrative with names, places and times will do.
-
If you don't doubt that CE399 was fired from C2766: How was Oswald's Carcano rifle obtained from the Paine's garage and put back there?
Easy stuff like: Who, When etc?
Can you show that the rifle now in evidence as C2766 was ever stored in Ruth Paine's garage?
-
That's a devil of a challenge, John. >:(
Good to see you are still using my "ODIA" acronym. Oswald did it... alone.
I know it's hard for you to accept this fact: The ballistic tests that link CE399 to C2766 "to the exclusion of all other weapons" is sufficient to confirm that the "almost whole" missile is one of the three shots fired from the SE corner of the TSBD at President Kennedy.
To successfully challenge that fact requires "supporting evidence". Some sort of plausible narrative with names, places and times will do.
The ballistic tests that link CE399 to C2766 "to the exclusion of all other weapons" is sufficient to confirm that the "almost whole" missile is one of the three shots fired from the SE corner of the TSBD at President Kennedy.
Nope. Not even close! The ballistic tests only show that CE399 was fired by C2766... That's it! Everything else is your imagination.
-
The ballistic tests that link CE399 to C2766 "to the exclusion of all other weapons" is sufficient to confirm that the "almost whole" missile is one of the three shots fired from the SE corner of the TSBD at President Kennedy.
Nope. Not even close! The ballistic tests only show that CE399 was fired by C2766... That's it! Everything else is your imagination.
You're wrong! Apart from the Warren Commission Report: Joseph D. Nichol (Superintendent of the Bureau of Criminal Investigation for the State Of Illinois) was interviewed by CBS for the 1967 Investigation into the Warren Report.
Walter Lister CBS: "In the case of the virtually intact bullet that was found on a stretcher in Parkland Hospital and the two fairly sizeable fragments found in the front of the Presidential limousine: you felt that those were definitely fired from Oswald's rifle"?
Joseph D. Nichol: "Yes sir".
Walter Lister CBS: "To the exclusion of all others"?
Joseph D. Nichol: "To the exclusion of all others - right".
Nichol's statement trumps YOUR imagination.
-
Can you show that the rifle now in evidence as C2766 was ever stored in Ruth Paine's garage?
From Wikipedia: Marina Oswald Porter
Marina learned of the assassination of President Kennedy from the media coverage of the event, and later, of the arrest of her husband. That afternoon, Dallas Police Department detectives arrived at the Paine household, and when asked if Lee owned a rifle, she gestured to the garage, where Oswald stored his rifle rolled up in a blanket; no rifle was found.
In case you get all cute and suggest the incident proves that the rifle was not in the garage: Marina expected it to be there!!!
In case you try to be even cuter and claim it was some other rifle: The rifle (C2766) in the national archives in Washington is the same one in the backyard photos taken at 214 W. Neely Street Dallas in late March of 1963.
Marina Oswald testified twice that she took the photos of Lee Oswald holding the rifle:
1.) The Warren Commission - 1964
2.) The House Select Committee on Assassinations - 1978
The rifle was taken from Dallas to New Orleans in Ruth Paine's station wagon and returned to the suburb of Irving in Dallas where it lay in a blanket in Paine's garage. Only a "confirmed" contrarian would believe that C2766 was never in the Paine's garage.
-
You're wrong! Apart from the Warren Commission Report: Joseph D. Nichol (Superintendent of the Bureau of Criminal Investigation for the State Of Illinois) was interviewed by CBS for the 1967 Investigation into the Warren Report.
Walter Lister CBS: "In the case of the virtually intact bullet that was found on a stretcher in Parkland Hospital and the two fairly sizeable fragments found in the front of the Presidential limousine: you felt that those were definitely fired from Oswald's rifle"?
Joseph D. Nichol: "Yes sir".
Walter Lister CBS: "To the exclusion of all others"?
Joseph D. Nichol: "To the exclusion of all others - right".
Nichol's statement trumps YOUR imagination.
What am I wrong about? Nichol merely confirms exactly what I said; that CE399 was fired by C2766
What Nichol does not confirm is that CE399 "is one of the three shots fired from the SE corner of the TSBD at President Kennedy." which is what you incorrectly claimed!
By the way, this question;
Walter Lister CBS: "In the case of the virtually intact bullet that was found on a stretcher in Parkland Hospital and the two fairly sizeable fragments found in the front of the Presidential limousine: you felt that those were definitely fired from Oswald's rifle"?
is extremely loaded as it assumes as fact that "the virtually intact bullet [i.e. CE399]" was indeed found at Parkland Hospital when there is no evidence to support that claim. The assumption that "two fairly sizeable fragments" were found in the limousine, when in fact they were handed to the FBI experts, upon their arrival at the Secret Service garage, by somebody who just claimed they were found in the limo. No photographs of the fragments in situ are available. And thirdly, it assumes that C2766 indeed is Oswald's rifle when the evidence for that is questionable.
-
From Wikipedia: Marina Oswald Porter
Marina learned of the assassination of President Kennedy from the media coverage of the event, and later, of the arrest of her husband. That afternoon, Dallas Police Department detectives arrived at the Paine household, and when asked if Lee owned a rifle, she gestured to the garage, where Oswald stored his rifle rolled up in a blanket; no rifle was found.
In case you get all cute and suggest the incident proves that the rifle was not in the garage: Marina expected it to be there!!!
In case you try to be even cuter and claim it was some other rifle: The rifle (C2766) in the national archives in Washington is the same one in the backyard photos taken at 214 W. Neely Street Dallas in late March of 1963.
Marina Oswald testified twice that she took the photos of Lee Oswald holding the rifle:
1.) The Warren Commission - 1964
2.) The House Select Committee on Assassinations - 1978
The rifle was taken from Dallas to New Orleans in Ruth Paine's station wagon and returned to the suburb of Irving in Dallas where it lay in a blanket in Paine's garage. Only a "confirmed" contrarian would believe that C2766 was never in the Paine's garage.
You don't get it.
It doesn't matter that Marina believed there was a rifle in Ruth Paine's garage or that Marina expected it to be there on 11/22/63. Marina testified she looked in the blanket only once, one week after she moved from New Orleans to Irving. This would roughly be the last week of September 1963. After that, Marina never looked in the package again and only assumed there was still a rifle there. In fact there may well have been a rifle there at some point but that does not automatically prove that it was the rifle now in evidence as C2766. Even worse, on Friday night 11/22/63 Marina was shown C2766 and she could not confirm it was the rifle she had seen in the blanket.
In case you try to be even cuter and claim it was some other rifle: The rifle (C2766) in the national archives in Washington is the same one in the backyard photos taken at 214 W. Neely Street Dallas in late March of 1963.
Really? Is there a number stamped in the rifle which is visible in the photos? Or are we playing the subjective "the lines and markings are the same" game again?
The rifle was taken from Dallas to New Orleans in Ruth Paine's station wagon and returned to the suburb of Irving in Dallas where it lay in a blanket in Paine's garage.
So now you can prove that the rifle allegedly transported by Ruth Paine was in fact the rifle now in evidence as C2766? Well.. go ahead and prove it.
Only a "confirmed" contrarian would believe that C2766 was never in the Paine's garage.
Oh no, you don't get to turn this around. You claim C2766 was stored in Ruth Paine's garage, so you have to prove it! Just because you believe it doesn't make it a fact!
-
No
-
Where are the SBT experts on this?
Where are the "SBFers" Jon? Some of the LNers claim that it is a fact so this should be easy for them. Right?
-
It's as much a truly sad state of affairs as highly revealing about their lack of confidence in their own arguments that, so far, no LN has had the guts to even try and show that the bullet now known as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital!
How can you have a SBT when you can't even demonstrate the authenticity of the most important bullet in that tale?
If you had a poll attached they would most likely have voted that they provided evidence for CE 399 being found even though they didn't.
-
That's a devil of a challenge, John. >:(
Good to see you are still using my "ODIA" acronym. Oswald did it... alone.
I know it's hard for you to accept this fact: The ballistic tests that link CE399 to C2766 "to the exclusion of all other weapons" is sufficient to confirm that the "almost whole" missile is one of the three shots fired from the SE corner of the TSBD at President Kennedy.
To successfully challenge that fact requires "supporting evidence". Some sort of plausible narrative with names, places and times will do.
This is why it is incumbent upon you to show that CE 399 was actually found at PH. Well?
-
From Wikipedia: Marina Oswald Porter
Marina learned of the assassination of President Kennedy from the media coverage of the event, and later, of the arrest of her husband. That afternoon, Dallas Police Department detectives arrived at the Paine household, and when asked if Lee owned a rifle, she gestured to the garage, where Oswald stored his rifle rolled up in a blanket; no rifle was found.
In case you get all cute and suggest the incident proves that the rifle was not in the garage: Marina expected it to be there!!!
In case you try to be even cuter and claim it was some other rifle: The rifle (C2766) in the national archives in Washington is the same one in the backyard photos taken at 214 W. Neely Street Dallas in late March of 1963.
Marina Oswald testified twice that she took the photos of Lee Oswald holding the rifle:
1.) The Warren Commission - 1964
2.) The House Select Committee on Assassinations - 1978
The rifle was taken from Dallas to New Orleans in Ruth Paine's station wagon and returned to the suburb of Irving in Dallas where it lay in a blanket in Paine's garage. Only a "confirmed" contrarian would believe that C2766 was never in the Paine's garage.
Can you provide evidence that shows the Oswalds lived at the Neely Street address?
-
In 54 years has it ever been proven that CE399 is the bullet found at Parkland?
Originally CTers question if CE399 was found by the stretcher which held Connally.
Now they question if CE399 was found at Parkland.
In ten years, they will question if CE399 was found in Texas.
-
If you had a poll attached they would most likely have voted that they provided evidence for CE 399 being found even though they didn't.
No.
Don't confuse your lame ass threads (where you're violently beat over the head with the evidence) with Weidmann's reasonable one.
-
Can you provide evidence that shows the Oswalds lived at the Neely Street address?
Stop hijacking Weidmann's thread with your stupidity.
-
Originally CTers question if CE399 was found by the stretcher which held Connally.
Now they question if CE399 was found at Parkland.
In ten years, they will question if CE399 was found in Texas.
Originally CTers question if CE399 was found by the stretcher which held Connally.
Perhaps they initially just assumed that the bullet Tomlinson found was indeed the one now in evidence as CE399, and only after more information came to light did they start to wonder if that assumption was justified.
Now they question if CE399 was found at Parkland.
Well, was it?
Was the bullet found by Tomlinson the same one that's now in evidence as CE399?
-
Originally CTers question if CE399 was found by the stretcher which held Connally.
Now they question if CE399 was found at Parkland.
In ten years, they will question if CE399 was found in Texas.
CE399 did have a tendency to move around, didn't it.
-
CE399 did have a tendency to move around, didn't it.
Thank you for not answering my very straight forward question. I will put you down as clueless!
-
Quote from: Jerry Freeman on September 28, 2018, 05:15:12 PM
I don't doubt that CE399 is the bullet that was found at Parkland....but how it got there cannot be proven.
I don't doubt that it was fired from C2766....but when and where cannot be proven.
If you don't doubt that CE399 was fired from C2766: How was Oswald's Carcano rifle obtained from the Paine's garage and put back there?
Now we went from moving a bullet around to moving a rifle around.
The only claim that there was a rifle in the garage was forced from Marina. Not Michael ..Not Ruthie..Marina was by this time just not credible. Even the Commission attorneys knew it. So what other proof is there that there was ever a rifle in the Paine garage at any time?
-
Stop hijacking Weidmann's thread with your stupidity.
Honestly that comment from Caprio
Can you provide evidence that shows the Oswalds lived at the Neely Street address?
shows that rather than assist in advancing the discussion he prefers to throw out an anchor at every turn to try and stifle the discussion by preventing it from moving past square one. Some of these discussions have been around in a circle three times just this year alone.
-
At trial, CE-399 would most likely be determined to be admissible. Most evidence, if the only issue with it is a questionable chain of custody, is indeed admissible. It is then left up to the jury to decide how much weight to give a certain piece of evidence with a questionable chain of custody.
The trial judge would admit the bullet. A questionable chain of custody of CE-399 may affect how much weight the jury gives the bullet but a questionable chain, on its own, does not affect it's admissibility.
The single bullet that passed through both Kennedy and Connally and ended up in Connally's thigh must, at some point, be found somewhere. Even if this bullet was NOT CE-399, it is a must that this bullet would be found by someone somewhere. No other bullet has ever been found (in Connally's thigh or elsewhere). Even if you do not believe in the single bullet theory, the fact remains that a bullet lodged itself in Connally's left thigh.
To any conspiracy advocate, especially the original poster of this thread, have you ever seen any evidence put forth which suggests that a bullet, other than CE-399, was found inside Connally's thigh or anywhere else related to the known movements of the bodies of both Kennedy and Connally?
On the night of the assassination and overnight into Saturday morning, the limousine was searched by the FBI. They were looking for evidence. Smaller fragments were found but no intact bullet, like 399, was found. No other bullet has ever been turned in and placed into the record and this circumstantial evidence alone gets 399 admitted into evidence.
It's up to the jury to decide, based on a questionable chain of custody, how much weight to give CE-399 as the bullet found at Parkland.
Also, it is up to the defense, since CE-399 was linked to Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world, to convince the jury that CE-399 was NOT the bullet found at the hospital. Has anyone in this forum (or anywhere else) done so?
-
Honestly that comment from Caprio shows that rather than assist in advancing the discussion he prefers to throw out an anchor at every turn to try and stifle the discussion by preventing it from moving past square one.
You are 100% correct.
He's a disgrace to all credible people who believe in a conspiracy and who evaluate the evidence in an honest manner.
-
How did the conspirators (name your favourite one here; SS, CIA, FBI, Mafia etc) know they should plant a bullet in the first place? Secondly how did they know the degree of damage to the planted bullet so it matched the wounds? Ten minutes after the bullet was found JFK was still on his back on the operating table. The casket hadn't even arrived. There had been no discussion between the two groups of surgeons.
Maybe the conspirators carried a case with a dozen bullets in various stages of damage for the remote chance that the result of their ambush meant that a plant was needed. That would have required some incredible foresight. How could they be sure that the planted bullet would be found by someone with a responsible attitude like Tomlinson rather than a cleaner simply pushing the whole lot down a laundry chute?
-
At trial, CE-399 would most likely be determined to be admissible. Most evidence, if the only issue with it is a questionable chain of custody, is indeed admissible. It is then left up to the jury to decide how much weight to give a certain piece of evidence with a questionable chain of custody.
The trial judge would admit the bullet. A questionable chain of custody of CE-399 may affect how much weight the jury gives the bullet but a questionable chain, on its own, does not affect it's admissibility.
The single bullet that passed through both Kennedy and Connally and ended up in Connally's thigh must, at some point, be found somewhere. Even if this bullet was NOT CE-399, it is a must that this bullet would be found by someone somewhere. No other bullet has ever been found (in Connally's thigh or elsewhere). Even if you do not believe in the single bullet theory, the fact remains that a bullet lodged itself in Connally's left thigh.
To any conspiracy advocate, especially the original poster of this thread, have you ever seen any evidence put forth which suggests that a bullet, other than CE-399, was found inside Connally's thigh or anywhere else related to the known movements of the bodies of both Kennedy and Connally?
On the night of the assassination and overnight into Saturday morning, the limousine was searched by the FBI. They were looking for evidence. Smaller fragments were found but no intact bullet, like 399, was found. No other bullet has ever been turned in and placed into the record and this circumstantial evidence alone gets 399 admitted into evidence.
It's up to the jury to decide, based on a questionable chain of custody, how much weight to give CE-399 as the bullet found at Parkland.
Also, it is up to the defense, since CE-399 was linked to Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world, to convince the jury that CE-399 was NOT the bullet found at the hospital. Has anyone in this forum (or anywhere else) done so?
For once I'll make the exception of responding for the purpose of advancing the discussion.
At trial, CE-399 would most likely be determined to be admissible. Most evidence, if the only issue with it is a questionable chain of custody, is indeed admissible. It is then left up to the jury to decide how much weight to give a certain piece of evidence with a questionable chain of custody.
The trial judge would admit the bullet. A questionable chain of custody of CE-399 may affect how much weight the jury gives the bullet but a questionable chain, on its own, does not affect it's admissibility.
It is pointless to speculate about the admissibility of evidence at trial as there will never be a trial. It's an understandable go-to position exactly because of the massive problems with the chain of custody as assuming CE399 would be admissible gets you passed the problem of having to explain and/or discuss the problems with the chain of custody.
The single bullet that passed through both Kennedy and Connally and ended up in Connally's thigh must, at some point, be found somewhere. Even if this bullet was NOT CE-399, it is a must that this bullet would be found by someone somewhere. No other bullet has ever been found (in Connally's thigh or elsewhere). Even if you do not believe in the single bullet theory, the fact remains that a bullet lodged itself in Connally's left thigh.
Apart from the flawed assumption that there ever was such a thing as a single bullet, the argument that a bullet would have to be found by someone somewhere doesn't hold water for several reasons;
1. There was a shot that missed. That bullet was never found proving that there is no certainty that a bullet would ever be found.
2. Allegedly bullet fragments were found in the limo. There is no reason to assume that these could not have come from a bullet that hit Kennedy or Connally or both.
3. If the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is in fact not the bullet found by Tomlinson at Parkland, it means there was evidence tampering involved. In such a case it would just as easy to make a bullet disappear as it is to make one appear.
To any conspiracy advocate, especially the original poster of this thread, have you ever seen any evidence put forth which suggests that a bullet, other than CE-399, was found inside Connally's thigh or anywhere else related to the known movements of the bodies of both Kennedy and Connally?
First of all, I'm not so sure that the movements of the bodies are known to any degree of certainty. There seems to be a lot of discussion about that. Secondly, the question is a loaded one as it assumes that the bullet that went through Connally was found. Thirdly, it implicitly suggests that the bullet that Tomlinson found was indeed (1) the bullet that went throught Connally and (2) is indeed the bullet now in evidence as CE399.
A far better question would be if I have ever seen evidence that the bullet found by Tomlinson was not the one that's now in evidence as CE399 and my answer would be; yes! There are indicators all over the place about how something is extremely wrong the the CE399 tale.
There is the statement made by O.P. Wright in 1966 (In "six seconds in Dallas") describing a completely different bullet as the one now known as CE399, there is the interview of Tomlinson by Raymond Marcus (part of the HSCA files) in which Tomlinson says that he was only shown a bullet for identification once and that was by SAC Shanklin in early December 1963 (I believe Shanklin showed him the actual bullet at that time) which contradicts the FBI claim in CE2011 that Odum showed CE399 to Tomlinson and Wright in mid 1964 (which Odum also denied ever doing) and the FBI Airtel written by Shanklin saying that Tomlinson and Wright could not identify the bullet allegedly shown to them by Odum. I believe Shanklin wrote that Airtel because he knew or at least understood, based on his interview with Tomlinson in December 1863) that there was a big problem with the bullet now known as CE399.
Granted, it's circumstantial, but if CE399 was on the up and up none of this would ever have happened or have been necessary (IMO)!
On the night of the assassination and overnight into Saturday morning, the limousine was searched by the FBI. They were looking for evidence. Smaller fragments were found but no intact bullet, like 399, was found.
Yes, the FBI searched the limo at the Secret Service garage, but they were not the ones who found the bullet fragments. Those fragments were in fact given to them when they arrived a the garage at around 11 pm that night and they were told they had been found in the limo.
No other bullet has ever been turned in and placed into the record and this circumstantial evidence alone gets 399 admitted into evidence.
It's up to the jury to decide, based on a questionable chain of custody, how much weight to give CE-399 as the bullet found at Parkland.
Evidence doesn't get admitted just because no other evidence has turned up. Besides there may well be strategic reasons for the defense not to oppose a motion to introduce CE399 into evidence. Admittance into evidence does not validate that evidence one way or the other, so to make the argument that it would be admitted as if it means something is just silly.
It also does not answer my basic question; Can you or anybody else show that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland?
Also, it is up to the defense, since CE-399 was linked to Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world, to convince the jury that CE-399 was NOT the bullet found at the hospital. Has anyone in this forum (or anywhere else) done so?
There is and never will be a jury to convince and even if there was, the burden of proof always rests on the shoulders of the prosecutor!
-
How did the conspirators (name your favourite one here; SS, CIA, FBI, Mafia etc) know they should plant a bullet in the first place? Secondly how did they know the degree of damage to the planted bullet so it matched the wounds? Ten minutes after the bullet was found JFK was still on his back on the operating table. The casket hadn't even arrived. There had been no discussion between the two groups of surgeons.
Maybe the conspirators carried a case with a dozen bullets in various stages of damage for the remote chance that the result of their ambush meant that a plant was needed. That would have required some incredible foresight. How could they be sure that the planted bullet would be found by someone with a responsible attitude like Tomlinson rather than a cleaner simply pushing the whole lot down a laundry chute?
How did the conspirators (name your favourite one here; SS, CIA, FBI, Mafia etc) know they should plant a bullet in the first place?
Silly question. You seem to be too hung up on the idea that conspirators controlled every aspect of the case, which is simply impossible. Perhaps there was no bullet planted at all. Perhaps it was just a bullet found on another unrelated stretcher which came in handy. Ever thought about that?
Everything else in your argument is flawed simply because it expands further on the primary notion that a bullet was planted when there is no certainty it actually was.
-
At trial, CE-399 would most likely be determined to be admissible. Most evidence, if the only issue with it is a questionable chain of custody, is indeed admissible. It is then left up to the jury to decide how much weight to give a certain piece of evidence with a questionable chain of custody.
The trial judge would admit the bullet. A questionable chain of custody of CE-399 may affect how much weight the jury gives the bullet but a questionable chain, on its own, does not affect it's admissibility.
It is pointless to speculate about the admissibility of evidence at trial as there will never be a trial. It's an understandable go-to position exactly because of the massive problems with the chain of custody as assuming CE399 would be admissible gets you passed the problem of having to explain and/or discuss the problems with the chain of custody.
Of course there will never be a real trial. If there is no trial, then the phrase "massive problems with the chain of custody" (your phrase, not mine) is irrelevant.
-
Of course there will never be a real trial. If there is no trial, then the phrase "massive problems with the chain of custody"(your phrase, not mine) is irrelevant.
It's just as irrelevant as claiming evidence would be admitted at a trial that will never be.
Now, can you show that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital?
-
... You seem to be too hung up on the idea that conspirators controlled every aspect of the case ...
So who are these conspirators you speak of? I hope you're not simply another contrarian like one or two others here who refuse to put their cards on the table.
Oh, it would be good if you would create a simple list of some aspects of the case that the conspirators did control and those they didn't control. That shouldn't be too hard?
-
So if it wasn't planted Tomlinson found a bullet fired from Oswald's rifle.
So what's your position? Did the bullet get planted or was it fired from Oswald's rifle less than an hour earlier and the official line is correct?
I don't have a position, but (and this might confuse you) I don't think any bullet was planted at Parkland Hospital.
I just want to see any evidence that shows that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital. Do you have any?
-
I don't have a position ...
Just as I thought. So was there a conspiracy? If so who was the mastermind? What did they have control over and what didn't they have control over? You must have some inkling surely. If there wasn't a conspiracy why would there be a switch of bullets? Put something on the table.
-
So who are these conspirators you speak of? I hope you're not simply another contrarian like one or two others here who refuse to put their cards on the table.
Oh, it would be good if you would create a simple list of some aspects of the case that the conspirators did control and those they didn't control. That shouldn't be too hard?
So who are these conspirators you speak of?
That I speak of? You were the one who brought them up;
How did the conspirators (name your favourite one here; SS, CIA, FBI, Mafia etc) know they should plant a bullet in the first place?
so why don't you tell me
Oh, it would be good if you would create a simple list of some aspects of the case that the conspirators did control and those they didn't control. That shouldn't be too hard?
There you go again, rambling on about some conspirators when all I doing is ask for evidence that proved the "Oswald did it" mantra.
-
Just as I thought.
Is it a problem for you that I don't have a position? Are you one of those who think that whatever they believe must be true [unless proven wrong - which for most LNs is impossible to begin with] and anybody who asks for evidence to show their position is correct is somehow a contrarian.
What's the problem? You like stating your case, you just don't like proving it?
-
Is it a problem for you that I don't have a position? Are you one of those who think that whatever they believe must be true [unless proven wrong - which for most LNs is impossible to begin with] and anybody who asks for evidence to show their position is correct is somehow a contrarian.
What's the problem? You like stating your case, you just don't like proving it?
This is simply a waste of time. When you have something to contribute put it on the table.
Until then you have nothing.
-
This is simply a waste of time. When you have something to contribute put it on the table.
Until then you have nothing.
Pretty pathetic reply which only shows you just don't get it.
Let me spell it out for you: you don't get to be right until somebody proves you wrong. You need to prove your case and your are failing big time!
I don't need to prove anything and I actually did contribute something. I showed that no LN is even remotely able to provide proof that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital. The sound of silence is enough to prove the fact!
When you claim that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was found at Parkland Hospital, you need to prove it and you can't. It's as simple as that.... that's why you play these stupid "shifting the burden of proof" games.
Come back any time when you have something to back up your belief.....
For the time being, I'll just consider you to be out of your league
-
The single bullet that passed through both Kennedy and Connally and ended up in Connally's thigh must, at some point, be found somewhere. Even if this bullet was NOT CE-399, it is a must that this bullet would be found by someone somewhere. No other bullet has ever been found (in Connally's thigh or elsewhere). Even if you do not believe in the single bullet theory, the fact remains that a bullet lodged itself in Connally's left thigh.
Apart from the flawed assumption that there ever was such a thing as a single bullet, the argument that a bullet would have to be found by someone somewhere doesn't hold water for several reasons;
1. There was a shot that missed. That bullet was never found proving that there is no certainty that a bullet would ever be found.
2. Allegedly bullet fragments were found in the limo. There is no reason to assume that these could not have come from a bullet that hit Kennedy or Connally or both.
3. If the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is in fact not the bullet found by Tomlinson at Parkland, it means there was evidence tampering involved. In such a case it would just as easy to make a bullet disappear as it is to make one appear.
Apart from the flawed assumption that there ever was such a thing as a single bullet,
This is simply erroneous. I did include the point that even if one does not believe in the single bullet theory, the fact remains that a bullet entered Connally's left thigh.
the argument that a bullet would have to be found by someone somewhere doesn't hold water for several reasons;
1. There was a shot that missed. That bullet was never found proving that there is no certainty that a bullet would ever be found.
False premise. That a bullet fired from the missed shot was never found certainly does NOT prove that there is no certainty that the bullet which hit Connally's left thigh would ever be found.
2. Allegedly bullet fragments were found in the limo. There is no reason to assume that these could not have come from a bullet that hit Kennedy or Connally or both.
Neutron activation analysis showed that fragments removed from Kennedy's brain matched the two larger fragments found inside the limo.
Through neutron activation analysis, all of the bullet fragments removed from the bodies of both Kennedy and Connally were traced to two bullets, no more, no less. NAA showed that all of the fragments taken from the bodies of Kennedy and Connally came from either CE-399 or from the bullet which the two larger fragments (found inside the limo) came from. These two larger fragments were found, by use of NAA, to have come from the same bullet.
It was proved (by the FBI) that CE-399 was fired from Oswald's rifle. It was also proved (by the FBI) that that the two larger fragments found inside the limo were fragments from a bullet fired from Oswald's rifle.
However, I will add that all of this is dependent on how much validity one chooses to give the NAA study of CE-399 and all relevant fragments.
But, choosing to dismiss the NAA study does not automatically infer that the fragments found inside the limo did not come from the same bullet which left fragments in Kennedy's brain (that were removed at autopsy).
3. If the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is in fact not the bullet found by Tomlinson at Parkland, it means there was evidence tampering involved. In such a case it would just as easy to make a bullet disappear as it is to make one appear.
Agreed.
Now the million dollar question. I really don't wish to engage in polemics, but you haven't shown anything which suggests that someone made a bullet appear, i.e. CE-399 isn't genuine.
-
This is simply erroneous. I did include the point that even if one does not believe in the single bullet theory, the fact remains that a bullet lodged inside Connally's left thigh.
False premise. That a bullet fired from the missed shot was never found certainly does NOT prove that there is no certainty that the bullet which hit Connally's left thigh would ever be found.
Neutron activation analysis showed that fragments removed from Kennedy's brain matched the two larger fragments found inside the limo.
Through neutron activation analysis, all of the bullet fragments removed from the bodies of both Kennedy and Connally were traced to two bullets, no more, no less. NAA showed that all of the fragments taken from the bodies of Kennedy and Connally came from either CE-399 or from the bullet which the two larger fragments (found inside the limo) came from. These two larger fragments were found, by use of NAA, to have come from the same bullet.
It was proved (by the FBI) that CE-399 was fired from Oswald's rifle. It was also proved (by the FBI) that that the two larger fragments found inside the limo were fragments from a bullet fired from Oswald's rifle.
However, I will add that all of this is dependent on how much validity one chooses to give the NAA study of CE-399 and all relevant fragments.
But, choosing to dismiss the NAA study does not automatically infer that the fragments found inside the limo did not come from the same bullet which left fragments in Kennedy's brain (that were removed at autopsy).
Agreed.
Now the million dollar question. I really don't wish to engage in polemics, but you haven't shown anything which suggests that someone made a bullet appear, i.e. CE-399 isn't genuine.
It was proved (by the FBI) that CE-399 was fired from Oswald's rifle. It was also proved (by the FBI) that that the two larger fragments found inside the limo were fragments from a bullet fired from Oswald's rifle.
The FBI proving that CE399 was fired from C2766 doesn't prove the bullet was fired from the TSBD on 11/22/63 nor does it prove CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital.
As far as the fragments go, I seem to remember that the FBI expert (can't recall his name at the moment) didn't get any futher than lining up the markings in his mind.
Btw what makes you so sure the fragments were found in the limo?
Neutron activation analysis showed that fragments removed from Kennedy's brain matched the two larger fragments found inside the limo.
Please post (or link to) the report for this analysis.
However, I will add that all of this is dependent on how much validity one chooses to give the NAA study of CE-399 and all relevant fragments.
But, choosing to dismiss the NAA study does not automatically infer that the fragments found inside the limo did not come from the same bullet which left fragments in Kennedy's brain (that were removed at autopsy).
I am not an expert in this field but I would imagine that most bullets from the same batch would provide similar results. In other words any fragments from the same batch would match the fragments left in Kennedy's brain. Btw, Paul O'Connor - who was responsible for removing the brain at the autopsy said there was no brain left to be removed. How does one explain this?
Now the million dollar question. I really don't wish to engage in polemics, but you haven't shown anything which suggests that someone made a bullet appear, i.e. CE-399 isn't genuine.
Why do I need to prove a negative? Since when do you get to assume that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is the one Tomlinson found at Parkland? I have already explained why I believe there are serious problems with CE399 and so far I have not seen a shred of evidence that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is the same one Tomlinson found.
-
Based on what we know so far:
- CE 399 may not have been found at Parkland Hospital
- The FBI lied or misled on CE 399 in order to avoid addressing the Chain of Custody problem
-
It was proved (by the FBI) that CE-399 was fired from Oswald's rifle. It was also proved (by the FBI) that that the two larger fragments found inside the limo were fragments from a bullet fired from Oswald's rifle.
The FBI proving that CE399 was fired from C2766 doesn't prove the bullet was fired from the TSBD on 11/22/63 nor does it prove CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital.
As far as the fragments go, I seem to remember that the FBI expert (can't recall his name at the moment) didn't get any futher than lining up the markings in his mind.
Btw what makes you so sure the fragments were found in the limo?
Neutron activation analysis showed that fragments removed from Kennedy's brain matched the two larger fragments found inside the limo.
Please post (or link to) the report for this analysis.
However, I will add that all of this is dependent on how much validity one chooses to give the NAA study of CE-399 and all relevant fragments.
But, choosing to dismiss the NAA study does not automatically infer that the fragments found inside the limo did not come from the same bullet which left fragments in Kennedy's brain (that were removed at autopsy).
I am not an expert in this field but I would imagine that most bullets from the same batch would provide similar results. In other words any fragments from the same batch would match the fragments left in Kennedy's brain. Btw, Paul O'Connor - who was responsible for removing the brain at the autopsy said there was no brain left to be removed. How does one explain this?
Now the million dollar question. I really don't wish to engage in polemics, but you haven't shown anything which suggests that someone made a bullet appear, i.e. CE-399 isn't genuine.
Why do I need to prove a negative? Since when do you get to assume that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is the one Tomlinson found at Parkland? I have already explained why I believe there are serious problems with CE399 and so far I have not seen a shred of evidence that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is the same one Tomlinson found.
It was proved (by the FBI) that CE-399 was fired from Oswald's rifle. It was also proved (by the FBI) that that the two larger fragments found inside the limo were fragments from a bullet fired from Oswald's rifle.
The FBI proving that CE399 was fired from C2766 doesn't prove the bullet was fired from the TSBD on 11/22/63 nor does it prove CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital.
Martins factual and accurate response ( green) to to Billy Bob Brown's irrational statement ( red) would be cause to reconsider your position if you thought as Billy Bob does. And your position should be an embarrassment if you were a sincere and honest person.
It was proved (by the FBI) that CE-399 was fired from Oswald's rifle. It was also proved (by the FBI) that that the two larger fragments found inside the limo were fragments from a bullet fired from Oswald's rifle.
It was proved (by the FBI) that CE-399 was fired from Oswald's rifle.
It has never been established that Lee Oswald owned the carcano with the serial number c2766
It was also proved (by the FBI) that that the two larger fragments found inside the limo were fragments from a bullet fired from Oswald's rifle
Pure unadulterated BS!!..... Even Hoover himself told LBJ that the fragments were useless as evidence that they fired from any particular gun.
-
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It was also proved (by the FBI) that that the two larger fragments found inside the limo were fragments from a bullet fired from Oswald's rifle
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pure unadulterated BS!!..... Even Hoover himself told LBJ that the fragments were useless as evidence that they fired from any particular gun.
adulterated=render (something) poorer in quality by adding another substance, typically an inferior one.
So yes Walt...that BS is adulterated ;)
-
No.
Don't confuse your lame ass threads (where you're violently beat over the head with the evidence) with Weidmann's reasonable one.
🤣
Your "evidence" is as invisible as the bag supposedly found in the alleged SN.
-
At trial, CE-399 would most likely be determined to be admissible. Most evidence, if the only issue with it is a questionable chain of custody, is indeed admissible. It is then left up to the jury to decide how much weight to give a certain piece of evidence with a questionable chain of custody.
The trial judge would admit the bullet. A questionable chain of custody of CE-399 may affect how much weight the jury gives the bullet but a questionable chain, on its own, does not affect it's admissibility.
The single bullet that passed through both Kennedy and Connally and ended up in Connally's thigh must, at some point, be found somewhere. Even if this bullet was NOT CE-399, it is a must that this bullet would be found by someone somewhere. No other bullet has ever been found (in Connally's thigh or elsewhere). Even if you do not believe in the single bullet theory, the fact remains that a bullet lodged itself in Connally's left thigh.
To any conspiracy advocate, especially the original poster of this thread, have you ever seen any evidence put forth which suggests that a bullet, other than CE-399, was found inside Connally's thigh or anywhere else related to the known movements of the bodies of both Kennedy and Connally?
On the night of the assassination and overnight into Saturday morning, the limousine was searched by the FBI. They were looking for evidence. Smaller fragments were found but no intact bullet, like 399, was found. No other bullet has ever been turned in and placed into the record and this circumstantial evidence alone gets 399 admitted into evidence.
It's up to the jury to decide, based on a questionable chain of custody, how much weight to give CE-399 as the bullet found at Parkland.
Also, it is up to the defense, since CE-399 was linked to Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world, to convince the jury that CE-399 was NOT the bullet found at the hospital. Has anyone in this forum (or anywhere else) done so?
Why not cite some court cases that support your claim?
-
You are 100% correct.
He's a disgrace to all credible people who believe in a conspiracy and who evaluate the evidence in an honest manner.
Says the guy who DOESN'T believe in a conspiracy and rarely ever cites the evidence.
-
It's just as irrelevant as claiming evidence would be admitted at a trial that will never be.
Now, can you show that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital?
And then he claims that I have hijacked the thread. Priceless.
-
Even if you do not believe in the single bullet theory ......................
Consistently admits it is indeed just a 'theory'.
-
The error made by conspiracy theorists and contrarians is to demand proof rather than come to a conclusion.
There is often an element of subjectivity in deciding what the truth is. An obstinate individual might never accept the truth no matter how much information is available.
Regarding CE399 found at Parkland Hospital by Daryl C. Tomlinson: we have his statement made to CBS Television for their 1967 program ?CBS News Inquiry ? The Warren Report?.
A conclusion usually involves deciding which alternative scenario is more likely to be what actually happened: the truth.
Alternative #1: The bullet found at Parkland Hospital (CE399) was fired by C2766?the rifle now in the National Archives in Washington DC. Moreover it was fired at approximately 12:30 pm CST by the assassin of President John F. Kennedy.
? Witnesses heard three (3) shots fired at President Kennedy?s limousine as it drove down Elm Street, Dealey Plaza. Three of those witnesses were directly beneath the shooter who was firing from the SE corner (6th floor) of the Texas Schoolbook Depository (TSBD).
? A Mannlicher Carcano rifle (C2766) was found on the 6th floor of the TSBD near the rear stairs. The rifle was determined to be owned and possessed by an employee of the TSBD, Lee Harvey Oswald.
? Three cartridge cases were found in the SE corner (6th floor) of the TSBD. Ballistic tests concluded that they were fired in the Carcano rifle C2766.
? Two bullet fragments were found in the Presidential limousine (in Washington DC) on the evening of 22 November 1963. Ballistic tests concluded the fragments were parts of a bullet fired in C2766.
? One whole bullet was found at Parkland Hospital soon after President Kennedy and Governor Connally were admitted there.
? Hospital employee Daryl C. Tomlinson found the bullet that was designated by the Warren Commission as CE399.
? Ballistic tests concluded that CE399 was fired in the Carcano rifle C2766.
? CE 399 has damage consistent with causing wounds to President Kennedy and Governor Connally.
Alternative #2: The bullet found at Parkland Hospital by Daryl C. Tomlinson was lost or deliberately discarded by the FBI. Another bullet was fired in C2766 and presented to the Warren Commission as the stretcher bullet (CE399).
Alternative #3: The bullet found at Parkland Hospital (CE399) was fired by C2766?the rifle now in the National Archives in Washington DC. It was fired at some undetermined time (prior to 12:30 pm CST) by an unknown person. Subsequently it was planted at Parkland Hospital by an unknown person at a time that cannot be precisely determined. Those persons were part of conspiracy to assassinate John F. Kennedy. The bullet was planted to frame Lee Harvey Oswald as the assassin of President John F. Kennedy.
Those who believe ?Alternative #3? to be ?the truth? are required to explain a scenario in which CE399 was planted by conspirators. They must provide convincing evidence to prove their version of ?the truth?.
Alternately it can be conceded that it was CE399 that fell out of the shallow wound in Governor Connally?s thigh on to the stretcher that he lay on during his journey up to the operating room at Parkland Hospital. That bullet now resides in the National Archives in Washington DC.
Those are the three (3) alternatives. I look forward to the writer of the subject stating which alternatives he believes is ?the truth?... presumably #2 or #3.
-
? CE 399 has damage consistent with causing wounds to President Kennedy and Governor Connally.
I find this a really interesting argument. Is there any bullet condition that you would say was not consistent?
Those are the three (3) alternatives. I look forward to the writer of the subject stating which alternatives he believes is ?the truth?... presumably #2 or #3.
These are not by any means an exhaustive list of alternatives. For example there was the story about SS agent Sam Kinney admitting on his death bed that he found a bullet in the limo and placed it on a stretcher at Parkland.
But I'm curious about what reasons you would have for rejecting your #2 alternative as a reasonable scenario that would fit all of the known evidence (well, with the caveat that we don't know if the bullet that Tomlinson found ever actually made it to the FBI).
-
I find this a really interesting argument. Is there any bullet condition that you would say was not consistent?
These are not by any means an exhaustive list of alternatives. For example there was the story about SS agent Sam Kinney admitting on his death bed that he found a bullet in the limo and placed it on a stretcher at Parkland.
But I'm curious about what reasons you would have for rejecting your #2 alternative as a reasonable scenario that would fit all of the known evidence (well, with the caveat that we don't know if the bullet that Tomlinson found ever actually made it to the FBI).
These are not by any means an exhaustive list of alternatives. For example there was the story about SS agent Sam Kinney admitting on his death bed that he found a bullet in the limo and placed it on a stretcher at Parkland.
Story!!! You're a great one for demanding "citations" John... or is it Rob Caprio? Regardless: do you have one?
If the Kinney "story" was true: it supports CE399 as a bullet fired by the assassin from the 6th floor of the TSBD.
This "death bed" stuff is amazing. I wish you a long and healthy life John. However, is it possible you might become an ODIA at the last moment?
-
Story!!! You're a great one for demanding "citations" John... or is it Rob Caprio? Regardless: do you have one?
Weren't you talking about hypothetical alternatives? I'm just pointing out that your three scenarios aren't the only possibilities.
If the Kinney "story" was true: it supports CE399 as a bullet fired by the assassin from the 6th floor of the TSBD.
Well, no, but it would support the bullet that Tomlinson found as having come from the limo. It's still an assumption that CE 399 is what Tomlinson found.
This "death bed" stuff is amazing. I wish you a long and healthy life John. However, is it possible you might become an ODIA at the last moment?
Not unless better evidence for that is forthcoming.
-
... there was the story about SS agent Sam Kinney admitting on his death bed that he found a bullet in the limo and placed it on a stretcher at Parkland.
Sounds bizarre. What is the source for this?
Did he explain why placing it on a stretcher seemed like the right thing to do? Did he explain why he didn't offer up this info earlier?
This is what he said way back then:
Pulling up parallel to the lead car, we were notified we were heading for the hospital, whereupon the motorcycle escort, the lead car, President's car and follow up proceeded to the hospital at a high rate of speed. We pulled into the emergency entrance of the hospital whereupon Gov. Connally was removed and then the President, and taken inside.
After this, maybe 15 or 20 minutes later, I put the bubble and canvas cover on the car, assisted by SA Hickey. Then under motorcycle escort, both cars proceeded to Love Field, whereupon I notified the crew to get the ramp down and we drove the cars onto the plane and secured them, awaiting departure.
http://www.jfk-online.com/kinney.html
He also said he helped lift JFK and Connally from the vehicle but he doesn't mention entering the hospital building at all.
-
That's a fair and reasonable set of alternatives Ross. Good post. Thumb1:
-
I can see that it is ltime for this again.
****************************************************
There are actually several key points that make or break the Warren Commission?s (WC) claim of a lone assassin, but perhaps none shows it more clearly and concisely than the Single Bullet Theory (SBT). The whole need for a SBT came about because the WC was limited to three shots by the assassin due to the time constraints offered by the Zapruder film. Using this film it was concluded that the assassin would have had roughly 5.6 seconds to fire at the motorcade and the cycling time of the Mannlicher-Carcano (M-C) was 2.3 seconds by the most experienced shooters, thus, the maximum number of shots that could be fired were three.
This is what both the FBI and Secret Service (SS) reported in their reports, and continue to report as they even scoff at the SBT as happening. Initially there were no problems with three shots though as the FBI and SS said the first shot hit President John F. Kennedy (JFK) in the back, the second hit Governor John B. Connally (JBC) in the back and the third hit JFK in the head. This was neat and concise and worked for both of these organizations. The fly in the ointment arose when a man by the name of James Tague came along however, and said he was wounded on the cheek by debris from a bullet hitting the concrete pavement/curb near him a the Triple Underpass area. He was standing there watching the motorcade. Hoover initially did what he did with a lot of evidence in this case -- he IGNORED him!!! He would not recognize him for many months, but finally this bullet had to be addressed. Which one could have struck JFK or JBC and still traveled that far and struck the pavement/curb near Tague? The WC came to the scary conclusion none could, thus they had a problem. NOW they had to address 7 wounds in two men with just two bullets!!
Enter the SBT scenario. This theory lacks any evidence and proof of its validity, yet the official government stance for 54 years has been this is what happened. In a nutshell the WC said the following:
1) The first shot hit JFK in the back AND then exited JFK's throat and went on to enter JBC's back on the right side and exit his chest near the right nipple (in the meantime it broke the fifth rib and deflated his right lung) and then went on to smash his radius bone in his right wrist and then exit there and land in his left thigh leaving a superficial wound.
2) The second shot missed completely and landed near Tague and caused his wound.
3) The third shot hit JFK in the head while his head was in a position NOT one witness could be found to say it was in at the time of impact (they claimed his head was completely down to the point of his chin nearly touching his chest). IN fact, there is NOT one picture or film that shows JFK's head in this position at the time of impact that I am aware of.
This post is NOT about the SBT though, but rather the bullet that was claimed to be the one that allowed the SBT to occur ? CE-399, a.k.a. ?The Magic Bullet.? We can look at the SBT in full in other posts in this series.
The claimed ?magic bullet? was discovered by the senior engineer, Darrell Tomlinson, of Parkland Hospital. He had been asked to manually operate the elevator that connected the ground-floor emergency rooms with the second-floor operating rooms. On one of these trips he would notice the bullet as it rolled out from under the edge of the mat it apparently had been under.
Who?s stretcher was this? For some time folks thought that it could have been JFK's, but evidence (via Nurse Bowron) shows that JFK's stretcher was put in trauma room two at the same time it was discovered by Tomlinson, thus, it pretty much eliminates this possibility. Most now accept the likelihood of it being found on the one that had contained two-year old Ronald Fuller. He had entered Parkland Hospital (PH) at 12:54 p.m. with a bad cut on his chin.
Let?s look at Darrell Tomlinson?s story.
*******************************************
The magical bullet (CE-399) is the key to the whole official conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO). acting alone, shot three times at the President and killed him and severely hurt JBC. Without this bullet they have no case, period (not much of one with it either). So let's see how this bullet came into evidence. Was it retrieved from either JFK or JBCs' bodies? No. Was it found within the mobile "crime scene", a.k.a. JFK's limousine? No. Was it found by one of the doctors or nurses treating either JFK or JBC? No. How was it then found you ask? This is how the most vital piece of evidence in the government's case (minus the true nature of the wounds to the JFK?s body) was "found".
JBC is rushed into Parkland Hospital and taken to trauma room 2, it is quickly assessed he needs surgery to save his life and treat the wounds he has received. He is placed on a stretcher and then wheeled to an elevator for a ride to the second floor of the hospital. Once the Gov. arrived on the second floor he is taken to an operating room, where he is transferred from the stretcher to the operating table. You may ask, did they find CE-399 now? No. The stretcher is then placed in the hallway for use at a later time.
Darrell C. Tomlinson, the hospital's senior engineer, enters the elevator and then sees the stretcher and takes it to the ground floor via an elevator. Tomlinson says he places the stretcher (the one presumably used for JBC by the WC, but NEVER shown to be) alongside another stretcher, which is against the wall. Did Tomlinson see the bullet during the trip down to the ground floor? No. After he puts the stretcher back against the wall following it being moved by an intern or doctor using the restroom he bumps the stretcher and then notices the bullet roll out from the mat. This is the magic bullet. Tomlinson will state he is not certain from which stretcher (really neither one was shown to have had anything to do with JBC) the bullet came from, but the WC will decide for him and say it was the one Gov. Connally had been on. How do they know this when the man who was right there didn't? How do you think this "chain of custody" would have held up in court?
They then go on to make matters more confusing and open to conjecture by stating the bullet was not from JFK's stretcher, but from JBC's. How did we get there? Who said it was from JFK's? It would make sense though based on Dr. Humes and the two FBI agents (O'Neill and Sibert) who learned that JFK had a non-penetrating wound and received cardiac massage on his stretcher. It makes more sense to think the bullet fell out of the JFK than from JBC who was just transferred from the stretcher to the operating table (Hoover thought so in a call with LBJ). But, as we have seen it is even more likely it came from Ronald Fuller?s stretcher. The KEY point here is Tomlinson NEVER said it was from JBC?s stretcher and that was the WC?s conjecture.
Here is his testimony concerning this issue.
Mr. SPECTER. Will you mark with a "B" the stretcher which was present at the time you pushed stretcher "A" off of the elevator?
Mr. TOMLINSON. (Witness complied with the request of Counsel Specter.) I believe that's it.
Here Specter is saying the stretcher he brought down is marked ?A? (allegedly JBC?s), and the stretcher that was present before is marked ?B?. Remember these designations for later.
Mr. TOMLINSON. Well, sir; I don't recall how long it had been exactly, but an intern or doctor, I didn't know which, came to use the men's room there in the elevator lobby.
Mr. SPECTER. Where is the men's room located on this diagram?
Mr. TOMLINSON. It would be right there (indicating) beside the "B" stretcher.
Mr. SPECTER. Would you draw in ink there the outline of that room in a general way?
Mr. TOMLINSON. Well, I really don't know.
Mr. SPECTER. And would you mark that with the letter "C"?
(Witness complied with request of Counsel Specter.)
Mr. SPECTER. That's fine. What happened when that gentleman came to use the men's room?
Mr. TOMLINSON. Well, he pushed the stretcher out from the wall to get in, and then when he came out he just walked off and didn't push the stretcher back up against the wall, so I pushed it out of the way where we would have clear area in front of the elevator.
.
Mr. SPECTER. And where did you push it to?
Mr. TOMLINSON. I pushed it back up against the wall.
Mr. SPECTER. What, if anything, happened then?
Mr. TOMLINSON. I bumped the wall and a spent cartridge or bullet rolled out that apparently had been lodged under the edge of the mat.
Mr. SPECTER.And that was from which stretcher?
Mr. TOMLINSON. I believe that it was "B".
So we see Tomlinson is saying the cartridge was found on stretcher B, and this was the one that was already present when he was called to operate the elevator. It was NOT the stretcher JBC had been on. He will now describe stretcher ?B?s? appearance for us.
Of course Specter did NOT like this answer and quickly tried to confuse Tomlinson.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, Mr. Tomlinson, are you sure that it was stretcher "A" that you took out of the elevator and not stretcher "B"?
Mr. TOMLINSON. Well, really, I can't be positive, just to be perfectly honest about it, I can't be positive, because I really didn't pay that much attention to it. The stretcher was on the elevator and I pushed it off of there and I believe we made one or two calls up before I straightened out the stretcher up against the wall.
As we will see shortly, Tomlinson could NOT even say stretcher "A" was from JBC as it was there when he arrived on the elevator.
Satisfied with this answer Specter went for the Coup de Grace, but FAILED!
Mr. SPECTER. And at the time we started our discussion, it was your recollection at that point that the bullet came off of stretcher A, was it not?
Mr. TOMLINSON. B.
Mr. SPECTER. Pardon me, stretcher B, but it was stretcher A that you took off of the elevator.
Mr. TOMLINSON. I believe that's right.
Sneaky, sneaky! See the sneaky trick Specter tried to play? Again though, stretcher "A" could NOT be tied to JBC at all.
However, Tomlinson stuck to his guns and said it was ?B? the bullet came off of, NOT ?A? that allegedly had JBC on it a little while earlier. Here is how Tomlinson described ?B? for us:
Mr. SPECTER. And what was on "B", if you recall; if anything?
Mr. TOMLINSON. Well, at one end they had one or two sheets rolled up; I didn't examine them. They were bloody. They were rolled up on the east end of it and there were a few surgical instruments on, the opposite end and a sterile pack or so.
Mr. SPECTER. A sterile what?
Mr. TOMLINSON. A sterile pack.
Mr. SPECTER. What do you mean by that?
Mr. TOMLINSON. Like gauze or something like that.
Mr. SPECTER. Was there an alcohol sponge?
Mr. TOMLINSON. There could have been.
Mr. SPECTER. Was there a roll of 1-inch tape?
Mr. TOMLINSON. No; I don't think so.
This description matches the injury suffered by Ronald Fuller much better as the young boy had cut his chin on a piece of broken soda pop bottle and had his chin sutured. Gauze packets were also used on him.
Despite Tomlinson?s firmness in saying the bullet was found on stretcher ?B? Specter kept on trying to confuse him. They went over how Tomlinson had been interviewed once by both the FBI and the SS in the latter part of November and early December of 1963. Specter made him say numerous times that he had said to the FBI and SS that he could NOT be sure which stretcher was ?A? and which was ?B?. Again, Specter tries to bully Tomlinson into saying it was stretcher ?A? the bullet came from.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, before I started to ask you questions under oath, which have been taken down here, I told you, did I not, that the Secret Service man wrote a report where he said that the bullet was found on the stretcher which you took off of the elevator---I called that to your attention, didn't I?
Mr. TOMLINSON. Yes; you told me that.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, after I tell you that, does that have any effect on refreshing your recollection of what you told the Secret Service man?
Mr. TOMLINSON. No it really doesn't---it really doesn't.
Mr. SPECTER. So, would it be a fair summary to say that when I first started to talk to you about it, your first view was that the stretcher you took off of the elevator was stretcher A, and then I told you that the Secret Service man said it was---that you had said the stretcher you took off of the elevator was the one that you found the bullet off, and when we talked about the whole matter and talked over the entire situation, you really can't be completely sure about which stretcher you took off of the elevator, because you didn't push the stretcher that you took off of the elevator right against the wall at first?
Mr. TOMLINSON. That's right.
As I have said many times, a defense attorney would have interjected here. This is clearly badgering the witness. Despite LHO?s Constitutional rights being denied this witness still held his ground. Also, since they could NOT show stretcher "A" was connected to JBC in anyway this is all meaningless anyway!
Mr. SPECTER. And, there was a lot of confusion that day, which is what you told me before?
Mr. TOMLINSON. Absolutely. And now, honestly, I don't remember telling him definitely-I know we talked about it, and I told him that it could have been. Now, he might have drawed his own conclusion on that.
Mr. SPECTER. You told the Secret Service agent that you didn't know where---
Mr. TOMLINSON. (interrupting). He asked me if it could have been brought down from the second floor.
Mr. SPECTER. You got the stretcher from where the bullet came from, whether it was brought down from the second floor?
Mr. TOMLINSON. It could have been--I'm not sure whether it was A I took off.
Mr. SPECTER. But did you tell the Secret Service man which one you thought it was you took off of the elevator?
Mr. TOMLINSON. I'm not clear on that---whether I absolutely made a positive statement to that effect.
Mr. SPECTER. You told him that it could have been B you took off of the elevator?
Mr. TOMLINSON. That's right.
Mr. SPECTER. But, you don't remember whether you told him it was A you took off of the elevator?
Mr. TOMLINSON. I think it was A---I'm not really sure.
Mr. SPECTER. Which did you tell the Secret Service agent--that you thought it was A that you took off of the elevator?
Mr. TOMLINSON. Really, I couldn't be real truthful in saying I told him this or that.
Mr. SPECTER. You just don't remember for sure whether you told him you thought it was A or not?
Mr. TOMLINSON. No, sir; I really don't remember. I'm not accustomed to being questioned by the Secret Service and the FBI and by you and they are writing down everything, I mean.
Since "A" was NOT tied to JBC as you will see shortly all this is akin to running around after your own tail!
And then Tomlinson gets his Coup de Grace in! Successfully too!
Mr. SPECTER. That's all right. I understand exactly what you are saying and I appreciate it and I really just want to get your best recollection.
We understand it isn't easy to remember all that went on, on a day like November 22d, and that a man's recollection is not perfect like every other part of a man, but I want you to tell me just what you remember, and that's the best you can do today, and I appreciate that, and so does the President's Commission, and that's all we can ask a man.
Mr. TOMLINSON. Yes, I'm going to tell you all I can, and I'm not going to tell you something I can't lay down and sleep at night with either.
I.E. he was NOT going to LIE to benefit the WC?s conclusion! As he said before the stretcher on the elevator may NOT have even been JBC?s as the WC kept claiming!
Mr. SPECTER. Do you know where the stretcher came from that you found on the elevator?
Mr. TOMLINSON. No, sir; I do not. It could have come from two, it could have come from three, it could have come from some other place.
Mr. SPECTER. You didn't see anybody put it there?
Mr. TOMLINSON. No, sir--it was on the elevator when I got there. There wasn't anyone on the elevator at the time when I keyed it off.
Again, for the umpteenth time we see the WC made a connection ?stretcher ?A? was JBC?s?when there was NO way to show this was true as the man who found it on the elevator had NO way of knowing where it came from! This was the WC's typical strategy and shows LHO was the patsy as he claimed to me.
We also have some other intriguing things to consider. Like these:
* At 1:25 p.m. the SS are trying to remove the body from Parkland for the journey to D.C. and when Kellerman asks the judge present to sign-off he is told by the judge that he must get permission from D.A. Wade. Henry Wade and Chief Curry give the following advice: "Do not release the body until the missile is taken into custody." This comment has given researchers much dilemma over the years, as they are not sure what "missile" they could be talking about as the CE-399 bullet is NOT found until 1:45 p.m. How did Wade know a bullet would be found?
* In addition to the one Tomlinson found, which he stated repeatedly was NOT the one the WC presented as CE-399 (he said a POINTY-NOSE bullet had been found), TWO other bullets were found as well. Elizabeth Goode Wright, director of nursing at Parkland, told researcher Wallace Millam in 1993 that her husband, O.P. Wright (director of security) found TWO bullets on 11/22/63. He handled the "magic bullet" before the Secret Service received it, but he also found a unfired, "whole" .38 with manufacturer's case markings ".38 SP WCC" -- the very same markings as 2 of the 4 shell casings allegedly retrieved from the Tippit scene and supposedly matched to the pistol found on LHO at the time of his arrest.
This was found on a hospital gurney and Wright did NOT turn it over to the authorities, and he showed it to Millam during the interview. To me, this is further proof of the frame being placed on LHO, as they planted a bullet matching the pistol he would allegedly be found with as well. Can the WC defenders explain this?
* SS Agent Richard Johnsen was given the bullet by O.P. Wright. He was NEVER called before the WC. Why? Well, in later interviews with researchers he too said CE-399 was NOT the bullet he was given and that he sent on to Washington! Johnsen, NEVER initialed CE-399 (or more likely, he initialed the actual one found), thus, this broke the chain of custody! (CE-2011/ 24H412)
* Chief James J. Rowley of the SS failed to ID CE-399 as the bullet he saw on 11/22/63. CE-399 and it also lacks his initials on it. (CE-2011/ 24H412)
* Although the bullet was "officially" found on a stretcher in a corridor of Parkland Hospital, the FBI (Sibert and O'Neil) reported that it was found in the emergency room! (CD-7)
All this shows us is that there is NO connection between any stretcher and JBC as claimed by the WC. It also shows us the bullet found, and touched and seen by quite a few people, is NOT the one in evidence to this day. IF Ruby did plant a bullet (could he have been the intern or doctor seen by Tomlinson?) it was NOT a 6.5 mm round as NO one could be found to say CE-399 was the bullet found at PH. This means the bullet was CHANGED while in CUSTODY OF THE AUTHORITIES. Furthermore, there is NO chain of custody for the bullet in evidence as it lacks the initials of those who sent it in.
I also did not get into it, but both the WC and HSCA ignored those that were involved to again interview a man who was NOT involved (Behn)! Does this make any sense? ONLY if you are trying to hide something. The single most important piece of evidence for the WC has NO link to LHO as the rifle in question is NOT tied to him by evidence, it has NO link to the victims NOR any link to the PH discovery! IT is basically worthless.
Once again we see that the claims of the WC are not supported by the actual evidence, thus, their conclusion is sunk again.
-
The error made by conspiracy theorists and contrarians is to demand proof rather than come to a conclusion.
There is often an element of subjectivity in deciding what the truth is. An obstinate individual might never accept the truth no matter how much information is available.
Regarding CE399 found at Parkland Hospital by Daryl C. Tomlinson: we have his statement made to CBS Television for their 1967 program ?CBS News Inquiry ? The Warren Report?.
A conclusion usually involves deciding which alternative scenario is more likely to be what actually happened: the truth.
Alternative #1: The bullet found at Parkland Hospital (CE399) was fired by C2766?the rifle now in the National Archives in Washington DC. Moreover it was fired at approximately 12:30 pm CST by the assassin of President John F. Kennedy.
? Witnesses heard three (3) shots fired at President Kennedy?s limousine as it drove down Elm Street, Dealey Plaza. Three of those witnesses were directly beneath the shooter who was firing from the SE corner (6th floor) of the Texas Schoolbook Depository (TSBD).
? A Mannlicher Carcano rifle (C2766) was found on the 6th floor of the TSBD near the rear stairs. The rifle was determined to be owned and possessed by an employee of the TSBD, Lee Harvey Oswald.
? Three cartridge cases were found in the SE corner (6th floor) of the TSBD. Ballistic tests concluded that they were fired in the Carcano rifle C2766.
? Two bullet fragments were found in the Presidential limousine (in Washington DC) on the evening of 22 November 1963. Ballistic tests concluded the fragments were parts of a bullet fired in C2766.
? One whole bullet was found at Parkland Hospital soon after President Kennedy and Governor Connally were admitted there.
? Hospital employee Daryl C. Tomlinson found the bullet that was designated by the Warren Commission as CE399.
? Ballistic tests concluded that CE399 was fired in the Carcano rifle C2766.
? CE 399 has damage consistent with causing wounds to President Kennedy and Governor Connally.
Alternative #2: The bullet found at Parkland Hospital by Daryl C. Tomlinson was lost or deliberately discarded by the FBI. Another bullet was fired in C2766 and presented to the Warren Commission as the stretcher bullet (CE399).
Alternative #3: The bullet found at Parkland Hospital (CE399) was fired by C2766?the rifle now in the National Archives in Washington DC. It was fired at some undetermined time (prior to 12:30 pm CST) by an unknown person. Subsequently it was planted at Parkland Hospital by an unknown person at a time that cannot be precisely determined. Those persons were part of conspiracy to assassinate John F. Kennedy. The bullet was planted to frame Lee Harvey Oswald as the assassin of President John F. Kennedy.
Those who believe ?Alternative #3? to be ?the truth? are required to explain a scenario in which CE399 was planted by conspirators. They must provide convincing evidence to prove their version of ?the truth?.
Alternately it can be conceded that it was CE399 that fell out of the shallow wound in Governor Connally?s thigh on to the stretcher that he lay on during his journey up to the operating room at Parkland Hospital. That bullet now resides in the National Archives in Washington DC.
Those are the three (3) alternatives. I look forward to the writer of the subject stating which alternatives he believes is ?the truth?... presumably #2 or #3.
Where in all of this do I find confirmation (of any kind) that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital?
Btw.. I like your speculation, but John is right when he says there are more than the 3 options you have listed? and, no, I am not going to pick one for the simple reason that what I believe is insignificant to the discussion if it can not be backed up by some sort of evidence. This thread isn't about me. It's about the evidentiary value of the bullet now in evidence as CE399.
-
Where in all of this do I find confirmation (of any kind) that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital?
Btw.. I like your speculation, but John is right when he says there are more than the 3 options you have listed? and, no, I am not going to pick one for the simple reason that what I believe is insignificant to the discussion if it can not be backed up by some sort of evidence. This thread isn't about me. It's about the evidentiary value of the bullet now in evidence as CE399.
... for the simple reason that what I believe is insignificant to the discussion if it can not be backed up by some sort of evidence.
It's pretty simple: Either CE399 came from Dealey Plaza to Parkland Hospital with Governor Connally... or it is a bullet planted by conspirators who plotted to kill President Kennedy? Which shall it be "great prevaricator"?
Just as I figured. A contrarian not interested enough (or courageous enough) to offer an opinion as to "what" happened. Not surprising when there is no way to provide "who", "how", "when" and "where".
It's rather common on this board: When asked for a conclusion; the usually opinionated man said, "Gee I dunno [sic]".
-
... for the simple reason that what I believe is insignificant to the discussion if it can not be backed up by some sort of evidence.
It's pretty simple: Either CE399 came from Dealey Plaza to Parkland Hospital with Governor Connally... or it is a bullet planted by conspirators who plotted to kill President Kennedy. Which shall it be "great prevaricator"?
Just as I figured. A contrarian not interested enough (or courageous enough) to offer an opinion as to "what" happened. Not surprising when there is no way to provide "who", "how", "when" and "where".
It's rather common on this board: When asked for a conclusion the usually opinionated man said, "Gee I dunno [sic]".
It's pretty simple: Either CE399 came from Dealey Plaza to Parkland Hospital with Governor Connally... or it is a bullet planted by conspirators who plotted to kill President Kennedy. Which shall it be "great prevaricator"?
Nope, it's only "pretty simple" in your world. There are other options
Just as I figured. A contrarian not interested enough (or courageous enough) to offer an opinion as to "what" happened.
Why do you want me to speculate about what really happened, when I am merely asking you to provide any kind of evidence that that bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland. You can grandstand all you want, but I have still to see even the beginning of answer to my question. Why is that?
It's rather common on this board: When asked for a conclusion the usually opinionated man said, "Gee I dunno [sic]".
Stop whining and provide the evidence that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is in fact the same bullet Tomlinson found! Can you?
-
It's pretty simple: Either CE399 came from Dealey Plaza to Parkland Hospital with Governor Connally... or it is a bullet planted by conspirators who plotted to kill President Kennedy?
Yes, that's pretty simple. And it's a false dichotomy. It could be neither.
It's pretty obvious that all of this scrambling to shift the burden of proof is a tacit admission that nobody can demonstrate that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital.
It's rather common on this board: When asked for a conclusion; the usually opinionated man said, "Gee I dunno [sic]".
What's so great about forming a conclusion without the evidence to support one? Is that supposed to be rational?
-
Originally CTers question if CE399 was found by the stretcher which held Connally.
Perhaps they initially just assumed that the bullet Tomlinson found was indeed the one now in evidence as CE399, and only after more information came to light did they start to wonder if that assumption was justified.
Now they question if CE399 was found at Parkland.
Well, was it?
Was the bullet found by Tomlinson the same one that's now in evidence as CE399?
Here is/was the evidence to support my rhetorical NO!!!!!! Tomlinson himself said it wasn't the same bullet he found when asked about it. The real question to ask is which investigator (Johnsen?, a veteran first responder?) failed to initial the evidence or collaborate the bullet put into the evidence locker and why not! He should have been fired because he knows better! The first investigator needed to be asked if he initialed some bullet or if it he mishandled it by not signing it and now denies that CE399 was the same bullet? No one questions!!
If he said he initialed it, the bullet was planted - end of story. Obviously, the seeds of doubt need to remain so that the planted evidence can be used to furnish the SBT!
You never looked at my REPLY #2 to closely and want to form a circular argument and just plain ignored it. I have clearly stated that no one signed in authority or initialed the evidence and no one wants to admit that the bullet in the evidence locker is the one they saw or hand carried! "We have 100% denial by the four men who examined the bullet that Tomlinson found, that it was CE399 ". Pretty simple. No one wants to say that the bullet at the evidence locker came from PH! Throw that bullet out. It could have came from a cotton box where it was gathered from!
Those people that gather the evidence surely know that you just can't "ADD" evidence at will to evidence locker. This is not the first time these shenanigans have taken place in the court system. Unfortunately prosecutors have sometimes used police to help them plant evidence when they both have already formed an opinion that someone is guilty and they just need a little bit more to make it stick. That is what happens when you have a "KANGAROO" court.
-
Yes, that's pretty simple. And it's a false dichotomy. It could be neither.
It's pretty obvious that all of this scrambling to shift the burden of proof is a tacit admission that nobody can demonstrate that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital.
What's so great about forming a conclusion without the evidence to support one? Is that supposed to be rational?
Yes, that's pretty simple. And it's a false dichotomy. It could be neither.
What is the "neither"?
What's so great about forming a conclusion without the evidence to support one? Is that supposed to be rational?
You're confusing "evidence" with "disputing evidence".
Based on the available facts there are two options.
-- CE399 fell out of the superficial wound in Governor Connally's thigh having been fired in C2766 at Dealey Plaza (12:30 pm CST).
OR
CE399 was placed on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital by a person sometime after 12:30 CST. The person was associated with plotters who fired a bullet in C2766 at some earlier time at a location other than Dealey Plaza.
Which is it John?
-
Where in all of this do I find confirmation (of any kind) that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital?
Btw.. I like your speculation, but John is right when he says there are more than the 3 options you have listed? and, no, I am not going to pick one for the simple reason that what I believe is insignificant to the discussion if it can not be backed up by some sort of evidence. This thread isn't about me. It's about the evidentiary value of the bullet now in evidence as CE399.
Name options 4, 5 and 6.
... no, I am not going to pick one for the simple reason that what I believe is insignificant to the discussion if it can not be backed up by some sort of evidence.
That's an admission that you have nothing. :D
-
It's pretty simple: Either CE399 came from Dealey Plaza to Parkland Hospital with Governor Connally... or it is a bullet planted by conspirators who plotted to kill President Kennedy. Which shall it be "great prevaricator"?
Nope, it's only "pretty simple" in your world. There are other options
Just as I figured. A contrarian not interested enough (or courageous enough) to offer an opinion as to "what" happened.
Why do you want me to speculate about what really happened, when I am merely asking you to provide any kind of evidence that that bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland. You can grandstand all you want, but I have still to see even the beginning of answer to my question. Why is that?
It's rather common on this board: When asked for a conclusion the usually opinionated man said, "Gee I dunno [sic]".
Stop whining and provide the evidence that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is in fact the same bullet Tomlinson found! Can you?
Nope, it's only "pretty simple" in your world. There are other options.
Name the options.
-
Here is/was the evidence to support my rhetorical NO!!!!!! Tomlinson himself said it wasn't the same bullet he found when asked about it. The real question to ask is which investigator (Johnsen?, a veteran first responder?) failed to initial the evidence or collaborate the bullet put into the evidence locker and why not! He should have been fired because he knows better! The first investigator needed to be asked if he initialed some bullet or if it he mishandled it by not signing it and now denies that CE399 was the same bullet? No one questions!!
If he said he initialed it, the bullet was planted - end of story. Obviously, the seeds of doubt need to remain so that the planted evidence can be used to furnish the SBT!
You never looked at my REPLY #2 to closely and want to form a circular argument and just plain ignored it. I have clearly stated that no one signed in authority or initialed the evidence and no one wants to admit that the bullet in the evidence locker is the one they saw or hand carried! "We have 100% denial by the four men who examined the bullet that Tomlinson found, that it was CE399 ". Pretty simple. No one wants to say that the bullet at the evidence locker came from PH! Throw that bullet out. It could have came from a cotton box where it was gathered from!
Those people that gather the evidence surely know that you just can't "ADD" evidence at will to evidence locker. This is not the first time these shenanigans have taken place in the court system. Unfortunately prosecutors have sometimes used police to help them plant evidence when they both have already formed an opinion that someone is guilty and they just need a little bit more to make it stick. That is what happens when you have a "KANGAROO" court.
Tomlinson himself said it wasn't the same bullet he found when asked about it.
When did Tomlinson say this and to whom?
I think you are confusing Tomlinson with Wright. The latter told Josiah Thompson in 1966 that the bullet he received from Tomlinson had a pointed tip and later showed Thompson a similar bullet of photo of which Tompson published in his book "Six seconds in Dallas". Wright also rejected CE399 (he was shown a photograph) as the bullet he had seen.
The real question to ask is which investigator (Johnsen?, a veteran first responder?) failed to initial the evidence or collaborate the bullet put into the evidence locker and why not!
That's a good question, especially as Parkland Hospital had special evidence envelopes available (one was used for bullet fragments taken from Connally during his operation).
You never looked at my REPLY #2 to closely and want to form a circular argument and just plain ignored it.
I'm not sure what you are on about as there is no circular argument on my part anywhere. I did in fact read your reply and noted that your arguments (or rather those of the person who wrote the article) were known to me. There was nothing there that I was not already aware of. What it didn't do is answer the question I asked, which is why I didn't reply to it as I wanted to stay on topic.
I have clearly stated that no one signed in authority or initialed the evidence and no one wants to admit that the bullet in the evidence locker is the one they saw or hand carried! "We have 100% denial by the four men who examined the bullet that Tomlinson found, that it was CE399 ". Pretty simple. No one wants to say that the bullet at the evidence locker came from PH! Throw that bullet out. It could have came from a cotton box where it was gathered from!
I agree, but what dealing with LNs it's not so simple. Once you discuss the chain of custody they will go the "at court it would have been admitted" route and then you end up with a completely different discussion about the evidentiary value of the chain of custody, which is where I didn't and don't want to go. My position is a simple one; the WC and the LNs claim the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was found at Parkland Hospital. I merely want them to show me that CE399 ever was at Parkland. That's what this thread is about.
-
Yes, that's pretty simple. And it's a false dichotomy. It could be neither.
What is the "neither"?
What's so great about forming a conclusion without the evidence to support one? Is that supposed to be rational?
You're confusing "evidence" with "disputing evidence".
Based on the available facts there are two options.
-- CE399 fell out of the superficial wound in Governor Connally's thigh having been fired in C2766 at Dealey Plaza (12:30 pm CST).
OR
CE399 was placed on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital by a person sometime after 12:30 CST. The person was associated with plotters who fired a bullet in C2766 at some earlier time at a location other than Dealey Plaza.
Which is it John?
Based on the available facts there are two options.
-- CE399 fell out of the superficial wound in Governor Connally's thigh having been fired in C2766 at Dealey Plaza (12:30 pm CST).
OR
CE399 was placed on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital by a person sometime after 12:30 CST. The person was associated with plotters who fired a bullet in C2766 at some earlier time at a location other than Dealey Plaza.
Nope... there is another option which you have been ignoring all along. Tomlinson may well have found a completely unrelated bullet (which Wright said had a pointed tip) which, as it turned out, came in very handy. The evidentairy life of the bullet now in evidence as CE399 began in Washington when Secret Service chief Rowely gave a bullet to FBI agent Elmer Todd. Was it the bullet Tomlinson and Wright gave to Johnsen or was it a substitute matching the CE2766 rifle?
-
Name options 4, 5 and 6.
... no, I am not going to pick one for the simple reason that what I believe is insignificant to the discussion if it can not be backed up by some sort of evidence.
That's an admission that you have nothing. :D
What substance are you on? In this thread I am asking a question, not making a claim I need to back up.
You are the one who has nothing, since so far you have failed completely to show that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital.
-
Nope, it's only "pretty simple" in your world. There are other options.
Name the options.
Stop whining and trying to divert the discussion to other topics. Instead provide the evidence that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is in fact the same bullet Tomlinson found! Can you?
-
Stop whining and trying to divert the discussion to other topics. Instead provide the evidence that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is in fact the same bullet Tomlinson found! Can you?
Asking for you to name the options is not "whining".
However... resorting to cliches (and nothing else) indicates a lack of intellectual rigor.
Diverting to "another" topic? You just don't like how I prosecute "this" topic.
-
Asking for you to name the options is not "whining".
However... resorting to cliches (and nothing else) indicates a lack of intellectual rigor.
Diverting to "another" topic? You just don't like how I prosecute "this" topic.
And still not even a shred of evidence to show that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Thumb1:
Btw you've been trying to talk about other things from your first post in this thread. I'll be more than happy to discuss any of the stuff you brought up when you start a new thread for that purpose. In this thread I prefer to stay on topic
Oh yeah, before I forget; I already gave an alternative option. If you have read the thread you would have known that!
-
What substance are you on? In this thread I am asking a question, not making a claim I need to back up.
You are the one who has nothing, since so far you have failed completely to show that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital.
When a member resorts to insults it's certain that he is cornered and cannot respond to the challenge.
I never tried to "prove" anything. I correctly explained that a "conclusion" is what is required with this difference of opinion about CE399.
I provided a list of reasons why I have "concluded" that CE399 is the bullet found at Parkland Hospital. I have not seen a list of reasons to support the alternative proposition: that CE399 was planted at Parkland Hospital but was fired somewhere else other than Dealey Plaza on Friday 22 November 1963 (12:30 pm CST). Alternately that the stretcher bullet was another missile fired in C2766 or some other gun.
You need to offer an opinion as to what you believe is the most logical explanation for a bullet being found by Daryl C. Tomlinson at Parkland Hospital. Either that or accept that you are committed contrarian not willing to follow through on where your question leads.
-
And still not even a shred of evidence to show that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Thumb1:
Btw you've been trying to talk about other things from your first post in this thread. I'll be more than happy to discuss any of the stuff you brought up when you start a new thread for that purpose. In this thread I prefer to stay on topic
Oh yeah, before I forget; I already gave an alternative option. If you have read the thread you would have known that!
Is this your alternative option?
I don't have a position, but (and this might confuse you) I don't think any bullet was planted at Parkland Hospital.
You are right: It's confusing. The sentence contains a contradiction.
Accepting you don't think any bullet was planted at Parkland Hospital: Can you explain why?
-
Is this your alternative option?
I don't have a position, but (and this might confuse you) I don't think any bullet was planted at Parkland Hospital.
You are right: It's confusing. The sentence contains a contradiction.
Accepting you don't think any bullet was planted at Parkland Hospital: Can you explain why?
Is this your alternative option?
No. Try to improve your reading skills
You are right: It's confusing. The sentence contains a contradiction.
No it doesn't
Accepting you don't think any bullet was planted at Parkland Hospital: Can you explain why?
Already done
-
When a member resorts to insults it's certain that he is cornered and cannot respond to the challenge.
I never tried to "prove" anything. I correctly explained that a "conclusion" is what is required with this difference of opinion about CE399.
I provided a list of reasons why I have "concluded" that CE399 is the bullet found at Parkland Hospital. I have not seen a list of reasons to support the alternative proposition: that CE399 was planted at Parkland Hospital but was fired somewhere else other than Dealey Plaza on Friday 22 November 1963 (12:30 pm CST). Alternately that the stretcher bullet was another missile fired in C2766 or some other gun.
You need to offer an opinion as to what you believe is the most logical explanation for a bullet being found by Daryl C. Tomlinson at Parkland Hospital. Either that or accept that you are committed contrarian not willing to follow through on where your question leads.
When a member resorts to insults it's certain that he is cornered and cannot respond to the challenge.
What was the challenge? I must have missed it.
I never tried to "prove" anything. I correctly explained that a "conclusion" is what is required with this difference of opinion about CE399.
Sorry I don't speak mambo jambo. I asked you to show that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital. If you set out never to prove anything, what are you doing in this thread?
I provided a list of reasons why I have "concluded" that CE399 is the bullet found at Parkland Hospital. I have not seen a list of reasons to support the alternative proposition: that CE399 was planted at Parkland Hospital but was fired somewhere else other than Dealey Plaza on Friday 22 November 1963 (12:30 pm CST). Alternately that the stretcher bullet was another missile fired in C2766 or some other gun
And round and round in circles we go.... I'm sorry you just don't get it.
You need to offer an opinion as to what you believe is the most logical explanation for a bullet being found by Daryl C. Tomlinson at Parkland Hospital. Either that or accept that you are committed contrarian not willing to follow through on where your question leads.
Pathetic! I don't need to do anything. I asked a question and you are unable to answer it. That about covers it! And that you don't get it won't be a surprise to anybody reading this.
-
Tomlinson himself said it wasn't the same bullet he found when asked about it.
When did Tomlinson say this and to whom?
I think you are confusing Tomlinson with Wright. The latter told Josiah Thompson in 1966 that the bullet he received from Tomlinson had a pointed tip and later showed Thompson a similar bullet of photo of which Tompson published in his book "Six seconds in Dallas". Wright also rejected CE399 (he was shown a photograph) as the bullet he had seen.
....
I thought Tomlinson himself said this in the 1988 Nova Film at 17:00 minutes during an interview with him. He only refers to the fact that Rob Caprio made with respect to which stretcher he found the bullet on! You maybe right that it was Wright that said it?
-
I thought Tomlinson himself said this in the 1988 Nova Film at 17:00 minutes during an interview with him. He only refers to the fact that Rob Caprio made with respect to which stretcher he found the bullet on! You maybe right that it was Wright that said it?
Thumb1:
No worries Allan. It's not easy to keep track of all the details.
-
When a member resorts to insults it's certain that he is cornered and cannot respond to the challenge.
What was the challenge? I must have missed it.
I never tried to "prove" anything. I correctly explained that a "conclusion" is what is required with this difference of opinion about CE399.
Sorry I don't speak mambo jambo. I asked you to show that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital. If you set out never to prove anything, what are you doing in this thread?
I provided a list of reasons why I have "concluded" that CE399 is the bullet found at Parkland Hospital. I have not seen a list of reasons to support the alternative proposition: that CE399 was planted at Parkland Hospital but was fired somewhere else other than Dealey Plaza on Friday 22 November 1963 (12:30 pm CST). Alternately that the stretcher bullet was another missile fired in C2766 or some other gun
And round and round in circles we go.... I'm sorry you just don't get it.
You need to offer an opinion as to what you believe is the most logical explanation for a bullet being found by Daryl C. Tomlinson at Parkland Hospital. Either that or accept that you are committed contrarian not willing to follow through on where your question leads.
Pathetic! I don't need to do anything. I asked a question and you are unable to answer it. That about covers it! And that you don't get it won't be a surprise to anybody reading this.
I answered the question... but not in the way that you want it to be answered.
You're the one who does not seem to get it. Your "proof" demand is unreasonable. When presented with a puzzle: The reasonable, intelligent option is to consider the available facts and decide which alternative is more likely to be the truth. You do not want to make a decision as to what actually happened; because that would open your "speculative opinion" to scrutiny.
You duck and dodge "ad infinitum"... because you are unwilling to clearly and unequivocally state what you think actually occurred with the stretcher bullet found by Daryl C. Tomlinson at Parkland Hospital.
You are well aware of what the challenge is. State your opinion about Tomlinson and the stretcher bullet at Parkland Hospital.
None of my sentences are "mambo jumbo". If you think they are: explain why with examples.
Your frustration is understandable. I wont play your silly game with your rules. That's why you resort to name-calling and cliches.
You can stop wasting my time by giving your opinion. Either that or concede that you have no opinion.
-
I answered the question... but not in the way that you want it to be answered.
You're the one who does not seem to get it. Your "proof" demand is unreasonable. When presented with a puzzle: The reasonable, intelligent option is to consider the available facts and decide which alternative is more likely to be the truth. You do not want to make a decision as to what actually happened; because that would open your "speculative opinion" to scrutiny.
You duck and dodge "ad infinitum"... because you are unwilling to clearly and unequivocally state what you think actually occurred with the stretcher bullet found by Daryl C. Tomlinson at Parkland Hospital.
You are well aware of what the challenge is. State your opinion about Tomlinson and the stretcher bullet at Parkland Hospital.
None of my sentences are "mambo jumbo". If you think they are: explain why with examples.
Your frustration is understandable. I wont play your silly game with your rules. That's why you resort to name-calling and cliches.
You can stop wasting my time by giving your opinion. Either that or concede that you have no opinion.
I answered the question... but not in the way that you want it to be answered.
No you didn't
You're the one who does not seem to get it. Your "proof" demand is unreasonable. When presented with a puzzle: The reasonable, intelligent option is to consider the available facts and decide which alternative is more likely to be the truth. You do not want to make a decision as to what actually happened; because that would open your "speculative opinion" to scrutiny.
Asking for evidence that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is the one Tomlinson found is "unreasonable"? Please tell me why?
You do not want to make a decision as to what actually happened; because that would open your "speculative opinion" to scrutiny.
Why should I make a decision before all the facts are presented to me?
You duck and dodge "ad infinitum"... because you are unwilling to clearly and unequivocally state what you think actually occurred with the stretcher bullet found by Daryl C. Tomlinson at Parkland Hospital.
Oh boy, you really are not getting any of this..... I don't give a damn what bullet Tomlinson found at Parkland. Being in Texas, Parkland was known for treating gunshot wounds. Whatever bullet Tomlinson found - and it isn't even conclusive on which strecher he found the bullet - it could have come from anywhere. What I need you to show is that the bullet he found is the same one that's now in evidence as CE399. Well, can you?
You are well aware of what the challenge is. State your opinion about Tomlinson and the stretcher bullet at Parkland Hospital.
Already done
You can stop wasting my time by giving your opinion. Either that or concede that you have no opinion.
I have no opinion. That's why I asked the question. As far as wasting your time goes, nobody is forcing you to answer. You are the one who is wasting your (and my) time
-
I answered the question... but not in the way that you want it to be answered.
No you didn't
You're the one who does not seem to get it. Your "proof" demand is unreasonable. When presented with a puzzle: The reasonable, intelligent option is to consider the available facts and decide which alternative is more likely to be the truth. You do not want to make a decision as to what actually happened; because that would open your "speculative opinion" to scrutiny.
Asking for evidence that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is the one Tomlinson found is "unreasonable"? Please tell me why?
You do not want to make a decision as to what actually happened; because that would open your "speculative opinion" to scrutiny.
Why should I make a decusion before the facts are presented to me?
You duck and dodge "ad infinitum"... because you are unwilling to clearly and unequivocally state what you think actually occurred with the stretcher bullet found by Daryl C. Tomlinson at Parkland Hospital.
Oh boy, you really are not getting any of this..... I don't give a damn what bullet Tomlinson found at Parkland. Being in Texas, Parkland was known for treating gunshot wounds. Whatever bullet Tomlinson found - and there isn't even a conclusive answer on which strecher he found the bullet - it could have come from anywhere. What I need you to show is that the bullet he found is the same one that's now in evidence as CE399. Well, can you?
You are well aware of what the challenge is. State your opinion about Tomlinson and the stretcher bullet at Parkland Hospital.
Already done
You can stop wasting my time by giving your opinion. Either that or concede that you have no opinion.
I have no opinion. That's why I asked the question. As far as wasting your time goes, nobody is forcing you to answer. You are the one who is wasting your (and my) time
No you didn't
More information please... this statement is too vague.
Oh boy, you really are not getting any of this..... I don't give a damn what bullet Tomlinson found at Parkland. Being in Texas, Parkland was known for treating gunshot wounds. Whatever bullet Tomlinson found - and there isn't even a conclusive answer on which strecher he found the bullet - it could have come from anywhere. What I need you to show is that the bullet he found is the same one that's now in evidence as CE399. Well, can you?
Now we are getting somewhere. You believe that the bullet found by Daryl C. Tomlinson is from another gunshot victim (not Governor Connally) treated at Parkland Hospital. Why didn't you say that before instead of persisting with "being cute"?
It's extremely unlikely that the "Tomlinson bullet" was from another gunshot victim not Governor Connally's thigh.
1.) It would be an incredible coincidence that another gunshot victim hit by a rifle bullet was treated at Parkland Hospital around the same time as Governor Connally.
2.) If a gunshot victim was treated at Parkland a day or more before Connally: Is it unlikely that the bullet would not have been discovered promptly. Hygiene is paramount at hospitals. The sheets on "stretchers" would be changed frequently. The bullet would have been discovered by staff that change the sheets on stretchers.
I have no opinion. That's why I asked the question.
Actually you do have an opinion. It's inconceivable that you would not. It's just that you refused to reveal it until pressured to do so. Your opinion is that another gunshot victim was hit by a rifle bullet, treated at Parkland Hospital, and that missile is the one found by Tomlinson.
I don't believe your unfounded claim that the "Tomlinson bullet" is from another gunshot victim.
I conclude that the "Tomlinson bullet" was the one that was lodged in Governor Connally's thigh wound and is CE399. Why? The proximity factor.
-- The proximity in time between the assassination shots in Dealey Plaza and the bullet's discovery at Parkland Hospital: less than an hour.
-- The physical proximity (short distance) between the shooting location (Dealey Plaza) and the stretcher at Parkland Hospital. The bullet traveled in the Presidential limousine to Parkland Hospital and moved to the stretcher with Governor Connally. Daryl C. Tomlinson found a bullet after hearing it fall off a stretcher and hit the floor.
Now that you have presented an opinion (bullet from another gunshot victim) about the identity of "Tomlinson bullet": There remains the other options to "consider" and make a final decision as to which is more likely to be true.
1.) CE399 is the "Tomlinson bullet" and is the missile that lodged in Governor Connally's thigh. It was fired in C2766 at Dealey Plaza (12:30 pm CST).
2.) CE399 is not the "Tomlinson bullet". The latter was inadvertently lost by law enforcement. CE399 is a replacement for the "TB" and was fired in the rifle C2766 by an agent of the FBI sometime after 22 November 1963.
3.) CE399 is the "Tomlinson bullet" but was not fired in Dealey Plaza at 12:30 pm CST. It was fired in C2766 on the morning of 22 November 1963 (or on an earlier date) at an unknown location by an unknown person. Conspirators planted CE399 at Parkland Hospital to frame Lee Harvey Oswald.
There is no evidence for #2 or #3. Therefore by a process of elimination: #1 is the truth.
I'm keen to know what you now "conclude", Martin.
Oh another thing: How often do I have to keep doing work that should be your responsibility?
-
Even Hoover himself told LBJ that the fragments were useless as evidence that they fired from any particular gun.
When did J. Edgar Hoover ever say any such stupid thing about CE567/569 (the limo fragments)? (Although, given these incredibly dumb things (http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/09/fbi-errors.html) uttered by Mr. Hoover in late November of 1963, I guess it is, indeed, quite possible that Hoover could have also been clueless with respect to the origin of the limo fragments as well.)
Anyway, those front-seat limousine fragments---both of them!---were positively determined by Hoover's FBI to have been fired from the C2766 Carcano rifle. No doubt about it. And it wasn't just the FBI's Robert Frazier who determined that fact. The independent firearms examiner from Illinois---Joseph Nicol---verified it as well....
Mr. NICOL -- "It is my opinion that the same weapon that fired Commission's Exhibit 572 [two test bullets fired from the C2766 rifle] also fired the projectiles in Commission's Exhibits 569, 567, and 399."
Also See:
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/09/ce567-and-ce569.html
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/#Darrell-Tomlinson-And-CE399
-
No you didn't
More information please... this statement is too vague.
Oh boy, you really are not getting any of this..... I don't give a damn what bullet Tomlinson found at Parkland. Being in Texas, Parkland was known for treating gunshot wounds. Whatever bullet Tomlinson found - and there isn't even a conclusive answer on which strecher he found the bullet - it could have come from anywhere. What I need you to show is that the bullet he found is the same one that's now in evidence as CE399. Well, can you?
Now we are getting somewhere. You believe that the bullet found by Daryl C. Tomlinson is from another gunshot victim (not Governor Connally) treated at Parkland Hospital. Why didn't you say that before instead of persisting with "being cute"?
It's extremely unlikely that the "Tomlinson bullet" was from another gunshot victim not Governor Connally's thigh.
1.) It would be an incredible coincidence that another gunshot victim hit by a rifle bullet was treated at Parkland Hospital around the same time as Governor Connally.
2.) If a gunshot victim was treated at Parkland a day or more before Connally: Is it unlikely that the bullet would have been undiscovered at Parkland for a day or more. Hygiene is paramount at hospitals. The sheets on "stretchers" would be changed frequently. The bullet would have been discovered by staff that change the sheets on stretchers.
I have no opinion. That's why I asked the question.
Actually you do have an opinion. It's inconceivable that you would not. It's just that you refused to reveal it until pressured to do so. Your opinion is that another gunshot victim was hit by a rifle bullet, treated at Parkland Hospital, and that missile is the one found by Tomlinson.
I don't believe your unfounded claim that the "Tomlinson bullet" is from another gunshot victim.
I conclude that the "Tomlinson bullet" was the one that was lodged in Governor Connally's thigh wound and is CE399. Why? The proximity factor.
-- The proximity in time between the assassination shots in Dealey Plaza and the bullet's discovery at Parkland Hospital: less than an hour.
-- The physical proximity (short distance) between the shooting location (Dealey Plaza) and the stretcher at Parkland Hospital. The bullet traveled in the Presidential limousine to Parkland Hospital and moved to the stretcher with Governor Connally. Daryl C. Tomlinson found a bullet after hearing it fall off a stretcher and hit the floor.
Now that you have presented an opinion (bullet from another gunshot victim) about the identity of "Tomlinson bullet": There remains the other options to "consider" and make a final decision as to which is more likely to be true.
1.) CE399 is the "Tomlinson bullet" and is the missile that lodged in Governor Connally's thigh. It was fired in C2766 at Dealey Plaza (12:30 pm CST).
2.) CE399 is not the "Tomlinson bullet". The latter was inadvertently lost by law enforcement. CE399 is a replacement for the "TB" and was fired in the rifle C2766 by an agent of the FBI sometime after 22 November 1963.
3.) CE399 is the "Tomlinson bullet" but was not fired in Dealey Plaza at 12:30 pm CST. It was fired in C2766 on the morning of 22 November 1963 (or on an earlier date) at an unknown location by an unknown person. Conspirators planted CE399 at Parkland Hospital to frame Lee Harvey Oswald.
There is no evidence for #2 or #3. Therefore by a process of elimination: #1 is the truth.
I'm keen to know what you now "conclude", Martin.
Oh another thing: How often do I have to keep doing work that should be your responsibility?
More information please... this statement is too vague.
Nothing vague about it. You did not answer my question and still haven't.
Now we are getting somewhere. You believe that the bullet found by Daryl C. Tomlinson is from another gunshot victim (not Governor Connally) treated at Parkland Hospital. Why didn't you say that before instead of persisting with "being cute"?
Wherever you think "we" are getting, you are actually getting there on your own. At times you seem to having a conversation with yourself rather than me. I didn't say that the bullet at Parkland was from another gunshot victum because at this time I simply don't necessarily accept or believe that option over all others, but-unlike you - I do keep an open mind for the possibility. There is a difference between believing something and considering several scenarios.
It's extremely unlikely that the "Tomlinson bullet" was from another gunshot victim not Governor Connally's thigh.
1.) It would be an incredible coincidence that another gunshot victim hit by a rifle bullet was treated at Parkland Hospital around the same time as Governor Connally.
2.) If a gunshot victim was treated at Parkland a day or more before Connally: Is it unlikely that the bullet would have been undiscovered at Parkland for a day or more. Hygiene is paramount at hospitals. The sheets on "stretchers" would be changed frequently. The bullet would have been discovered by staff that change the sheets on stretchers.
You do understand that your opinion isn't evidence, right?
Actually you do have an opinion. It's inconceivable that you would not. It's just that you refused to reveal it until pressured to do so. Your opinion is that another gunshot victim was hit by a rifle bullet, treated at Parkland Hospital, and that missile is the one found by Tomlinson.
I do indeed have an opinion and this is it: it is my opinion that you are trying to force an opinion on me so that you can attack something rather than having to answer my question. I find it highly remarkable that you think you can tell me what my opinion is.... And you are wrong of course!
I don't believe your unfounded claim that the "Tomlinson bullet" is from another gunshot victim.
Too bad that I never made such a claim. Makes you look somewhat foolish, doesn't it?
I conclude that the "Tomlinson bullet" was the one that was lodged in Governor Connally's thigh wound and is CE399. Why? The proximity factor.
I didn't ask you for your conclusion. I asked you to answer my question. Can you show the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital or not?
Now that you have presented an opinion (bullet from another gunshot victim) about the identity of "Tomlinson bullet": There remains the other options to "consider" and make a final decision as to which is more likely to be true.
1.) CE399 is the "Tomlinson bullet" and is the missile that lodged in Governor Connally's thigh. It was fired in C2766 at Dealey Plaza (12:30 pm CST).
2.) CE399 is not the "Tomlinson bullet". The latter was inadvertently lost by law enforcement. CE399 is a replacement for the "TB" and was fired in the rifle C2766 by an agent of the FBI sometime after 22 November 1963.
3.) CE399 is the "Tomlinson bullet" but was not fired in Dealey Plaza at 12:30 pm CST. It was fired in C2766 on the morning of 22 November 1963 (or on an earlier date) at an unknown location by an unknown person. Conspirators planted CE399 at Parkland Hospital to frame Lee Harvey Oswald.
Once again; I have mentioned an option you previously failed to consider. I did not offer an opinion. I gave you another option to those you had offered earlier and you called it an opinion. I find it hard to believe that you don't understand the difference.
There is no evidence for #2 or #3. Therefore by a process of elimination: #1 is the truth.
I'm keen to know what you now "conclude", Martin.
What I conclude is that this is a very stupid thing to say. There is also no evidence for #1 which makes your entire exercise pointless and invalid. How do I know there is no evidence for #1? Simple... you would have answered my question and presented that evidence. You did not, ergo it doesn't exist!
Oh another thing: How often do I have to keep doing work that should be your responsibility?
You have never done and are not doing work that is my responsibility. All you do is huff and puff repeating selfserving strawman arguments so you can knock them down. You don't need to do my work.... all you need to do is answer my question!
-
When did J. Edgar Hoover ever say any such stupid thing about CE567/569 (the limo fragments)? (Although given these incredibly dumb things (http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/09/fbi-errors.html) uttered by Mr. Hoover in late November of 1963, I guess it is, indeed, quite possible that Hoover could have also been clueless with respect to the limo fragments as well.)
Anyway, those front-seat limousine fragments---both of them!---were positively determined by Hoover's FBI to have been fired from the C2766 Carcano rifle. No doubt about it. And it wasn't just the FBI's Robert Frazier who determined that fact. The independent firearms examiner from Illinois---Joseph Nicol---verified it as well....
Mr. NICOL -- "It is my opinion that the same weapon that fired Commission's Exhibit 572 [two test bullets fired from the C2766 rifle] also fired the projectiles in Commission's Exhibits 569, 567, and 399."
Also See:
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/09/ce567-and-ce569.html
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/#Darrell-Tomlinson-And-CE399
Did the FBI experts find these fragments in the limousine, when they examined the car at the Secret Service garage, David?
-
Did the FBI experts find these fragments in the limousine, when they examined the car at the Secret Service garage, David?
The Secret Service found the fragments when they searched the car at the White House garage, and then turned them over to Bob Frazier at the FBI.
Does that fact somehow make those fragments worthless as evidence in this case, Martin?
-
The Secret Service found them when they searched the car at the White House garage, and then turned them over to Bob Frazier at the FBI.
Does that fact somehow make those fragments worthless as evidence in this case, Martin?
I don't know, David. You tell me.....
I just find it a bit strange that a team of the FBI is directed to forensically examine the limousine only to find when they arrive at the garage that clearly unqualified Secret Service and White House personal has already gone through the crime scene and has allegedly removed from situ two vital pieces of evidence.
-
Now we are getting somewhere. You believe that the bullet found by Daryl C. Tomlinson is from another gunshot victim (not Governor Connally) treated at Parkland Hospital. Why didn't you say that before instead of persisting with "being cute"?
This is why it's so frustrating trying to have a conversation with most LNers. You're asked for evidence that CE 399 was the bullet found at Parkland and you immediately try to shift the burden by creating a strawman position, "the bullet found by Tomlinson is from another gunshot victim" and demand proof for that instead.
Why is it so hard to just admit, "no, there is no evidence that CE399 is the bullet found at Parkland". It would be nice if there was, but there isn't.
-
When did J. Edgar Hoover ever say any such stupid thing about CE567/569 (the limo fragments)? (Although, given these incredibly dumb things (http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/09/fbi-errors.html) uttered by Mr. Hoover in late November of 1963, I guess it is, indeed, quite possible that Hoover could have also been clueless with respect to the origin of the limo fragments as well.)
Anyway, those front-seat limousine fragments---both of them!---were positively determined by Hoover's FBI to have been fired from the C2766 Carcano rifle. No doubt about it. And it wasn't just the FBI's Robert Frazier who determined that fact. The independent firearms examiner from Illinois---Joseph Nicol---verified it as well....
Mr. NICOL -- "It is my opinion that the same weapon that fired Commission's Exhibit 572 [two test bullets fired from the C2766 rifle] also fired the projectiles in Commission's Exhibits 569, 567, and 399."
Also See:
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/09/ce567-and-ce569.html
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/#Darrell-Tomlinson-And-CE399
When the defendant has no legal representation challenging the prosecution's (WC) expert witnesses they
can get away with saying whatever they want. That doesn't make their opinions correct. They wouldn't have been put on the stand if what they said didn't support the (WC) case.
11/23/63
J. Edgar Hoover: I just wanted to let you know of a development which I think is very important in connection with this case - this man in Dallas (Lee Harvey Oswald). We, of course, charged him with the murder of the President. The evidence that they have at the present time is not very, very strong. We have just discovered the place where the gun was purchased and the shipment of the gun from Chicago to Dallas, to a post office box in Dallas, to a man - no, to a woman by the name of "A. Hidell."... We had it flown up last night, and our laboratory here is making an examination of it.
Lyndon B. Johnson: Yes, I told the Secret Service to see that that got taken care of.
J. Edgar Hoover: That's right. We have the gun and we have the bullet. There was only one full bullet that was found. That was on the stretcher that the President was on. It apparently had fallen out when they massaged his heart, and we have that one. We have what we call slivers, which are not very valuable in the identification. As soon as we finish the testing of the gun for fingerprints ... we will then be able to test the one bullet we have with the gun. But the important thing is that this gun was bought in Chicago on a money order. Cost twenty-one dollars, and it seems almost impossible to think that for twenty-one dollars you could kill the President of the United States.
-
And it wasn't just the FBI's Robert Frazier who determined that fact. The independent firearms examiner from Illinois---Joseph Nicol---verified it as well....
Is this the same Joseph Nicol that the WC trotted out to identify the Tippit slug after Cortlandt Cunningham didn't give them the answer they were looking for? Is there another example anywhere in Warren Commission lore of the WC getting a second outside opinion on an FBI analysis?
-
The Secret Service found the fragments when they searched the car at the White House garage, and then turned them over to Bob Frazier at the FBI.
Actually one of them was found by a Navy Corpsman.
Allegedly.
And Frazier got them from another FBI agent, Bartlett, not from the Secret Service.
Allegedly.
But where and when was any of this documented? How exactly did Bartlett get them to begin with?
-
Is this the same Joseph Nicol that the WC trotted out to identify the Tippit slug after Cortlandt Cunningham didn't give them the answer they were looking for? Is there another example anywhere in Warren Commission lore of the WC getting a second outside opinion on an FBI analysis?
Is this the same Joseph Nicol that the WC trotted out to identify the Tippit slug after Cortlandt Cunningham didn't give them the answer they were looking for?
Are you implying that Nicol was giving the Commission the answers they wanted, regardless of the truth? If so, can you support it? If you're not implying such a thing, then what is your point?
Is there another example anywhere in Warren Commission lore of the WC getting a second outside opinion on an FBI analysis?
Sebastian Latona (supervisor of the latent fingerprint section of the identification division, FBI) and Arthur Mandella (fingerprint expert, New York City Police Department).
In the sniper's nest, there were four boxes used in connection with the shooting. One large box containing books and then two of the smaller "Rolling Readers" boxes atop the large box of books. The fourth box was on the floor behind the stack of three,
obviously used as a seat.
On one of the Rolling Readers boxes at the window, Oswald's left palmprint and his right index fingerprint were found.
The employees laying the floor moved the large boxes of books from the west end of the floor over to the east end. However, the "Rolling Readers" boxes did not need to be moved, i.e. they weren't over on the west end where the new floor was being placed down. The two "Rolling readers" boxes in the sniper's nest were originally about three aisles over from the sniper's nest window and were taken to that window for the purposes of being used as a gun rest. The "Rolling Readers" boxes didn't contain books.
On the box on the floor, the one used as a seat, Day, using powder, dusted the box and developed a palmprint. Latona examined the print and found it to be from Oswald's right palm. Because Day used a powder to develop the print, Latona stated that not too long a time had passed between the time the print was placed on the box and the time it was developed by Day. Powder cannot develop prints beyond a certain point in time.
FBI experiments showed that twenty-four hours was a likely maximum time between the print being placed on the box and the time it was developed by the powder. However, Latona would only state that he could only testify with certainty that the print was less than three days old.
Arthur Mandella (fingerprint expert, NYPD), examined the prints and agreed that they belonged to Oswald. Mandella was of the opinion that the palmprint developed by Day (using the powder) from the box on the floor (the one used as a seat) was probably made within a day to a day and a half of the examination made on the 22nd.
Oswald could obviously have handled the boxes as part of his normal work duties. Fingerprints were taken from the twelve Depository employees who may have had cause to handle the boxes (found in the sniper's nest) as part of their normal work duties as well.
Other identifiable prints were developed on the boxes. These prints were compared with the fingerprints of all other employees as well as law enforcement personnel who handled the boxes. None of the identifiable prints belonged to any of the other employees.
Point being, the larger box on the sniper's nest floor used as a seat, was moved by the floor laying crew at some point earlier in the week. Day dusted this box with powder and developed a palmprint, which Latona said belonged to Oswald. The process of using the powder develops prints based on perspiration and therefore would not find prints older than one to three days (time frame dependent on which fingerprint expert you listen to).
While it's possible to handle the boxes and not leave a print at all, it's also likely as possible that Oswald was the only person to handle that box at any point in time past Tuesday the 19th (per Latona's three days out). Or, if you go by Mandella of the NYPD, Oswald could have been the only person to handle that box after Wednesday the 20th. If you go by the FBI's experiments, Oswald was possibly the only person to handle that box after Thursday the 21st.
Oswald's prints on the boxes prove he was in that window, but they can't prove when he was there exactly.
-
Bill, I think you would agree only that his palm print shows that he touched the box, not that he touched it in the window area.
-
Sebastian Latona (supervisor of the latent fingerprint section of the identification division, FBI) and Arthur Mandella (fingerprint expert, New York City Police Department).
Thumb1: Thanks!
As for the rest of that, "the one used as a seat" and "taken to that window for the purposes of being used as a gun rest" are pure speculation.
-
Yes, that's pretty simple. And it's a false dichotomy. It could be neither.
What is the "neither"?
What's so great about forming a conclusion without the evidence to support one? Is that supposed to be rational?
You're confusing "evidence" with "disputing evidence".
Based on the available facts there are two options.
-- CE399 fell out of the superficial wound in Governor Connally's thigh having been fired in C2766 at Dealey Plaza (12:30 pm CST).
OR
CE399 was placed on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital by a person sometime after 12:30 CST. The person was associated with plotters who fired a bullet in C2766 at some earlier time at a location other than Dealey Plaza.
Which is it John?
Why not use the official evidence to show that it was found on JBC's stretcher? I did and it doesn't show this.
See reply #59.
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1299.50.html
-
The Secret Service found the fragments when they searched the car at the White House garage, and then turned them over to Bob Frazier at the FBI.
Does that fact somehow make those fragments worthless as evidence in this case, Martin?
Yes since neither the FBI or SS had jurisdiction for the crime.
-
No you didn't
More information please... this statement is too vague.
Oh boy, you really are not getting any of this..... I don't give a damn what bullet Tomlinson found at Parkland. Being in Texas, Parkland was known for treating gunshot wounds. Whatever bullet Tomlinson found - and there isn't even a conclusive answer on which strecher he found the bullet - it could have come from anywhere. What I need you to show is that the bullet he found is the same one that's now in evidence as CE399. Well, can you?
Now we are getting somewhere. You believe that the bullet found by Daryl C. Tomlinson is from another gunshot victim (not Governor Connally) treated at Parkland Hospital. Why didn't you say that before instead of persisting with "being cute"?
It's extremely unlikely that the "Tomlinson bullet" was from another gunshot victim not Governor Connally's thigh.
1.) It would be an incredible coincidence that another gunshot victim hit by a rifle bullet was treated at Parkland Hospital around the same time as Governor Connally.
2.) If a gunshot victim was treated at Parkland a day or more before Connally: Is it unlikely that the bullet would not have been discovered promptly. Hygiene is paramount at hospitals. The sheets on "stretchers" would be changed frequently. The bullet would have been discovered by staff that change the sheets on stretchers.
I have no opinion. That's why I asked the question.
Actually you do have an opinion. It's inconceivable that you would not. It's just that you refused to reveal it until pressured to do so. Your opinion is that another gunshot victim was hit by a rifle bullet, treated at Parkland Hospital, and that missile is the one found by Tomlinson.
I don't believe your unfounded claim that the "Tomlinson bullet" is from another gunshot victim.
I conclude that the "Tomlinson bullet" was the one that was lodged in Governor Connally's thigh wound and is CE399. Why? The proximity factor.
-- The proximity in time between the assassination shots in Dealey Plaza and the bullet's discovery at Parkland Hospital: less than an hour.[/i][/u]
-- The physical proximity (short distance) between the shooting location (Dealey Plaza) and the stretcher at Parkland Hospital. The bullet traveled in the Presidential limousine to Parkland Hospital and moved to the stretcher with Governor Connally. Daryl C. Tomlinson found a bullet after hearing it fall off a stretcher and hit the floor.
Now that you have presented an opinion (bullet from another gunshot victim) about the identity of "Tomlinson bullet": There remains the other options to "consider" and make a final decision as to which is more likely to be true.
1.) CE399 is the "Tomlinson bullet" and is the missile that lodged in Governor Connally's thigh. It was fired in C2766 at Dealey Plaza (12:30 pm CST).
2.) CE399 is not the "Tomlinson bullet". The latter was inadvertently lost by law enforcement. CE399 is a replacement for the "TB" and was fired in the rifle C2766 by an agent of the FBI sometime after 22 November 1963.
3.) CE399 is the "Tomlinson bullet" but was not fired in Dealey Plaza at 12:30 pm CST. It was fired in C2766 on the morning of 22 November 1963 (or on an earlier date) at an unknown location by an unknown person. Conspirators planted CE399 at Parkland Hospital to frame Lee Harvey Oswald.
There is no evidence for #2 or #3. Therefore by a process of elimination: #1 is the truth.
I'm keen to know what you now "conclude", Martin.
Oh another thing: How often do I have to keep doing work that should be your responsibility?
Your actually ignoring the smoke and mirrors argument associated with having a bullet found and then switched out for another. Introducing a piece of evidence early on and then calling it into play later is a sinister plot that was being played out here. They needed someone to see something roll of a stretcher. I could drop a piece of evidence out of my pocket and call attention to it by a bystander - even innocently like glancing at it with my eyes and having him find it first! If the bullet found was not necessary for a magic bullet theory to come out later, that reporting would never have to be used later. We have several people that said it was found in the car at the same time. Lots of smoke and mirrors are called into play.
I watched a good analogy played out where the MSM propaganda machine was used years later. Every one has long forgotten the collapse of the Twin Towers - I still follow! Years ago, one of the major network anchors made a statement to the effect that they just had a video clip of Mayor Guilliani holding the 2 black boxes from the two airplanes that crashed into the towers and that they were about too show it - "right after the commercial break". Then this anchor retracted the statement and said he didn't have any video and apologized profusely for that error. However, he ended his apology with a statement that Guilliani was holding a picture of a black box (never shown on broadcast!) - really just continuing to sow the seeds of deception to be used later! This sort of thing of introducing and then retracting statements are smoke and mirrors tactics used to deceive and cover up the truth. This went on with the JFK investigation as well and is a good coverup! Create enough doubt and you have a hard time believing anything. Conspiracy at its finest!
-
I still haven't seen any evidence that shows the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital.
Why is that?
-
I still haven't seen any evidence that shows the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital.
Why is that?
Bump
-
Bump
Martin they can't give what doesn't exist. You will have an awful long wait.
-
Are you implying that Nicol was giving the Commission the answers they wanted, regardless of the truth? If so, can you support it? If you're not implying such a thing, then what is your point?
Sebastian Latona (supervisor of the latent fingerprint section of the identification division, FBI) and Arthur Mandella (fingerprint expert, New York City Police Department).
In the sniper's nest, there were four boxes used in connection with the shooting. One large box containing books and then two of the smaller "Rolling Readers" boxes atop the large box of books. The fourth box was on the floor behind the stack of three,
obviously used as a seat.
On one of the Rolling Readers boxes at the window, Oswald's left palmprint and his right index fingerprint were found.
The employees laying the floor moved the large boxes of books from the west end of the floor over to the east end. However, the "Rolling Readers" boxes did not need to be moved, i.e. they weren't over on the west end where the new floor was being placed down. The two "Rolling readers" boxes in the sniper's nest were originally about three aisles over from the sniper's nest window and were taken to that window for the purposes of being used as a gun rest. The "Rolling Readers" boxes didn't contain books.
On the box on the floor, the one used as a seat, Day, using powder, dusted the box and developed a palmprint. Latona examined the print and found it to be from Oswald's right palm. Because Day used a powder to develop the print, Latona stated that not too long a time had passed between the time the print was placed on the box and the time it was developed by Day. Powder cannot develop prints beyond a certain point in time.
FBI experiments showed that twenty-four hours was a likely maximum time between the print being placed on the box and the time it was developed by the powder. However, Latona would only state that he could only testify with certainty that the print was less than three days old.
Arthur Mandella (fingerprint expert, NYPD), examined the prints and agreed that they belonged to Oswald. Mandella was of the opinion that the palmprint developed by Day (using the powder) from the box on the floor (the one used as a seat) was probably made within a day to a day and a half of the examination made on the 22nd.
Oswald could obviously have handled the boxes as part of his normal work duties. Fingerprints were taken from the twelve Depository employees who may have had cause to handle the boxes (found in the sniper's nest) as part of their normal work duties as well.
Other identifiable prints were developed on the boxes. These prints were compared with the fingerprints of all other employees as well as law enforcement personnel who handled the boxes. None of the identifiable prints belonged to any of the other employees.
Point being, the larger box on the sniper's nest floor used as a seat, was moved by the floor laying crew at some point earlier in the week. Day dusted this box with powder and developed a palmprint, which Latona said belonged to Oswald. The process of using the powder develops prints based on perspiration and therefore would not find prints older than one to three days (time frame dependent on which fingerprint expert you listen to).
While it's possible to handle the boxes and not leave a print at all, it's also likely as possible that Oswald was the only person to handle that box at any point in time past Tuesday the 19th (per Latona's three days out). Or, if you go by Mandella of the NYPD, Oswald could have been the only person to handle that box after Wednesday the 20th. If you go by the FBI's experiments, Oswald was possibly the only person to handle that box after Thursday the 21st.
Oswald's prints on the boxes prove he was in that window, but they can't prove when he was there exactly.
WOW!!.....There's so much information to comment on, and refute, in this post it will have to be chopped up and refuted one point at a time...
In the sniper's nest, there were four boxes used in connection with the shooting. One large box containing books and then two of the smaller "Rolling Readers" boxes atop the large box of books. The fourth box was on the floor behind the stack of three,
obviously used as a seat.
The scene is usually referred to as "the Sniper's Nest" even though there were no shots fired from that location, and it was originally constructed as a "Smoker's nook" or "Loafer's Hideaway "... The three boxes were stacked behind the window that was used as a table and the fourth box was the seat....The loafer could sit there out of sight of the boss, behind that open window and smoke ( in a NO SMOKING area) where the smoke would escape out of the window. There was no box on the window sill.....
A 5'9" man could not have sat on the seat box and rested a rifle on the stack of three and fired down onto elm street.... Physically impossible,..
Here's why... The man sitting on the box would have had to have crouched very low to bring his shoulder down to the elevation of the top of the Rolling readers box but that low crouch would have prevented him from declining the muzzle of the rifle down toward Elm street. ( don't take my word..try it for yourself)
On one of the Rolling Readers boxes at the window, Oswald's left palmprint and his right index fingerprint were found.
Since Lee Oswald's job required him to handle, move, and open, boxes of books.... It's entirely reasonable that his prints could have been found on boxes of books...But WHY?? did they only identify Lee Oswald's prints when it is a FACT that other employees handled boxes and used that "Smoker's Nook".
On the box on the floor, the one used as a seat, Day, using powder, dusted the box and developed a palmprint. Latona examined the print and found it to be from Oswald's right palm. Because Day used a powder to develop the print, Latona stated that not too long a time had passed between the time the print was placed on the box and the time it was developed by Day. Powder cannot develop prints beyond a certain point in time.
When this print was discovered on the Northwest corner of the box, Detective Studebaker encircled it with a ball point pen and added a note outside that perimeter ...The note he wrote read.... "From top of box suspect sat on --- LEFT palm " 11/22/63
So Studebaker saw a LEFT palm print and labeled it as such....
BIG problem....The print was on the Northwest corner of the box, so IF the box was used in the manner the police imagined ( Lee Oswald sat there) then he was facing AWAY from the window....Because the print was on the north side of the top of the box ...and any elementary school kid knows that if his left hand is north then he is facing east.....
-
Martin they can't give what doesn't exist. You will have an awful long wait.
If that's true, the entire SBT is (putting it mildly) in question also?.
-
If that's true, the entire SBT is (putting it mildly) in question also?.
Naturally you will have noted the lack of response to your question. :D
-
Naturally you will have noted the lack of response to your question. :D
Yes I have....
So much so that it might inspire me to ask more of these questions, if only to help the LNs to deconstruct their own case by staying silent or being unable to come up with credible information about vital parts of their fairytale. I can think of a couple of good questions to ask right now.
-
OK, let's start with where it ended up (Frazier and the FBI) and work
backwards.
Frazier testified about how he got the bullet from Elmer Todd (3H428).
Both Todd and Frazier had marked their initials on the bullet (CE 2011).
Todd had gotten the bullet from James Rowley, of the Secret Service.
Rowley had gotten it from an agent, Richard Johnsen. Johnsen filed a
report about getting the bullet (18H798-799), and forwarded a note along
with the bullet (18H800). The note said, in part, " . . . the attached
expended bullet was received by me about 5 minutes prior to Mrs. Kennedy's
departure from the hospital."
The note further named the "person from whom I received this bullet" as
O.P. Wright.
I can't find any WC testimony from O.P. Wright, although CE 2011 records
that he passed the bullet along. And then, we have Tomlinson's WC
testimony that he gave the bullet to Wright, and Johnsen's written
statements that he got the bullet from Wright.
Further, Thompson interviewed Wright in 1966. He managed to get Wright to
say that CE 399 didn't look like the bullet that he had handled, but he
never for an instant denied getting the bullet from Tomlinson and giving
it to Johnsen. SSID, p. 175.
Translation: CE 399 would have been perfectly admissible. At most, the
Oswald prosecution would have had to call some of these guys to the stand.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/cece399.txt
JohnM
-
OK, let's start with where it ended up (Frazier and the FBI) and work
backwards.
Frazier testified about how he got the bullet from Elmer Todd (3H428).
Both Todd and Frazier had marked their initials on the bullet (CE 2011).
So, this places the bullet now in evidence as CE399 in the hands of the FBI.
Todd had gotten the bullet from James Rowley, of the Secret Service.
What bullet? You say "the bullet" but what does that mean? Can you show that "the bullet" is the one now in evidence as CE399?
Rowley had gotten it from an agent, Richard Johnsen. Johnsen filed a report about getting the bullet (18H798-799), and forwarded a note along with the bullet (18H800). The note said, in part, " . . . the attached expended bullet was received by me about 5 minutes prior to Mrs. Kennedy's departure from the hospital."
The note further named the "person from whom I received this bullet" as O.P. Wright.
Yes, we know all that, but was the bullet Johnsen received from Wright, and passed on to Rowley, the same one as the one now in evidence as CE399?
I can't find any WC testimony from O.P. Wright, although CE 2011 records that he passed the bullet along. And then, we have Tomlinson's WC testimony that he gave the bullet to Wright, and Johnsen's written statements that he got the bullet from Wright.
What bullet?
Neither Tomlinson, Wright or Johnsen can confirm that the bullet they handled on 11/22/63 was the same as the one now in evidence as CE399!
Further, Thompson interviewed Wright in 1966. He managed to get Wright to say that CE 399 didn't look like the bullet that he had handled, but he never for an instant denied getting the bullet from Tomlinson and giving it to Johnsen. SSID, p. 175.
What do you mean with "He managed to get Wright to say"? ?. Did he somehow force Wright to make a false statement? Is that what you are claiming?
The facts are fairly simple; Wright can't confirm that the bullet he got from Tomlinson and passed on to Johnsen was indeed the bullet now in evidence as CE399. In fact, he not only failed to identify CE399 when allegedly shown to him by Odum but he clearly states that the bullet he saw did not look like CE399.
Btw the WC took testimony from Tomlinson but they never asked him to identify the bullet CE399 (which wasn`t entered into evidence until after Tomlinson`s testimony). Considering that lawyers never ask questions they already know the answer to, why do you think they failed to show CE399 to Tomlinson for identification?
Translation: CE 399 would have been perfectly admissible. At most, the Oswald prosecution would have had to call some of these guys to the stand.[/b]
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/cece399.txt
JohnM
Complete rubbish. I don't care about your opinion about the admissibility of evidence at a trial that will never happen. I wanted you to show that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital and you have failed miserably to do so.
-
So, this places the bullet now in evidence as CE399 in the hands of the FBI.
What bullet? You say "the bullet" but what does that mean? Can you show that "the bullet" is the one now in evidence as CE399?
Yes, we know all that, but was the bullet Johnsen received from Wright, and passed on to Rowley, the same one as the one now in evidence as CE399?
What bullet?
Neither Tomlinson, Wright or Johnsen can confirm that the bullet they handled on 11/22/63 was the same as the one now in evidence as CE399!
What do you mean with "He managed to get Wright to say"? ?. Did he somehow force Wright to make a false statement? Is that what you are claiming?
The facts are fairly simple; Wright can't confirm that the bullet he got from Tomlinson and passed on to Johnsen was indeed the bullet now in evidence as CE399. In fact, he not only failed to identify CE399 when allegedly shown to him by Odum but he clearly states that the bullet he saw did not look like CE399.
Btw the WC took testimony from Tomlinson but they never asked him to identify the bullet CE399 (which wasn`t entered into evidence until after Tomlinson`s testimony). Considering that lawyers never ask questions they already know the answer to, why do you think they failed to show CE399 to Tomlinson for identification?
Complete rubbish. I don't care about your opinion about the admissibility of evidence at a trial that will never happen. I wanted you to show that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital and you have failed miserably to do so.
I asked you in another thread to tell me who in 54 years has ever said they planted or manufactured any evidence in the JFK case and before you ran away your only answer was this weak attempt at diversion.
The facts are that CE399 would be admitted into court and you can't do a thing about it.
JohnM
-
I asked you in another thread to tell me who in 54 years has ever said they planted or manufactured any evidence in the JFK case and before you ran away your only answer was this weak attempt at diversion.
The facts are that CE399 would be admitted into court and you can't do a thing about it.
JohnM
I asked you in another thread to tell me who in 54 years has ever said they planted or manufactured any evidence in the JFK case and before you ran away your only answer was this weak attempt at diversion.
You fool! If you can not show the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland (and you can't), it must have come from somewhere else!
The facts are that CE399 would be admitted into court and you can't do a thing about it.
No. That facts are that you think that CE399 would be admitted into court (which btw by itself means very little) and you need to argue that because you have nothing else.
-
I asked you in another thread to tell me who in 54 years has ever said they planted or manufactured any evidence in the JFK case and before you ran away your only answer was this weak attempt at diversion.
You fool! If you can not show the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland (and you can't), it must have come from somewhere else!
The facts are that CE399 would be admitted into court and you can't do a thing about it.
No. That facts are that you think that CE399 would be admitted into court (which btw by itself means very little) and you need to argue that because you have nothing else.
The facts are that CE399 would be admitted into court and you can't do a thing about it.
No. That facts are that you think that CE399 would be admitted into court (which btw by itself means very little) and you need to argue that because you have nothing else.
(which btw by itself means very little)
Very true.... Even if CE 399 were admitted into court There is a whole string of questions that would be attached to it....One of them would definitely be; If after verifying that the bullet had in fact been fired through the barrel of CE 139.... WHEN was it fired ??
-
I asked you in another thread to tell me who in 54 years has ever said they planted or manufactured any evidence in the JFK case and before you ran away your only answer was this weak attempt at diversion.
You fool! If you can not show the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland (and you can't), it must have come from somewhere else!
The facts are that CE399 would be admitted into court and you can't do a thing about it.
No. That facts are that you think that CE399 would be admitted into court (which btw by itself means very little) and you need to argue that because you have nothing else.
While your side relies on some mysterious unknown boogeyman, we rely on logic and science.
1. Who could possibly know how many bullets and fragments would be recovered at the crime scene or in the Limo?
2. Before Connally's surgery was finished and before Kennedy's autopsy, who could possibly know how many bullets were in the two men?
3. Before the two men's injuries were analysed who could possibly know that a whole bullet would fit their injuries?
4. Who could possibly know that their planted bullet needed to be missing a tiny amount of lead?
I would like to see someone create a plausible alternative narrative of exactly what bullet Tomlinson found and why the conspirators risked just leaving the bullet where it possibly may have not been connected with this case?
JohnM
-
While your side relies on some mysterious unknown boogeyman, we rely on logic and science.
1. Who could possibly know how many bullets and fragments would be recovered at the crime scene or in the Limo?
2. Before Connally's surgery was finished and before Kennedy's autopsy, who could possibly know how many bullets were in the two men?
3. Before the two men's injuries were analysed who could possibly know that a whole bullet would fit their injuries?
4. Who could possibly know that their planted bullet needed to be missing a tiny amount of lead?
I would like to see someone create a plausible alternative narrative of exactly what bullet Tomlinson found and why the conspirators risked just leaving the bullet where it possibly may have not been connected with this case?
JohnM
While your side relies on some mysterious unknown boogeyman,
Which side would "your side" be? Am I member of some sort of club without knowing it, or are you just simply paranoid?
And what "mysterious unknown boogeyman" do you mean and how can one rely on somebody who is unknown?
we rely on logic and science.
That's only true if you mean by "logic" pure speculation, self serving assumptions, unwarrented leaps of faith and nitpicking evidence.
As for the science.... you don't rely on it. You misrepresent it in every way possible.
1. Who could possibly know how many bullets and fragments would be recovered at the crime scene or in the Limo?
2. Before Connally's surgery was finished and before Kennedy's autopsy, who could possibly know how many bullets were in the two men?
3. Before the two men's injuries were analysed who could possibly know that a whole bullet would fit their injuries?
4. Who could possibly know that their planted bullet needed to be missing a tiny amount of lead?
Silly questions that are completely irrelevant for what's being discussed here, because if the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was never in Parkland Hospital (and it's evidentiary life did indeed begin in the FBI lab in Washington) all four questions asked could be easily answered after the fact.
Although there was talk early on about a bullet having been found on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital, just how long did it take after that before the narrative about CE399 (and the limo fragments) became known in the public domain?
-
While your side relies on some mysterious unknown boogeyman,
Which side would "your side" be? Am I member of some sort of club without knowing it, or are you just simply paranoid?
And what "mysterious unknown boogeyman" do you mean and how can one rely on somebody who is unknown?
we rely on logic and science.
That's only true if you mean by "logic" pure speculation, self serving assumptions, unwarrented leaps of faith and nitpicking evidence.
As for the science.... you don't rely on it. You misrepresent it in every way possible.
1. Who could possibly know how many bullets and fragments would be recovered at the crime scene or in the Limo?
2. Before Connally's surgery was finished and before Kennedy's autopsy, who could possibly know how many bullets were in the two men?
3. Before the two men's injuries were analysed who could possibly know that a whole bullet would fit their injuries?
4. Who could possibly know that their planted bullet needed to be missing a tiny amount of lead?
Silly questions that are completely irrelevant for what's being discussed here, because if the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was never in Parkland Hospital (and it's evidentiary life did indeed begin in the FBI lab in Washington) all four questions asked could be easily answered after the fact.
Although there was talk early on about a bullet having been found on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital, just how long did it take after that before the narrative about CE399 (and the limo fragments) became known in the public domain?
Which side would "your side" be?
The side that implies that CE399 wasn't at Parkland.
...all four questions asked could be easily answered after the fact.
Unless your name is Nostradamus the chances of planting at such an early stage only one whole bullet that coincidentally satisfies the above 4 part criteria is pretty slim but somehow according to you "could be easily answered after the fact" which logically can only lead to one question... Without knowing the facts why bother risking planting anything in the first place?
Btw I would love to know the narrative where someone who apparently doesn't even care if a bullet was fired from Oswald's rifle just decides to plant a whole bullet on a random stretcher in some room on another floor at Parkland?, is that logical? or perhaps you have a better alternative?
JohnM
-
The side that implies that CE399 wasn't at Parkland.
Unless your name is Nostradamus the chances of planting at such an early stage only one whole bullet that coincidentally satisfies the above 4 part criteria is pretty slim but somehow according to you "could be easily answered after the fact" which logically can only lead to one question... Without knowing the facts why bother risking planting anything in the first place?
Btw I would love to know the narrative where someone who apparently doesn't even care if a bullet was fired from Oswald's rifle just decides to plant a whole bullet on a random stretcher in some room on another floor at Parkland?, is that logical? or perhaps you have a better alternative?
JohnM
The side that implies that CE399 wasn't at Parkland.
Who implies that CE399 wasn't at Parkland?
All that I've done is ask for the evidence that shows the bullet now in evidence as CE399 ever was at Parkland. I can't help it that you can't provide such evidence and wish to rely upon pure assumption!
Unless your name is Nostradamus the chances of planting at such an early stage only one whole bullet that coincidentally satisfies the above 4 part criteria is pretty slim but somehow according to you "could be easily answered after the fact" which logically can only lead to one question... Without knowing the facts why bother risking planting anything in the first place?
You keep on going on about planting evidence, but nobody else is.
Btw I would love to know the narrative where someone who apparently doesn't even care if a bullet was fired from Oswald's rifle just decides to plant a whole bullet on a random stretcher in some room on another floor at Parkland?, is that logical? or perhaps you have a better alternative?
Boy. here you go again. You must be really obsessed with this "planting" crap. Why do you keep assuming that a bullet must have been planted?
-
Boy. here you go again. You must be really obsessed with this "planting" crap. Why do you keep assuming that a bullet must have been planted?
It's the usual ploy of setting up a false dichotomy and then trying to shift the burden onto you to prove the other side of the false dichotomy or his side just wins by default.
It's the most popular fallacy in the LN arsenal.
The answer is that he cannot show that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital. He's just assuming that it was.
-
Let's give this one another try?. ;)
-
Most evidence, if the only issue with it is a questionable chain of custody, is indeed admissible. It is then left up to the jury to decide how much weight to give a certain piece of evidence with a questionable chain of custody.
A questionable chain of custody of CE-399 may affect how much weight the jury gives the bullet but a questionable chain, on its own, does not affect it's admissibility.
The single bullet that passed through both Kennedy and Connally and ended up in Connally's thigh must, at some point, be found somewhere. Even if this bullet was NOT CE-399, it is a must that this bullet would be found by someone somewhere. No other bullet has ever been found (in Connally's thigh or elsewhere). Even if you do not believe in the single bullet theory, the fact remains that a bullet lodged itself in Connally's left thigh.
To any conspiracy advocate, especially the original poster of this thread, have you ever seen any evidence put forth which suggests that a bullet, other than CE-399, was found inside Connally's thigh or anywhere else related to the known movements of the bodies of both Kennedy and Connally?
On the night of the assassination and overnight into Saturday morning, the limousine was searched by the FBI. They were looking for evidence. Smaller fragments were found but no intact bullet, like 399, was found. No other bullet has ever been turned in and placed into the record and this circumstantial evidence alone gets 399 admitted into evidence.
It's up to the jury to decide, based on a questionable chain of custody, how much weight to give CE-399 as the bullet found at Parkland.
Also, it is up to the defense, since CE-399 was linked to Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world, to convince the jury that CE-399 was NOT the bullet found at the hospital. Has anyone in this forum (or anywhere else) done so?
-
I wonder when this trial is going to be and if jury selection has already begun?..
-
I wonder when this trial is going to be and if jury selection has already begun?..
And I'm wondering if you're ever going to be able to prove that CE-399 was NOT found on Connally's stretcher at Parkland.
It is one thing to question the authenticity of a piece of evidence; any wannabe defense attorney can do that. It is another thing entirely to actually show that a particular piece of evidence is not authentic.
Keep questioning every piece of evidence, as if you're somehow getting somewhere in an attempt to show that Oswald was not responsible; it's all you do.
There is nothing wrong with questioning the evidence. So question a piece of evidence, if you want. I just wish you'd finally make a case for said piece of evidence not being what it is claimed to be. So far, all I have seen is you doubting the evidence and explaining why you doubt it. That's all you have; doubts? Have any proof?
-
That's a classic example of the shifting the burden of proof fallacy:
Oh yeah? Prove that CE399 is not the bullet found at Parkland.
Otherwise, then I guess it just is by default.
-
That's a classic example of the shifting the burden of proof fallacy:
Oh yeah? Prove that CE399 is not the bullet found at Parkland.
Otherwise, then I guess it just is by default.
Yeahhhhhhhhhh.... seems JBC last had custody of the twofer bullet, shallow thigh wound and all.
Too bad he forgot to initial it...
-
Yeah....seems JBC last had possession of the twofer, shallow thigh wound and all.
Too bad he forgot to initial it...
Too bad he forgot to initial it...
Initial what exactly?
-
John Mytton has been making a big deal about the lack of proof for evidence having been manufactured or planted.
This obviously also includes the bullet now in evidence as CE399, which according to John Mytton (and others) was found by Tomlinson at Parkland Hospital, but when I asked John to first show that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is in fact the same bullet that was found by Tomlinson, he became extremely evasive. I find this somewhat strange because before you can discuss the possibility of evidence being manufactured or planted, you need to establish if an item is actually evidence at all.
At the moment I am having serious doubts, for a number of reasons, that the bullet now in evidence CE399 was ever at Parkland Hospital, but if anybody can show, with anything beyond mere assumption, it was, I'll be more than happy to be convinced otherwise?.
Please post your evidence to show the bullet now in evidence as CE399 is the same bullet Tomlinson found, so it can be discussed?.
Before reading through this discussion , I'll just point out that I , as well as others in the old forum, have provided evidence that showed beyond any reasonable doubt that CE-399 is the bullet found on the stretcher at Parkland. It is an established and accepted fact of history. The National Archives even records it as such.
https://catalog.archives.gov/id/305144
-
Before reading through this discussion , I'll just point out that I , as well as others in the old forum, have provided evidence that showed beyond any reasonable doubt that CE-399 is the bullet found on the stretcher at Parkland. It is an established and accepted fact of history. The National Archives even records it as such.
https://catalog.archives.gov/id/305144
I'll just point out that I , as well as others in the old forum, have provided evidence that showed beyond any reasonable doubt that CE-399 is the bullet found on the stretcher at Parkland.
I must have missed that and so must all the other participants in this thread because so far nobody has been able to answer my question.
It is an established and accepted fact of history.
That's a strange argument to make on a forum which basically exits because large numbers of people are not convinced by those so-called "established and accepted facts"
The National Archives even records it as such.
The National Archives is not an investigative body. They most likely rely on the descriptions provided to them.