JFK Assassination Forum

General Discussion & Debate => General Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Tony Fratini on January 27, 2018, 02:59:35 AM

Title: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 27, 2018, 02:59:35 AM
Why is CE 142 a controversial piece of crime scene evidence?

Who had constructed it - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?


I want to present my case that it was in fact constructed by Detective Robert Lee Studebaker for totally non-nefarious means on the afternoon of 22/11/1963 in the first floor shipping room of the TSBD.

What was CE 142?

CE 142 was the "home made" paper bag that the DP, FBI and WC believed that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) had constructed from paper and 3 inch wide tape samples taken from the first floor shipping room of the TSBD likely on or before the 21/11/1963. Since the tape had to be pulled through a dispenser, it was specifically marked and wet as it was pulled through. As a consequence of this, the paper bag likely had to be constructed in situ otherwise the tape would not have been sticky.

At no stage did TSBD employee Troy West (who was the main book wrapper) ever see LHO in the shipping room.

LHO would of then had to have folded the paper bag which was 38 inches x 8.5 inches (oblong shape) into a smaller size and conceal it on him when he was driven home on Thursday night (21/11/1963) by BWF to see his wife and two children who were staying at the Paine household.

BWF did not see or hear any paper bag on LHO while he was driven to the Paine household on 21/11/1963.

Neither Marina nor Ruth ever saw LHO with any paper bag on 21/11/1963.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether your husband carried any package with him when he left the house on November 22nd?
Mrs. OSWALD. I think that he had a package with his lunch. But a small package.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether he had any package like a rifle in some container?
Mrs. OSWALD. No.

The DP, FBI and WC believed that LHO had constructed CE 142 went to the Paine garage and placed a disassembled CE 139 (the rifle) into CE 142 (the paper bag) and placed it into the backseat of BWF's car as seen by LMR, his sister on 22/11/1963.

Neither Marina nor Ruth saw LHO enter or leave the garage on 21/11/1963. Ruth admitted that she went into the garage but does not know who left the garage light on.

LHO then took "the package" (disassembled CE 139 in CE 142) to the TSBD at 8 am.

No one saw LHO with any package while inside the TSBD on the 22/11/1963.

This included Jack Edwin Dougherty who saw LHO enter into the TSBD from the back door at 8 am. As you see below, it would be difficult not to note the presence of CE 142 in someone's hands:

Mr. BALL - Did you pay enough attention to him, you think, that you would remember whether he did or didn't?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I believe I can---yes, sir---I'll put it this way; I didn't see anything in his hands at the time.
Mr. BALL - In other words, your memory is definite on that is it?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - In other words, you would say positively he had nothing in his hands?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - I would say that---yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - Or, are you guessing?  ;D
Mr. DOUGHERTY - I don't think so.

(https://preview.ibb.co/h9kP3m/Slide344.gif) (https://ibb.co/hGTNpR)

What always intrigued me was just how did LHO "know" the correct width (8.5 inches) to make the paper bag to hold an assembled CE 139 with scope attached without having CE 139 with him in the first floor shipping room as a point of reference?

The size of the taped flap at one end was approximately 3 inches, meaning the paper was initially long enough (41 inches) to completely conceal a fully assembled CE 139 with scope.

Why did Detective Studebaker and Lt Day stop in the first floor shipping room?

Mr. DAY. On the first floor of the Texas School Book Depository, and I noticed from their wrapping bench there was paper and tape of a similar--the tape was of the same width as this. I took the bag over and tried it, and I noticed that the tape was the same width as on the bag.

Mr. DAY. I directed one of the officers standing by me, I don't know which, to get a piece of the tape and a piece of the paper from the wrapping bench.

Comment

Does anyone seriously believe that Lt Day took a mental note of the width of the tape on CE 142 and had the amazing ability to note a tape dispenser on a wrapping bench in a cluttered shipping room and note that the tape was the same width as the tape on CE 142?  :o

Detective Robert Lee Studebaker was in the first floor shipping room of the TSBD (after CE 139 was discovered on the 6th floor) in the presence of Truly and Day, handled the paper and tape that was a 100% match to CE 142 and CE 677 (tape stuck on paper) and was in the presence of the assembled CE 139 that Day had with him.

Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; this is the record I made of the gun when I took it back office. Now, the gun did not leave my possession.
Mr. BELIN. From the time it was found at the School Book Depository Building?
Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; I took the gun myself and retained possession, took it to the office where I dictated----

This made me ask some tough questions about the origins of CE 142.

A wrapping table in the first floor of the TSBD with paper and tape dispenser

(https://preview.ibb.co/eWYEww/Slide158.jpg) (https://ibb.co/mLVG9G)

CE 677 placed both Studebaker and Day in the first floor wrapping room

(https://preview.ibb.co/nr3Eww/Slide4.gif) (https://ibb.co/f26Cib)

Mr Truly was in the first floor wrapping room when the paper and tape samples were removed

(https://preview.ibb.co/kFNWWw/Slide118.gif) (https://ibb.co/eDiGyb)

Studebaker and Day in the first floor wrapping room

(https://preview.ibb.co/bMcWWw/Slide122.jpg) (https://ibb.co/gMY5rw)

(https://preview.ibb.co/dTswgw/Slide123.jpg) (https://ibb.co/f8ASob)

The WC did not ask Detective Studebaker about being in the first floor wrapping room collecting paper and tape samples.

The WC did not ask Mr Truly about being in the shipping room while Detective Studebaker took paper and tape samples.

Lee Harvey Oswald - did he construct CE 142?

In comparison, no one saw Lee Harvey Oswald, remove paper and tape samples from the first floor shipping room, construct, transport, bring to the Paine household and placed a disassembled CE 139 into any paper bag or container.

No witness ever saw LHO with CE 142 in his possession that included BWF and LMR on the night of 22/11/1963.

CE 142 was meant to be in the SE corner of the so-called SN on the 6th floor of the TSBD

Up to 11 seasoned and experienced Law Enforcement Officers (Detectives/Deputy Sheriffs/Sergeants/Captain) and 1 camera man never saw CE 142 in situ, including Captain Will Fritz who was in the SN and examined the boxes and the spent hulls.

(https://preview.ibb.co/eYHPww/Slide28.jpg) (https://ibb.co/iH3KUG)

Captain Will Fritz and the SN, WC testimony

Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; there were some boxes stacked there and I believe one box, one small box I believe was in the window, and another box was on the floor. There were some boxes stacked to his right that more or less blinded him from the rest of the floor. If anyone else had been on the floor I doubt if they could have seen where he was sitting.
Mr. McCLOY. Did you see anything other----
Mr. FRITZ. Lieutenant Day, of course, made a detailed description of all of that and he can give it to you much better than I can.
Mr. McCLOY. He is going to be here?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; and he will give it to you in detail; yes, sir.
Mr. DULLES. When was the paper bag covering that apparently he brought the rifle in, was that discovered in the sixth floor about the same time?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; that was recovered a little later. I wasn't down there when that was found.
Mr. DULLES. It was recovered on the sixth floor, was it not?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I believe so. We can check here and see. I believe it was. But I wasn't there when that was recovered.

Captain Will Fritz, Tom Alyea and the SN

http://www.jfk-online.com/alyea.html

"The barricade on the sixth floor ran parallel to the windows, extending in an "L" shape that ended against the front wall between the first and second twin windows. The height of the stack of boxes was a minimum of 5 ft. I looked over the barricade and saw three shell casings laying on the floor in front of the second window in the two window casement. They were scattered in an area that could be covered by a bushel basket. They were located about half way between the inside of the barricade. I set my lens focus at the estimated distance from the camera to the floor and held the camera over the top of the barricade and filmed them before anybody went into the enclosure. I could not position my eye to the camera's view finder to get the shot. After filming the casings with my wide angle lens, from a height of 5 ft., I asked Captain Fritz, who was standing at my side, if I could go behind the barricade and get a close-up shot of the casings. He told me that it would be better if I got my shots from outside the barricade. He then rounded the pile of boxes and entered the enclosure. This was the first time anybody walked between the barricade and the windows.

Alyea was unaware that Mooney and Hill had already been at the SN. Fritz had entered the SN from the LHS (facing Elm) meaning he had to have stepped onto CE 142. Fritz never saw any paper bag in situ in the SE corner nor under his feet.

"We all looked over the barricade to see if the half open window with three boxes piled to form a shooting rest for a gunman. One box was actually on the window sill, tilted at an angle. There was a reason for this that I cover in my JFK Facts newsletter. The shooting location consists of two windows set together to form one single window. (The police photo showing the shell casings laying next to the brick wall was staged later by crime lab people who did not see the original positioning because they were not called upon the scene until after the rifle was found nearly an hour later.)" . . .

Studebaker, Alyea and the "SN"

"Studebaker never saw the original placement of the casings so he tossed them on the floor and photographed them. Det. Studebaker was alone at this site until after Lt. Day left the building with the rifle. We in the search team went to the sniper's site. Studebaker had already photographed the casings on the floor and was busy dusting the pop bottle when we arrived. The casings were no longer on the floor. I never saw them again. The barricade had been completely dismantled and the boxes from the West side of the barricade had been removed and placed in various locations around the site. We did not realize at the time that Studebaker had not recorded on film the original placement of the boxes in the barricade. He also had removed the shooting support boxes on the window ledge and stacked them one on top of the other on the floor inside. He took a picture of this reconstructed arrangement.

Now you see it, now you don't - the magical paper bag that disappeared then reappeared on demand

(https://preview.ibb.co/gLdC1w/Slide148.jpg) (https://ibb.co/fn3egw)

Who was at and in the "SN" and didn't see CE 142 in situ?

Deputy Sheriff for the Dallas County Sheriff's Department Luke Mooney

Sergeant in the Dallas Police Department Gerald Lynn Hill 
 
Captain of homicide and robbery bureau for the Dallas Police Department J. W. Fritz

Detective in the homicide and robbery bureau for the Dallas Police Department Elmer L. Boyd

Detective in the homicide and robbery bureau for the Dallas Police Department (since August 2, 1948) Richard M. Sims

Deputy Sheriff for the Dallas County Sheriff's Department Roger Dean Craig

Deputy Sheriff for the Dallas County Sheriff's Department A. D. McCurley

Deputy Sheriff for the Dallas County Sheriff's Department Jack W. Faulkner

Deputy Sheriff for the Dallas County Sheriff's Department Ralph Walters

Detective in the criminal intelligence section, Police Department Dallas V. J. Brian

Sergeant Patrol Division, Dallas Police Department Donald Flusche
 
Cameraman for WFAA-TV in Dallas, Texas Tom Alyea

What was the role of Lt Day?

Mr. BELIN. Now, in your 23 years of work for the Dallas Police Department, have you had occasion to spend a good number of these years in crime-scene matters?
Mr. DAY. Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN. How long, about?
Mr. DAY. The past 7 years I have been--I have had immediate supervision of the crime-scene search section. It is our responsibility to go to the scene of the crime, take photographs, check for fingerprints, collect any other evidence that might be available, and primarily we are to assist the investigators with certain technical parts of the investigation.

Where was the in situ photograph of CE 142?

No in situ photo (or film) of CE 142 ever was taken by either Studebaker nor Day despite having a fully functional camera.

(https://preview.ibb.co/jyBOpG/Slide43.jpg) (https://ibb.co/dZ7w9G)

No one knows who moved CE 142 in situ and why it wasnt photographed in situ. This was not further investigated by the FBI nor the WC.

(https://preview.ibb.co/ftCzm6/Slide576.jpg) (https://ibb.co/dMbQR6)

Mr. BALL. Did you draw the diagram?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. I drew a diagram in there for the FBI, somebody from the FBI called me down - I can't think of his name, and he wanted an approximate location of where the paper was found.
Mr. BALL. Does that show the approximate location?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.
Mr. BALL. Where you have the dotted lines?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.

Big trouble for the WC with the lack of CE 142 in the SE corner

(https://preview.ibb.co/h89RTb/Slide19.jpg) (https://ibb.co/j4ut8b)

(https://preview.ibb.co/hYiLMw/Slide141.jpg) (https://ibb.co/n3n2ZG)

Detective Studebaker takes a crime scene photo while standing next to or on top of CE 142 and yet fails to photograph it?

(https://preview.ibb.co/mGSYom/Slide149.jpg) (https://ibb.co/fUEDom)

(https://preview.ibb.co/eckBuG/Slide34.jpg) (https://ibb.co/f2dmTb)

Mr. BALL. How long was it, approximately?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. I don't know - I picked it up and dusted it and they took it down there and sent it to Washington and that's the last I have seen of it, and I don't know.
Mr. BALL. Did you take a picture of it before you picked it up?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. No.
Mr. BALL. Does that sack show in any of the pictures you took?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. No; it doesn't show in any of the pictures.

Detective Studebaker fails to place in CE 142 in his map of the SN - 25/11/1963. Why?

(https://preview.ibb.co/eLVXob/Slide15.gif) (https://ibb.co/hYQbEG)

Johnson, Montgomery and Studebaker - comedy central at the SN

Who was present?

Montgomery (was stationed where the hulls were found and did not see CE 139)

Johnson (was stationed where the Dr Pepper bottle was and did not see CE 139)

Studebaker - had come back onto the 6th floor with CE 142 and the camera. He saw and photographed CE 139.

Mr. BELIN. When the rifle was found, did you leave your post?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, sir.
Mr. BELIN. What about Detective Montgomery?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, sir.

The fun begins

Mr. BELIN. Do you know who found it?
Mr. JOHNSON. I know that the first I saw of it, L. D. Montgomery, my partner, picked it up off the floor, and it was folded up, and he unfolded it.
Mr. BELIN. When it was folded up, was it folded once or refolded?
Mr. JOHNSON. It was folded and then refolded. It was a fairly small package.

Mr. JOHNSON. I would say that the sack was folded up here and it was east of the pipes in the corner. To the best of my memory, that is where my partner picked it up. I was standing there when he picked it up.
Mr. BELIN. You were standing there when he picked it up?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, because the Crime Lab was already finished where I was, and I had already walked off to where he was.

Mr. JOHNSON. Well, I couldn't say exact distance. All I know is my partner picked that up right out of that corner, and how far it was from the wall in either direction, I don't know.

Mr. BELIN. All right, is there anything else you can remember about that sack?
Mr. JOHNSON. No; other than like I said, my partner picked it up and we unfolded it and it appeared to be about the same shape as a rifle case would be. In other words, we made the remark that that is what he probably brought it in.
That is why, the reason we saved it.

Johnson had no idea what rifle was found, yet is acting like Nostradamus and still Studebaker doesn't photograph it.

Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN. Did you ever dust it for prints or not, or do you know?
Mr. JOHNSON. Well, now, the lunch sack itself, sir?
Mr. BELIN. Yes.
Mr. JOHNSON. I don't know whether they did or not. Now that sack we are talking about, it was dusted right there at the scene.
Mr. BELIN. That is the long paper sack you found in the southeast corner? I mean as far as the lunch sack is concerned?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, the lunch sack, I don't know. We turned it in, but I never did hear after that what he did with it. I am pretty sure they did use it for something.

Studebaker definitely dusted the chicken lunch sack but not CE 142.

Mr. BALL. I don't have a picture of the paper sack.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. You don't? Well, it was there--I can't recall for sure if it was on one of the boxes or on the floor there.
Mr. BALL. It was over in what corner?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. It would be the southeast corner of the building there where the shooting was.
Mr. BALL. Did you turn the sack over to anybody or did you pick it up?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes---let's see Lieutenant Day and Detective
Studebaker came up and took pictures and everything, and then we took a Dr. Pepper bottle and that sack that we found that looked like the rifle was wrapped up in.

Montgomery is now acting like Nostradamus and yet CE 142 isn't photographed.

Mr. BALL. You found the sack in the area marked 2 on Exhibit J to the Studebaker deposition. Did you pick the sack up?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Which sack are we talking about now?
Mr. BALL. The paper sack?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. The small one or the larger one?
Mr. BALL. The larger one you mentioned that was in position 2.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes.
Mr. BALL. You picked it up?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Wait just a minute no; I didn't pick it up. I believe Mr. Studebaker did. We left it laying right there so they could check it for prints.

So now no one touched it nor unfolded it and Studebaker dusted it for prints and doesn't take a photograph.

Studebaker

Mr. BALL. In the southeast corner of the building?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. It was a paper - I don't know what it was.
Mr. BALL. And it was folded, you say?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.

Mr. BALL. How long was it, approximately?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. I don't know - I picked it up and dusted it and they took it down there and sent it to Washington and that's the last I have seen of it, and I don't know.

Note - no mention of his little trip to the first floor shipping room with Lt Day nor the construction of CE 677

The Three Amigos

Mr. STUDEBAKER. I was with them in the corner all the time - they were with me rather, I guess Captain Fritz told them to stay with us and help us in case they were needed.
Mr. BALL. Johnson and Montgomery?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Johnson and Montgomery - they were with me all the time over in that one corner.

Neither Johnson nor Montgomery, both of whom remarked about the rifle being inside the paper bag thought they should tell Studebaker about their Nostradamus moment nor watch him take a photograph of it. Staggering.

Suddenly Detective Studebaker goes total recall

Mr Ball asked this as the final questions to Detective Studebaker

Mr. BALL. Now, how big was this paper.that you saw - you saw the wrapper - tell me about how big that paper bag was - how long was it?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. It was about, I would say, 3 1/2 to 4 feet long.
Mr. BALL. The paper bag?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.
Mr. BALL. And how wide was it?
Mr. STUDEBAKER.Approximately 8 inches.

Wow! From knowing "nothing" to providing dimensions of CE 142 - yes he should know.

My hypothesis - CE 142 was constructed by Detective Studebaker

I personally believe there is much stronger evidence, and a case for, that CE 142 wasnt constructed by LHO but was constructed by Detective Robert Lee Studebaker for the express purposes of placing the fully assembled CE 139 into it in order to transport it to City Hall by Lt. Day.

Day changed his mind due to the possibility of smudging fingerprints on CE 139.

CE 142 was left behind with Detective Robert Lee Studebaker, while Day took CE 139 to City Hall for further processing.

CE 142 was instead used for the removal of the thin wooden window sill strip taken from the SE corner of the 6th floor - the so called "SN".

CE 142 was first seen and photographed outside of the TSBD in the hands of Detective Montgomery at ~ 3 pm. Montgomery is holding a thin object that is propping up the paper bag.

(https://preview.ibb.co/b0TxGw/Slide29.jpg) (https://ibb.co/iT0oOb)

No one knows how the thin wooden window sill strip removed from the SN was taken to City Hall.

(https://preview.ibb.co/jR94EG/Slide83.jpg) (https://ibb.co/m6TaMw)

(https://preview.ibb.co/gkTxGw/Slide137.jpg) (https://ibb.co/eDsPww)

Mr Truly gives the dimensions of the window sill strip and noted it was removed only from the one window

(https://preview.ibb.co/cVxOUR/Slide306.gif) (https://ibb.co/kxUFb6)

No one knows what the FBI did with the window sill strip

(https://preview.ibb.co/iKPMbw/Slide71.jpg) (https://ibb.co/b0aSGw)

Speculation: Detective Montgomery held up CE 142 with the thin wooden window strip that was 30 inches long.


(https://preview.ibb.co/kL7AMw/Slide323.gif) (https://ibb.co/hVNzEG)

(https://preview.ibb.co/iEfA9R/Slide320.gif) (https://ibb.co/i6xCOm)

Note - this would mean that one "panel" of the paper bag would flop down (as shown above).

CE 142 AND THE 30 INCH WINDOW SILL PIECE - AN UPDATE

(http://i64.tinypic.com/2mo575f.jpg)

CE 142 was "clocked in" at City Hall at 3.20 pm

(https://preview.ibb.co/eC7Yrw/Slide87.gif) (https://ibb.co/i4bRBw)

Note there is no CE 677 - where is it?

FBI Analysis of CE 142 and CE 677

CE 677 (made by Detective Studebaker) and CE 142 were made from the same exact paper and tape samples

(https://preview.ibb.co/ipZOuG/Slide216.jpg) (https://ibb.co/cQVwEG)

The FBI could not associate CE 142 with CE 139 or to any weapon.

(https://preview.ibb.co/hxKAMw/Slide49.jpg) (https://ibb.co/gRSKEG)

The FBI found the presence of a small piece of wood and candle wax inside CE 142.

Studebaker and Day could not find any fingerprints on CE 142 using black magnetic powder (22/11/1963).

The FBI (23/11/1963) found two partial prints which they stated came from LHO using silver nitrate which is a destructive process.

The Forensic FBI evidence

(https://preview.ibb.co/ip0PUG/Slide54.jpg) (https://ibb.co/dSff3b)

The movement of CE 142 from the shipping room to the 6th floor

(https://preview.ibb.co/g5CGbw/Slide149.jpg) (https://ibb.co/emKwbw)

This explained why the early Law enforcement Officers and Camera man Tom Alyea who were at an "untouched" SN never saw CE 142 in situ, but was later seen in the SE corner by several Detectives - notably Montgomery, Johnson and Studebaker.

The activities of Lt Day - 22/11/1963

(https://preview.ibb.co/fkaJUR/Slide339.gif) (https://ibb.co/e60Vb6)

(https://preview.ibb.co/cWqtUR/Slide340.gif) (https://ibb.co/k65hOm)

CE 142, its construction and movement is associated with Detective Robert Lee Studebaker.

The only place Mr Truly would have seen CE 142 was in the first floor wrapping room - another version of the FBI Vincent Drain note

(https://preview.ibb.co/mOxX66/Slide571.gif) (https://ibb.co/kqNzm6)

The direct observation of BWF exonerates LHO as being in possession of CE 142

First day testimony clearly explains how BWF saw Lee holding the paper bag on the morning of 22/11/1963.

(https://preview.ibb.co/gN9XZG/Slide128.jpg) (https://ibb.co/fhr1Tb)

BWF passed his polygraph test and he didn't recognize an unstained CE 142

(https://preview.ibb.co/dpPWyb/Slide81.jpg) (https://ibb.co/eN04Jb)

The DP can not find the paper bag as described by BWF on the night of 22/11/1963

(https://preview.ibb.co/eoZOuG/Slide230.jpg) (https://ibb.co/cGzpZG)

This was not what the DP, FBI and WC wanted to hear from BWF

(https://preview.ibb.co/jut6bw/Slide10.jpg) (https://ibb.co/nND6bw)

The problem for the DP, FBI and WC of a 20 inch (or smaller) paper bag

(https://preview.ibb.co/gTbaob/Slide124.jpg) (https://ibb.co/b3W88b)

CE 142 was 55% of Lee's body height and extremely difficult to conceal

(https://preview.ibb.co/cFyNGw/Slide155.jpg) (https://ibb.co/cVPJpG)

CE 142 was not a commercially available paper bag as described by BWF

(https://preview.ibb.co/cBHJOb/Slide118.jpg) (https://ibb.co/kep9UG)

BWF vs the WC

(https://preview.ibb.co/cqGmgw/Slide18.gif) (https://ibb.co/dVZHob)

Dan Rather invents his own version of "CE 142"

(https://preview.ibb.co/mK3KUG/Slide119.jpg) (https://ibb.co/fGP4ww)

(https://preview.ibb.co/iZYxGw/Slide123.jpg) (https://ibb.co/cPBjww)

(https://preview.ibb.co/fe8Q3b/Slide122.jpg) (https://ibb.co/jumCib)

What did Dan Rather get wrong about what BWF saw?

(https://preview.ibb.co/n1QSGw/Slide125.jpg) (https://ibb.co/kM7w9G)

Bugliosi and the leaning forward paper bag

(https://preview.ibb.co/eeHk3b/Slide79.jpg) (https://ibb.co/fwROpG)

This was how far the paper bag had to "lean forward" for BWF not to see it from behind. Keep in mind that CE 139 was 8 pounds in weight.

(https://preview.ibb.co/eUW69G/Slide118.jpg) (https://ibb.co/d5dWbw)

The FBI construct a replica paper sack

(https://preview.ibb.co/k2nGbw/Slide5.gif) (https://ibb.co/gvsSib)

The paper and tape were completely different to CE 677 and CE 142. This meant that by the time the FBI constructed the replica paper sack, the paper and tape rolls in the shipping room had been changed.

The WC assigned the paper bag two CE numbers - why?

(https://preview.ibb.co/g1G9EG/Slide218.gif) (https://ibb.co/hnZwuG)

CE 142 (stained with silver nitrate) in the NA

(https://preview.ibb.co/fusJOb/Slide8.gif) (https://ibb.co/gKkuww)

(https://preview.ibb.co/b21jww/Slide9.gif) (https://ibb.co/iiFoOb)

An unstained CE 142 in the FBI crimes lab - note is was completely flat

(https://preview.ibb.co/igPhib/Slide7.gif) (https://ibb.co/jyYKUG)

The bag in Montgomery's hands is the same one in the NA but appears to have a flap added at one end

(https://preview.ibb.co/n1aYpG/Slide11.gif) (https://ibb.co/kx88Ob)

(https://preview.ibb.co/jP83pG/Slide12.gif) (https://ibb.co/mxjb9G)

Lt. Day writes directly on CE 142 instead of placing an ID tag on it

(https://preview.ibb.co/dGQcGw/Slide27.jpg) (https://ibb.co/mseR9G)

This suggests that Lt. Day wrote on CE 142 back at City Hall prior to handing it to Vincent Drain (FBI).

The chicken lunch sack (belonging to BRW) was dusted with fingerprint powder and was tagged

(https://image.ibb.co/dH9eww/Slide45_crop.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)

(https://preview.ibb.co/b5nc1w/Slide227.jpg) (https://ibb.co/gM86uG)

A close look at CE 142 doesn't show any obvious black fingerprint powder as Studebaker claimed he did in situ.

Mr. BALL. You say you dusted it?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. With that magnetic powders.
Mr. BALL. Did you lift any prints?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. There wasn't but just smudges on it - is all it was. There was one little ole piece of a print and I'm sure I put a piece of tape on it preserve it.
Mr. BALL. Well, then, there was a print that you found on it?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes; just a partial print.
Mr. BALL. The print of a finger or palm or what?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. You couldn't tell, it was so small.
Mr. BALL. But you did dust it and lift some print?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.
Mr. BALL. When you say you taped it, what did you do, cover it with some paper?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. We have - it's like a Magic Mending Tape, only we use it just strictly for fingerprinting.
Mr. BALL. Let's stick with the paper.
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Well, on the paper I put a piece of 1 inch tape over it - I'm sure I did.
Mr. BALL. After you dusted the print, you put a 1 inch tape over it?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir.

Which paper sample(s) taken from the TSBD (22/11/1963) were dusted with Black magnetic powder?

(https://preview.ibb.co/fW88rw/Slide147.jpg) (https://ibb.co/dCForw)

The FBI expert failed to find any fingerprint preserving tape on the outside of CE 142. This contradicted what Detective Studebaker told the WC.

Did Detective Studebaker only dust the chicken lunch sack in situ?

(https://preview.ibb.co/e8kP3m/Slide263.gif) (https://ibb.co/jdp6G6)

When a lack of crime scene evidence is not an problem for the FBI or the WC - a drawing would suffice

(https://preview.ibb.co/cuScib/Slide59.gif) (https://ibb.co/ipOuUG)

The partial prints on CE 142

Due to the destructive nature of silver nitrate, these can not longer be re-examined for contact DNA.

(https://preview.ibb.co/mmL2Gw/Slide58.gif) (https://ibb.co/no4jUG)

Three Detectives signed and dated CE 142 right next to a print that none of them could have seen on 22/11/1963. Neither Montgomery, Studebaker nor Johnson were shown CE 142 during their WC testimonies.

(https://preview.ibb.co/jkHcZG/Slide138.jpg) (https://ibb.co/bJkmTb)

The construction of CE 142

(https://preview.ibb.co/g6VQob/Slide465.jpg) (https://ibb.co/eZvrTb)

(https://preview.ibb.co/eSf88b/Slide466.gif) (https://ibb.co/gzGgTb)

The "Bag within a Bag" - a memorandum that has to read to be believed.

(https://preview.ibb.co/huvmBw/Slide258.gif) (https://ibb.co/nn7NjG)

Carl Day had to be prompted about one of the largest items (CE 142) in the photo that he took. Why?

(https://preview.ibb.co/dwXuyb/Slide8.jpg) (https://ibb.co/eU7SJb)

CE 142 was oblong shaped and did not have a tapered end in order to conceal a dismantled CE 139 within it.

(https://preview.ibb.co/jencJb/Slide6.jpg) (https://ibb.co/bBFmBw)

Marina doesn't see her husband enter in the Paine garage at any stage of the evening

(https://preview.ibb.co/g9GqMw/Slide48.jpg) (https://ibb.co/btuMTb)

Those damn curtain rods - did they really exist?

(https://preview.ibb.co/c3k9gw/Slide52.jpg) (https://ibb.co/gQ6t8b)

Carl Day, No More Silence

"Also found on the sixth floor, as I recall, near the shell area,
was a paper bag. It should have been photographed, but for some
reason, apparently wasn’t
. The story that I received later was that
when this man came to work that morning he was carrying
something wrapped in shipping or wrapping paper or brown roll
paper.
In the shipping room on the first floor, there were one or
two rolls of that paper. We took the end pieces off those rolls for
possible comparison with the bag that was found. It would have
been a tedious job, but on other cases I’ve had occasion to match
the ends of two pieces of paper.
If you can find the right place,
they’ll match up, even if it’s torn off. We had possession of that
bag, but I didn’t have a chance to work with it due to events that
later occurred."


Comment

Day had no idea how CE 139 was brought into the TSBD at that stage hence CE 142 wasnt used for nefarious purposes to frame a potential assassin. Does anyone seriously believe Day and that he knew at that very stage to start collecting paper and tape from the shipping room when Kraft paper and gummed tape could be purchased anywhere in the US?  Why didn't he take both items immediately to City Hall? It is nothing but a BS story.

"When we opened the door, man, there was a mob out there! I
didn’t know whether to run back upstairs or what! If I had realized
how many people were there, I would have done something
besides show that gun. It was definitely a poor way to handle
evidence!
"

Comment

This was why Day initially thought it was a good idea to wrap CE 139 up because it was a "poor way to handle evidence".

"Just looking at it I thought the chances were slim that we’d
find any prints on the rifle itself. It had what we call a wartime
finish on the barrel which would lift out of the stock. That type
of surface didn’t take prints well, nor did the wood stock which
was too course or rough. You’ve got to have a smooth, fairly
clean surface before the ridges will leave an impression. If it’s
rougher than the ridges of the finger, you’re not going to find
anything there.
At that time, just through casual observation, it didn’t look
too promising. It wasn’t the place to try to do any fingerprint
work since it’s a rather lengthy process and we had other things to
do.
So I decided to carry the gun back to the office at City Hall,
store it under lock and key, examine it under ideal conditions, and
get to it when I could. I didn’t have anything to wrap it up with at
the time, so I carried it out making sure that I didn’t touch
anything other than the strap. Besides, you had to be careful in
wrapping stuff because if there were any prints, you’re liable to
smear them just from the wrapping."


Comment

Carl Day stated it clearly in black in white - he was in a WRAPPING room collection paper and yet didn't have anything to wrap the rifle in and then explained why it wasnt a good idea to wrap it in paper - smearing of prints.

Montgomery, No More Silence

"I don’t remember exactly where I found the brown paper that
Oswald had wrapped the rifle in. It was probably close to 36 inches
long with tape on it and no writing. I recall that it was stuffed
between the boxes, not lying out open on the floor as were the
shell casings.
Since we were looking for the rifle, we figured that it
must have been used to wrap the rifle.
None of the items had been
touched at that time.
Marvin and I also found the sack where he’d
eaten, and I believe that he drank a Dr. Pepper. We later took the
bottle back to the Crime Lab to dust it for prints.
While searching the floor, I heard somebody say, ‘Hey, this is
the rifle!” Several of us responded and I got a good look at it, but I
didn’t know much about it other than it was an old bolt action
military rifle.
After that we took the Dr Pepper bottle and the brown
wrapping paper back to the Crime Lab to be fingerprinted
"

Comment

Montgomery completely contradicts his WC testimony in so many ways 1) location of bag 2) knows the length and what it was used for despite being with Studebaker all the time who doesn't photograph it. Further the bag is taken to City Hall to be fingerprinted completely supporting the photos showing no black magnetic powder on CE 142 and no FBI agent fiding anything on the outside and contradicting Studebaker. Montgomery didn't see CE 139 because he was instructed not to leave his post at the SN. CE 139 was found near the NW stairwell and there were rows of books in the way.

What did the WR state?

Location of Bag
A handmade bag of wrapping paper and tape 174 was found in the southeast corner of the sixth floor alongside the window from which the shots were fired. 175 (See Commission Exhibit No. 2707, p. 142.) It was not a standard type bag which could be obtained in a store and it was presumably made for a particular purpose. It was the appropriate size to contain, in disassembled form, Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, serial No. C2766, which was also found on the sixth floor. 176 Three cartons had been placed at the window apparently to act as a gun rest and a fourth carton was placed behind those at the window. 177 (See Commission Exhibit No. 1301, p. 138.) A person seated on the fourth carton could assemble the rifle without being seen from the rest of the sixth floor because the cartons stacked around the southeast corner would shield him. 178 (See Commission Exhibit No. 723, p. 80.) The presence of the bag in this corner is cogent evidence that it was used as the container for the rifle. At the time the bag was found, Lieutenant Day of the Dallas police wrote on it, "Found next to the sixth floor window gun fired from. May have been used to carry gun. Lt. J. C. Day." 179

Commission, Warren; House Select Committee on Assassinations; Assassination Records Review Board; U.S. Government. Complete Guide to the 1963 JFK Assassination: The Full Text of Three Major Reports - Warren Commission, House Select Committee, and the Assassination Records Review Board - President John F. Kennedy (Kindle Locations 2510-2519). Progressive Management. Kindle Edition.

Comment

There is no evidence that CE 142 was found in the SE by Lt. Day and further if he wrote on it in situ "May have been used to carry gun", why didn't he photograph it in situ?

"The preponderance of the evidence supports the conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald (1) told the curtain rod story to Frazier to explain both the return to Irving on a Thursday and the obvious bulk of the package which he intended to bring to work the next day; (2) took paper and tape from the wrapping bench of the Depository and fashioned a bag large enough to carry the disassembled rifle; (3) removed the rifle from the blanket in the Paines' garage on Thursday evening; (4) carried the rifle into the Depository Building, concealed in the bag; and, (5) left the bag alongside the window from which the shots were fired."

Commission, Warren; House Select Committee on Assassinations; Assassination Records Review Board; U.S. Government. Complete Guide to the 1963 JFK Assassination: The Full Text of Three Major Reports - Warren Commission, House Select Committee, and the Assassination Records Review Board - President John F. Kennedy (Kindle Locations 2568-2572). Progressive Management. Kindle Edition.

Comment

The WC did not prove points 1 - 5.

Conclusion

Detective Robert Lee Studebaker was in the first floor shipping room and handled the paper and tape rolls that ultimately CE 142 was constructed from (as proven by comparison to CE 677 which was constructed by Detective Studebaker). He also had access to the fully assembled CE 139 as a reference point to make the bag the correct width and length (without the flap).

Lieutenant Carl Day had ordered Detective Robert Lee Studebaker to take paper and tape samples from the rolls.

CE 142 was very simple to construct - Detective Studebaker was in the right location and had access to all the necessary components to make it.

The DP, FBI and WC could not prove that Lee Harvey Oswald was responsible for the construction of any paper bag.

The partial prints on CE 142 does not prove LHO had constructed the paper bag nor does it prove he was responsible for the assassination of JFK.

Discuss and "fire away" but please try keeping it on track.

My suggestion is hit "reply" or "quoting" a specific section.

I look forward to your constructive criticism.  8)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Joe Elliott on January 27, 2018, 05:56:50 PM

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

CE 142 was the "home made" paper bag that the DP, FBI and WC believed that Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) had constructed from paper and 3 inch wide tape samples taken from the first floor shipping room of the TSBD likely on or before the 21/11/1963. Since the tape had to be pulled through a dispenser, it was specifically marked and wet as it was pulled through. As a consequence of this, the paper bag likely had to be constructed in situ otherwise the tape would not have been sticky. At no stage did TSBD employee Troy West (who was the main book wrapper) ever see LHO in the shipping room.

LHO would of then had to have folded the paper bag which was 38 inches x 8.5 inches (oblong shape) into a smaller size and conceal it on him when he was driven home on Thursday night (21/11/1963) by BWF to see his wife and two children who were staying at the Paine household.

(https://preview.ibb.co/b0TxGw/Slide29.jpg) (https://ibb.co/iT0oOb)



An empty paper bag is far easier to hide than the same bag containing a rifle. It would be as simple as folding it up or rolling it up. And the picture of the bag you show looks like a bag that at some point was rolled up or folded up.

While there is no reason to hide the bag from Frazier, he was, after all, going to see it the next morning, he would like to hide it from his wife and Mrs. Paine, so it would be natural to fold it up and hide it under his jacket as he rode with Frazier on Thursday evening and walked into Mrs. Paine’s house.



You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

No one knows who moved CE 142 in situ and why it wasnt photographed in situ. This was not further investigated by the FBI nor the WC.


Probably because it wasn’t immediately apparent what was pertinent evidence and what wasn’t. They may have moved some boxes and other stuff, like paper bags around, while looking for the rifle and other evidence.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 27, 2018, 07:40:14 PM
Those damn curtain rods - did they really exist?

Answer.....Definitely not!......  Option #2 is correct.....

P.S.  I believe you're chasing a "wild goose".....in pursuing the weather strip ......
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 27, 2018, 11:46:55 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

An empty paper bag is far easier to hide than the same bag containing a rifle. It would be as simple as folding it up or rolling it up. And the picture of the bag you show looks like a bag that at some point was rolled up or folded up.

While there is no reason to hide the bag from Frazier, he was, after all, going to see it the next morning, he would like to hide it from his wife and Mrs. Paine, so it would be natural to fold it up and hide it under his jacket as he rode with Frazier on Thursday evening and walked into Mrs. Paine’s house.



Probably because it wasn’t immediately apparent what was pertinent evidence and what wasn’t. They may have moved some boxes and other stuff, like paper bags around, while looking for the rifle and other evidence.

Hi Joe,

what makes you believe that it was LHO who had constructed CE 142 and not Detective Studebaker?

How can you disprove that Detective Studebaker didn't fold up CE 142 while in the wrapping room and then transported it back up to the 6th floor to continue with the processing of the crime scene on the 6th floor in the absence of Lt Day?

How then can you explain why CE 142 came into the possession of Detective Studebaker and Lt Day? Clearly they both thought it was important crime scene evidence because both men made a stop in the first floor shipping room to commence collecting non-evidence.

Seems rather odd - they have CE 142 and CE 139 and they commence collecting paper and tape? Yet, Lt Day leaves CE 142 behind with Studebaker, fails to look inside it and writes directly on it?

Why would you go to a wrapping room, with Mr Truly, while holding an unwrapped CE 139? Any guesses?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 27, 2018, 11:57:11 PM
Walt,

the wooden window strip removal from the SN was kept VERY low key - the DP held onto it for 6 days despite being told by Curry to hand everything over to the FBI, there is no photograph of it being removed from the window, no one knows who brought it in and how. It also isn't mentioned in the WR and the FBI reported that it didn't have LHO's prints on it.

You see - if the window sill strip was placed into CE 142 = party over for it being made by LHO. Hence there is a "black hole" about the window sill strip.

Yet, Montgomery, in an oral history, said that it was a piece of Venetian blind! Excuse me? A Venetian blind strip just happened to be a thin piece of wood, just like the window sill strip was.

Montgomery also stated that CE 142 wasnt in the SE corner at all when he gave an oral history to Sneed.

How can one piece of crime scene evidence have such a questionable and controversial history?

Answer - it never was present in the SN in the first place. That was entirely consistent with the Detectives who arrived at an untouched SN. Just ask Captain Will Fritz.  ;D

The FBI "retrofitted" CE 142 as belonging to LHO and had to discredit the only two witnesses who saw LHO with a paper bag that morning.

We have three Detectives (Montgomery, Johnson and Studebaker) sign and date CE 142 - but not Lt Day. Since when does one write directly on crime scene evidence potentially obliterating prints? How can one explain that the signatures of the Detectiuves are all next to a partial print that no one saw on 22/11/1963?

None of these Detectives were shown CE 142 and none were asked about signing it either.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Joe Elliott on January 28, 2018, 12:30:19 AM

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

what makes you believe that it was LHO who had constructed CE 142 and not Detective Studebaker?


Oswald made an explained visit to Mrs. Paine’s home on a Thursday night. Why not go on a Friday night so he can spend the whole weekend with his wife and children, as he had always done before. Why only spend one night?

The obvious answer? So, he can get his rifle and sneak it into work in a long paper bag. Oswald being seen with a long paper package by two witnesses, a long paper package being found in the building, fits with this scenario.



You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

How can you disprove that Detective Studebaker didn't fold up CE 142 while in the wrapping room and then transported it back up to the 6th floor to continue with the processing of the crime scene on the 6th floor in the absence of Lt Day?



No. Any more than I can disprove that Detective Studebaker didn’t bring the bag into the building with him. Or any number of other possible suggestions.



You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

How then can you explain why CE 142 came into the possession of Detective Studebaker and Lt Day? Clearly they both thought it was important crime scene evidence because both men made a stop in the first floor shipping room to commence collecting non-evidence.

Seems rather odd - they have CE 142 and CE 139 and they commence collecting paper and tape? Yet, Lt Day leaves CE 142 behind with Studebaker, fails to look inside it and writes directly on it?

Why would you go to a wrapping room, with Mr Truly, while holding an unwrapped CE 139? Any guesses?



The first-floor shipping room would did contain evidence. Once it was realized the paper bag may have contained the rifle, they would want to check it Oswald made it or had it made from materials in the building. They would ask questions about this and would want to collect samples of the shipping paper and tape to see if it matched the bag. A natural part of doing an investigation.

You seem to reject the obvious, common sense explanations and immediately assume any action must be a part of the frame up of Oswald.



If Oswald was a patsy, they knew about this long about it before noon November 22. They didn’t just decide on this at the last second. They would have Oswald bring in a long enough package into work that day and use that package to claim his guilt. Not make a package at the last minute.

Question:

If there was a conspiracy, which makes more sense:

a.   Instruct Oswald to bring in a package that is 38 inches long.

b.   Instruct Oswald to bring in a package that is 30 inches long.

Bring in members of the Dallas Police Department into the conspiracy, when this is not necessary. This risks exposure if they bulk.

Instruct the detectives to make the bag at the last second. They just have to risk being caught and just have to hope that no one wanders into the shipping room at the wrong time and asks “What the hell are they doing?”. Maybe by some police officer who was not brought into the conspiracy.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 28, 2018, 12:56:37 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Oswald made an explained visit to Mrs. Paine’s home on a Thursday night. Why not go on a Friday night so he can spend the whole weekend with his wife and children, as he had always done before. Why only spend one night?

The obvious answer? So, he can get his rifle and sneak it into work in a long paper bag. Oswald being seen with a long paper package by two witnesses, a long paper package being found in the building, fits with this scenario.




No. Any more than I can disprove that Detective Studebaker didn’t bring the bag into the building with him. Or any number of other possible suggestions.




The first-floor shipping room would did contain evidence. Once it was realized the paper bag may have contained the rifle, they would want to check it Oswald made it or had it made from materials in the building. They would ask questions about this and would want to collect samples of the shipping paper and tape to see if it matched the bag. A natural part of doing an investigation.

You seem to reject the obvious, common sense explanations and immediately assume any action must be a part of the frame up of Oswald.



If Oswald was a patsy, they knew about this long about it before noon November 22. They didn’t just decide on this at the last second. They would have Oswald bring in a long enough package into work that day and use that package to claim his guilt. Not make a package at the last minute.

Question:

If there was a conspiracy, which makes more sense:

a.   Instruct Oswald to bring in a package that is 38 inches long.

b.   Instruct Oswald to bring in a package that is 30 inches long.

Bring in members of the Dallas Police Department into the conspiracy, when this is not necessary. This risks exposure if they bulk.

Instruct the detectives to make the bag at the last second. They just have to risk being caught and just have to hope that no one wanders into the shipping room at the wrong time and asks “What the hell are they doing?”. Maybe by some police officer who was not brought into the conspiracy.


Joe,

since when does an impromptu visit to see his family, to mend a heated argument over the phone with Marina, equate to killing the POTUS?

No one saw LHO with CE 142.

No need to Joe, the FBI proved he took the paper and tape from the rolls of the TSBD and as admitted by Lt Day.

No one knew how and who placed the rifle in the TSBD at the time the rifle was found. 

What are Studebaker and Day doing in the wrapping room when they had the evidence with them?

Neither Studebaker nor Lt Day framed anyone with CE 142.

Not at all - the presence of the rifle anywhere in the TSBD was all that was required by a conspirator to implicate LHO in the assassination.

CE 142 was constructed for non nefarious means - to take CE 139 out of the TSBD.

Studebaker and Day were Law enforcement officers who had CE 139 with them, what is the big deal of wrapping it in paper to transport it to City Hall?

Have you read what Day told Sneed? It strongly implied, he was thinking of wrapping CE 139 up but decided it wasnt a good idea.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Mytton on January 28, 2018, 02:33:48 AM

Oswald made the bag.

Oswald's rifle bag had Oswald's prints.
Oswald's rifle bag was made too small, if the DP had the rifle and as much paper as they needed why would they make the bag too small? Doh!
The rifle ad that Oswald sent away was for a 36 inch rifle so Oswald logically made the bag 38 inches.
The rifle bag was stained.
The rifle bag was excessively folded.
The rifle bag was crumpled.
Oswald denied putting the rifle bag on the back seat.
Oswald said his bag only contained his lunch but Oswald told Frazier the bag contained curtain rods.


Btw from the thread title I thought this was a Poll thread, can you change this thread to a Poll?



JohnM
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 28, 2018, 04:16:32 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Oswald made the bag.

Oswald's rifle bag had Oswald's prints.
Oswald's rifle bag was made too small, if the DP had the rifle and as much paper as they needed why would they make the bag too small? Doh!
The rifle ad that Oswald sent away was for a 36 inch rifle so Oswald logically made the bag 38 inches.
The rifle bag was stained.
The rifle bag was excessively folded.
The rifle bag was crumpled.
Oswald denied putting the rifle bag on the back seat.
Oswald said his bag only contained his lunch but Oswald told Frazier the bag contained curtain rods.


Btw from the thread title I thought this was a Poll thread, can you change this thread to a Poll?



JohnM

JohnM,

Myth 1

pay close attention - the paper taken from the roll by Studebaker was at least 41 inches - more than enough to wrap an assembled CE 139. Its task was to take the rifle to City Hall in a concealed manner which was just a few minutes away.

Myth 2

See above.

Myth 3

I showed that the wrapping benches had stains on them.

(https://preview.ibb.co/nGD54G/Slide157.jpg) (https://ibb.co/mrLUWw)

(https://preview.ibb.co/eWYEww/Slide158.jpg) (https://ibb.co/mLVG9G)

Myth 4

Excessively folded compared to what? Studebaker folded it, to take it upstairs.


Myth 5

Crumpled by whom? Studebaker or Montgomery? Note there is no tapered or taped end on CE 142. Dan Rather's representation is a fraud.

Myth 6

Back seat? You have LMR's word only and she can not collaborate the observation and her brother could have easily embellished the story.

Myth 7

Same issue as above - he said vs he said.

Oswald's prints? Mayfield will argue with you that the FBI fingerprinting experts can make mistakes - costly ones at that.

It is not a poll thread - I want feedback and reasons why I am wrong.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Zeon Wasinsky on January 28, 2018, 05:02:11 AM
We should try some experiments to see how easy it is to take paper from a roll with bare hands, and tape from the roll, with bare hands, and fold the paper several times and the tape somehow too, and place them inside our jacket, and then take them out later, and unfold the paper, and lay out the tape, and then begin making the bag , and then putting the rifle disassembled and all that into the bag, and folding the end of the bag, and the carrying the bag several times, lifting it and placing it down and lifting it again, removing the parts from the bag, or the garbage bag the parts were wrapped in, removing that from the bag..

and then see how if the single solitary print at top and 1 palm print at bottom bag can be demonstated to be anywhere near probable.

We will  not count any of   the 37 attempts that might have some malfunction of ripping the bag, or leaving an oil stain, or leaving some clear indent into the paper, or prints other than the 1 single finger print at top and 1 palm print at bottom.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Mytton on January 28, 2018, 05:24:39 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
JohnM,

Myth 1

pay close attention - the paper taken from the roll by Studebaker was at least 41 inches - more than enough to wrap an assembled CE 139. Its task was to take the rifle to City Hall in a concealed manner which was just a few minutes away.

Myth 2

See above.

Myth 3

I showed that the wrapping benches had stains on them.

(https://preview.ibb.co/nGD54G/Slide157.jpg) (https://ibb.co/mrLUWw)

(https://preview.ibb.co/eWYEww/Slide158.jpg) (https://ibb.co/mLVG9G)

Myth 4

Excessively folded compared to what? Studebaker folded it, to take it upstairs.


Myth 5

Crumpled by whom? Studebaker or Montgomery? Note there is no tapered or taped end on CE 142. Dan Rather's representation is a fraud.

Myth 6

Back seat? You have LMR's word only and she can not collaborate the observation and her brother could have easily embellished the story.

Myth 7

Same issue as above - he said vs he said.

Oswald's prints? Mayfield will argue with you that the FBI fingerprinting experts can make mistakes - costly ones at that.

It is not a poll thread - I want feedback and reasons why I am wrong.




Quote
pay close attention - the paper taken from the roll by Studebaker was at least 41 inches - more than enough to wrap an assembled CE 139. Its task was to take the rifle to City Hall in a concealed manner which was just a few minutes away.


Huh, the 38 inch bag was made to fit a rifle that was 36 inches long. Oswald based the size on the Kleins ad.

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0AvdN1r1G0E/TelVpZr4NDI/AAAAAAAAAE4/eZjRsBaiDeo/s400/blanket+rifle+lee+framed+junie+june.jpg)

Quote
I showed that the wrapping benches had stains on them.

(https://preview.ibb.co/nGD54G/Slide157.jpg)

(https://preview.ibb.co/eWYEww/Slide158.jpg)

Hahahaha, you're just seeing a table that's worn.
It's a table that's used to send out customers orders and you're saying that it has a constant wet spot that somehow transferred to Oswald's rifle bag and presumably all the customers orders as well??
Or are you saying that Oswald's rifle bag transferred it's stain onto the table? LOL!

Quote
Excessively folded compared to what? Studebaker folded it, to take it upstairs.

You reckon this is the result of being folded just an hour or two earlier?
Btw why is he treating the bag like it's evidence?

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-eSB3HYpevE0/T3oIdYEqRtI/AAAAAAAAHJM/qCyDjxVjJUw/s1600/LD-Montgomery-Holds-Brown-Paper-Bag.jpg)

Quote
Back seat? You have LMR's word only and she can not collaborate the observation and her brother could have easily embellished the story.

Why would Linnie lie?
Linnie saw Oswald put the large package in the back seat and Frazier saw the package on the back seat, slam dunk!

Quote
Oswald's prints? Mayfield will argue with you that the FBI fingerprinting experts can make mistakes - costly ones at that.

This again, really Tony?, how the FBI kept their records has zero connection with the direct hands on positive ID of Oswald's prints on the bag.

Quote
It is not a poll thread - I want feedback and reasons why I am wrong.

You should make it a poll thread and perhaps you will wake up to yourself.



JohnM



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 28, 2018, 05:28:17 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
We should try some experiments to see how easy it is to take paper from a roll with bare hands, and tape from the roll, with bare hands, and fold the paper several times and the tape somehow too, and place them inside our jacket, and then take them out later, and unfold the paper, and lay out the tape, and then begin making the bag , and then putting the rifle disassembled and all that into the bag, and folding the end of the bag, and the carrying the bag several times, lifting it and placing it down and lifting it again, removing the parts from the bag, or the garbage bag the parts were wrapped in, removing that from the bag..

and then see how if the single solitary print at top and 1 palm print at bottom bag can be demonstated to be anywhere near probable.

We will  not count any of   the 37 attempts that might have some malfunction of ripping the bag, or leaving an oil stain, or leaving some clear indent into the paper, or prints other than the 1 single finger print at top and 1 palm print at bottom.

Despite the FBI expert finding no evidence of any weapon being within CE 142, this didn't deter the WC at all. Yet had the FBI expert found evidence for an association with CE 139, it would have been splashed in every News print in the US.

The FBI were only interested in prints belonging to LHO, no one else.

What the FBI did find inside CE 142 was a small piece of wood as well as candle wax. Wax was often used as a water sealant.

The removed window sill was a weather strip.



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 28, 2018, 05:40:39 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


 

Huh, the 38 inch bag was made to fit a rifle that was 36 inches long. Oswald based the size on the Kleins ad.

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0AvdN1r1G0E/TelVpZr4NDI/AAAAAAAAAE4/eZjRsBaiDeo/s400/blanket+rifle+lee+framed+junie+june.jpg)

(https://preview.ibb.co/nGD54G/Slide157.jpg)

(https://preview.ibb.co/eWYEww/Slide158.jpg)

Hahahaha, you're just seeing a table that's worn.
It's a table that's used to send out customers orders and you're saying that it has a constant wet spot that somehow transferred to Oswald's rifle bag and presumably all the customers orders as well??
Or are you saying that Oswald's rifle bag transferred it's stain onto the table? LOL!

You reckon this is the result of being folded just an hour or two earlier?
Btw why is he treating the bag like it's evidence?

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-eSB3HYpevE0/T3oIdYEqRtI/AAAAAAAAHJM/qCyDjxVjJUw/s1600/LD-Montgomery-Holds-Brown-Paper-Bag.jpg)

Why would Linnie lie?
Linnie saw Oswald put the large package in the back seat and Frazier saw the package on the back seat, slam dunk!

This again, really Tony?, how the FBI kept their records has zero connection with the direct hands on positive ID of Oswald's prints on the bag.

You should make it a poll thread and perhaps you will wake up to yourself.

JohnM

No - the paper taken from the roll was 41 inches at least - give Studebaker some credit.

Where do you think the paper got the stain from? That's where Studebaker and Day were. Those tables were where the boys had their coffee as well.

Do creases "age" differently after one day as compared to 1 hour? Studebaker took it with him upstairs - why would he treat a paper bag with TLC?

If the bag was treated like evidence, why did Lt Day leave it behind in the TSBD? Hmmm? Why did he fail to photograph it? Hmm?

Why wasnt it opened up to look inside? Hmm? Why did 12 people not see it in situ? Hmm?

You have no answers JohnM. Never did.

LMR knew full well what was going to happen to her naive younger brother.

I know right - how could the FBI FU with a slam dunk like Mayfield? I can give you $2,000,000 reasons.

Your blowing smoke -you cant place LHO in the wrapping room, but I sure can with Studebaker.



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 28, 2018, 01:29:36 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
No - the paper taken from the roll was 41 inches at least - give Studebaker some credit.

Where do you think the paper got the stain from? That's where Studebaker and Day were. Those tables were where the boys had their coffee as well.

Do creases "age" differently after one day as compared to 1 hour? Studebaker took it with him upstairs - why would he treat a paper bag with TLC?

If the bag was treated like evidence, why did Lt Day leave it behind in the TSBD? Hmmm? Why did he fail to photograph it? Hmm?

Why wasnt it opened up to look inside? Hmm? Why did 12 people not see it in situ? Hmm?

You have no answers JohnM. Never did.

LMR knew full well what was going to happen to her naive younger brother.

I know right - how could the FBI FU with a slam dunk like Mayfield? I can give you $2,000,000 reasons.

Your blowing smoke -you cant place LHO in the wrapping room, but I sure can with Studebaker.

If the bag was treated like evidence, why did Lt Day leave it behind in the TSBD? Hmmm?

Tony, Have you never seen the report or memo that Lt Day wrote in which he said he spotted a paper sack that was SHAPED like a gun case ?   At the time Roy Truly was with him and he ( Day) asked if he'd ever seen the gun case before.   Truly denied ever having seen the paper gun case ....Day folded it up and put it in his jacket never to be seen again.

LMR knew full well what was going to happen to her naive younger brother.

LMR did NOT realize that she was getting her brother involved when she decided to claim her "moment  of fame" by going to the Paine's house and telling the police that she had seen the villain carrying a long paper sack that morning.

She had had been watching TV and she had seen Detective Montgomery carry that huge bag from the TSBD and that's where she got the idea that she could help the police.  She had no idea that she was creating a nightmare for herself and her brother. 
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 28, 2018, 04:31:23 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Joe,

since when does an impromptu visit to see his family, to mend a heated argument over the phone with Marina, equate to killing the POTUS?

No one saw LHO with CE 142.

No need to Joe, the FBI proved he took the paper and tape from the rolls of the TSBD and as admitted by Lt Day.

No one knew how and who placed the rifle in the TSBD at the time the rifle was found. 

What are Studebaker and Day doing in the wrapping room when they had the evidence with them?

Neither Studebaker nor Lt Day framed anyone with CE 142.

Not at all - the presence of the rifle anywhere in the TSBD was all that was required by a conspirator to implicate LHO in the assassination.

CE 142 was constructed for non nefarious means - to take CE 139 out of the TSBD.

Studebaker and Day were Law enforcement officers who had CE 139 with them, what is the big deal of wrapping it in paper to transport it to City Hall?

Have you read what Day told Sneed? It strongly implied, he was thinking of wrapping CE 139 up but decided it wasnt a good idea.

CE 142 was constructed for non nefarious means - to take CE 139 out of the TSBD.

If that is true.....Why wouldn't they simply admit that they had constructed the bag to protect it in transit?

I agree that Studebaker and Day constructed the bag that Montgomery carried from the building......

Since Day wrote a memo in which he stated that he had found a gun case SHAPED ( tapered)  paper sack and concealed that sack from everybody. ......I believe he and Studebaker constructed the bag that Montgomery carried out of the building.  They intended it to be a decoy  for the reporters .....because even though Day stated that he had not displayed the gun case shaped sack to anybody......he knew that Tom Alyea had seen that tapered bag.     

I'd bet the farm that the tapered gun case had a person's name ( Campbell ?, Truly?, Shelly?,  et al) written on it.....because one of the guns that Truly had at his office on Wednesday had been from  a gun shop or sporting goods store and they had written the name of the owner on that bag.

 
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 29, 2018, 01:23:03 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
CE 142 was constructed for non nefarious means - to take CE 139 out of the TSBD.

If that is true.....Why wouldn't they simply admit that they had constructed the bag to protect it in transit?

I agree that Studebaker and Day constructed the bag that Montgomery carried from the building......

Since Day wrote a memo in which he stated that he had found a gun case SHAPED ( tapered)  paper sack and concealed that sack from everybody. ......I believe he and Studebaker constructed the bag that Montgomery carried out of the building.  They intended it to be a decoy  for the reporters .....because even though Day stated that he had not displayed the gun case shaped sack to anybody......he knew that Tom Alyea had seen that tapered bag.     

I'd bet the farm that the tapered gun case had a person's name ( Campbell ?, Truly?, Shelly?,  et al) written on it.....because one of the guns that Truly had at his office on Wednesday had been from  a gun shop or sporting goods store and they had written the name of the owner on that bag.

Hi Walt,

have a read of this.

(https://preview.ibb.co/j1jsmw/Slide1.gif) (https://ibb.co/mSL9Yb)

LHO told Fritz about these rifles that he saw Mr Truly with.

(https://preview.ibb.co/df0weG/Slide1.jpg) (https://ibb.co/k7Xnmw)

So it appeared not to be a "big deal" bringing in a rifle or two to work at all and showing it off to the other employees.

It was deer hunting season after all Walt.

(https://preview.ibb.co/j7c6Db/Slide2.gif) (https://ibb.co/gui2mw)

What type of rifle did Arnold Rowland see again on the 6th floor? CE 139? I don't think so.

Mr. ROWLAND - No. In proportion to the scope it appeared to me to be a .30-odd size 6, a deer rifle with a fairly large or powerful scope.
Mr. SPECTER - When you say, .30-odd-6, exactly what did you mean by that?
Mr. ROWLAND - That is a rifle that is used quite frequently for deer hunting. It is an import.
Mr. SPECTER - Do you own any rifles?
Mr. ROWLAND - No; my stepfather does.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you ever gone hunting deer with such a rifle?
Mr. ROWLAND - Yes; I have.
Mr. SPECTER - And is that a .30-odd-6 rifle that you have hunted deer with?
Mr. ROWLAND - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - Is that a popular size of rifle in the Dallas, Tex., area?
Mr. ROWLAND - I don't know about Dallas. I do know in Oregon it is one of the most popular for deer hunting.
Mr. SPECTER - Was the rifle which you observed similar to, or perhaps identical with, .30-odd rifles which you have seen before?
Mr. ROWLAND - The best I could tell it was of that size.
Mr. SPECTER - Have you seen such .30-odd rifles before at close range which had telescopic sights?
Mr. ROWLAND - Yes; one my stepfather has has a very powerful scope on it.
Mr. SPECTER - And did this rifle appear similar to the one your stepfather owned?
Mr. ROWLAND - From my distance, I would say very similar or of similar manufacture.

Not CE 139
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 29, 2018, 02:58:16 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Bumping. Predictable to get a post filled with rhetoric and short on information.

Here is the challenge that Paul failed to respond to.

Easy question for you Paul (or anyone). When was CE142 discovered and by whom? No need to provide the exact time just the event ordered amongst those others that day. Eg discovery of the shells, chicken lunch, rifle, the dusting for prints of these and the SN boxes and wooden strip, Tippit shooting, Day taking the rifle to the DPD and the eventual removal of "evidence by Montgomery and Johnson.

Anyone care to give it a shot?

I will give it a try Colin - see my answer below  ;D

update

The "SN" in the SE corner of the 6th floor of the TSBD containing three spent hulls on the floor and a chicken lunch sack and a partially eaten piece of chicken on a book box was discovered at ~1.15 pm by Deputy Sheriff Luke Mooney

A 38 inch x 8.5 inch paper bag (CE 142) in the "SN" in the SE corner of the 6th floor of the TSBD next to the spent hulls was discovered at what time and by whom?

A hidden 40.2 inch rifle (CE 139) in the NW corner of the 6th floor of the TSBD was discovered at ~ 1.22 pm by Dallas Sheriff’s Deputy Eugene Boone.

Who was at and in the "SN" and didn't see CE 142 in situ?

Deputy Sheriff for the Dallas County Sheriff's Department Luke Mooney

Sergeant in the Dallas Police Department Gerald Lynn Hill 
 
Captain of homicide and robbery bureau for the Dallas Police Department J. W. Fritz

Detective in the homicide and robbery bureau for the Dallas Police Department Elmer L. Boyd 

Detective in the homicide and robbery bureau for the Dallas Police Department (since August 2, 1948) Richard M. Sims

Deputy Sheriff for the Dallas County Sheriff's Department Roger Dean Craig

Deputy Sheriff for the Dallas County Sheriff's Department A. D. McCurley

Deputy Sheriff for the Dallas County Sheriff's Department Jack W. Faulkner

Deputy Sheriff for the Dallas County Sheriff's Department Ralph Walters

Detective in the criminal intelligence section, Police Department Dallas V. J. Brian

Sergeant Patrol Division, Dallas Police Department Donald Flusche
 
Cameraman for WFAA-TV in Dallas, Texas Tom Alyea


Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tom Sorensen on January 29, 2018, 09:03:11 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Tony, Have you never seen the report or memo that Lt Day wrote in which he said he spotted a paper sack that was SHAPED like a gun case ?   At the time Roy Truly was with him and he ( Day) asked if he'd ever seen the gun case before.   Truly denied ever having seen the paper gun case ....Day folded it up and put it in his jacket never to be seen again.


The memo Walt refers to even came in two flavors. It is discussed by Pat Speer in this article:

https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Essay_-_Proof_the_FBI_Changed_Documents_and_Vincent_Bugliosi_was_Wrong.html

Btw, wasn't Frazier shown the bag late on the 22nd?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 29, 2018, 09:15:59 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The memo Walt refers to even came in two flavors. It is discussed by Pat Speer in this article:

https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Essay_-_Proof_the_FBI_Changed_Documents_and_Vincent_Bugliosi_was_Wrong.html

Btw, wasn't Frazier shown the bag late on the 22nd?

BWF was shown an unstained CE 142 during his polygraph on the night of 22/11/1963 and couldn't ID it. He passed his polygraph test.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tom Sorensen on January 29, 2018, 10:53:10 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
BWF was shown an unstained CE 142 during his polygraph on the night of 22/11/1963 and couldn't ID it. He passed his polygraph test.

Right, so if what the report states is true Day refers to a different bag that the one Frazier was shown although the report says it was the one that traveled back and forth between the DPD and the FBI. Interesting date of interview, the same day the WC was formed... 

IMO the most damming evidence is Studebaker's crime scene photo 039 where he must have been literary standing on the bag taking the shot, that combined with his sketch missing the bag entirely although he supposedly dusted it for prints.

Good to see your bag thread coming back. I'll post something later on the CE numbers.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 29, 2018, 11:22:36 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Right, so if what the report states is true Day refers to a different bag that the one Frazier was shown although the report says it was the one that traveled back and forth between the DPD and the FBI. Interesting date of interview, the same day the WC was formed... 

IMO the most damming evidence is Studebaker's crime scene photo 039 where he must have been literary standing on the bag taking the shot, that combined with his sketch missing the bag entirely although he supposedly dusted it for prints.

Good to see your bag thread coming back. I'll post something later on the CE numbers.

Cheers  :)

I am continually updating my OP so that all pertinent documents are in the one spot.

We have the benefit of hindsight to see the deception that went on with CE 142.

I like to call it the "paper shuffle"  ;D

I thought CE 399 was bad enough but CE 142 takes the cake.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on January 29, 2018, 11:59:08 AM
A couple more names for your list Tony.

Bonnie Ray Williams and...
..


Carl Day
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on January 29, 2018, 12:04:51 PM
Seeing as our LN friends are reluctant to engage......here is a clue regarding when the bag was found.

Mr. BELIN. You were standing there (in the SN) when he (Montgomery) picked it up?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, because the Crime Lab (Studebaker) was already finished where I was (where the lunch sack, chicken and pop bottle were), and I had already walked off to where he (Montgomery) was.


Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 29, 2018, 12:36:47 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
A couple more names for your list Tony.

Bonnie Ray Williams and...
..


Carl Day

Damn your good Colin! I was hoping our well read LNers would have picked that one up.

The irony of course was that only Day was shown CE 142 during his WC testimony and he very likely NEVER saw it in situ on the 6th floor. The last place he saw it was in the shipping room in Studebaker's possession.

DVP is still scratching his head on how CE 142 got to the SN with BRW munching on his lunch within the SN.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on January 29, 2018, 12:45:46 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Damn your good Colin! I was hoping our well read LNers would have picked that one up.

The irony of course was that only Day was shown CE 142 during his WC testimony and he very likely NEVER saw it in situ on the 6th floor. The last place he saw it was in the shipping room in Studebaker's possession.

DVP is still scratching his head on how CE 142 got to the SN with BRW munching on his lunch within the SN.

But Tony,
If Day never saw CE142 in the SN how could he have related the 3” tape on it to that used in the shipping room? Apparently he observed that on his way up to the 6th floor.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 29, 2018, 12:47:49 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Seeing as our LN friends are reluctant to engage......here is a clue regarding when the bag was found.

Mr. BELIN. You were standing there (in the SN) when he (Montgomery) picked it up?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, because the Crime Lab (Studebaker) was already finished where I was (where the lunch sack, chicken and pop bottle were), and I had already walked off to where he (Montgomery) was.

Note - no mention of Lt Day (because he hadn't returned from City Hall yet).

Note - Studebaker, Johnson and Montgomery (after returning from the first floor wrapping room with CE 142) remained together on the 6th floor.

Who discovered CE 142?

Who moved CE 142?

When were the two SN photographs taken by Studebaker?

How can any one (Johnson or Montgomery) "discover it" on the floor of the SE corner if it was in Studebaker's possession as he (supposedly) took it to the shipping room with Day prior to 2 pm?

This might explain Montgomery's observation of seeing CE 142 "stuffed between two boxes"?

Johnson, Montgomery and Studebaker can not get any of their paper bag stories correct.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 29, 2018, 12:53:06 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
But Tony,
If Day never saw CE142 in the SN how could he have related the 3” tape on it to that used in the shipping room? Apparently he observed that on his way up to the 6th floor.

Didn't Day take the front staircase to the second floor first?

Mr. BELIN. What did you do when you got there?
Mr. DAY. I was directed to the sixth floor by the police inspector who was at the front door when I arrived.
Mr. BELIN. Do you know who that was?
Mr. DAY. Inspector Sawyer.
Mr. BELIN. What did you do when you got to the sixth floor?
Mr. DAY. I had to go up the stairs. The elevator--we couldn't figure out how to run it. When I got to the head of the stairs, I believe it was the patrolman standing there, I am not sure, stated they had found some hulls over in the northeast corner of the building, and I proceeded to that area excuse me, southeast corner of the building.

Did Inspector Sawyer know about the NW elevators or just the front passenger one?

When and how did Lt Day know about the tape dispenser with the three inch tape in the first floor wrapping room?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on January 29, 2018, 01:02:53 PM
Day from "No More Silence"


(https://preview.ibb.co/jnaP1w/224_E56_E4_6741_41_F9_9451_04_A8_E2_E629_B1.jpg)

Oh what a tangled web we weave......

He said similar in his 1996 Oral History for the 6th Floor Museum.

(https://preview.ibb.co/bZ4byb/A553_A204_3_FB0_41_DD_9_C57_62_B3356598_E8.jpg)

So much for noticing the tape on the way up.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 29, 2018, 01:13:42 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Day from "No More Silence"


(https://preview.ibb.co/jnaP1w/224_E56_E4_6741_41_F9_9451_04_A8_E2_E629_B1.jpg)

Oh what a tangled web we weave......

He said similar in his 1996 Oral History for the 6th Floor Museum. So much for noticing the tape on the way up.

This meant that Lt Day only found out about the first floor shipping room from one person - Mr Roy Truly who had arrived to the 6th floor to tell Captain Fritz about Lee missing from the line up.

Now why would Lt Day ask Mr Truly about a shipping room that contained paper and tape?

BTW - no one mentioned seeing CE 142 at the NW corner where Lt Day and Detective Studebaker were processing the rifle nor was it filmed by Tom Alyea.

So how does CE 142 make a sudden appearance on the first floor in the shipping room?

Answer - it was constructed in the shipping room by Detective Studebaker to potentially wrap up CE 139. 

Mr Truly likely saw him do it but was never asked about CE 142, yet he saw Lt Day take CE 139 out of the TSBD.

Note the strategic interruption/post insertion by Mr Belin

Mr. BELIN. Did you ever get the kind of sample used at the School Book Depository?

Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; on the afternoon of November 22, 1963, I had the bag listed as----

Mr. BELIN. Commission Exhibit 626 or 142.

Mr. DAY. On the first floor of the Texas School Book Depository, and I noticed from their wrapping bench there was paper and tape of a similar--the tape was of the same width as this. I took the bag over and tried it, and I noticed that the tape was the same width as on the bag.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on January 29, 2018, 01:19:23 PM
More from Day's Oral History....

Carl: He was surly…kind of cocky and surly. He didn‟t seem to, well,
he was denying everything…wasn‟t cooperating at all. There was one other incident that
happened there. While I was working with the gun, I didn‟t know what was going on, on
the third floor - the executive office. Captain Fritz had Marina Oswald in his office and  he wanted her to look at the gun. He came up to my office and said he wanted her to look
at the gun to see if she could identify it, but he didn‟t want to bring her out into the
reporters out there in the hall. Well, I‟m accustomed to four, five, six reporters hanging
out in that hall all the time in any major case. And if I wrapped the thing up, likely to
mess up the powder or prints that are on there.
So I just picked it up by the straps, or the
strap and the stock, I‟d already determined that nothing could get anything off there, and
I decided I‟d carry it like that down, and go through a few reporters and show it to her.
Well when I got off at the third floor, I was shocked. There was television cameras and I
don‟t know how many people were there- it was loaded. And here I am with a piece of
evidence, standing there holding it over my head, and all these people around, I didn‟t
know whether to run or what. But Captain Fritz and his men spread them out, and I
walked on through holding the gun over my head so nobody would touch it. And showed
it to Marina Oswald in the office. She was across the hall, I mean across the room from
me. I didn‟t know what she said, whether in English or Russian. But they asked her
something and finally I took the gun on back upstairs. But they got that television picture
of me holding it over my head and everything else. Looked to me like I was trying to
show the thing off, which was, it was a poor way of handling evidence. Poor way of
handling evidence. Another one of those things seemed like you just couldn‟t seem to do
anything right; just kind of sneaked up on me, and I didn‟t know people were down there.

And from No More Silence....

(https://preview.ibb.co/bWMH4G/3_B7_F603_B_8_E52_4_DA6_A0_F8_F496_EACABE68.jpg)

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on January 29, 2018, 01:24:33 PM
So it seems that Day took the rifle to the first floor to get samples of tape and paper he could not be aware existed to compare with a bag that he had not seen.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 29, 2018, 01:30:13 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
More from Day's Oral History....

Carl: He was surly…kind of cocky and surly. He didn‟t seem to, well,
he was denying everything…wasn‟t cooperating at all. There was one other incident that
happened there. While I was working with the gun, I didn‟t know what was going on, on
the third floor - the executive office. Captain Fritz had Marina Oswald in his office and  he wanted her to look at the gun. He came up to my office and said he wanted her to look
at the gun to see if she could identify it, but he didn‟t want to bring her out into the
reporters out there in the hall. Well, I‟m accustomed to four, five, six reporters hanging
out in that hall all the time in any major case. And if I wrapped the thing up, likely to
mess up the powder or prints that are on there.
So I just picked it up by the straps, or the
strap and the stock, I‟d already determined that nothing could get anything off there, and
I decided I‟d carry it like that down, and go through a few reporters and show it to her.
Well when I got off at the third floor, I was shocked. There was television cameras and I
don‟t know how many people were there- it was loaded. And here I am with a piece of
evidence, standing there holding it over my head, and all these people around, I didn‟t
know whether to run or what. But Captain Fritz and his men spread them out, and I
walked on through holding the gun over my head so nobody would touch it. And showed
it to Marina Oswald in the office. She was across the hall, I mean across the room from
me. I didn‟t know what she said, whether in English or Russian. But they asked her
something and finally I took the gun on back upstairs. But they got that television picture
of me holding it over my head and everything else. Looked to me like I was trying to
show the thing off, which was, it was a poor way of handling evidence. Poor way of
handling evidence. Another one of those things seemed like you just couldn‟t seem to do
anything right; just kind of sneaked up on me, and I didn‟t know people were down there.

Here is my take - if CE 139 wasnt initially dusted for prints by Lt Day - Lt Day would have placed CE 139 inside the paper bag made by Detective Studebaker which was 41 inches with out the flap.

Since Lt Day had initially commenced dusting CE 139 with black magnetic powder and had issues doing so, he changed his mind - left the paper bag behind with Detective Studebaker - and took CE 139 out the front door holding it by the strap.

That is not how you handle evidence (uncovered and unprotected) - and do a show and tell to the world media outside the front door.

In the meantime, Detective Studebaker folds up the paper bag and takes it upstairs to continue processing the SN in the presence of Montgomery and Johnson.

The paper bag was the perfect size to place in the wooden window sill strip.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tom Sorensen on January 29, 2018, 01:31:32 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So it seems that Day took the rifle to the first floor to get samples of tape and paper he could not be aware existed to compare with a bag that he had not seen.

One could go with Vince Drain's report saying Truly furnished similar brown paper from the roll...

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10406#relPageId=132
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 29, 2018, 01:42:17 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So it seems that Day took the rifle to the first floor to get samples of tape and paper he could not be aware existed to compare with a bag that he had not seen.

Correct. Further if Day had suspected that the paper bag was the means by which the rifle was brought to the TSBD (hence precipitating him and Studebaker going to the wrapping room in the first place) then the light bulb should have gone off and either one of them would have photographed the paper bag in situ.

Neither did.

So we have this complex and convoluted story instead.

Yet, if I am correct - just two people needed to shut up about the origins of CE 142. This CYA became essential by the 24/11/1963 (day LHO was killed).

Mr. BELIN. Did you find anything, any print of any kind, in connection with the processing of this?
Mr. DAY. No legible prints were found with the powder, no.
Mr. BELIN. Do you know whether any legible prints were found by any other means or any other place?
Mr. DAY. There is a legible print on it now. They were on there when it was returned to me from the FBI on November 24.


Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Matthew Finch on January 29, 2018, 03:58:16 PM
Thanks for reposting this Tony - I recall contributing to the (rather lengthy!) thread pre-board reset. I think you are absolutely on to something here. Although in my mind it doesn't remove Oswald away from the SN, it does to me highlight one of the stronger arguments for post-assassination 'cover-up' of a bungled task.  :)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 29, 2018, 06:02:59 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Thanks for reposting this Tony - I recall contributing to the (rather lengthy!) thread pre-board reset. I think you are absolutely on to something here. Although in my mind it doesn't remove Oswald away from the SN, it does to me highlight one of the stronger arguments for post-assassination 'cover-up' of a bungled task.  :)

Although in my mind it doesn't remove Oswald away from the SN,

Can you explain how Lee Oswald knew that Junior Jarman and Harold Norman entered the rear door of the first floor shipping room at 12:27, if he was on the sixth floor as you believe?

Lee told the interrogators that he was on the first fl;oor and while he was there he saw Jarman and Norman come in to the shipping room.   Jarman and Norman said that they entered the shipping room about 12:27.

Spectators on the street saw a man in light colored khaki clothing behind the sixth floor window at the very time that Jarman and Norman entered the building.

Can you provide any evidence that Lee Oswald owned ANY khaki clothing?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on January 29, 2018, 09:15:37 PM
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 29, 2018, 09:40:58 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The obvious answer? So, he can get his rifle and sneak it into work in a long paper bag.

Only obvious to somebody who already believes that this is what happened.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 29, 2018, 09:41:49 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Oswald's rifle bag had Oswald's prints.

"Oswald's rifle bag".  LOL.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 29, 2018, 09:46:20 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Lee told the interrogators that he was on the first fl;oor and while he was there he saw Jarman and Norman come in to the shipping room.

Sigh.  Walt Fabrication #2.  None of the accounts of the interrogation have Oswald ever saying anything about the shipping room.  Just stop!

Fritz's notes:  "two negr. came in.....one Jr. + short negro."

Fritz's report: "he said he ate lunch with some of the colored boys who worked with him. One of them was called "Junior" and the other one was a little short man whose name he did not know."

Bookhout's report: "recalled possibly two Negro employees walking through the room during this period."

Kelley's report: "He said he ate his lunch with the colored boys who worked with him. He described one of them as "Junior," a colored boy, and the other was little short negro boy."
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 29, 2018, 11:55:13 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Thanks for reposting this Tony - I recall contributing to the (rather lengthy!) thread pre-board reset. I think you are absolutely on to something here. Although in my mind it doesn't remove Oswald away from the SN, it does to me highlight one of the stronger arguments for post-assassination 'cover-up' of a bungled task.  :)

Matthew,

if CE 142 was constructed for non-nefarious means by Detective Studebaker, and neither BWF and LMR could ID CE 142 on the night of the assassination as being the paper bag in LHO's possession that morning then that strongly indicated that it couldn't have been LHO that brought in CE 139 on the morning of 22/11/1963.

For Lt Day, a seasoned and experienced Officer - documenting and photographing the untouched SN on the 6th floor of the TSBD should have been a trivial affair.

Photograph, tag, remove, document and deposit at City Hall.

Look at the items -

3 spent hulls

1 chicken lunch sack

1 Dr Pepper bottle

1 cigarette packet

1 rifle containing one live round

1 38 inch x 8.5 inch homemade paper bag

However something went horribly wrong in this process, but only with CE 142.

By reading the testimonies and the official reports about CE 142 - nothing stacks up and the deception is evident.

The WC "controlled" and "contained" the fall out by only showing Lt Day CE 142.

Now who actually "found" CE 142 in the SN?

I can not answer that - same with the Detectives. You want pure comedy - read the testimonies of Johnson, Montgomery, Day and Studebaker in regards to CE 142.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 30, 2018, 12:56:26 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Sigh.  Walt Fabrication #2.  None of the accounts of the interrogation have Oswald ever saying anything about the shipping room.  Just stop!

Fritz's notes:  "two negr. came in.....one Jr. + short negro."

Fritz's report: "he said he ate lunch with some of the colored boys who worked with him. One of them was called "Junior" and the other one was a little short man whose name he did not know."

Bookhout's report: "recalled possibly two Negro employees walking through the room during this period."

Kelley's report: "He said he ate his lunch with the colored boys who worked with him. He described one of them as "Junior," a colored boy, and the other was little short negro boy."

On day one... Interrogation session one.....Fritz wrote the truth....."say two negr. came in.....one Jr. + short negro."
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on January 30, 2018, 01:06:28 AM
Walt and John. I believe that the timing of Norman and Jarman's ascent to the 5th floor is important. Let us be disciplined and consider this in a separate thread and not distract from the bag "discovery".

Regards
Colin.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 30, 2018, 12:07:22 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Walt and John. I believe that the timing of Norman and Jarman's ascent to the 5th floor is important. Let us be disciplined and consider this in a separate thread and not distract from the bag "discovery".

Regards
Colin.

What more is there to say about the bag?....   Mr Fratini has done a magnificent job of presenting the facts which expose the fabricated tale of a paper bag.   

Not many intelligent folks believe that CE 142 is the paper sack that Lee Oswald carried to work that rainy morning.

Perhaps I should say the NO intelligent folks believe it ...... Only a dim witted person would believe it.

There are some who PROFESS to believe it but they are not dimwits ......... 
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 30, 2018, 04:43:12 PM
Colin .....Thank you so much for posting this video.....  Notice that the opening frames of the video show the rifle lying in a position that Lt  Day can simply reach out and grab the leather sling and pick the rifle up.  The rifle comes up with the scope down just as would be expected ( it does NOT rotate 180 degrees )

The point being....The official tale says that the rifle was found with the butt plate vertical and with the scope up.  Which would have placed the leather sling on the Left side of the rifle and AWAY from Day's hand......

The official photo of the rifle in situ is a fake..... as is proven by this video......

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on January 30, 2018, 09:34:00 PM
Here is Studebaker Exhibit A

(https://preview.ibb.co/iWOrZR/B027_E37_E_1866_414_A_8_DD1_21_A194_E343_C1.jpg)

I believe this to be the only picture taken before any boxes were moved in the SN. But that is another story.

The point is notice the boxes in the foreground that were claimed to form a rest for the rifle. If CE 142 was present where Studebaker drew it in his exhibit he would almost be standing on in in this photo.

It was not found where the DPD claimed. End of story. The question for those who support the official story is not if they lied but why did they lie?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 30, 2018, 09:58:37 PM
100 % correct Colin, but unfortunately this would have been unfathomable for the DP, FBI and WC. Somehow they had to insert a 38 inch paper bag in the SE corner where there never was one initially.

In that photograph, CE 142 would have literally been at Studebaker's feet if not under them. No one from the DP could, or ever did, explain why CE 142 was subsequently removed and not photographed in situ. The WC did not even ask why.

The simplest and most logical answer was that it never was present there in the first place.

Even if someone had moved it "innocently" from the SE corner how then can one explain why both Studebaker and Day thought that CE 142 was so important to IDing it's origins that both men go to the wrapping room and start collecting non evidence from the paper and tape rolls? If CE 142 was that important - then why not return it back to it's location and photograph it?

Allan took photographs with Studebaker being watched on by two Detectives literally staring at where CE 142 was on the floor!

An in situ photograph of CE 142 in the SE corner would have been devastating to LHO's claim of innocence.

The way CE 142 was initially treated by Studebaker and Day strongly suggested that it was non-evidence from the get-go.

Most damning was the lack of an in situ photograph as well as the lack of a uniform "seeing" it in the SE corner by 12 adults -mostly trained Law enforcement officers as well as a camera man that was filming evidence.

At no stage did the FBI nor the WC present a case as to why CE 142 was potentially a bogus piece of "evidence".
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 30, 2018, 10:38:08 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
An in situ photograph of CE 142 in the SE corner would have been devastating to LHO's claim of innocence.

How so, Tony?  There's nothing that connects the bag to the crime.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 30, 2018, 10:41:29 PM
I believe this to be the only picture taken before any boxes were moved in the SN.

This photo was taken much earlier in the day than late afternoon......

It must have been taken along with the other fake photos that the DPD created....

LOOK at the shadow of the window sash that is being cast on the box...( it's faint and nearly washed out by the camera flash but it is visible)  That shadow shows that the sun was much higher in the sky and  further to the south than it was at anytime after the imaginary "Sniper's Nest" was discovered  on the afternoon of the murder.

The sun was approximately 10 degrees west of the TSBD's E /W face when this photo was taken.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 30, 2018, 11:05:24 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
How so, Tony?  There's nothing that connects the bag to the crime.

I agree John - but I was referring to "perception" and "impression" in people's minds. For example, most thought that LHO was eating a chicken lunch and drinking a Dr Pepper in the "SN" while waiting for JFK to arrive which turned out to be demonstrably false. However this had the immediate effect of a cold blooded killer who was casually eating his lunch.

As it was, the FBI could not link CE 142 to CE 139 or to any weapon.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 30, 2018, 11:13:58 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I agree John - but I was referring to "perception" and "impression" in people's minds. For example, most thought that LHO was eating a chicken lunch and drinking a Dr Pepper in the "SN" while waiting for JFK to arrive which turned out to be demonstrably false. However this had the immediate effect of a cold blooded killer who was casually eating his lunch.

As it was, the FBI could not link CE 142 to CE 139 or to any weapon.

the FBI could not link CE 142 to CE 139 .

Naturally....  They couldn't link the rifle to the bag.....because as you have pointed out the bag was created at the first floor book wrapping table and was never in that SE corner of the sixth floor.....  The rifle was never in that bag.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 30, 2018, 11:17:47 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I believe this to be the only picture taken before any boxes were moved in the SN.

This photo was taken much earlier in the day than late afternoon......

It must have been taken along with the other fake photos that the DPD created....

LOOK at the shadow of the window sash that is being cast on the box...( it's faint and nearly washed out by the camera flash but it is visible)  That shadow shows that the sun was much higher in the sky and  further to the south than it was at anytime after the imaginary "Sniper's Nest" was discovered  on the afternoon of the murder.

Walt,

when do you think it was taken - before or after Lt Day left with CE 139 to City Hall at ~ 2.00 pm?

It is not clear from the testimonies at all when the 2 SN photos were taken by Detective Studebaker. And you are correct - there is nothing "untouched" about them. For a start, the chicken lunch sack and chicken piece had been moved further West by Hill. The boxes at the West end of the SN were also moved, likely by Studebaker.

Then there was CE 142 which no one knows who moved it and to where and how it eventually got back onto the floor in the SE corner.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 30, 2018, 11:24:27 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
the FBI could not link CE 142 to CE 139 .

Naturally....  They couldn't link the rifle to the bag.....because as you have pointed out the bag was created at the first floor book wrapping table and was never in that SE corner of the sixth floor.....  The rifle was never in that bag.

Agree - but, not unexpectedly, this negative association didn't deter the FBI expert nor the WC.

Essentially it went like this: WC "even though you couldn't forensically associate the paper bag with any weapon it still could mean that CE 139 could have been in the bag?" FBI expert "yes".

 8)

It begs the question - Why do any tests at all if you have an agenda?

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 30, 2018, 11:31:14 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Again, Colin asked you to please stop and you just continue like a senile fool .

Now you're bringing up this LIE that you have attempted to spread before.

If left unchecked, you spread like ferocious cancer, infecting the forum with your fabricated crap.

The clip never never never shows the rifle touching the floor.
The entire forum including your lying ass self was shown a clip of the rifle with the butt plate in a vertical position.
Do you want to see it again?
Yet you continue to spit out your fabrications.
You are a sick man.
Now STFU and stop derailing the damn thread.
LIAR!

If left unchecked, you spread like ferocious cancer,

I'm sure you meant to write....."If left unchecked, you spread like ferocious cancer antigen".....but in your limited vocabulary and haste to applaud you forgot the word antigen.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 30, 2018, 11:37:10 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If left unchecked, you spread like ferocious cancer,

I'm sure you meant to write....."If left unchecked, you spread like ferocious cancer antigen".....but in your limited vocabulary and haste to applaud you forgot the word antigen.

No, he meant "ferocious cancer".

Walt's Fabrications (https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,99.0.html)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 30, 2018, 11:40:26 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
No, he meant "ferocious cancer".

Walt's Fabrications (https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,99.0.html)

No, he meant "ferocious cancer".


Ladies and Gentlemen.....Let me introduce the great Iacoletti.....  The man who can read other people minds....Amazing!
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on January 30, 2018, 11:53:33 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
No, he meant "ferocious cancer".


Ladies and Gentlemen.....Let me introduce the great Iacoletti.....  The man who can read other people minds....Amazing!

Says the guy who thinks he can mindread Lee Oswald, Will Fritz, Howard Brennan, William Walter, George DeMohrenschildt, Steven Wilson, Marina, LBJ, and J. Edgar Hoover.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 30, 2018, 11:54:21 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I think that is very insensitive and distasteful Steve. You should retract that.

There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with someone but that's getting personal Steve.

Thanks Tony.....You know things that nobody else knows.....
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 31, 2018, 12:27:50 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Sorry if I offended anybody, except Cakebread.
This goes beyond disagreeing with him.
What I find offensive and extremely distasteful is how the majority of people put up with
his time wasting bullxxxx.
Is the chasm that deep and wide between CT's and LNers that CT's will sit there and endorse and promulgate this jerk's
faux facts without the slightest objection?

I believe CE 142 could be the potential card that brings the WC deck crashing down.

Let's keep it civil please.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on January 31, 2018, 11:31:58 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I believe this to be the only picture taken before any boxes were moved in the SN.

This photo was taken much earlier in the day than late afternoon......

It must have been taken along with the other fake photos that the DPD created....

LOOK at the shadow of the window sash that is being cast on the box...( it's faint and nearly washed out by the camera flash but it is visible)  That shadow shows that the sun was much higher in the sky and  further to the south than it was at anytime after the imaginary "Sniper's Nest" was discovered  on the afternoon of the murder.

The sun was approximately 10 degrees west of the TSBD's E /W face when this photo was taken.

To me the shadows cast on the floorboards near the boxes by the window frames are pretty consistent with the shadow angle thrown onto the brickwork in the Dillard photo. That’s merely by eye tho.....no measurement done.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 31, 2018, 12:14:55 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
To me the shadows cast on the floorboards near the boxes by the window frames are pretty consistent with the shadow angle thrown onto the brickwork in the Dillard photo. That’s merely by eye tho.....no measurement done.

"To me the shadows cast on the floorboards near the boxes by the window frames are pretty consistent with the shadow angle thrown onto the brickwork in the Dillard photo."

There are many photos of what the DPD  imagined to be a  "sniper's Nest".....A few of them are authentic but most of them are photos of what the DPD called "The reconstructed scene".

Any photo that shows a box sitting on the window sill is not an authentic photo.

It fairly easy to know if a photo is a fake by observing the angle of the shadows cast by the sun....  The sun was shining directly on the face of the TSBD at about 11:20  and the sun was fairly high in the sky....but the sun moves pretty rapidly across the sky in late November so by 2:00 pm it was far too the west and lower in the sky...... 

The sunlight on the floor boards in the photo indicate the photo was taken in early after"noon".....( after the sun passed it's Zenith )
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 31, 2018, 12:25:44 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
To me the shadows cast on the floorboards near the boxes by the window frames are pretty consistent with the shadow angle thrown onto the brickwork in the Dillard photo.

There are many photos of what the DPD  imagined to be a  "sniper's Nest".....A few of them are authentic but most of them are photos of what the DPD called "The reconstructed scene".

It fairly easy to know if a photo is a fake by observing the angle of the shadows cast by the sun....  The sun was shining directly on the face of the TSBD at about 11:20  and the sun was fairly high in the sky....but the sun moves pretty rapidly across the sky in late November so by 2:00 pm it was far too the west and lower in the sky...... 

The sunlight on the floor boards in the photo indicate the photo was taken in early after"noon".....( after the sun passed it's Zenith )

Walt,

both Studebaker and Day arrived at the TSBD at ~ 1.12 pm. The rifle was found at ~1.25 pm.

Both Studebaker and Day were called over to process the rifle in the NW corner - that didn't give Studebaker and Day much time to properly process the SN nor photograph it (2 photographs).

Is it possible that the SN was photographed and processed after 2 pm?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 31, 2018, 12:59:39 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Walt,

both Studebaker and Day arrived at the TSBD at ~ 1.12 pm. The rifle was found at ~1.25 pm.

Both Studebaker and Day were called over to process the rifle in the NW corner - that didn't give Studebaker and Day much time to properly process the SN nor photograph it (2 photographs).

Is it possible that the SN was photographed and processed after 2 pm?

Is it possible that the SN was photographed and processed after 2 pm?

Absolutely......Just as Day and Studebaker were setting up and starting to process the so called "Snipers Nest" they were called to the NW corner of the sixth floor to photograph the carcano.   (it was discovered at 1:22 pm)

I believe Day and Studebaker were able to take only a couple photos of the back side of the so called barricade boxes in the SE corner before they were interrupted and went to the NW corner...  They did not return to the SE corner until about 2:30.   

This is verified by the map that Studebaker made....  That map shows the sequence of the photos. 

The sun was shining on the west side of the TSBD and into the window where Day was dusting the rifle for finger prints.

The sun had traveled about 3/4 of the arc to the west at 2:30, so the authentic photos show shadows that are cast at an acute angle relative to the face of the building.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Ray Mitcham on January 31, 2018, 03:53:12 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I believe this to be the only picture taken before any boxes were moved in the SN.

This photo was taken much earlier in the day than late afternoon......

It must have been taken along with the other fake photos that the DPD created....

LOOK at the shadow of the window sash that is being cast on the box...( it's faint and nearly washed out by the camera flash but it is visible)  That shadow shows that the sun was much higher in the sky and  further to the south than it was at anytime after the imaginary "Sniper's Nest" was discovered  on the afternoon of the murder.

The sun was approximately 10 degrees west of the TSBD's E /W face when this photo was taken.

In the photo the angle of the window on the floorboards, is approximately 64˚ to the line of the wall. As the TSBD is about 12˚ north compared to the West East axis, (or 78˚ East of North.)  This would make the shadow of the window to be approx 76˚ to the same line (or 14˚ East of North.) This angle would show the sun to be much later than early afternoon. IMO.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 31, 2018, 05:03:30 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
In the photo the angle of the window on the floorboards, is approximately 64˚ to the line of the wall. As the TSBD is about 12˚ north compared to the West East axis, (or 78˚ East of North.)  This would make the shadow of the window to be approx 76˚ to the same line (or 14˚ East of North.) This angle would show the sun to be much later than early afternoon. IMO.

Before the site was hacked there were sun charts available, with which the sun angles could be determined...

I agree that the sunlight on the floor is at about 64 degrees relative to the east /west brick wall in the photo.

I disagree that the TSBD is located 78 degrees east of north.   The east / west face of the TSBD was about 12 degrees off a line of latitude.   IOW the TSBD is rotated cw about 12 degrees with reference to true North..

I don't know that the 12 degrees is significant for this conversation......

I believe the shadow of the window sash on the box indicates the sun was higher in the sky than it would have been at 2:30 pm...... 



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Ray Mitcham on January 31, 2018, 05:37:31 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Before the site was hacked there were sun charts available, with which the sun angles could be determined...

I agree that the sunlight on the floor is at about 64 degrees relative to the east /west brick wall in the photo.

I disagree that the TSBD is located 78 degrees east of north.   The east / west face of the TSBD was about 12 degrees off a line of latitude.   IOW the TSBD is rotated cw about 12 degrees with reference to true North..

I don't know that the 12 degrees is significant for this conversation......

I believe the shadow of the window sash on the box indicates the sun was higher in the sky than it would have been at 2:30 pm......

It is the South face of the building which is at 12˚N of the line of latitude. 78˚ east of North is the same as about 12˚ off a line of latitude. i.e. 90˚ minus 12˚ =78. If you want a sun angle calculator look at the NASA solar  calculator here

https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/grad/solcalc/azel.html

12˚ is important as it is about 48 minutes  travel of the shadow.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jerry Organ on January 31, 2018, 10:05:01 PM
(https://preview.ibb.co/iWOrZR/B027_E37_E_1866_414_A_8_DD1_21_A194_E343_C1.jpg)

You can't determine the sun angle in Crime Lab Photo 20 by using just the angle as measured on the floor. The photograph subject has three-point perspective. A SunCalc map has no perspective.

I don't expect this to dissuade the CT loons one bit.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on January 31, 2018, 10:27:34 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
(https://preview.ibb.co/iWOrZR/B027_E37_E_1866_414_A_8_DD1_21_A194_E343_C1.jpg)

You can't determine the sun angle in Crime Lab Photo 20 by using just the angle as measured on the floor. The photograph subject has three-point perspective. A SunCalc map has no perspective.

I don't expect this to dissuade the CT loons one bit.

It's possible to measure the height of the bricks that form the wall beneath the window and the distance from that brick wall to the shadow being cast on the floor by that brick wall ....then it's simple geometry to calculate the angle to the sun.

   
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on January 31, 2018, 10:39:28 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
(https://preview.ibb.co/iWOrZR/B027_E37_E_1866_414_A_8_DD1_21_A194_E343_C1.jpg)

You can't determine the sun angle in Crime Lab Photo 20 by using just the angle as measured on the floor. The photograph subject has three-point perspective. A SunCalc map has no perspective.

I don't expect this to dissuade the CT loons one bit.

Hi Jerry.

when do you think Detective Robert Studebaker took the photo of the "untouched" SN before or after CE 139 was found?

According to Studebaker, it was before.

Mr. BALL. In other words, Exhibit A was filmed from the east, with the camera facing west?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. And Exhibit B is what?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Facing east.
Mr. BALL. You are facing east?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. We have a jacket we made up that has all of those pictures numbered in there, and I believe he made an explanation on every one of those.
Mr. BALL. We will Identify your Exhibit A as your No. 20 and your Exhibit B as your No. 19. Now, what other pictures did you take?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Of the rifle?
Mr. BALL. Yes.
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir; that's why, right after these were taken, they said they had found a rifle and to bring the cameras over to the northwest corner of the building where the rifle was found and I loaded everything up and carried it over there.

Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir; now, on this negative right down here in the bottom corner of this negative, there is another hull - you can just barely see the tip of it right here, and when this picture was printed, the exposure of the printing left this out, but I have one - I didn't know this was like that, but I have another one that shows this hull this way.
You see these boxes all right stacked up here, and you couldn't get over here to take another picture in that way, without getting up on everything and messing everything up. This is exact before anything was ever moved or picked up.
There are just two different views there. You probably got one or two recopies We printed a bunch of them.

If that was the case - do you think Studebaker left a shoe print on CE 142?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Larry Baldwin on February 01, 2018, 04:31:21 PM
Fascinating thread.  Great work!  I can see why there are only a few LN contributions.  If only other threads were as wrought with information.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 01, 2018, 09:56:49 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Fascinating thread.  Great work!  I can see why there are only a few LN contributions.  If only other threads were as wrought with information.

Cheers,

what was frustrating in the previous incantation of the thread was that a lot of information was spread out everywhere and it meant that we covered the same material time and time again. This time, I will update my OP as I gather my notes  or find more relevant information.

Yes - it will essentially be LNer free  :(

Enjoy.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 01, 2018, 09:58:52 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Hi Jerry.

when do you think Detective Robert Studebaker took the photo of the "untouched" SN before or after CE 139 was found?

According to Studebaker, it was before.

Mr. BALL. In other words, Exhibit A was filmed from the east, with the camera facing west?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. And Exhibit B is what?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Facing east.
Mr. BALL. You are facing east?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. We have a jacket we made up that has all of those pictures numbered in there, and I believe he made an explanation on every one of those.
Mr. BALL. We will Identify your Exhibit A as your No. 20 and your Exhibit B as your No. 19. Now, what other pictures did you take?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Of the rifle?
Mr. BALL. Yes.
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir; that's why, right after these were taken, they said they had found a rifle and to bring the cameras over to the northwest corner of the building where the rifle was found and I loaded everything up and carried it over there.

Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir; now, on this negative right down here in the bottom corner of this negative, there is another hull - you can just barely see the tip of it right here, and when this picture was printed, the exposure of the printing left this out, but I have one - I didn't know this was like that, but I have another one that shows this hull this way.
You see these boxes all right stacked up here, and you couldn't get over here to take another picture in that way, without getting up on everything and messing everything up. This is exact before anything was ever moved or picked up.
There are just two different views there. You probably got one or two recopies We printed a bunch of them.

If that was the case - do you think Studebaker left a shoe print on CE 142?

when do you think Detective Robert Studebaker took the photo of the "untouched" SN before or after CE 139 was found?

According to Studebaker's map   He started taking photo on the east side f the sixth floor looking south toward the SE corner of the room.  Photo's 1 thru 7 are all in the east side of the room....and they were taken before the rifle was found 
None of these photos were taken from within the imaginary so called "Sniper's Nest", and none of them correspond to DP 18 which is roughly the scene depicted in the photo that is posted.

The rifle was found at 1:22 and Studebaker and Day they were called away from the SE corner to take photos of the area where the rifle was found. 

Photos 12 thru 16 were taken in the NW corner where the rifle was found then photo #18 ( which corresponds roughly to the photo posted) was  taken ....so it's quite obvious that DP #18 was taken after about 2:15.

The photo posted is a fake....It is NOT DP 18 but it does roughly correspond to DP 18.....
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 01, 2018, 11:50:49 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
when do you think Detective Robert Studebaker took the photo of the "untouched" SN before or after CE 139 was found?

According to Studebaker's map   He started taking photo on the east side f the sixth floor looking south toward the SE corner of the room.  Photo's 1 thru 7 are all in the east side of the room....and they were taken before the rifle was found 
None of these photos were taken from within the imaginary so called "Sniper's Nest", and none of them correspond to DP 18 which is roughly the scene depicted in the photo that is posted.

The rifle was found at 1:22 and Studebaker and Day they were called away from the SE corner to take photos of the area where the rifle was found. 

Photos 12 thru 16 were taken in the NW corner where the rifle was found then photo #18 ( which corresponds roughly to the photo posted) was  taken ....so it's quite obvious that DP #18 was taken after about 2:15.

The photo posted is a fake....It is NOT DP 18 but it does roughly correspond to DP 18.....

Walt,

reading the WC testimonies doesn't help in establishing when the two "SN" photos were taken, showing the hulls, by Studebaker.

What makes no sense is why the photos are numbered 19 and 20 if they were his first 2 pictures. I suspect, that they were not.

Both Day and Studebaker had very little time to "set up" the camera for the SN photos - the priority was CE 139.

My suspicion was that the SN was "processed" by Studebaker alone (in the presence of Montgomery and Johnson) as Day took CE 139 to City Hall. Day then rejoined Studebaker on the 6th floor after he had returned.

One thing that was certain - no one took an in situ photo of CE 142 anywhere within the TSBD.

Have a look at this for all the photos taken.

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth49632/m1/1/zoom/?q=texas%20school%20book%20depository%20map&resolution=0.5&lat=1812&lon=750

Photo 20 is with Studebaker standing on CE 142  8)

(https://preview.ibb.co/mGSYom/Slide149.jpg) (https://ibb.co/fUEDom)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 02, 2018, 12:36:40 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Walt,

reading the WC testimonies doesn't help in establishing when the two "SN" photos were taken, showing the hulls, by Studebaker.

What makes no sense is why the photos are numbered 19 and 20 if they were his first 2 pictures. I suspect, that they were not.

Both Day and Studebaker had very little time to "set up" the camera for the SN photos - the priority was CE 139.

My suspicion was that the SN was "processed" by Studebaker alone (in the presence of Montgomery and Johnson) as Day took CE 139 to City Hall. Day then rejoined Studebaker on the 6th floor after he had returned.

One thing that was certain - no one took an in situ photo of CE 142 anywhere within the TSBD.

Have a look at this for all the photos taken.

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth49632/m1/1/zoom/?q=texas%20school%20book%20depository%20map&resolution=0.5&lat=1812&lon=750

Photo 20 is with Studebaker standing on CE 142  8)

(https://preview.ibb.co/mGSYom/Slide149.jpg) (https://ibb.co/fUEDom)

reading the WC testimonies doesn't help in establishing when the two "SN" photos were taken, showing the hulls, by Studebaker.

Fully agree......  But I use Studebaker map to establish the sequence of the photos....  He never got to take any photos inside the so called Sniper's Nest BEFORE he was called to the NW corner where the rifle had been found....

Then after taking photos up to number 17  ( photos 11 thru 16 are taken in the NW corner)  Then he returned to the imaginary Sniper's Nest and took photos 17 thru 21....  The photo that has been posted in this thread is NOT DP# 18 although it roughly corresponds to DP 18.

What makes no sense is why the photos are numbered 19 and 20 if they were his first 2 pictures. I suspect, that they were not.

Studebaker kept a log (map) of the location where he was located at the time he snapped the photos in sequence....Of course the film in his camera recorded the sequence and the map he created revealed where he was standing when he took the photo.

What is very STRANGE  is the fact that he did NOT take any in situ photos of the rifle until AFTER he had returned to the SN ...where he took photos 17 thru 21.....THEN the in situ photos were taken and they are lableled 22 and 23 on Studebaker's map.   Do you see the problem?? 
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 01:03:19 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
reading the WC testimonies doesn't help in establishing when the two "SN" photos were taken, showing the hulls, by Studebaker.

Fully agree......  But I use Studebaker map to establish the sequence of the photos....  He never got to take any photos inside the so called Sniper's Nest BEFORE he was called to the NW corner where the rifle had been found....

Then after taking photos up to number 17  ( photos 11 thru 16 are taken in the NW corner)  Then he returned to the imaginary Sniper's Nest and took photos 17 thru 21....  The photo that has been posted in this thread is NOT DP# 18 although it roughly corresponds to DP 18.

What makes no sense is why the photos are numbered 19 and 20 if they were his first 2 pictures. I suspect, that they were not.

Studebaker kept a log (map) of the location where he was located at the time he snapped the photos in sequence....Of course the film in his camera recorded the sequence and the map he created revealed where he was standing when he took the photo.

What is very STRANGE  is the fact that he did NOT take any in situ photos of the rifle until AFTER he had returned to the SN ...where he took photos 17 thru 21.....THEN the in situ photos were taken and they are lableled 22 and 23 on Studebaker's map.   Do you see the problem??

I see a LOT of issues in which the evidence was documented and photographed. It appeared that Studebaker went between both the NW and SE corner several times.

It appears he started with the SE corner then went to the NW corner.

Remember both he and Day had just the one camera and that at one stage both men were in the first floor shipping room with "CE 142", CE 139 and the camera.

Day left with CE 139 and hence Studebaker returned to the 6th floor with "CE 142" and the camera.

So it is highly likely that Studebaker continued taking photos back on the 6th floor of both locations without Day being present for some of them.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jerry Organ on February 02, 2018, 01:15:38 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
when do you think Detective Robert Studebaker took the photo of the "untouched" SN before or after CE 139 was found?

According to Studebaker's map   He started taking photo on the east side f the sixth floor looking south toward the SE corner of the room.  Photo's 1 thru 7 are all in the east side of the room....and they were taken before the rifle was found 
None of these photos were taken from within the imaginary so called "Sniper's Nest", and none of them correspond to DP 18 which is roughly the scene depicted in the photo that is posted.

The rifle was found at 1:22 and Studebaker and Day they were called away from the SE corner to take photos of the area where the rifle was found. 

Photos 12 thru 16 were taken in the NW corner where the rifle was found then photo #18 ( which corresponds roughly to the photo posted) was  taken ....so it's quite obvious that DP #18 was taken after about 2:15.

The photo posted is a fake....It is NOT DP 18 but it does roughly correspond to DP 18.....

Gary Savage and Rusty Livingston were told by Day and Studebaker that the numbers on the map didn't represent the order in which the pictures were taken.

(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338942/m1/1/high_res/)

Doesn't make sense that they took a series of photos on the approach (including orientation scenes of adjoining aisles) to the evidence scene in the SE corner rather than first go there directly.

(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337079/m1/5/small_res)
Crime Lab Photo 18
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338712/m1/1/small_res/)
Crime Lab Photo 19
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339097/m1/1/small_res)
Crime Lab Photo 20
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339287/m1/3/small_res)
Crime Lab Photo 21

Crime Lab Photos 19 and 20 (21 is almost the same as 20) were the first taken by Day/Studebaker, about 1:15. No. 18 (showing the boxes re-stacked) was taken after the evidence scene was processed; the photographer may be standing about where the bag was reported to have been seen.

Quote
What is very STRANGE  is the fact that he did NOT take any in situ photos of the rifle until AFTER he had returned to the SN ...where he took photos 17 thru 21.....THEN the in situ photos were taken and they are lableled 22 and 23 on Studebaker's map.   Do you see the problem??

Studebaker took the in-situ rifle photos just after the rifle was discovered at about 1:22; Alyea filmed him doing so. You think (or used to think) the lack of sun light on the boxes in the in-situ photos indicate night-time.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 01:59:25 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Gary Savage and Rusty Livingston were told by Day and Studebaker that the numbers on the map didn't represent the order in which the pictures were taken.

(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338942/m1/1/high_res/)

Doesn't make sense that they took a series of photos on the approach (including orientation scenes of adjoining aisles) to the evidence scene in the SE corner rather than first go there directly.

(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337079/m1/5/small_res)
Crime Lab Photo 18
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338712/m1/1/small_res/)
Crime Lab Photo 19
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339097/m1/1/small_res)
Crime Lab Photo 20
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339287/m1/3/small_res)
Crime Lab Photo 21

Crime Lab Photos 19 and 20 (21 is almost the same as 20) were the first taken by Day/Studebaker, about 1:15. No. 18 (showing the boxes re-stacked) was taken after the evidence scene was processed; the photographer may be standing about where the bag was reported to have been seen.

Studebaker took the in-situ rifle photos just after the rifle was discovered at about 1:22; Alyea filmed him doing so. You think (or used to think) the lack of sun light on the boxes in the in-situ photos indicate night-time.

Then it was entirely possible for Studebaker to have taken the two SN photos after he returned from the first floor with CE 142.

Yes?

What purpose then was it for Studebaker to place any numbers on the map if the numbers meant nothing in terms of chronology?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jerry Organ on February 02, 2018, 03:15:34 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Then it was entirely possible for Studebaker to have taken the two SN photos after he returned from the first floor with CE 142.

Yes?


No.

Quote

What purpose then was it for Studebaker to place any numbers on the map if the numbers meant nothing in terms of chronology?

The numbering seems to reflect that the DPD wanted their work to be conveyed to a reader in an orderly fashion. So a general layout of the area first, followed by the in-situ photos.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 03:31:37 AM
An early news report on what was found on the 6th floor - note one item (time 4.14 of video) was not mentioned.


Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 03:34:46 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
No.

The numbering seems to reflect that the DPD wanted their work to be conveyed to a reader in an orderly fashion. So a general layout of the area first, followed by the in-situ photos.

Then if that was the case, in an untouched SN, Detective Robert Lee Studebaker was standing directly on CE 142.

Have an explanation for that?

The number system is random and chaotic.

Crime Lab photo 18 is very close to photos taken by William Allen later that afternoon.

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth184783/m1/1/?q=william%20allen

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jerry Organ on February 02, 2018, 04:25:30 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Then if that was the case, in an untouched SN, Detective Robert Lee Studebaker was standing directly on CE 142.

Have an explanation for that?


Studebaker is not standing in the paper bag area in Photos No. 19-21. He may be standing somewhat in that area in No. 18.

Quote

The number system is random and chaotic.


If that's what you think, fine. I told you what I believe.

Quote

Crime Lab photo 18 is very close to photos taken by William Allen later that afternoon.

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth184783/m1/1/?q=william%20allen (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth184783/m1/1/?q=william%20allen)

(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337079/m1/5/med_res)
Crime Lab Photo 18
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark%3A/67531/metapth184783/m1/1/med_res/)
William Allen photo

Studebaker took his picture earlier than Allen, who took his picture about 3 PM (est.).
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 05:14:32 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Studebaker is not standing in the paper bag area in Photos No. 19-21. He may be standing somewhat in that area in No. 18.

If that's what you think, fine. I told you what I believe.

(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337079/m1/5/med_res)
Crime Lab Photo 18
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark%3A/67531/metapth184783/m1/1/med_res/)
William Allen photo

Studebaker took his picture earlier than Allen, who took his picture about 3 PM (est.).

Do you have a suggestion as to why two crime scene Detectives failed to photograph a piece of crime scene evidence (in the shape of an object large enough to conceal a rifle) in a corner of a building bounded by book boxes where a "rifle rest" was present as well as three spent hulls? Then someone (unknown) pickups "CE 142" and takes it to the first floor shipping room only to be left behind and then returned back to the 6th floor by Detective Robert Lee Studebaker?

Do you find this rather perplexing Jerry?

BTW Crime lab 18 is CE 724 which was taken at ~ 3.15/3.20 - according to Lt Day.

Allen was also up on the 6th floor taking pictures of Lt Day as well as the SN.

If I am not mistaken the thin wooded sill strip appears to have been removed from the window - you can see what appears to be a nail head on the sill as well as the window sill strip outline. Need to check out a better image.

CE 142 was already out of the TSBD by 3 pm.

This Allen photograph shows the hammer in the adjacent window likely used to pry off the window sill piece. 

https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth184783/m1/1/?q=william%20allen

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 02, 2018, 11:13:35 AM
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Michael Capasse on February 02, 2018, 11:55:29 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

and so how does that demonstrate what LMR saw?
...he carried it this way, you know, and it almost touched the ground as he carried it...
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 02, 2018, 12:03:03 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
and so how does that demonstrate what LMR saw?
...he carried it this way, you know, and it almost touched the ground as he carried it...

Tony Fratini says that Linnie Mae Randle lied.

I just want everyone to have the opportunity to see her, in a filmed interview, clearly state that she saw Oswald that morning and that he was carrying "a brown paper bag that was about twenty-seven inches long".
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 12:14:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tony Fratini says that Linnie Mae Randle lied.

I just want everyone to have the opportunity to see her, in a filmed interview, clearly state that she saw Oswald that morning and that he was carrying "a brown paper bag that was about twenty-seven inches long".

Bill,

what ever LMR saw or didn't see from her brief glimpse at LHO from her kitchen window was immaterial - both herself and her brother didn't see LHO with a 38 inch x 8.5 inch taped paper bag.

You can spin it anyway you want but if you read my OP you will see the damning evidence.

Detective Robert Lee Studebaker had his own hands on the paper and tape that constructed CE 142 - that's a fact.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 12:18:46 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Bill,

really? I am embarrassed for you. Debunked and thrown out.

Rather should have stuck to the Z film which he completely FU'ed JFK's movement on the head shot.


He has ZERO credibility and in fact obfuscated what CE 142 really looked like.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Michael Capasse on February 02, 2018, 12:24:09 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tony Fratini says that Linnie Mae Randle lied.

I just want everyone to have the opportunity to see her, in a filmed interview, clearly state that she saw Oswald that morning and that he was carrying "a brown paper bag that was about twenty-seven inches long".

good for Tony....again how does this demonstrate what LMR saw?
as the weight of the rifle will tear open that bag?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 02, 2018, 12:36:30 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Bill,

really? I am embarrassed for you. Debunked and thrown out.

Rather should have stuck to the Z film which he completely FU'ed JFK's movement on the head shot.

He has ZERO credibility and in fact obfuscated what CE 142 really looked like.

I posted that to show what Randle stated.  I'm not concerned with Rather in that video.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 12:40:54 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I posted that to show what Randle stated.  I'm not concerned with Rather in that video.

You should be Bill.

LMR has no one to back up what she apparently saw. No one.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 12:44:46 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
good for Tony....again how does this demonstrate what LMR saw?
as the weight of the rifle will tear open that bag?

This is how much weight "equivalent" was meant to have been present in CE 142. 8 pounds.

http://www.sungloidaho.com/wwwroot/userfiles/images/ss_8lbidahopotatopoly.gif

Does CE 142 appear to have carried anything of substantial weight?

(https://preview.ibb.co/igPhib/Slide7.gif) (https://ibb.co/jyYKUG)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Michael Capasse on February 02, 2018, 12:48:58 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
This is how much weight "equivalent" was meant to have been present in CE 142. 8 pounds.

http://www.sungloidaho.com/wwwroot/userfiles/images/ss_8lbidahopotatopoly.gif

Does CE 142 appear to have carried anything of substantial weight?

(https://preview.ibb.co/igPhib/Slide7.gif) (https://ibb.co/jyYKUG)

and when "carried down" the weight of such would tear open that bag
Rather's bag proves nothing
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 12:59:19 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
and when "carried down" the weight of such would tear open that bag
Rather's bag proves nothing

Agreed. There is no "stress" on the taped end of CE 142 - no bulge, nothing. The end which would have had the most weight on it was pancake flat. What LMR described made no sense at all. LHO carried it to the car with the weight all on the bottom on the bag, yet cupped it in his right hand when carrying it to the TSBD?

According to the WC, the rifle was in pieces, yet left no markings internally on the paper?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 02, 2018, 01:02:39 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You should be Bill.

LMR has no one to back up what she apparently saw. No one.

Which is exactly my point.  You're saying she lied.  I wanted to be sure everyone saw her say, in her own words, that she saw Oswald walk across the street towards her house carrying a brown paper bag that was twenty-seven inches long.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 01:07:20 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Which is exactly my point.  You're saying she lied.  I wanted to be sure everyone saw her say, in her own words, that she saw Oswald walk across the street towards her house carrying a brown paper bag that was twenty-seven inches long.

Which could not have been the 38 inch CE 142.

She was shown CE 142 on the night of 22/11/1963 - she failed to recognize it.

BWF was shown CE 142 on the night of 22/11/1963 - he failed to recognize it.

JED didn't see CE 142 at all. Neither did 11 Law enforcement Officers and one camera man, Bill.

You still talking about LMR?




Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 02, 2018, 01:25:30 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Which could not have been the 38 inch CE 142.

She was shown CE 142 on the night of 22/11/1963 - she failed to recognize it.

BWF was shown CE 142 on the night of 22/11/1963 - he failed to recognize it.

JED didn't see CE 142 at all. Neither did 11 Law enforcement Officers and one camera man, Bill.

You still talking about LMR?


Quote
You still talking about LMR?

It depends.  Are you still saying she lied?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 02, 2018, 01:28:04 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Neither Marina nor Ruth ever saw LHO with any paper bag on 21/11/1963.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether your husband carried any package with him when he left the house on November 22nd?
Mrs. OSWALD. I think that he had a package with his lunch. But a small package.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether he had any package like a rifle in some container?
Mrs. OSWALD. No.

Irrelevant.

Marina didn't get out of bed that morning, i.e. she was in bed when Lee went out the door.  She would have no way of knowing what Lee was carrying as he left.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 01:28:10 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

It depends.  Are you still saying she lied?

You are rapidly becoming the new JohnM - a time waster.

That's very disappointing Bill. Re-read my OP and then decide whether what LMR "saw" actually mattered at all.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 01:29:30 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Irrelevant.

Marina didn't get out of bed that morning, i.e. she was in bed when Lee went out the door.  She would have no way of knowing what Lee was carrying as he left.

And you were there in their bedroom observing all of this Bill?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 02, 2018, 01:33:05 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
What always intrigued me was just how did LHO "know" the correct width (8.5 inches) to make the paper bag to hold an assembled CE 139 with scope attached without having CE 139 with him in the first floor shipping room as a point of reference?

Help me out here, Tony.

The correct width of the assembled CE-139 was eight and a half inches?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 01:36:46 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Help me out here, Tony.

The correct width of the assembled CE-139 was eight and a half inches?

You tell me what you obtain Bill and we can compare notes  : )
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 02, 2018, 01:37:47 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Why did Detective Studebaker and Lt Day stop in the first floor shipping room?

Mr. DAY. On the first floor of the Texas School Book Depository, and I noticed from their wrapping bench there was paper and tape of a similar--the tape was of the same width as this. I took the bag over and tried it, and I noticed that the tape was the same width as on the bag.

Mr. DAY. I directed one of the officers standing by me, I don't know which, to get a piece of the tape and a piece of the paper from the wrapping bench.

Comment

Does anyone seriously believe that Lt Day took a mental note of the width of the tape on CE 142 and had the amazing ability to note a tape dispenser on a wrapping bench in a cluttered shipping room and note that the tape was the same width as the tape on CE 142?

I am trying to follow you here.  What is so ridiculous about Day noticing the width of the tape on CE-142 and the width of the tape in the tape dispenser on the table as being the same as each other?

Also, why is it so ridiculous for Day to notice the tape dispenser on the table?

I think you're reaching here.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 01:43:08 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I am trying to follow you here.  What is so ridiculous about Day noticing the width of the tape on CE-142 and the width of the tape in the tape dispenser on the table as being the same as each other?

Also, why is it so ridiculous for Day to notice the tape dispenser on the table?

I think you're reaching here.

Place yourself in his shoes at that time - would your immediate priority be taking the crime scene evidence, that you have just gathered, to City Hall or stopping to pick up non-evidence?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 02, 2018, 01:46:08 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Up to 11 seasoned and experienced Law Enforcement Officers (Detectives/Deputy Sheriffs/Sergeants/Captain) and 1 camera man never saw CE 142 in situ, including Captain Will Fritz who was in the SN and examined the boxes and the spent hulls.

(https://preview.ibb.co/eYHPww/Slide28.jpg) (https://ibb.co/iH3KUG)

Captain Will Fritz and the SN, WC testimony

Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; there were some boxes stacked there and I believe one box, one small box I believe was in the window, and another box was on the floor. There were some boxes stacked to his right that more or less blinded him from the rest of the floor. If anyone else had been on the floor I doubt if they could have seen where he was sitting.
Mr. McCLOY. Did you see anything other----
Mr. FRITZ. Lieutenant Day, of course, made a detailed description of all of that and he can give it to you much better than I can.
Mr. McCLOY. He is going to be here?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; and he will give it to you in detail; yes, sir.
Mr. DULLES. When was the paper bag covering that apparently he brought the rifle in, was that discovered in the sixth floor about the same time?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; that was recovered a little later. I wasn't down there when that was found.
Mr. DULLES. It was recovered on the sixth floor, was it not?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I believe so. We can check here and see. I believe it was. But I wasn't there when that was recovered.

Now you see it, now you don't - the magical paper bag that disappeared then reappeared on demand


Who was at and in the "SN" and didn't see CE 142 in situ?

Deputy Sheriff for the Dallas County Sheriff's Department Luke Mooney

Sergeant in the Dallas Police Department Gerald Lynn Hill 
 
Captain of homicide and robbery bureau for the Dallas Police Department J. W. Fritz

Detective in the homicide and robbery bureau for the Dallas Police Department Elmer L. Boyd

Detective in the homicide and robbery bureau for the Dallas Police Department (since August 2, 1948) Richard M. Sims

Deputy Sheriff for the Dallas County Sheriff's Department Roger Dean Craig

Deputy Sheriff for the Dallas County Sheriff's Department A. D. McCurley

Deputy Sheriff for the Dallas County Sheriff's Department Jack W. Faulkner

Deputy Sheriff for the Dallas County Sheriff's Department Ralph Walters

Detective in the criminal intelligence section, Police Department Dallas V. J. Brian

Sergeant Patrol Division, Dallas Police Department Donald Flusche
 
Cameraman for WFAA-TV in Dallas, Texas Tom Alyea

Studebaker, Haygood, Day, Johnson, Montgomery and Brewer all stated that they saw the bag in place.  Right?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 01:52:01 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Studebaker, Haygood, Day, Johnson, Montgomery and Brewer all stated that they saw the bag in place.  Right?

You tell me what they saw, where they saw it and when.

Prove that Haygood and Brewer saw CE 142.

Prove that Day saw CE 142 on the 6th floor.

If you can supply an in situ photo of CE 142, I would appreciate it.  :)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 02, 2018, 02:13:29 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
What always intrigued me was just how did LHO "know" the correct width (8.5 inches) to make the paper bag to hold an assembled CE 139 with scope attached without having CE 139 with him in the first floor shipping room as a point of reference?

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Help me out here, Tony.

The correct width of the assembled CE-139 was eight and a half inches?

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You tell me what you obtain Bill and we can compare notes  : )

I'm asking you a direct question.  How many inches, according to your notes, was the width of the assembled rifle?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 02, 2018, 02:14:14 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Then it was entirely possible for Studebaker to have taken the two SN photos after he returned from the first floor with CE 142.

Yes?

What purpose then was it for Studebaker to place any numbers on the map if the numbers meant nothing in terms of chronology?

What purpose then was it for Studebaker to place any numbers on the map if the numbers meant nothing in terms of chronology?

Of course the photos were taken in chronological order.......

And recall that the official tale says that nothing was touched at either the SE corner or the NW corner prior to being photographed.   Day and Studebaker were called to the NW corner to photograph the rifle in situ  .....But they took the photos 11 thur 16 and then returned to the SE corner leaving the rifle un-photographed, then they took exposures 17 thru 21 before returning to the NW corner to take the insitu photos number 22 and 23....

That's what Studebaker's map reveals...and it conflicts with the official lie.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 02, 2018, 02:16:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Neither Marina nor Ruth ever saw LHO with any paper bag on 21/11/1963.

Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether your husband carried any package with him when he left the house on November 22nd?
Mrs. OSWALD. I think that he had a package with his lunch. But a small package.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you know whether he had any package like a rifle in some container?
Mrs. OSWALD. No.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Irrelevant.

Marina didn't get out of bed that morning, i.e. she was in bed when Lee went out the door.  She would have no way of knowing what Lee was carrying as he left.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
And you were there in their bedroom observing all of this Bill?

Disappointing response, Tony.

You state, as if it means a damn thing, that Marina didn't see Lee with any paper bag that morning.  I then state that it's irrelevant because Marina was in bed when Lee left the house.  Your response to that was lame.  Sorry.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 02:17:12 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I'm asking you a direct question.  How many inches, according to your notes, was the width of the assembled rifle?

Do you realize how many direct questions I have asked YOU, only never to receive an answer.

The information is available to find the answer out - it will be nice to compare notes.

Bottom of rifle butt to top of scope - go for it.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 02:21:02 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Disappointing response, Tony.

You state, as if it means a damn thing, that Marina didn't see Lee with any paper bag that morning.  I then state that it's irrelevant because Marina was in bed when Lee left the house.  Your response to that was lame.  Sorry.

I am used to disappointing responses from LNers like yourself Bill.

You are not interested in finding answers Bill, but only in obfuscation and time wasting.

Your number one issue is trying to explain why Day and Studebaker failed to photograph CE 142 in situ closely followed by why both men stopped in the first floor shipping room collecting non-evidence.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 02, 2018, 02:28:43 PM
Why would Day take the rifle and the bag down to the first floor and then leave the bag to be returned back to the sixth floor? Since when do you return "evidence" back to,the crime scene? Did he have a premonition that he would find the tape on the way out? Was he carrying the rifle and Studebaker the bag with intention to for them both to head to the crime lab and then change his mind as they passed the tape? Makes no sense.....


Telling porkies methinks.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 02, 2018, 02:28:56 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I am trying to follow you here.  What is so ridiculous about Day noticing the width of the tape on CE-142 and the width of the tape in the tape dispenser on the table as being the same as each other?

Also, why is it so ridiculous for Day to notice the tape dispenser on the table?

I think you're reaching here.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Place yourself in his shoes at that time - would your immediate priority be taking the crime scene evidence, that you have just gathered, to City Hall or stopping to pick up non-evidence?

I think it was pretty smart of Day, after CE-142 was found up on the sixth floor, to collect paper and tape samples from inside the Depository in order to compare the paper sample with the bag and compare a tape sample taken from the dispenser with the tape on the bag, in an effort to determine where the "homemade" bag was made.

You're questioning every single element surrounding the bag and placing a nefarious conclusion to each one.

Explain, if you can, how it is suspicious that Day would collect paper and tape samples for comparison?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 02, 2018, 02:32:57 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Do you realize how many direct questions I have asked YOU, only never to receive an answer.

The information is available to find the answer out - it will be nice to compare notes.

Bottom of rifle butt to top of scope - go for it.

I simply do not have the inclination to do so.

What do you have, as for as how many inches the assembled rifle was?

You state that it's always bothered you (my word, not yours) that Oswald knew exactly how wide to make the bag (8.5 inches, you say) without having the rifle present for reference.  How wide is the rifle?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 02:33:27 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Why would Day take the rifle and the bag down to the first floor and then leave the bag to be returned back to the sixth floor? Since when do you return "evidence" back to,the crime scene? Did he have a premonition that he would find the tape on the way out? Was he carrying the rifle and Studebaker the bag with intention to for them both to head to the crime lab and then change his mind as they passed the tape? Makes no sense.....


Telling porkies methinks.

No doubt a CYA, especially by Lt Day.

When Day and Studebaker initially entered the TSBD, how did they know there was a shipping room in the first place when both men went via the front stairs?

Who told them about a wrapping room?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 02, 2018, 02:36:42 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I am used to disappointing responses from LNers like yourself Bill.

You are not interested in finding answers Bill, but only in obfuscation and time wasting.

Your number one issue is trying to explain why Day and Studebaker failed to photograph CE 142 in situ closely followed by why both men stopped in the first floor shipping room collecting non-evidence.

They should have most definitely photographed the bag in situ.  They didn't.  They messed up.  Does that prove that the bag was not there?  Hardly.

If there was a photo of the bag in place, many CT's would simply claim the photo is faked, like they do with other evidence.

Day and Studebaker stopped in the shipping room to collect samples; hardly a ridiculous notion.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 02:41:22 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I think it was pretty smart of Day, after CE-142 was found up on the sixth floor, to collect paper and tape samples from inside the Depository in order to compare the paper sample with the bag and compare a tape sample taken from the dispenser with the tape on the bag, in an effort to determine where the "homemade" bag was made.

You're questioning every single element surrounding the bag and placing a nefarious conclusion to each one.

Explain, if you can, how it is suspicious that Day would collect paper and tape samples for comparison?

Do you also believe in the tooth fairy while your at it Bill?

If Day had the sudden "light bulb moment" of going to the wrapping room because he had attached some importance to the paper bag (at a time he had no idea how and who brought in CE 139) - why would both men fail to photograph CE 142 in situ especially when one considers that Studebaker brought it back up to the 6th floor with his camera?

No - he HAD to mention he was in the wrapping room with Studebaker because he handed over CE 677 to the FBI.

Clearly he had no idea that the FBI were going to forensically test both CE 677 and CE 142 which turned out to be the same thing - both paper and tape.

CE 142 was not made for nefarious means Bill  :)

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 02:46:57 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
They should have most definitely photographed the bag in situ.  They didn't.  They messed up.  Does that prove that the bag was not there?  Hardly.

If there was a photo of the bag in place, many CT's would simply claim the photo is faked, like they do with other evidence.

Day and Studebaker stopped in the shipping room to collect samples; hardly a ridiculous notion.

You HAVE become the new JohnM.  :(

You have just trivialized one of the most significant FU's in DP crime scene investigation history.

Yet - as a LNer you haven't even considered the most logical reason why it was never photographed in the first place - it wasnt there and it wasnt crime scene evidence.

If both men HAD the crime scene evidence with them in their hands (CE 139 and CE 142), why did Day leave half of it behind (CE 142) with Studebaker and it then ended up in Montgomery's hands and Studebaker had NFI about it?

Mr. STUDEBAKER. I don't know - I picked it up and dusted it and they took it down there and sent it to Washington and that's the last I have seen of it, and I don't know.
Mr. BALL. Did you take a picture of it before you picked it up?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. No.
Mr. BALL. Does that sack show in any of the pictures you took?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. No; it doesn't show in any of the pictures.


Come on Bill - you are (usually) much better than that!



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 02, 2018, 02:54:53 PM
When was the bag "found"?

Mr. BELIN. You were standing there when he picked it up? 
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, because the Crime Lab was already finished where I was, and I had already walked off to where he was. 


Johnson had returned to the SN because Studebaker had finished dusting the Dr Pepper bottle and lunchsack. Day was already on his way to the DP office with the rifle.

Bob: Now where was it now, where was it? Kind of behind the boxes,
do you remember?
Carl: To the best of my knowledge, it was to the right on the floor of
where he was sitting, on the box that I showed you a minute ago. It may have been the
right, it may have been the left, but there was a bag there.
Bob: Left would be like in the corner…
Carl: Yes, in the corner out back towards the north side of the building,
where you headed up to it.
Bob: What did it look like to you, then, if you collected it, did you not
know what it was?
Carl: I didn‟t know anything about a bag at that time. There was a bag
laying there, at the first thing, there was a brown paper bag, it was too big for that. Later
examination indicated that it was a bag had been made out of wrapping paper. It
appeared to be shipping paper, and there was a roll in the shipping department downstairs
that sent me the paper. Of course at that time, we didn‟t know anything about Oswald,
didn‟t know anything about what happened. There was a bag there and it was collected.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 03:00:24 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
When was the bag "found"?

Mr. BELIN. You were standing there when he picked it up?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, because the Crime Lab was already finished where I was, and I had already walked off to where he was.


Johnson had returned to the SN because Studebaker had finished dusting the Dr Pepper bottle and lunchsack. Day was already on his way to the DP office with the rifle.

Bob: Now where was it now, where was it? Kind of behind the boxes,
do you remember?
Carl: To the best of my knowledge, it was to the right on the floor of
where he was sitting, on the box that I showed you a minute ago. It may have been the
right, it may have been the left, but there was a bag there.
Bob: Left would be like in the corner…
Carl: Yes, in the corner out back towards the north side of the building,
where you headed up to it.
Bob: What did it look like to you, then, if you collected it, did you not
know what it was?
Carl: I didn‟t know anything about a bag at that time. There was a bag
laying there, at the first thing, there was a brown paper bag, it was too big for that. Later
examination indicated that it was a bag had been made out of wrapping paper. It
appeared to be shipping paper, and there was a roll in the shipping department downstairs
that sent me the paper. Of course at that time, we didn‟t know anything about Oswald,
didn‟t know anything about what happened. There was a bag there and it was collected.

I rest my case - Day wasnt even present when CE 142 was "discovered". Clearly he had no "ownership" over it at all.

The entire thing was made up to cover themselves over the true origins of the paper bag.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 02, 2018, 04:55:27 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
No doubt a CYA, especially by Lt Day.

When Day and Studebaker initially entered the TSBD, how did they know there was a shipping room in the first place when both men went via the front stairs?

Who told them about a wrapping room?


Must have been obvious.

Mr. BELIN. Did you find anything else up in the southeast corner of the sixth floor? We have talked about the rifle, we have talked about the shells, we have talked about the chicken bones and the lunch sack and the pop bottle by that second pair of windows. Anything else?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. We found this brown paper sack or case. It was made out of heavy wrapping paper. Actually, it looked similar to the paper that those books was wrapped in. It was just a long narrow paper bag.
Mr. BELIN. Where was this found?
Mr. JOHNSON. Right in the corner of the building.
Mr. BELIN. On what floor?
Mr. JOHNSON. Sixth floor.
Mr. BELIN. Which corner?
Mr. JOHNSON. Southeast corner.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 02, 2018, 05:13:03 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Must have been obvious.

Mr. BELIN. Did you find anything else up in the southeast corner of the sixth floor? We have talked about the rifle, we have talked about the shells, we have talked about the chicken bones and the lunch sack and the pop bottle by that second pair of windows. Anything else?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. We found this brown paper sack or case. It was made out of heavy wrapping paper. Actually, it looked similar to the paper that those books was wrapped in. It was just a long narrow paper bag.
Mr. BELIN. Where was this found?
Mr. JOHNSON. Right in the corner of the building.
Mr. BELIN. On what floor?
Mr. JOHNSON. Sixth floor.
Mr. BELIN. Which corner?
Mr. JOHNSON. Southeast corner.

We found this brown paper sack or case. It was made out of heavy wrapping paper. Actually, it looked similar to the paper that those books was wrapped in.

I have always thought that those cops imaginations were running wild.....  Mooney imagined that he had discovered a "Sniper's Nest" based on the spent shells, and a scar (made by recoil of rifle) on the top box of what he imagined to be a rifle rest.

That stack of boxes could NOT have been used as a rifle rest.....and any rational thinking person would have known that..and yet many experienced cops viewed the scene and none of them ever questioned the fact that it would have been impossible for a gunman to have performed the feat that was imagined by Mooney and was the very basis for the whole case.

Likewise the paper sack......Some cop saw a book wrapper and imagined it to be a gun case.....and the snowball was rolling.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 02, 2018, 05:43:10 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I rest my case - Day wasnt even present when CE 142 was "discovered". Clearly he had no "ownership" over it at all.

The entire thing was made up to cover themselves over the true origins of the paper bag.


Det Harry Weatherford stated he seen the bag.

: HARRY WEATHERFORD, Deputy Sheriff
Date: November 23, 1963
On Friday, November 22, 1963, at about 12:30 PM, I was standing in front of the Sheriff's Office watching the Presidential Motorcade. The President's car had passed my location a couple of minutes when I heard a loud report which I thought was a railroad torpedo, as it sounded as if it came from the railroad yard. Thinking, this was a heck of a time for one to go off, then I heard a 2nd report which had more of an echo report and thought to myself, that this was a rifle and I started toward the corner when I heard the 3rd report. By this time I was running towards the railroad yards where the sound seemed to come from. I got with Deputy Allan Sweatt and was searching the tracks and cars, etc, then someone said the shots came from above. I then went to the Elm Street loading gates of the Texas School Book Depository where I met Deputies Ralph Walters, Luke Mooney, Eugene Boone and Sam Webster. We all went into the building and proceeded to the first floor by way of the stairs. I jumped out of the first window onto the roof of the adjoining covered loading dock. I then searched the roof for any expended shell cases, as at the time we were trying to find just where the shots came from and if they were fired from the west side of the building they possibly could have fallen onto this roof. Finding no shells, I then climbed into the window and started searching the first floor, with an unknown DPD detective. Then learning other officers were searching this first floor, I went to the top floor to start down with each floor. Looking over the 7th floor to no avail, I came down to the 6th floor and while searching this floor, Deputy Luke Mooney said, "here are some shells". I went over to where he was and saw 3 expended rifle shells, and a sack on the floor and a partially eaten piece of chicken on top of one of the cartons which was used as a sort of barracade, advising Mooney to preserve the scene for the Crime Lab. I then proceeded to look for the rifle as it was possible it was still on this floor. After several minutes passed, I was about 10 feet from Deputy Boone when he found the rifle with a light he was using. This was also preserved for the Crime Lab.


Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 06:24:10 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Det Harry Weatherford stated he seen the bag.

: HARRY WEATHERFORD, Deputy Sheriff
Date: November 23, 1963
On Friday, November 22, 1963, at about 12:30 PM, I was standing in front of the Sheriff's Office watching the Presidential Motorcade. The President's car had passed my location a couple of minutes when I heard a loud report which I thought was a railroad torpedo, as it sounded as if it came from the railroad yard. Thinking, this was a heck of a time for one to go off, then I heard a 2nd report which had more of an echo report and thought to myself, that this was a rifle and I started toward the corner when I heard the 3rd report. By this time I was running towards the railroad yards where the sound seemed to come from. I got with Deputy Allan Sweatt and was searching the tracks and cars, etc, then someone said the shots came from above. I then went to the Elm Street loading gates of the Texas School Book Depository where I met Deputies Ralph Walters, Luke Mooney, Eugene Boone and Sam Webster. We all went into the building and proceeded to the first floor by way of the stairs. I jumped out of the first window onto the roof of the adjoining covered loading dock. I then searched the roof for any expended shell cases, as at the time we were trying to find just where the shots came from and if they were fired from the west side of the building they possibly could have fallen onto this roof. Finding no shells, I then climbed into the window and started searching the first floor, with an unknown DPD detective. Then learning other officers were searching this first floor, I went to the top floor to start down with each floor. Looking over the 7th floor to no avail, I came down to the 6th floor and while searching this floor, Deputy Luke Mooney said, "here are some shells". I went over to where he was and saw 3 expended rifle shells, and a sack on the floor and a partially eaten piece of chicken on top of one of the cartons which was used as a sort of barracade, advising Mooney to preserve the scene for the Crime Lab. I then proceeded to look for the rifle as it was possible it was still on this floor. After several minutes passed, I was about 10 feet from Deputy Boone when he found the rifle with a light he was using. This was also preserved for the Crime Lab.


His description of a sack was vague and non descript and he likely saw the chicken lunch sack. How do you explain Mooney failing to see the same sack, yet see the chicken lunch sack?

Was Harry shown  CE 142 for confirmation?

No.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 06:33:45 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Must have been obvious.

Mr. BELIN. Did you find anything else up in the southeast corner of the sixth floor? We have talked about the rifle, we have talked about the shells, we have talked about the chicken bones and the lunch sack and the pop bottle by that second pair of windows. Anything else?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. We found this brown paper sack or case. It was made out of heavy wrapping paper. Actually, it looked similar to the paper that those books was wrapped in. It was just a long narrow paper bag.
Mr. BELIN. Where was this found?
Mr. JOHNSON. Right in the corner of the building.
Mr. BELIN. On what floor?
Mr. JOHNSON. Sixth floor.
Mr. BELIN. Which corner?
Mr. JOHNSON. Southeast corner.

100% agree that Detective Johnson did see CE 142. No question about it. Johnson was stationed where the Dr Pepper was located. He remained there until Studebaker had finished dusting the Dr Pepper bottle and chicken lunch sack. Alyea even filmed him doing this.

When do you think Johnson saw CE 142?

Was he shown CE 142 during his WC testimony?

No.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 02, 2018, 07:00:03 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
His description of a sack was vague and non descript and he likely saw the chicken lunch sack. How do you explain Mooney failing to see the same sack, yet see the chicken lunch sack?

Was Harry shown  CE 142 for confirmation?

No.

he likely saw the chicken lunch sack.

Since Weatherford combines the sack and the chicken in the same sentence it seems likely that he was referring to a lunch sack on the floor.

 (I saw) 'a sack on the floor and a partially eaten piece of chicken on top of one of the cartons "
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 07:16:21 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
he likely saw the chicken lunch sack.

Since Weatherford combines the sack and the chicken in the same sentence it seems likely that he was referring to a lunch sack on the floor.

 (I saw) 'a sack on the floor and a partially eaten piece of chicken on top of one of the cartons "

Agree Walt. The give away was seeing the chicken piece which was later moved by Hill.

Mooney of course didn't see anything in the SE corner but saw the chicken lunch sack as well as the chicken piece.

This is consistent with the initial non appearance of CE 142 in the SE corner.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 02, 2018, 08:04:32 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Agree Walt. The give away was seeing the chicken piece which was later moved by Hill.

Mooney of course didn't see anything in the SE corner but saw the chicken lunch sack as well as the chicken piece.

This is consistent with the initial non appearance of CE 142 in the SE corner.

Tony, Is there a thread that focuses on the Studebaker map?   

There is a wealth of information available on Studebaker's map, when used in conjunction with the evidence photos and Tom Alyea's photos.  We've been told that Studebaker and Day went to the NW corner of the sixth floor where they were ordered to photographically record the scene and the evidence at that site.   The primary reason for being pulled away from the SE corner was because they were supposed to record the rifle as it was found.....but according to the sequence of the photos they did not photograph the rifle until after they had finished photographing the so called "Sniper's Nest"

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Ray Mitcham on February 02, 2018, 08:41:06 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tony, Is there a thread that focuses on the Studebaker map?   

There is a wealth of information available on Studebaker's map, when used in conjunction with the evidence photos and Tom Alyea's photos.  We've been told that Studebaker and Day went to the NW corner of the sixth floor where they were ordered to photographically record the scene and the evidence at that site.   The primary reason for being pulled away from the SE corner was because they were supposed to record the rifle as it was found.....but according to the sequence of the photos they did not photograph the rifle until after they had finished photographing the so called "Sniper's Nest"

Not only that, Walt, but two DPD cops were delegated to ensure that nobody disturbed the crime scene. So who moved the paper bag, whilst the cops were guarding the scene?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 02, 2018, 10:50:03 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tony, Is there a thread that focuses on the Studebaker map?   

There is a wealth of information available on Studebaker's map, when used in conjunction with the evidence photos and Tom Alyea's photos.  We've been told that Studebaker and Day went to the NW corner of the sixth floor where they were ordered to photographically record the scene and the evidence at that site.   The primary reason for being pulled away from the SE corner was because they were supposed to record the rifle as it was found.....but according to the sequence of the photos they did not photograph the rifle until after they had finished photographing the so called "Sniper's Nest"

No there is not Walt.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 02, 2018, 10:53:44 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Det Harry Weatherford stated he seen the bag.

: HARRY WEATHERFORD, Deputy Sheriff
Date: November 23, 1963
On Friday, November 22, 1963, at about 12:30 PM, I was standing in front of the Sheriff's Office watching the Presidential Motorcade. The President's car had passed my location a couple of minutes when I heard a loud report which I thought was a railroad torpedo, as it sounded as if it came from the railroad yard. Thinking, this was a heck of a time for one to go off, then I heard a 2nd report which had more of an echo report and thought to myself, that this was a rifle and I started toward the corner when I heard the 3rd report. By this time I was running towards the railroad yards where the sound seemed to come from. I got with Deputy Allan Sweatt and was searching the tracks and cars, etc, then someone said the shots came from above. I then went to the Elm Street loading gates of the Texas School Book Depository where I met Deputies Ralph Walters, Luke Mooney, Eugene Boone and Sam Webster. We all went into the building and proceeded to the first floor by way of the stairs. I jumped out of the first window onto the roof of the adjoining covered loading dock. I then searched the roof for any expended shell cases, as at the time we were trying to find just where the shots came from and if they were fired from the west side of the building they possibly could have fallen onto this roof. Finding no shells, I then climbed into the window and started searching the first floor, with an unknown DPD detective. Then learning other officers were searching this first floor, I went to the top floor to start down with each floor. Looking over the 7th floor to no avail, I came down to the 6th floor and while searching this floor, Deputy Luke Mooney said, "here are some shells". I went over to where he was and saw 3 expended rifle shells, and a sack on the floor and a partially eaten piece of chicken on top of one of the cartons which was used as a sort of barracade, advising Mooney to preserve the scene for the Crime Lab. I then proceeded to look for the rifle as it was possible it was still on this floor. After several minutes passed, I was about 10 feet from Deputy Boone when he found the rifle with a light he was using. This was also preserved for the Crime Lab.


You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
His description of a sack was vague and non descript and he likely saw the chicken lunch sack. How do you explain Mooney failing to see the same sack, yet see the chicken lunch sack?

Was Harry shown  CE 142 for confirmation?

No.

Where did others claim the chicken lunch sack was when they saw it?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 02, 2018, 11:01:46 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Where did others claim the chicken lunch sack was when they saw it?

Where BRW originally left it in the SN or after it was moved?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 02, 2018, 11:30:57 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Where BRW originally left it in the SN or after it was moved?

Williams didn't eat his lunch in the sniper's nest.  Therefore, he didn't leave his lunch sack there.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 02, 2018, 11:35:09 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Williams didn't eat his lunch in the sniper's nest.  Therefore, he didn't leave his lunch sack there.

And how do you determine where Williams ate his lunch? The lunch sack and chicken were originally found close to the SN then moved westward.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 02, 2018, 11:48:24 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
And how do you determine where Williams ate his lunch? The lunch sack and chicken were originally found close to the SN then moved westward.

In Commission Exhibit 483, Williams marked the rough location where he was sitting eating his lunch.  He also said, once he finished eating, that he just threw his lunch bag down.  He didn't say that he threw it all the way over to the southeast corner.

The rectangle marks where Williams stated he ate his lunch...

(https://i.imgur.com/ojaWZJ8.jpg)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 03, 2018, 12:11:38 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
In Commission Exhibit 483, Williams marked the rough location where he was sitting eating his lunch.  He also said, once he finished eating, that he just threw his lunch bag down.  He didn't say that he threw it all the way over to the southeast corner.

The rectangle marks where Williams stated he ate his lunch...

(https://i.imgur.com/ojaWZJ8.jpg)

Either someone else moved his lunch into the SN after about 12.27 pm (or later) when he left the 6th floor or he lied. Anything other than his testimony that you have?

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,175.0.html (https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,175.0.html)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 01:45:17 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Where did others claim the chicken lunch sack was when they saw it?

Bill,

you need to examine the testimony of those that "discovered" the "untouched" SN - Mooney and Hill for example:

Mr. MOONEY - There was one of them partially eaten. And there was a little small paper poke.
Mr. BALL - By poke, you mean a paper sack?
Mr. MOONEY - Right.
Mr. BALL - Where was that?
Mr. MOONEY - Saw the chicken bone was laying here. The poke was laying about a foot away from it.
Mr. BALL - On the same carton?
Mr. MOONEY - Yes, sir. In close relation to each other. But as to what was in the sack--it was kind of together, and I didn't open it. I didn't put my hands on it to open it. I only saw one piece of chicken.
Senator COOPER - How far was the chicken, the piece of chicken you saw, and the paper bag from the boxes near the window, and particularly the box that had the crease in it?
Mr. MOONEY - I would say they might have been 5 feet or something like that. He wouldn't have had to leave the location. He could just maybe take one step and lay it over there, if he was the one that put it there.
Senator COOPER - You mean if someone had been standing near the box with the crease in it?
Mr. MOONEY - Yes, sir.
Senator COOPER - It would have been that approximate distance to the chicken leg and paper bag?
Mr. MOONEY - Sir?
Senator COOPER - And the paper bag you spoke of?
Mr. MOONEY - Yes, sir; they were in close relation to each other, yes, sir.
Mr. BALL - How big a bag was it?
Mr. MOONEY - Well, as to the number--these bags are numbered, I understand. But it was--I don't know what the number you would call it, but it didn't stand more than that high.
Mr. BALL - About 12 inches?
Mr. MOONEY - About 8 to 10 inches, at the most.
Mr. BALL - What color was the bag?
Mr. MOONEY - It was brown. Just a regular paper bag. Just as a grocery store uses for their produce and what-have-you.


Mr. HILL. There was the boxes. The boxes were stacked in sort of a three-sided shield.
That would have concealed from general view, unless somebody specifically walked up and looked over them, anyone who was in a sitting or crouched position between them and the window. In front of this window and to the left or east corner of the window, there were two boxes, cardboard boxes that had the words "Roller books," on them.
On top of the larger stack of boxes that would have been used for concealment. there was a chicken leg bone and a paper sack which appeared to have been about the size normally used for a lunch sack. I wouldn't know what the sizes were. It was a sack, I would say extended, it would probably be 12 inches high, 10 inches long, and about 4 inches thick.


HARRY WEATHERFORD

"Looking over the 7th floor to no avail, I came down to the 6th floor and while searching this floor, Deputy Luke Mooney said, "here are some shells". I went over to where he was and saw 3 expended rifle shells, and a sack on the floor and a partially eaten piece of chicken on top of one of the cartons which was used as a sort of barracade, advising Mooney to preserve the scene for the Crime Lab. I then proceeded to look for the rifle as it was possible it was still on this floor. After several minutes passed, I was about 10 feet from Deputy Boone when he found the rifle with a light he was using. This was also preserved for the Crime Lab.

Harry saw the chicken lunch sack that Mooney and Hill observed.

COUNTY OF DALLAS
SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT
SUPPLEMENTARY INVESTIGATION REPORT
Name of Complainant
ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT KENNEDY
Offense
Officer A. D. McCurley, Deputy Sheriff, Dallas County Sheriff's Office
Date: Nov. 22, 1963
I was standing at the front entrance of the Dallas Sheriff's Office at 505 Main Street, Dallas as the President's motorcade passed and was watching the remainder of the parade pass when I heard a retort and I immediately recognized it as the sound of a rifle. I started running around the corner where I knew the President's car should be and in a matter of a few seconds heard a second shot and then a third shot. I along with other officers who had been standing near me, all started running and I rushed towards the park and saw people running towards the railroad yards beyond Elm Street and I ran over and jumped a fence and a railroad worker stated to me that he believed the smoke from the bullets came from the vicinity of a stockade fence which surrounds the park area. A search was made of this vicinity and then information came to us that the shots came from the Texas School Book Depository Building at the corner of Elm and Houston. Officer Jack Faulkner and I, together with several other City officers went to the building and started checking the floors. We were searching the 6th floor when Deputy Sheriff Mooney, who was also on the 6th floor, hollered that he had found the place where the assassin had fired from. I went over and saw 3 expended shells laying by the window that faced onto Elm Street, along with a half-eaten piece of chicken that was laying on a cardboard carton. It appeared as if the assassin had piled up a bunch of boxes to hide from the view of anyone who happened to come up on that floor and had arranged 3 other cartons of books next to the window as though to make a rifle rest. This area was roped off and guarded until Captain Will Fritz of Dallas Police Department Homicide Bureau carrived. It was about this same time that Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone yelled that he had found the rifle which had been placed between some rows of cardboard boxes near the staircase which leads down to the 5th floor. The Dallas Crime Lab Officers took over the gun and I proceeded to help officers continue to search this building from the roof down and through the basement area.

Conclusion

The half eaten piece of chicken as well as the chicken lunch sack were IN the SN - the same place that BRW ate his lunch.

Hill moved the chicken piece and lunch sack over to the west side and hence the Detectives who came later saw the lunch sack and chicken piece further to the west of the SN.

(https://preview.ibb.co/gxvzg6/Slide55.jpg) (https://ibb.co/nbQMuR)

BTW Bill - you are at least 2 years behind in this discussion.  8)

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 01:52:02 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Williams didn't eat his lunch in the sniper's nest. Therefore, he didn't leave his lunch sack there.

Yes he did and further he was seen by Arnold Rowland sticking his head out of the SN window at 12.15 pm while there was a gunman at the SW end.

BRW absolutely lied to the WC and I completely understand why he did so.

Bill, if BRW ate his lunch at the two wheeler (instead of the opened window of the SE corner with a prime viewing position of Elm street and a box to sit on) why didn't he see the gunman and vice versa?

(https://preview.ibb.co/c0b5M6/Slide65.jpg) (https://ibb.co/i2FMuR)

(https://preview.ibb.co/ggz0M6/Slide67.jpg) (https://ibb.co/hMHWTm)

Pity that the WC didn't ask BRW if he saw CE 142 at his feet while he was in the "SN".

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jerry Organ on February 03, 2018, 02:34:02 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tony, Is there a thread that focuses on the Studebaker map?   

There is a wealth of information available on Studebaker's map, when used in conjunction with the evidence photos and Tom Alyea's photos. 


The map numbering isn't chronological.

Quote
We've been told that Studebaker and Day went to the NW corner of the sixth floor where they were ordered to photographically record the scene and the evidence at that site.   The primary reason for being pulled away from the SE corner was because they were supposed to record the rifle as it was found.....but according to the sequence of the photos they did not photograph the rifle until after they had finished photographing the so called "Sniper's Nest"

(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338712/m1/1/med_res/)
Crime Lab Photo 19
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339097/m1/1/small_res)
Crime Lab Photo 20
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339287/m1/3/small_res)
Crime Lab Photo 21

Photos 19 to 21 were taken about 1:15.



(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339962/m1/1/med_res/)
Crime Lab Photo 22
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337263/m1/1/med_res)
Crime Lab Photo 23

Photos 22 and 23 were taken after the rifle discovery at 1:22. Allowing time for the walk across, preliminary inspection, and climbing up on the boxes, I would estimate it was probably taken no earlier than 1:30.



(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338859/m1/1/med_res/)
Crime Lab Photo 17
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337079/m1/5/med_res)
Crime Lab Photo 18

My tentative SunCalc of Photo 18 shows it was taken at about 2:40 to 3:00, which is after Day's return at about 2:30. Day's estimate that Photo 18 was taken about 3:15 or later would seem to be wrong; by 3:15 there are several photographers on the sixth floor with Day pointing out things. There is hardly any shadow movement between Photos 17 and 18, so they taken very close together, closer than Day claimed. Presumably he was more accurate with the "important" photos.

(http://i64.tinypic.com/2je5liu.jpg)

(The large truck seen in both photos are two different trucks.)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 03, 2018, 02:47:50 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

HARRY WEATHERFORD

"Looking over the 7th floor to no avail, I came down to the 6th floor and while searching this floor, Deputy Luke Mooney said, "here are some shells". I went over to where he was and saw 3 expended rifle shells, and a sack on the floor and a partially eaten piece of chicken on top of one of the cartons which was used as a sort of barracade, advising Mooney to preserve the scene for the Crime Lab.

Tony, if the paper bag was on top of the box about a foot away from the half eaten piece of chicken, what was the sack that Weatherford saw on the floor?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 02:51:25 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The map numbering isn't chronological.

(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338712/m1/1/med_res/)
Crime Lab Photo 19
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339097/m1/1/small_res)
Crime Lab Photo 20
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339287/m1/3/small_res)
Crime Lab Photo 21

Photos 19 to 21 were taken about 1:15.



(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339962/m1/1/med_res/)
Crime Lab Photo 22
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337263/m1/1/med_res)
Crime Lab Photo 23

Photos 22 and 23 were taken after the rifle discovery at 1:22. Allowing time for the walk across, preliminary inspection, and climbing up on the boxes, I would estimate it was probably taken no earlier than 1:30.



(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338859/m1/1/med_res/)
Crime Lab Photo 17
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337079/m1/5/med_res)
Crime Lab Photo 18

My tentative SunCalc of Photo 18 shows it was taken at about 2:40 to 3:00, which is after Day's return at about 2:30. Day's estimate that Photo 18 was taken about 3:15 or later would seem to be wrong; by 3:15 there are several photographers on the sixth floor with Day pointing out things. There is hardly any shadow movement between Photos 17 and 18, so they taken very close together, closer than Day claimed. Presumably he was more accurate with the "important" photos.

(http://i64.tinypic.com/2je5liu.jpg)

(The large truck seen in both photos are two different trucks.)

Jerry,

do you see a window sill strip in Crime Lab photo 18?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 02:56:03 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tony, if the paper bag was on top of the box about a foot away from the half eaten piece of chicken, what was the sack that Weatherford saw on the floor?

Hi Tim,

good to see you posting again.

Weatherford had made an error. Now to have simply resolved this all he needed to be shown was the chicken lunch sack and CE 142 and asked "did you see any of these paper bags and where?"

His mentioning of a sack on the floor was inconsistent with Mooney's and Hill's observation of the same region of the floor.

Weatherford doesn't mention the chicken lunch sack - why?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 03, 2018, 02:59:24 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Hi Tim,

good to see you posting again.

Weatherford had made an error.

Mistakes were made eh?


Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 03, 2018, 03:01:19 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


Weatherford doesn't mention the chicken lunch sack - why?

Good question Tony. Also, what about the other chicken bones? Why weren't they seen by all?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jerry Organ on February 03, 2018, 03:10:54 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Jerry,

do you see a window sill strip in Crime Lab photo 18?

I figure the strip was taken out when the photographers happened to no longer be at the front entrance. Even if the newsmen met the officer carrying a stick, there was probably no incentive to take a picture.

It's not within the paper bag. That was a stick about 26" long.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 03:13:03 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Mistakes were made eh?

If Weatherford, and every other Detective - apart from Day - were not shown either CE 142 nor the chicken lunch sack what did you expect? Weatherford had no idea about what either looked like.

A "sack" is non descriptive - can be anything. If you think he saw CE 142, why didn't the 12 others also see it and why then didn't two crime scene Detectives have the cognitive ability to photograph it in situ?

However if Weatherford simply had mistaken were he saw the "sack" - makes perfect sense and was completely consistent with the lack of seeing CE 142 in the SE corner by the others.

Nice try Tim  :)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 03:17:18 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I figure the strip was taken out when the photographers happened to no longer be at the front entrance. Even if the newsmen met the officer carrying a stick, there was probably no incentive to take a picture.

It's not within the paper bag. That was a stick about 26" long.

The window sill strip was 30 inches - it had broken when they had removed it.

Take a few inches off it because Montgomery was holding one end = perfect fit.

Thanks for confirming Jerry.

(https://preview.ibb.co/iBU1dm/Slide67.jpg) (https://ibb.co/dnPZym)

See my OP for further diagrams.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 03:27:42 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Good question Tony. Also, what about the other chicken bones? Why weren't they seen by all?

They were moved by Hill and dropped onto the floor next to the two wheeler.

(https://preview.ibb.co/ghrEym/Slide90.gif) (https://ibb.co/e9Ggdm)

(https://preview.ibb.co/cUUEW6/Slide96.jpg) (https://ibb.co/imriPR)

That explained the confusion by the Detectives who came after Hill and Mooney left.

The "SN" had already been corrupted.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 03:32:03 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I figure the strip was taken out when the photographers happened to no longer be at the front entrance. Even if the newsmen met the officer carrying a stick, there was probably no incentive to take a picture.

It's not within the paper bag. That was a stick about 26" long.

Taken out by who? It was Montgomery and Johnson who took the crime scene evidence to City Hall by 3.20 pm.

See OP for documents.

Carrying a stick? They removed the window sill strip to test for fingerprints to ID the assassin - wouldn't you think it was a good idea to protect it instead of carrying a stick? That is place it inside a paper bag?



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jerry Organ on February 03, 2018, 03:42:34 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The window sill strip was 30 inches - it had broken when they had removed it.

Take a few inches off it because Montgomery was holding one end = perfect fit.

Thanks for confirming Jerry.

(https://preview.ibb.co/iBU1dm/Slide67.jpg) (https://ibb.co/dnPZym)

See my OP for further diagrams.

I've seen your OP a few times, checking for updates. The level of fantasy is all I find impressive.

The bottom of Montgomery's right hand is level the open end of the bag.n26 inches reaches from the open end to the fold. Like you say, a 30-inch strip would need some length to extend beyond the open end of the bag. A whopping four inches.

Besides, it's obvious the bag is what's being preserved. Not the other way around.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Taken out by who? It was Montgomery and Johnson who took the crime scene evidence to City Hall by 3.20 pm.


I don't know who took the strip out, just that it arrived there. Maybe Day or Studebaker took it with them when they left again. Are there any pictures of one or the other leaving then?

Quote

See OP for documents.


That confirms the paper bag was evidence and that whatever was in the bag for temporary support wasn't.

Quote

Carrying a stick? They removed the window sill strip to test for fingerprints to ID the assassin - wouldn't you think it was a good idea to protect it instead of carrying a stick? That is place it inside a paper bag?


How did they extract it from the window, if they didn't touch it? They could have done a preliminary examination for fingerprints, settled on an area that had no traces, and used that area for lifting and carrying. They could have used a cloth so they wouldn't be adding their own prints.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 03:53:54 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I've seen your OP a few times, checking for updates. The level of fantasy is all I find impressive.

The bottom of Montgomery's right hand is level the open end of the bag.n26 inches reaches from the open end to the fold. Like you say, a 30-inch strip would need some length to extend beyond the open end of the bag. A whopping four inches.

Besides, it's obvious the bag is what's being preserved. Not the other way around.

I don't know who took the strip out, just that it arrived there. Maybe Day or Studebaker took it with them when they left again. Are there any pictures of one or the other leaving then?

That confirms the paper bag was evidence and that whatever was in the bag for temporary support wasn't.

How did they extract it from the window, if they didn't touch it? They could have done a preliminary examination for fingerprints, settled on an area that had no traces, and used that area for lifting and carrying. They could have used a cloth so they wouldn't be adding their own prints.

Fantasy? The previous thread of mine had over 270,000 views (highest viewed on the forum) all based on fantasy?

Noted.

Where do you think the fold is in CE 142?

Why did Day leave it behind then when he took CE 139 to City Hall?

Right, an important piece of crime scene evidence taken from the window from where the shots had been fired from "just that it arrived there" Are you serious?

Do you know if the Officer checked inside CE 142 when he clocked it in?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 03:58:02 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I've seen your OP a few times, checking for updates. The level of fantasy is all I find impressive.

The bottom of Montgomery's right hand is level the open end of the bag.n26 inches reaches from the open end to the fold. Like you say, a 30-inch strip would need some length to extend beyond the open end of the bag. A whopping four inches.

Besides, it's obvious the bag is what's being preserved. Not the other way around.

I don't know who took the strip out, just that it arrived there. Maybe Day or Studebaker took it with them when they left again. Are there any pictures of one or the other leaving then?

That confirms the paper bag was evidence and that whatever was in the bag for temporary support wasn't.

How did they extract it from the window, if they didn't touch it? They could have done a preliminary examination for fingerprints, settled on an area that had no traces, and used that area for lifting and carrying. They could have used a cloth so they wouldn't be adding their own prints.

What would you use to remove a piece of nailed in wood?

I will give you a subtle hint

(https://preview.ibb.co/b5vGdm/Slide88.gif) (https://ibb.co/gU0hJm)

If you look carefully you find the answers in the photographs of the SN.

For example

(https://preview.ibb.co/jJ7yPR/Slide350.gif) (https://ibb.co/cis9W6)

That was why i asked you did you see the window sill strip in the picture?

I believe it is gone and timing wise it is a perfect fit - the window sill strip was transported in CE 142 and taken out at ~3 pm.

Now there would be no way that Day would leave the sill strip intact because the 6th floor had many people on it, including reporters which Day gave a tour to.

It made perfect sense to immediately remove it from the window.

The only two Detectives who took in the crime scene evidence taken from the SN (apart from the hulls and CE 139) were Montgomery and Johnson.

Unless you have X ray vision, you can not disprove the flat 30 inch window sill strip wasnt within CE 142.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jerry Organ on February 03, 2018, 04:09:22 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
What would you use to remove a piece of nailed in wood?

I will give you a subtle hint

(https://preview.ibb.co/b5vGdm/Slide88.gif) (https://ibb.co/gU0hJm)

If you look carefully you find the answers in the photographs of the SN.

I know a hammer was used. But I would support the piece to keep it from falling to the ground and I would have to pick it up away from the sill at some point. All I'm saying.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 04:14:38 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I know a hammer was used. But I would support the piece to keep it from falling to the ground and I would have to pick it up away from the sill at some point. All I'm saying.

Then why are you so resistant to my suggestion that the window sill strip was placed inside the paper bag (CE 142) which gave it immediate protection?

That was the reason why Day went to the wrapping room in the first place - to protect and cover CE 139 which was an entirely reasonable thing to do. Was it not?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 03, 2018, 04:16:45 AM
(https://image.ibb.co/iyfDr6/8_CF41_DFF_0048_46_C3_8_BE0_CB48_A5278181.jpg)

Keep reeling Tony....
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 04:25:41 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
(https://image.ibb.co/iyfDr6/8_CF41_DFF_0048_46_C3_8_BE0_CB48_A5278181.jpg)

Keep reeling Tony....

Which reminds me of this Colin  ;D

(https://preview.ibb.co/dPNbB6/Slide3.jpg) (https://ibb.co/gE7nJm)



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jerry Organ on February 03, 2018, 04:31:12 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Then why are you so resistant to my suggestion that the window sill strip was placed inside the paper bag (CE 142) which gave it immediate protection?


You call it resistant; I call it common sense.

And you've been given reasons:
They didn't even carry the rifle inside something. The strap and an escort sufficed.

Quote

That was the reason why Day went to the wrapping room in the first place - to protect and cover CE 139 which was an entirely reasonable thing to do. Was it not?

Only in the windmills of your mind.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 03, 2018, 04:36:07 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You call it resistant; I call it common sense.

And you've been given reasons:
  • The strip length doesn't work
  • Another support was used to carry the bag and was probably discarded
  • The bag was placed in evidence because it was evidence
  • The strip could have been transported by carrying it alone.
They didn't even carry the rifle inside something. The strap and an escort sufficed.

Only in the windmills of your mind.

Good ol' common sense......

Let’s start with the stick length argument Jerry.....let’s see your detailed analysis.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jerry Organ on February 03, 2018, 04:51:34 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Good ol' common sense......

Let’s start with the stick length argument Jerry.....let’s see your detailed analysis.

Appears you didn't read the OP too closely.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 05:01:32 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You call it resistant; I call it common sense.

And you've been given reasons:
  • The strip length doesn't work
  • Another support was used to carry the bag and was probably discarded
  • The bag was placed in evidence because it was evidence
  • The strip could have been transported by carrying it alone.
They didn't even carry the rifle inside something. The strap and an escort sufficed.

Only in the windmills of your mind.

I have presented an alternative to the official WC narrative in regards to CE 142 in an open and honest manner. I did that by extensive reading and research over many years - something that LNers like yourself are devoid of doing or even attempting.

The DP kept the removal, transport and admitting into evidence of the window sill strip to a minimum. In fact the DP only handed it in to the FBI after LHO was killed. They held onto crime scene evidence (the window sill) for 6 days despite being asked to hand everything over. The window sill strip removal was not even mentioned in the WR nor WC.

If I am correct, Montgomery and Johnson would have only "seen" CE 142 when Studebaker brought it back up to the 6th floor.

Neither of them would have known about its origins and when it was brought into City Hall neither did the officer clocking it in.

The making of CE 142 by Studebaker in the first floor wrapping room solves the 12 blind mice paradox, the failure of it being photographed in situ, the failure of it looking like it never was dusted for fingerprints, the failure of Day taking it immediately with him, the failure of Day looking inside it, the failure of determining how the window sill strip was taken to City Hall, explained why CE 677 and CE 142 were a 100 % match as well as the FACT that neither BWF and his sister had failed to recognize CE 142 on the night of 22/11/1963.

It all points to CE 142 being constructed AFTER CE 139 was found.

What have you brought to the table?

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 03, 2018, 05:16:24 AM
So...

Linnie Mae Randle lied.

Bonnie Ray Williams lied.

Harry Weatherford was wrong, except for when he wasn't.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 05:41:29 AM
Mistakes were made due to the ineptitude of the investigation and the horrendous handling and documentation of the evidence.

I gave you my reasons Bill over hundreds of posts spread over several years.

You are not interested.

LMR - can not collaborate her observations and could never ID CE 142 = end of story.

BRW - an entire mega thread was devoted to BRW and Arnold Rowland - there is NO DOUBT - BRW chose not to "get involved " in disclosing what happened on the 6th floor and it served the WC to simply accept what he told them.

Weatherford had made a non-descript remark and was simply wrong - because if he was with Mooney why didn't Mooney see the same as what Weatherford stated about the sack?

Even better - why didn't Mr Belin simply show him CE 142 and the chicken lunch sack to resolve his statement?

That's all you have Bill?

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 03, 2018, 06:29:11 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Mistakes were made due to the ineptitude of the investigation and the horrendous handling and documentation of the evidence.

I gave you my reasons Bill over hundreds of posts spread over several years.

You are not interested.

LMR - can not collaborate her observations and could never ID CE 142 = end of story.

BRW - an entire mega thread was devoted to BRW and Arnold Rowland - there is NO DOUBT - BRW chose not to "get involved " in disclosing what happened on the 6th floor and it served the WC to simply accept what he told them.

Weatherford had made a non-descript remark and was simply wrong - because if he was with Mooney why didn't Mooney see the same as what Weatherford stated about the sack?

Even better - why didn't Mr Belin simply show him CE 142 and the chicken lunch sack to resolve his statement?

That's all you have Bill?

Correct, mistakes were made.

Weatherford was wrong, except for when he wasn't.  Mooney could be wrong and the bones he saw were on top of a box in the next set of windows to the west of the sniper's nest.  If Weatherford was wrong, Mooney can be wrong, too.

I can't buy that Bonnie Ray Williams saw something up on the sixth floor that he wasn't supposed to see and therefore lied about where he ate his lunch in an attempt to not get involved or that Linnie Mae Randle really didn't see Oswald with a longer package as he walked across the street towards her house that morning.

You creatively explain away some things (Linnie Mae Randle seeing Oswald with a longer bag) with the claim that "they lied but had a good reason to".  When you do this, and Randle is a great example, it's like you've completed this 1,000 piece puzzle and the picture looks great... only to realize that there is one piece laying floor and you must fit it in somewhere even though the picture is already set.  Same goes with Bonnie Ray Williams.  You have no proof whatsoever that Williams saw someone else up there.  You base your hypothesis on Williams seeing something that he was not supposed to see and then  you attempt to turn that into a fact.

You criticize Day for having the foresight to take paper and tape samples from the shipping area, even going as far as questioning how Day could possibly even notice the tape dispenser.

You raise concern over the bag being eight and a half inches wide and how Oswald could possibly have measured it out to that width without having the rifle present for reference.  This means nothing.  How wide was the rifle, top to bottom?  Is it impossible for Oswald to have had predetermined estimates in his mind?  If CE-142 is authentic to Oswald, he obviously messed up his estimate on the length, so he got one right (the width) and got one wrong (the length).
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 07:05:55 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Correct, mistakes were made.

Weatherford was wrong, except for when he wasn't.  Mooney could be wrong and the bones he saw were on top of a box in the next set of windows to the west of the sniper's nest.  If Weatherford was wrong, Mooney can be wrong, too.

I can't buy that Bonnie Ray Williams saw something up on the sixth floor that he wasn't supposed to see and therefore lied about where he ate his lunch in an attempt to not get involved or that Linnie Mae Randle really didn't see Oswald with a longer package as he walked across the street towards her house that morning.

You creatively explain away some things (Linnie Mae Randle seeing Oswald with a longer bag) with the claim that "they lied but had a good reason to".  When you do this, and Randle is a great example, it's like you've completed this 1,000 piece puzzle and the picture looks great... only to realize that there is one piece laying floor and you must fit it in somewhere even though the picture is already set.  Same goes with Bonnie Ray Williams.  You have no proof whatsoever that Williams saw someone else up there.  You base your hypothesis on Williams seeing something that he was not supposed to see and then  you attempt to turn that into a fact.

You criticize Day for having the foresight to take paper and tape samples from the shipping area, even going as far as questioning how Day could possibly even notice the tape dispenser.

You raise concern over the bag being eight and a half inches wide and how Oswald could possibly have measured it out to that width without having the rifle present for reference.  This means nothing.  How wide was the rifle, top to bottom?  Is it impossible for Oswald to have had predetermined estimates in his mind?  If CE-142 is authentic to Oswald, he obviously messed up his estimate on the length, so he got one right (the width) and got one wrong (the length).

All 12, including a camera man? Right - the "12 blind mice paradox" Bill.

You, LMR, BWF, the FBI, the DP and the WC have ZERO proof that LHO constructed any paper bag let alone CE 142.

Bill - if Day was Pinocchio his nose would be longer than CE 142.

I know as FACT that Detective Studebaker handled the very paper and tape that constructed CE 142 but no one can prove that LHO did the same.

You are forgetting - remove the flap from CE 142 and it was long enough to hold a fully assembled CE 139 in both dimensions.

So far, you haven't even dented my original hypothesis but merely inserted your own speculation.

BRW deserves it's own thread - it's massive. May be you would like to commence one? I have at least 50 documents I could contribute.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 03, 2018, 07:17:23 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
All 12, including a camera man? Right - the "12 blind mice paradox" Bill.

You, LMR, BWF, the FBI, the DP and the WC have ZERO proof that LHO constructed any paper bag let alone CE 142.

Bill - if Day was Pinocchio his nose would be longer than CE 142.

I know as FACT that Detective Studebaker handled the very paper and tape that constructed CE 142 but no one can prove that LHO did the same.

You are forgetting - remove the flap from CE 142 and it was long enough to hold a fully assembled CE 139 in both dimensions.

So far, you haven't even dented my original hypothesis but merely inserted your own speculation.

BRW deserves it's own thread - it's massive. May be you would like to commence one? I have at least 50 documents I could contribute.


Quote
I know as FACT that Detective Studebaker handled the very paper and tape that constructed CE 142 but no one can prove that LHO did the same.

Could you be so kind as to highlight that information for me right now?  I'm not going back to try to find it.


Quote
So far, you haven't even dented my original hypothesis but merely inserted your own speculation.

Correct.  Your speculation.  My speculation.  No one can prove your "speculation" wrong.  It's your speculation.  There's no wrong answer.  It's your speculation that Weatherford was wrong, that Randle lied and that Williams lied.  I can't prove that Randle or Williams did not lie, I can only point out that your hypothesis relies on it.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 08:56:22 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Could you be so kind as to highlight that information for me right now?  I'm not going back to try to find it.


Correct.  Your speculation.  My speculation.  No one can prove your "speculation" wrong.  It's your speculation.  There's no wrong answer.  It's your speculation that Weatherford was wrong, that Randle lied and that Williams lied.  I can't prove that Randle or Williams did not lie, I can only point out that your hypothesis relies on it.

No it does not - I hope you can see that Bill.

What LMR saw had no influence on the actual size of the paper bag that LHO may of had on him.

BWF provided the definitive measurement - tucked under the arm and cupped in the right hand. This meant the paper bag was 20 inches or less.

What Weatherford stated bears no weight as he wasnt shown either CE 142 nor the chicken lunch sack.

Those that saw the chicken piece also saw the chicken lunch sack except for Weatherford. He had made a simple error.

Bill, CE 677 was manufactured by Studebaker - the same paper and tape that CE 142 was constructed from.

I believe I have built up and presented a very convincing case that LHO did not construct CE 142.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 03, 2018, 09:02:36 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
No it does not - I hope you can see that Bill.

What LMR saw had no influence on the actual size of the paper bag that LHO may of had on him.

BWF provided the definitive measurement - tucked under the arm and cupped in the right hand. This meant the paper bag was 20 inches or less.

What Weatherford stated bears no weight as he wasnt shown either CE 142 nor the chicken lunch sack.

Those that saw the chicken piece also saw the chicken lunch sack except for Weatherford. He had made a simple error.

Bill, CE 677 was manufactured by Studebaker - the same paper and tape that CE 142 was constructed from.

I believe I have built up and presented a very convincing case that LHO did not construct CE 142.

So Linnie Mae Randle did indeed see Oswald carry some sort of a long bag that morning?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 09:06:54 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So Linnie Mae Randle did indeed see Oswald carry some sort of a long bag that morning?

If she did, it was his small lunch bag  ;)

If you see my OP - I go through ALL the possible permutations Bill.

Do you believe that LHO constructed CE 142 and placed a disassembled CE 139 inside it?

If yes, show me your evidence.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 03, 2018, 09:07:54 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So Linnie Mae Randle did indeed see Oswald carry some sort of a long bag that morning?

Well that’s the story she told after speaking with her brother when he returned home that afternoon.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Duncan MacRae on February 03, 2018, 09:17:03 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Well that’s the story she told after speaking with her brother when he returned home that afternoon.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 03, 2018, 09:38:27 AM
Bump
===========================

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I know as FACT that Detective Studebaker handled the very paper and tape that constructed CE 142 but no one can prove that LHO did the same.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Could you be so kind as to highlight that information for me right now?  I'm not going back to try to find it.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 03, 2018, 09:40:25 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So Linnie Mae Randle did indeed see Oswald carry some sort of a long bag that morning?

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If she did, it was his small lunch bag  ;)

If you see my OP - I go through ALL the possible permutations Bill.

So she was lying or she was not lying?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 09:46:43 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So she was lying or she was not lying?

Unknown.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 09:56:53 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Bump
===========================

You serious?

Mr. BELIN. Did you ever get the kind of sample used at the School Book Depository?
Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; on the afternoon of November 22, 1963, I had the bag listed as----
Mr. BELIN. Commission Exhibit 626 or 142.
Mr. DAY. On the first floor of the Texas School Book Depository, and I noticed from their wrapping bench there was paper and tape of a similar--the tape was of the same width as this. I took the bag over and tried it, and I noticed that the tape was the same width as on the bag.
Mr. BELIN. Did it appear to have the same color?
Mr. DAY. Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN. All right. Then what did you do?
Mr. DAY. Sir?
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?
Mr. DAY. I directed one of the officers standing by me, I don't know which, to get a piece of the tape and a piece of the paper from the wrapping bench.
Mr. BELIN. Handing you what has been marked as Commission Exhibit 677, I will ask you to state if you know what this is.
Mr. DAY. This is the tape and paper collected from the first floor in the shipping department of the Texas School Book Depository on November 22, 1963.
Mr. BELIN. Does this have any identification marks on it?
Mr. DAY. It has my name, "J. C. Day, Dallas Police Department," and also in my writing, "Shipping Department."
Mr. BELIN. Any other writing on there that you recognize?
Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; Detective Studebaker, who was with me, and in his writing it says, "Paper sample from first floor, Texas School Book Depository, Studebaker, 11-22-63." The tape also has Studebaker's writing on it, "Tape sample from first floor."

Mr. CADIGAN. 
..In all of the observations and physical tests, that I made, I found that for Exhibit 142, the bag, and the paper sample, Commission Exhibit 677, the results were the same.

That means that Detective Robert Lee Studebaker handled and obtained paper and tape that CE 142 was constructed from.

CE 677 and CE 142 = same paper and same tape.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 03, 2018, 10:12:38 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Unknown.

Unknown?

Randle stated that the bag was a long brown paper bag.  The manner in which she described Oswald carrying the bag is not how one would carry a small lunch bag.  Randle agreed that the bag almost touched the ground as Oswald crossed the street towards her house.

First things first.  You're calling her a liar.  Right?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 03, 2018, 10:16:20 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You serious?

Mr. BELIN. Did you ever get the kind of sample used at the School Book Depository?
Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; on the afternoon of November 22, 1963, I had the bag listed as----
Mr. BELIN. Commission Exhibit 626 or 142.
Mr. DAY. On the first floor of the Texas School Book Depository, and I noticed from their wrapping bench there was paper and tape of a similar--the tape was of the same width as this. I took the bag over and tried it, and I noticed that the tape was the same width as on the bag.
Mr. BELIN. Did it appear to have the same color?
Mr. DAY. Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN. All right. Then what did you do?
Mr. DAY. Sir?
Mr. BELIN. Then what did you do?
Mr. DAY. I directed one of the officers standing by me, I don't know which, to get a piece of the tape and a piece of the paper from the wrapping bench.
Mr. BELIN. Handing you what has been marked as Commission Exhibit 677, I will ask you to state if you know what this is.
Mr. DAY. This is the tape and paper collected from the first floor in the shipping department of the Texas School Book Depository on November 22, 1963.
Mr. BELIN. Does this have any identification marks on it?
Mr. DAY. It has my name, "J. C. Day, Dallas Police Department," and also in my writing, "Shipping Department."
Mr. BELIN. Any other writing on there that you recognize?
Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; Detective Studebaker, who was with me, and in his writing it says, "Paper sample from first floor, Texas School Book Depository, Studebaker, 11-22-63." The tape also has Studebaker's writing on it, "Tape sample from first floor."

Mr. CADIGAN. 
..In all of the observations and physical tests, that I made, I found that for Exhibit 142, the bag, and the paper sample, Commission Exhibit 677, the results were the same.

That means that Detective Robert Lee Studebaker handled and obtained paper and tape that CE 142 was constructed from.

CE 677 and CE 142 = same paper and same tape.

So when you said that you know "as a FACT that Detective Studebaker handled the very paper and tape that constructed CE 142", you're simply referring to paper from the same roll and you didn't mean the paper that made up the bag itself.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 10:29:23 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Unknown?

Randle stated that the bag was a long brown paper bag.  The manner in which she described Oswald carrying the bag is not how one would carry a small lunch bag.  Randle agreed that the bag almost touched the ground as Oswald crossed the street towards her house.

First things first.  You're calling her a liar.  Right?

LMR has no form of collaboration. That's the way it is Bill. Your speculation vs mine.

Now you tell me - did LHO have CE 142 in his possession on the morning of 22/11/1963?

If yes, provide your evidence.



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 10:34:22 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So when you said that you know "as a FACT that Detective Studebaker handled the very paper and tape that constructed CE 142", you're simply referring to paper from the same roll and you didn't mean the paper that made up the bag itself.

LOL Bill - the difference is simple  - either LHO made CE 142 or Detective Studebaker did.

The EXACT paper and tape that Studebaker handled to construct CE 677 on 22/11/1963 was ALSO used to construct CE 142.

I am speculating that it was Detective Studebaker who constructed CE 142.

Go ahead and prove me wrong.

This is what we know -

Det. Studebaker was in the first floor shipping room at the wrapping table.

Det. Studebaker, under the direct supervision of Lt. Day (and seen by Mr Truly) handled the same paper and tape that was used to construct CE 677 and CE 142. This meant that neither the paper nor tape rolls were changed between when CE 677 and CE 142 were constructed.

Det. Studebaker was in the presence of an assembled CE 139.

List your evidence that LHO was in the shipping room and constructed CE 142.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Martin Weidmann on February 03, 2018, 12:13:19 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
LOL Bill - the difference is simple  - either LHO made CE 142 or Detective Studebaker did.

The EXACT paper and tape that Studebaker handled to construct CE 677 on 22/11/1963 was ALSO used to construct CE 142.

I am speculating that it was Detective Studebaker who constructed CE 142.

Go ahead and prove me wrong.

This is what we know -

Det. Studebaker was in the first floor shipping room at the wrapping table.

Det. Studebaker, under the direct supervision of Lt. Day (and seen by Mr Truly) handled the same paper and tape that was used to construct CE 677 and CE 142. This meant that neither the paper nor tape rolls were changed between when CE 677 and CE 142 were constructed.

Det. Studebaker was in the presence of an assembled CE 139.

List your evidence that LHO was in the shipping room and constructed CE 142.

If I remember correctly, I once read somewhere that the TSBD shipping department went through several rolls of wrapping paper each day. If that's true, how can the same paper and tape be used to construct CE 677 and CE 142 if they were really made on different days?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 12:26:30 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If I remember correctly, I once read somewhere that the TSBD shipping department went through several rolls of wrapping paper each day. If that's true, how can the same paper and tape be used to construct CE 677 and CE 142 if they were really made on different days?

That is an excellent point. Have a read of this

http://22november1963.org.uk/tsbd-sixth-floor-paper-bag-genuine

When Was the Bag Assembled?

James Cadigan of the FBI laboratory testified that the paper and tape of the bag possessed “identical” physical characteristics to samples of wrapping paper and tape taken by the Dallas police on the afternoon of 22 November (Warren Commission Hearings, vol.4, p.93).

The TSBD used approximately one roll of paper every three working days (ibid., p.96). For each consignment of 58 rolls of paper, the company ordered a consignment of 500 rolls of tape (Commission Document 897, p.163), the equivalent of using one roll of tape roughly every three working hours.

The tape on the paper bag supposedly found on the sixth floor seems to have been applied within about three working hours of the samples being taken by the Dallas police. The bag is likely to have been constructed during the period between Oswald’s arrival at the TSBD, four and a half hours before the assassination, and the bag’s first public appearance in the hands of Detective Montgomery later that afternoon.

The other alternative, is what I am suggesting - CE 677 and CE 142 were made at the same time by Detective Studebaker after the finding of CE 139.

Depending on the workload that day, Troy West should have been on his second roll of new tape (8 am - 12 noon).

That meant that LHO had to have constructed CE 142 within a 3 hour on the day prior and before Troy West changed the tape roll.

Troy West never saw LHO in the shipping room.

Mr. BELIN - Did you ever see him around these wrapper rolls or wrapper roll machines, or not?
Mr. WEST - No, sir; I never noticed him being around.


Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 03, 2018, 12:41:07 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If I remember correctly, I once read somewhere that the TSBD shipping department went through several rolls of wrapping paper each day. If that's true, how can the same paper and tape be used to construct CE 677 and CE 142 if they were really made on different days?

 I once read somewhere that the TSBD shipping department went through several rolls of wrapping paper each day.

I believe they would consume a couple of rolls of wrapping paper per week during the busy season of September and early October...but by late November the roll of paper was rarely replaced.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 12:45:45 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I once read somewhere that the TSBD shipping department went through several rolls of wrapping paper each day.

I believe they would consume a couple of rolls of wrapping paper per week during the busy season of September and early October...but by late November the roll of paper was rarely replaced.

However the rate of tape usage was approximately 3 rolls per day.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 03, 2018, 12:49:22 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
However the rate of tape usage was approximately 3 rolls per day.

Was this during the gun case manufacturing season?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 03, 2018, 12:59:05 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Was this during the gun case manufacturing season?

 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Well ironically, I am speculating, that CE 142 was constructed specifically for the assembled CE 139.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 03, 2018, 02:15:06 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Well ironically, I am speculating, that CE 142 was constructed specifically for the assembled CE 139.

I wouldn't disagree.....  I can think of another reason for fabricating the sack......

Let's speculate that the conspirators had been told that they would find a paper sack that would be presented as the sack the patsy had used to smuggle the rifle into the building.....(I suspect that some of the cops knew the script which called for them to find the spent shells, the rifle, and the paper sack)   but after the shooting the couldn't find any sack at the crime scene.   But the script called for that sack as a vital piece of evidence.   So, to stick to the plan they fabricated a paper sack and then boldly paraded it for newsmen and told them it was the method that had been used to smuggle the rifle into the building.

Linnie Mae was watching TV and saw the paper sack......   and "remembered" that Lee was carrying a paper sack when she saw him walk to her brother's car that morning.   She imagined that the cops would be very grateful  to learn what she had seen....  So she went to the house of Paine and told detective Adamcik that she had seen Lee carry a paper sack that morning.    It's probable that at this point the lunch sack that Lee was carrying started growing longer.....
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Martin Weidmann on February 03, 2018, 02:21:16 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I once read somewhere that the TSBD shipping department went through several rolls of wrapping paper each day.

I believe they would consume a couple of rolls of wrapping paper per week during the busy season of September and early October...but by late November the roll of paper was rarely replaced.

Really?

Walt,

If business was slow by then, as you suggest, why did they hire workers in October and let them stay on until late November?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 03, 2018, 04:29:29 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Agree Walt. The give away was seeing the chicken piece which was later moved by Hill.

Mooney of course didn't see anything in the SE corner but saw the chicken lunch sack as well as the chicken piece.

This is consistent with the initial non appearance of CE 142 in the SE corner.


Hill never moved any piece of chicken.

It is not so easy to dismiss Weatherfords statement. His statement is similar to Montgomery's. A piece of chicken on the baricade boxes and a bag in the corner.

Weatherford is referencing the same piece of chicken as Montgomery not the chicken lunch BRW left farther to the West.  Montgomery states there was two locations for pieces of chicken.

Mr. BALL. Now, was there some more chicken some place there also?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes--there would be some more chicken over here around where the hulls were found.

Mr. BALL. And what did you see on top of those boxes?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. There was one piece of chicken there.
Mr. BALL. Partially eaten?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes; I believe it was partially eaten---on that picture right there I was just looking at.
Mr. BALL. That's Exhibit J.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Right over here is where we found that long piece of paper that looked like a sack, that the rifle had been in.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 03, 2018, 04:35:46 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Really?

Walt,

If business was slow by then, as you suggest, why did they hire workers in October and let them stay on until late November?

Who was hired in late October....Lee Oswald and ??
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Paul Ernst on February 03, 2018, 04:39:29 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Hill never moved any piece of chicken.

It is not so easy to dismiss Weatherfords statement. His statement is similar to Montgomery's. A piece of chicken on the baricade boxes and a bag in the corner.

Weatherford is referencing the same piece of chicken as Montgomery not the chicken lunch BRW left farther to the West.  Montgomery states there was two locations for pieces of chicken.

Mr. BALL. Now, was there some more chicken some place there also?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes--there would be some more chicken over here around where the hulls were found.

Mr. BALL. And what did you see on top of those boxes?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. There was one piece of chicken there.
Mr. BALL. Partially eaten?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes; I believe it was partially eaten---on that picture right there I was just looking at.
Mr. BALL. That's Exhibit J.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Right over here is where we found that long piece of paper that looked like a sack, that the rifle had been in.

Montgomery states there was two locations for pieces of chicken.

Jack,...Does that mean two different persons eaten there on the 6th floor?
And where did they get the chicken from?
Catering car?


 
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 03, 2018, 04:42:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
100% agree that Detective Johnson did see CE 142. No question about it. Johnson was stationed where the Dr Pepper was located. He remained there until Studebaker had finished dusting the Dr Pepper bottle and chicken lunch sack. Alyea even filmed him doing this.

When do you think Johnson saw CE 142?

Was he shown CE 142 during his WC testimony?

No.


The answer is in Johnson's statement statement "we found". That would place the it at the time they first searched the 6th floor.
Mr. JOHNSON. "Yes, sir. We found this brown paper sack or case. It was made out of heavy wrapping paper. Actually, it looked similar to the paper that those books was wrapped in. It was just a long narrow paper bag."

Johnson did ID the bag he already states the bag looked like the paper wrapping paper on the books. He stood there and compared the paper on the boos to the bag in the corner.

Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. We found this brown paper sack or case. It was made out of heavy wrapping paper. Actually, it looked similar to the paper that those books was wrapped in. It was just a long narrow paper bag.


Can you provide the statements of all the people who would have seen Studebaker make CE 142? According to Truly the tape room was crowded with employees and police. Just making insinuations and accusations about the police is a little to easy. Even speculation requires a level of believable proof.


Mr. TRULY. That's right, and at such time that you have information of the officers taking the names of the workers in the warehouse over in and around the wrapping tables, it was at such time that I noticed that this boy wasn't among the other workers.

Mr. TRULY. Then in a few minutes--it could have been moments or minutes at a time like that--I noticed some of my boys were over in the west corner of the shipping department, and there were several officers over there taking their names and addresses, and so forth.
There were other officers in other parts of the building taking other employees, like office people's names. I noticed that Lee Oswald was not among these boys.

Mr. TRULY. When I got back to the first floor, at first I didn't see anything except officers running around, reporters in the place. There was a regular madhouse.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 03, 2018, 05:09:31 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Montgomery states there was two locations for pieces of chicken.

Jack,...Does that mean two different persons eaten there on the 6th floor?
And where did they get the chicken from?
Catering car?


It means Bill Shelley was correct. Some one was eating chicken in that area during the morning. He thought it was maybe Givens. This was part of the early investigation before the start of testimonies.

"With regards to the chicken bones on the sixth floor, William H. Shelley stated that he observed an employee other than Oswald eating fried chicken at the location where the bones were found fairly early in the morning on November 22 and is certain the bones and the waxed paper were left there by this other employee and not Oswald. " Ball Belin Report Feb 25th, 1964


Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Paul Ernst on February 03, 2018, 05:21:33 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It means Bill Shelley was correct. Some one was eating chicken in that area during the morning. He thought it was maybe Givens. This was part of the early investigation before the start of testimonies.

"With regards to the chicken bones on the sixth floor, William H. Shelley stated that he observed an employee other than Oswald eating fried chicken at the location where the bones were found fairly early in the morning on November 22 and is certain the bones and the waxed paper were left there by this other employee and not Oswald. " Ball Belin Report Feb 25th, 1964

Thanks for your answer Jack!

And did they get the chicken from a catering car?

And if so did the DPD interrogate the salesman from that catering car,...and saw the persons who bought those chicken lunches?


 
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 03, 2018, 06:23:10 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It means Bill Shelley was correct. Some one was eating chicken in that area during the morning. He thought it was maybe Givens. This was part of the early investigation before the start of testimonies.

"With regards to the chicken bones on the sixth floor, William H. Shelley stated that he observed an employee other than Oswald eating fried chicken at the location where the bones were found fairly early in the morning on November 22 and is certain the bones and the waxed paper were left there by this other employee and not Oswald. " Ball Belin Report Feb 25th, 1964

Bill Shelley was correct. Some one was eating chicken in that area during the morning. He thought it was maybe Givens.

This is very interesting...I've long thought that it was Givens who constructed the hidden Smoker's Nook that Mooney imaged to be a Sniper's Nest....

The fact that there was an empty Viceroy cigarette package found there lead me to believe that it was Charles Givens who ate chicken, drank a Dr Pepper, and smoked some cigarettes behind that SE corner window.

Apparently Bill Shelley knew that it was NOT any assassin who sat there calmly eating chicken while waiting to blow JFK's head off.....( no gunman sat there awaiting JFK) .....And Ball and Belin knew it.....But they kept that information hidden...
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 03, 2018, 11:29:55 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Who was hired in late October....Lee Oswald and ??

Why was Lee Oswald hired at a time when Truly was trying to keep his seasonal employees busy by assigning them to "make work" jobs like laying sheets of plywood over the old floor.

Truly didn't need another order filler......   But Lee was given a job in the building......

I've always suspected that Lee was placed in the TSBD by the FBI.....   Hoover thought that there were communists working in the TSBD..... Hoover thought Joe Molina was a subversive....  I'd bet that Lee thought he was watching activities in the TSBD for the FBI.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 04, 2018, 12:24:31 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The answer is in Johnson's statement statement "we found". That would place the it at the time they first searched the 6th floor.
Mr. JOHNSON. "Yes, sir. We found this brown paper sack or case. It was made out of heavy wrapping paper. Actually, it looked similar to the paper that those books was wrapped in. It was just a long narrow paper bag.


Here is the statement that relates to when the bag was found.......Johnson was not part of the initial search of the 6 floor by the way. He was not involved in the search but was told to guard the SN area and prevent anything being touched.

Mr. BELIN. You were standing there when he picked it up? 
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, because the Crime Lab was already finished where I was, and I had already walked off to where he was. 

The "there" refers to the SN area, the first set of windows in the SE corner.

The Crime Lab refers to Studebaker. "Where I was" refers to the area just west of the SN, outside the barricade. Studebaker had finished there, fingerprinting the lunch sack and Dr Pepper bottle.

This was after Day had left the 6th floor to take the rifle back to headquarters at 2pm.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 04, 2018, 12:34:16 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Hill never moved any piece of chicken.

It is not so easy to dismiss Weatherfords statement. His statement is similar to Montgomery's. A piece of chicken on the baricade boxes and a bag in the corner.

Weatherford is referencing the same piece of chicken as Montgomery not the chicken lunch BRW left farther to the West.  Montgomery states there was two locations for pieces of chicken.

Mr. BALL. Now, was there some more chicken some place there also?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes--there would be some more chicken over here around where the hulls were found.

Mr. BALL. And what did you see on top of those boxes?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. There was one piece of chicken there.
Mr. BALL. Partially eaten?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes; I believe it was partially eaten---on that picture right there I was just looking at.
Mr. BALL. That's Exhibit J.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Right over here is where we found that long piece of paper that looked like a sack, that the rifle had been in.

Hill never moved any piece of chicken.

Yes he did Jack - he was seen and heard doing so by News Reporter Jim Ewell and he was photographed with his head sticking out of the adjacent window to the SN by William Allen.

Jim Ewell, No More Silence

"Meanwhile Jerry Hill worked his way up to the sixth floor, leaned out an open window, and he had what was thought to be Oswald’s little fried chicken lunch. It was in a little pop box. Jerry was holding that box and holding up one of the chicken bones exclaiming to everybody that listened to him down on the street that the fried chicken was what he had been eating."

You can not get it any more clearly than that.

It is not so easy to dismiss Weatherfords statement.

Yes it is Jack - his observation is not backed up by 12 others.

"I went over to where he was and saw 3 expended rifle shells, and a sack on the floor and a partially eaten piece of chicken on top of one of the cartons which was used as a sort of barracade, advising Mooney to preserve the scene for the Crime Lab."

How do explain why Weatherford was the only early law enforcement Officer who saw a "sack on the floor" but failed to mention the chicken lunch sack whereas Mooney didn't see anything on the floor in the SE corner (despite being within the SN) but mentions the chicken piece and the chicken lunch sack?

Weatherford made an error about the sack's location.

BRW left farther to the West.

The chicken lunch sack was moved there by Sgt. Hill.

Which box did Montgomery see the chicken piece on? Same one as Mooney and Hill?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 04, 2018, 12:48:48 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The answer is in Johnson's statement statement "we found". That would place the it at the time they first searched the 6th floor.
Mr. JOHNSON. "Yes, sir. We found this brown paper sack or case. It was made out of heavy wrapping paper. Actually, it looked similar to the paper that those books was wrapped in. It was just a long narrow paper bag."

Johnson did ID the bag he already states the bag looked like the paper wrapping paper on the books. He stood there and compared the paper on the boos to the bag in the corner.

Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. We found this brown paper sack or case. It was made out of heavy wrapping paper. Actually, it looked similar to the paper that those books was wrapped in. It was just a long narrow paper bag.


Can you provide the statements of all the people who would have seen Studebaker make CE 142? According to Truly the tape room was crowded with employees and police. Just making insinuations and accusations about the police is a little to easy. Even speculation requires a level of believable proof.


Mr. TRULY. That's right, and at such time that you have information of the officers taking the names of the workers in the warehouse over in and around the wrapping tables, it was at such time that I noticed that this boy wasn't among the other workers.

Mr. TRULY. Then in a few minutes--it could have been moments or minutes at a time like that--I noticed some of my boys were over in the west corner of the shipping department, and there were several officers over there taking their names and addresses, and so forth.
There were other officers in other parts of the building taking other employees, like office people's names. I noticed that Lee Oswald was not among these boys.

Mr. TRULY. When I got back to the first floor, at first I didn't see anything except officers running around, reporters in the place. There was a regular madhouse.

Are you serious? Who was asked if they saw Detective Studebaker construct a paper bag? Mr Truly wasnt asked anything nor any employee. Who was going to question a Detective and a Lt on what they were doing in a shipping room? An employee of the TSBD?

Can you provide any statement or witness that proves that LHO constructed CE 142?

Even speculation requires a level of believable proof.

CE 677 is the proof - think about it - if Detective Studebaker knows how to stick tape on paper (CE 677) I am confident that he knows how to fold a piece of paper and construct CE 142.

Detective Studebaker was there in the shipping room and touched the same materials in which CE 142 was constructed from.

What has Studebaker constructing CE 142 got to do with a conspiracy or framing anyone? Neither Studebaker nor Day had any idea how CE 139 got placed onto the 6th floor and by whom at that stage.

What was wrong with wrapping up crime scene evidence (CE 139) in a paper bag?



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 04, 2018, 12:58:06 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It means Bill Shelley was correct. Some one was eating chicken in that area during the morning. He thought it was maybe Givens. This was part of the early investigation before the start of testimonies.

"With regards to the chicken bones on the sixth floor, William H. Shelley stated that he observed an employee other than Oswald eating fried chicken at the location where the bones were found fairly early in the morning on November 22 and is certain the bones and the waxed paper were left there by this other employee and not Oswald. " Ball Belin Report Feb 25th, 1964

The chicken lunch, the chicken lunch sack, the fritos packet and Dr Pepper belonged to BRW

Mr. BALL. And that day, on November 22d, how did you carry your lunch from home to work?
Mr. WILLIAMS. I carried my lunch from home to work in a brown paper bag. I believe it was size No. 6 or maybe 8--paper bag.
Mr. BALL. Number 6 or 8 size paper bag?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Small bag?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Like you get in the grocery store?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. What did you have in your lunch?
Mr. WILLIAMS. I had a chicken sandwich.
Mr. BALL. Describe the sandwich. What did it have in it besides chicken?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Well, it just had chicken in it. Chicken on the bone.
Mr. BALL. Chicken on the bone?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes.
Mr. BALL. The chicken was not boned?
Mr. WILLIAMS. It was just chicken on the bone. Just plain old chicken.
Mr. BALL. Did it have bread around it?
Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes, it did.
Mr. BALL. Before you went upstairs, did you get anything to drink?
Mr. WILLIAMS. I got a small bottle of Dr. Pepper from the Dr. Pepper machine.
Mr. BALL. Did you have anything else in your lunch besides chicken?
Mr. WILLIAMS. I had a bag of Fritos, I believe it was.
Mr. BALL. Anything else?
Mr. WILLIAMS. No; I believe that was all.

Mr. BALL - Did you see anybody eating fried chicken on that floor that morning?
Mr. SHELLEY - At one time I think I said I did but Charles Givens was the guy that was eating and he was further on over toward the west side and he was eating a sandwich so he says.
Mr. BALL - Now you say that you thought that you had seen someone had eaten fried chicken that morning?
Mr. SHELLEY - I thought I had; those colored boys are always eating chicken.
Mr. BALL - Do you think you did or do you know?
Mr. SHELLEY - I asked Charles Givens whether it was him that was eating and he said it was a sandwich.
Mr. BALL - Was that before you went down for lunch?
Mr. SHELLEY - Yes, sir; it was pretty early in the morning, about 9:30.
Mr. BALL - Where was it?
Mr. SHELLEY - It was two-thirds across the building toward the west because I didn't put plywood over there and he didn't get too far from where we were actually working.

Mr. BELIN. That day had you eaten any chicken at all, or anything on the sixth floor?
Mr. GIVENS. No, sir.
Mr. BELIN. Had you eaten any chicken or left a pep bottle on any previous days on the sixth floor?
Mr. GIVENS. No, sir.

Another myth busted.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 04, 2018, 01:45:16 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Here is the statement that relates to when the bag was found.......Johnson was not part of the initial search of the 6 floor by the way. He was not involved in the search but was told to guard the SN area and prevent anything being touched.

Mr. BELIN. You were standing there when he picked it up?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, because the Crime Lab was already finished where I was, and I had already walked off to where he was.

The "there" refers to the SN area, the first set of windows in the SE corner.

The Crime Lab refers to Studebaker. "Where I was" refers to the area just west of the SN, outside the barricade. Studebaker had finished there, fingerprinting the lunch sack and Dr Pepper bottle.

This was after Day had left the 6th floor to take the rifle back to headquarters at 2pm.

Note - we now have the "sudden appearance" of CE 142 in the SE corner of the 6th floor.

Who was present?

Montgomery (was stationed where the hulls were found and did not see CE 139)

Johnson (was stationed where the Dr Pepper bottle was and did not see CE 139)

Studebaker - had come back onto the 6th floor with CE 142 and the camera. He saw and photographed CE 139.

Mr. BELIN. When the rifle was found, did you leave your post?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, sir.
Mr. BELIN. What about Detective Montgomery?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, sir.

The fun begins

Mr. BELIN. Do you know who found it?
Mr. JOHNSON. I know that the first I saw of it, L. D. Montgomery, my partner, picked it up off the floor, and it was folded up, and he unfolded it.
Mr. BELIN. When it was folded up, was it folded once or refolded?
Mr. JOHNSON. It was folded and then refolded. It was a fairly small package.

Mr. JOHNSON. I would say that the sack was folded up here and it was east of the pipes in the corner. To the best of my memory, that is where my partner picked it up. I was standing there when he picked it up.
Mr. BELIN. You were standing there when he picked it up?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, because the Crime Lab was already finished where I was, and I had already walked off to where he was.

Mr. JOHNSON. Well, I couldn't say exact distance. All I know is my partner picked that up right out of that corner, and how far it was from the wall in either direction, I don't know.

Mr. BELIN. All right, is there anything else you can remember about that sack?
Mr. JOHNSON. No; other than like I said, my partner picked it up and we unfolded it and it appeared to be about the same shape as a rifle case would be. In other words, we made the remark that that is what he probably brought it in.
That is why, the reason we saved it.


Johnson had no idea what rifle was found, yet is acting like Nostradamus and still Studebaker doesn't photograph it.

Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN. Did you ever dust it for prints or not, or do you know?
Mr. JOHNSON. Well, now, the lunch sack itself, sir?
Mr. BELIN. Yes.
Mr. JOHNSON. I don't know whether they did or not. Now that sack we are talking about, it was dusted right there at the scene.
Mr. BELIN. That is the long paper sack you found in the southeast corner? I mean as far as the lunch sack is concerned?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, the lunch sack, I don't know. We turned it in, but I never did hear after that what he did with it. I am pretty sure they did use it for something.

Studebaker definitely dusted the chicken lunch sack but not CE 142.

Mr. BALL. I don't have a picture of the paper sack.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. You don't? Well, it was there--I can't recall for sure if it was on one of the boxes or on the floor there.
Mr. BALL. It was over in what corner?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. It would be the southeast corner of the building there where the shooting was.
Mr. BALL. Did you turn the sack over to anybody or did you pick it up?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes---let's see Lieutenant Day and Detective
 Studebaker came up and took pictures and everything, and then we took a Dr. Pepper bottle and that sack that we found that looked like the rifle was wrapped up in.

Montgomery is now acting like Nostradamus and yet CE 142 isn't photographed.

Mr. BALL. You found the sack in the area marked 2 on Exhibit J to the Studebaker deposition. Did you pick the sack up?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Which sack are we talking about now?
Mr. BALL. The paper sack?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. The small one or the larger one?
Mr. BALL. The larger one you mentioned that was in position 2.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes.
Mr. BALL. You picked it up?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Wait just a minute no; I didn't pick it up. I believe Mr. Studebaker did. We left it laying right there so they could check it for prints.

So now no one touched it nor unfolded it and Studebaker dusted it for prints and doesn't take a photograph.

Studebaker

Mr. BALL. In the southeast corner of the building?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. It was a paper - I don't know what it was.
Mr. BALL. And it was folded, you say?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.

Mr. BALL. How long was it, approximately?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. I don't know - I picked it up and dusted it and they took it down there and sent it to Washington and that's the last I have seen of it, and I don't know.

Note - no mention of his little trip to the first floor shipping room with Lt Day nor the construction of CE 677

The Three Amigos

Mr. STUDEBAKER. I was with them in the corner all the time - they were with me rather, I guess Captain Fritz told them to stay with us and help us in case they were needed.
Mr. BALL. Johnson and Montgomery?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Johnson and Montgomery - they were with me all the time over in that one corner.

Neither Johnson nor Montgomery, both of whom remarked about the rifle being inside the paper bag thought they should tell Studebaker about their Nostradamus moment nor watch him take a photograph of it. Staggering.

Suddenly Detective Studebaker goes total recall

Mr Ball asked this as the final questions to Detective Studebaker

Mr. BALL. Now, how big was this paper.that you saw - you saw the wrapper - tell me about how big that paper bag was - how long was it?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. It was about, I would say, 3 1/2 to 4 feet long.
Mr. BALL. The paper bag?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.
Mr. BALL. And how wide was it?
Mr. STUDEBAKER.Approximately 8 inches.

Wow! From knowing "nothing" to providing dimensions of CE 142 - yes he should know.

 ;D

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 04, 2018, 02:56:17 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
What would you use to remove a piece of nailed in wood?

I will give you a subtle hint

(https://preview.ibb.co/b5vGdm/Slide88.gif) (https://ibb.co/gU0hJm)

If you look carefully you find the answers in the photographs of the SN.

For example

(https://preview.ibb.co/jJ7yPR/Slide350.gif) (https://ibb.co/cis9W6)

That was why i asked you did you see the window sill strip in the picture?

I believe it is gone and timing wise it is a perfect fit - the window sill strip was transported in CE 142 and taken out at ~3 pm.

Now there would be no way that Day would leave the sill strip intact because the 6th floor had many people on it, including reporters which Day gave a tour to.

It made perfect sense to immediately remove it from the window.

The only two Detectives who took in the crime scene evidence taken from the SN (apart from the hulls and CE 139) were Montgomery and Johnson.

Unless you have X ray vision, you can not disprove the flat 30 inch window sill strip wasnt within CE 142.

This is an authentic photo that was taken on the afternoon of the murder....Using the shadow on the box as a chronometer, It appears to have been taken about 3:00pm.

(https://preview.ibb.co/jJ7yPR/Slide350.gif) (https://ibb.co/cis9W6)

Notice that there is no box on the window sill.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 04, 2018, 03:21:20 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The map numbering isn't chronological.

(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338712/m1/1/med_res/)
Crime Lab Photo 19
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339097/m1/1/small_res)
Crime Lab Photo 20
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339287/m1/3/small_res)
Crime Lab Photo 21

Photos 19 to 21 were taken about 1:15.



(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth339962/m1/1/med_res/)
Crime Lab Photo 22
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337263/m1/1/med_res)
Crime Lab Photo 23

Photos 22 and 23 were taken after the rifle discovery at 1:22. Allowing time for the walk across, preliminary inspection, and climbing up on the boxes, I would estimate it was probably taken no earlier than 1:30.



(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338859/m1/1/med_res/)
Crime Lab Photo 17
  (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337079/m1/5/med_res)
Crime Lab Photo 18

My tentative SunCalc of Photo 18 shows it was taken at about 2:40 to 3:00, which is after Day's return at about 2:30. Day's estimate that Photo 18 was taken about 3:15 or later would seem to be wrong; by 3:15 there are several photographers on the sixth floor with Day pointing out things. There is hardly any shadow movement between Photos 17 and 18, so they taken very close together, closer than Day claimed. Presumably he was more accurate with the "important" photos.

(http://i64.tinypic.com/2je5liu.jpg)

(The large truck seen in both photos are two different trucks.)

This is an authentic photo .....  Notice that there is no box on the window sill....  Any photo in which there is a box on the window sill is a fake photo.

(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth337079/m1/5/med_res)
Crime Lab Photo 18
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Gary Craig on February 04, 2018, 03:32:00 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The answer is in Johnson's statement statement "we found". That would place the it at the time they first searched the 6th floor.
Mr. JOHNSON. "Yes, sir. We found this brown paper sack or case. It was made out of heavy wrapping paper. Actually, it looked similar to the paper that those books was wrapped in. It was just a long narrow paper bag."

Johnson did ID the bag he already states the bag looked like the paper wrapping paper on the books. He stood there and compared the paper on the boos to the bag in the corner.

Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. We found this brown paper sack or case. It was made out of heavy wrapping paper. Actually, it looked similar to the paper that those books was wrapped in. It was just a long narrow paper bag.


Can you provide the statements of all the people who would have seen Studebaker make CE 142? According to Truly the tape room was crowded with employees and police. Just making insinuations and accusations about the police is a little to easy. Even speculation requires a level of believable proof.


Mr. TRULY. That's right, and at such time that you have information of the officers taking the names of the workers in the warehouse over in and around the wrapping tables, it was at such time that I noticed that this boy wasn't among the other workers.

Mr. TRULY. Then in a few minutes--it could have been moments or minutes at a time like that--I noticed some of my boys were over in the west corner of the shipping department, and there were several officers over there taking their names and addresses, and so forth.
There were other officers in other parts of the building taking other employees, like office people's names. I noticed that Lee Oswald was not among these boys.

Mr. TRULY. When I got back to the first floor, at first I didn't see anything except officers running around, reporters in the place. There was a regular madhouse.

"Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. We found this brown paper sack or case. It was made out of heavy wrapping paper. Actually, it looked similar to the paper that those books was wrapped in. It was just a long narrow paper bag."

Someone else pointed out that Frazier would have been familiar with that heavy wrapping paper, allegedly used by Ozzie as a gun case for the Carcano. Yet he described the package LHO allegedly put in the back seat of his car as made of something completely different.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 04, 2018, 03:40:33 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
"Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. We found this brown paper sack or case. It was made out of heavy wrapping paper. Actually, it looked similar to the paper that those books was wrapped in. It was just a long narrow paper bag."

Someone else pointed out that Frazier would have been familiar with that heavy wrapping paper, allegedly used by Ozzie as a gun case for the Carcano. Yet he described the package LHO allegedly put in the back seat of his car as made of something completely different.

No in situ photo (or film) of CE 142 ever was taken by either Studebaker nor Day despite having a fully functional camera.

(https://preview.ibb.co/jyBOpG/Slide43.jpg) (https://ibb.co/dZ7w9G)

What is Studebaker taking a picture of ???

It appears that Studebaker DID take a photo of "something" of interest in that corner....My guess is he did capture the image of a paper wrapping....but it did not fit the rifle....ergo...it disappeared.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 04, 2018, 04:25:41 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Here is the statement that relates to when the bag was found.......Johnson was not part of the initial search of the 6 floor by the way. He was not involved in the search but was told to guard the SN area and prevent anything being touched.

Mr. BELIN. You were standing there when he picked it up?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, because the Crime Lab was already finished where I was, and I had already walked off to where he was.

The "there" refers to the SN area, the first set of windows in the SE corner.

The Crime Lab refers to Studebaker. "Where I was" refers to the area just west of the SN, outside the barricade. Studebaker had finished there, fingerprinting the lunch sack and Dr Pepper bottle.

This was after Day had left the 6th floor to take the rifle back to headquarters at 2pm.

The claim being made is the bag was made after 2:00 PM by Studebaker.  The bag in the SN was seen by the detectives after their arrival at 1:00.

Mr. BELIN. About what time did you get there?
Mr. JOHNSON. Around 1 o'clock.
 

Weatherford was there at the same time as Mooney and before Studebaker first arrived.


"....I came down to the 6th floor and while searching this floor, Deputy Luke Mooney said, "here are some shells". I went over to where he was and saw 3 expended rifle shells, and a sack on the floor and a partially eaten piece of chicken on top of one of the cartons which was used as a sort of barracade, advising Mooney to preserve the scene for the Crime Lab"
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 04, 2018, 04:32:13 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Hill never moved any piece of chicken.

Yes he did Jack - he was seen and heard doing so by News Reporter Jim Ewell and he was photographed with his head sticking out of the adjacent window to the SN by William Allen.

Jim Ewell, No More Silence

"Meanwhile Jerry Hill worked his way up to the sixth floor, leaned out an open window, and he had what was thought to be Oswald’s little fried chicken lunch. It was in a little pop box. Jerry was holding that box and holding up one of the chicken bones exclaiming to everybody that listened to him down on the street that the fried chicken was what he had been eating."

You can not get it any more clearly than that.

It is not so easy to dismiss Weatherfords statement.

Yes it is Jack - his observation is not backed up by 12 others.

"I went over to where he was and saw 3 expended rifle shells, and a sack on the floor and a partially eaten piece of chicken on top of one of the cartons which was used as a sort of barracade, advising Mooney to preserve the scene for the Crime Lab."

How do explain why Weatherford was the only early law enforcement Officer who saw a "sack on the floor" but failed to mention the chicken lunch sack whereas Mooney didn't see anything on the floor in the SE corner (despite being within the SN) but mentions the chicken piece and the chicken lunch sack?

Weatherford made an error about the sack's location.

BRW left farther to the West.

The chicken lunch sack was moved there by Sgt. Hill.

Which box did Montgomery see the chicken piece on? Same one as Mooney and Hill?



Hill holding a piece of chicken out of the window absolutely did not happen and Hill can be seen in the photo he is holding his hat.

Hill was holding his hat not a piece of chicken while leaning out the window. Jim Ewell years later had this epiphany about Hill leaning out the window holding a piece of chicken. No. 1 it would be highly unprofessional. Not everything written 30 years later in No more Silence is beyond reproach.

Here is the genesis of the Hill story from Colin Crow's Bags Bones and Bungling thread from the old forum.

"Meanwhile Jerry Hill worked his way up to the sixth floor, leaned out an open window, and he had what was thought to be Oswald’s little fried chicken lunch. It was in a little pop box. Jerry was holding that box and holding up one of the chicken bones exclaiming to everybody that listened to him down on the street that the fried chicken was what he had been eating. About that time there was a commotion around one of the squad cars, and we could hear a radio saying that an officer had been shot in Oak Cliff."

============================================

In the same thread you and Colin were in complete agreement about the bag being found in the SN. Like Jim Ewell the whole story is now changing.

March 26th 2015

CC. The roughly 2 foot long package is thought by Johnson and Montgomery to be the package the rifle was transported in. They had not seen the rifle as they had not left the southeast corner of the sixth floor. The rifle was discovered in the northwest corner. Their speculation was that the rifle could fit in a 2 foot package and thought it worth saving. Did Montgomery find it in a more secluded place in the SN and after realizing it might be important decided to place it folded once in the SE corner near the pipes? Now ready to be "discovered" by Studebaker upon his eventual return to the SN.

You completely agrees with this statement.

March 26, 2015, 11:19:17 AM
Super Member
Posts: 7810


Colin,



Tony:

 "my analysis of the same events is confirmed by your analysis"

==================================

Weatherford's statement is the same as Montgomery's.

Maybe the other detectives not mentioning the bag, and the witnesses and DPD not mentioning the actions of Studebaker are two sides of the same coin. Nobody placed any importance to either. Not noticing a paper sack on the floor in an area where an abundant amount of the same type of paper is really proof the DPD was part of a conspiracy.


Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 04, 2018, 04:40:26 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Note - we now have the "sudden appearance" of CE 142 in the SE corner of the 6th floor.

Who was present?

Montgomery (was stationed where the hulls were found and did not see CE 139)

Johnson (was stationed where the Dr Pepper bottle was and did not see CE 139)

Studebaker - had come back onto the 6th floor with CE 142 and the camera. He saw and photographed CE 139.

Mr. BELIN. When the rifle was found, did you leave your post?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, sir.
Mr. BELIN. What about Detective Montgomery?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, sir.

The fun begins

Mr. BELIN. Do you know who found it?
Mr. JOHNSON. I know that the first I saw of it, L. D. Montgomery, my partner, picked it up off the floor, and it was folded up, and he unfolded it.
Mr. BELIN. When it was folded up, was it folded once or refolded?
Mr. JOHNSON. It was folded and then refolded. It was a fairly small package.

Mr. JOHNSON. I would say that the sack was folded up here and it was east of the pipes in the corner. To the best of my memory, that is where my partner picked it up. I was standing there when he picked it up.
Mr. BELIN. You were standing there when he picked it up?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, because the Crime Lab was already finished where I was, and I had already walked off to where he was.

Mr. JOHNSON. Well, I couldn't say exact distance. All I know is my partner picked that up right out of that corner, and how far it was from the wall in either direction, I don't know.

Mr. BELIN. All right, is there anything else you can remember about that sack?
Mr. JOHNSON. No; other than like I said, my partner picked it up and we unfolded it and it appeared to be about the same shape as a rifle case would be. In other words, we made the remark that that is what he probably brought it in.
That is why, the reason we saved it.


Johnson had no idea what rifle was found, yet is acting like Nostradamus and still Studebaker doesn't photograph it.

Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN. Did you ever dust it for prints or not, or do you know?
Mr. JOHNSON. Well, now, the lunch sack itself, sir?
Mr. BELIN. Yes.
Mr. JOHNSON. I don't know whether they did or not. Now that sack we are talking about, it was dusted right there at the scene.
Mr. BELIN. That is the long paper sack you found in the southeast corner? I mean as far as the lunch sack is concerned?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, the lunch sack, I don't know. We turned it in, but I never did hear after that what he did with it. I am pretty sure they did use it for something.

Studebaker definitely dusted the chicken lunch sack but not CE 142.

Mr. BALL. I don't have a picture of the paper sack.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. You don't? Well, it was there--I can't recall for sure if it was on one of the boxes or on the floor there.
Mr. BALL. It was over in what corner?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. It would be the southeast corner of the building there where the shooting was.
Mr. BALL. Did you turn the sack over to anybody or did you pick it up?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes---let's see Lieutenant Day and Detective
 Studebaker came up and took pictures and everything, and then we took a Dr. Pepper bottle and that sack that we found that looked like the rifle was wrapped up in.

Montgomery is now acting like Nostradamus and yet CE 142 isn't photographed.

Mr. BALL. You found the sack in the area marked 2 on Exhibit J to the Studebaker deposition. Did you pick the sack up?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Which sack are we talking about now?
Mr. BALL. The paper sack?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. The small one or the larger one?
Mr. BALL. The larger one you mentioned that was in position 2.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes.
Mr. BALL. You picked it up?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Wait just a minute no; I didn't pick it up. I believe Mr. Studebaker did. We left it laying right there so they could check it for prints.

So now no one touched it nor unfolded it and Studebaker dusted it for prints and doesn't take a photograph.

Studebaker

Mr. BALL. In the southeast corner of the building?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. It was a paper - I don't know what it was.
Mr. BALL. And it was folded, you say?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.

Mr. BALL. How long was it, approximately?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. I don't know - I picked it up and dusted it and they took it down there and sent it to Washington and that's the last I have seen of it, and I don't know.

Note - no mention of his little trip to the first floor shipping room with Lt Day nor the construction of CE 677

The Three Amigos

Mr. STUDEBAKER. I was with them in the corner all the time - they were with me rather, I guess Captain Fritz told them to stay with us and help us in case they were needed.
Mr. BALL. Johnson and Montgomery?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Johnson and Montgomery - they were with me all the time over in that one corner.

Neither Johnson nor Montgomery, both of whom remarked about the rifle being inside the paper bag thought they should tell Studebaker about their Nostradamus moment nor watch him take a photograph of it. Staggering.

Suddenly Detective Studebaker goes total recall

Mr Ball asked this as the final questions to Detective Studebaker

Mr. BALL. Now, how big was this paper.that you saw - you saw the wrapper - tell me about how big that paper bag was - how long was it?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. It was about, I would say, 3 1/2 to 4 feet long.
Mr. BALL. The paper bag?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.
Mr. BALL. And how wide was it?
Mr. STUDEBAKER.Approximately 8 inches.

Wow! From knowing "nothing" to providing dimensions of CE 142 - yes he should know.

 ;D


The issue is was there a bag lying on the floor and did these detectives see it. The answer is yes.

Montgomery --Yes
Johnson --yes
Weatherford --- yes

Are you now saying this is not true? Weatherford was there before Montgomery and Johnson and Weatherford seen the bag

Tony Fratini:   "100% agree that Detective Johnson did see CE 142. No question about it. Johnson was stationed where the Dr Pepper was located. He remained there until Studebaker had finished dusting the Dr Pepper bottle and chicken lunch sack. Alyea even filmed him doing this. "

 Actually what is the point you are trying to make, the detectives were incompetent? There is not one word in any of the statements that could possibly lead to the conclusion that the bag was not present in the SN.

Johnson even ID's the bag as being similar to the paper used on the books that he can see. If anything you can somewhat tell in their statements that they were proud they picked up on that observation.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 04, 2018, 04:43:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Are you serious? Who was asked if they saw Detective Studebaker construct a paper bag? Mr Truly wasnt asked anything nor any employee. Who was going to question a Detective and a Lt on what they were doing in a shipping room? An employee of the TSBD?

Can you provide any statement or witness that proves that LHO constructed CE 142?

Even speculation requires a level of believable proof.

CE 677 is the proof - think about it - if Detective Studebaker knows how to stick tape on paper (CE 677) I am confident that he knows how to fold a piece of paper and construct CE 142.

Detective Studebaker was there in the shipping room and touched the same materials in which CE 142 was constructed from.

What has Studebaker constructing CE 142 got to do with a conspiracy or framing anyone? Neither Studebaker nor Day had any idea how CE 139 got placed onto the 6th floor and by whom at that stage.

What was wrong with wrapping up crime scene evidence (CE 139) in a paper bag?


What myth, Shelley just confirmed Weatherford and Montgomery were right. Weatherford is referencing the same sack as Montgomery. Montgomery states there was two locations for a piece of chicken and Shelley confirms the reason why. Weatherford, Montgomery, and Johnson all reference a bag being seen in the SN. Shelley confirms what Montgomery states about there being two locations for the chicken.

How is this proof. Two sides of the same story told by two different people. Givens admitted to Shelley he was eating that morning. I am sure Given's eating while the others were working would be a point of contention.

Mr. BALL - Do you think you did or do you know?
Mr. SHELLEY - I asked Charles Givens whether it was him that was eating and he said it was a sandwich.
Mr. BALL - Was that before you went down for lunch?
Mr. SHELLEY - Yes, sir; it was pretty early in the morning, about 9:30.

Mr. BELIN. That day had you eaten any chicken at all, or anything on the sixth floor?
Mr. GIVENS. No, sir.

=============================

Someone left it. Montgomery states there was two locations for a piece of chicken. Shelley thought it was Givens

Mr. BALL. Now, was there some more chicken some place there also?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes--there would be some more chicken over here around where the hulls were found.
Shelley states he seen it the morning of the 22nd to Ball/Belin

"With regards to the chicken bones on the sixth floor, William H. Shelley stated that he observed an employee other than Oswald eating fried chicken at the location where the bones were found fairly early in the morning on November 22 and is certain the bones and the waxed paper were left there by this other employee and not Oswald. " Ball Belin Report Feb 25th, 1964

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Ray Mitcham on February 04, 2018, 07:23:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The issue is was there a bag lying on the floor and did these detectives see it. The answer is yes.

Montgomery --Yes
Johnson --yes
Weatherford --- yes

Are you now saying this is not true? Weatherford was there before Montgomery and Johnson and Weatherford seen the bag
Weather ford. " I went over to where he was and saw 3 expended rifle shells, and a sack on the floor and a partially eaten piece of chicken on top of one of the cartons which was used as a sort of barracade, advising Mooney to preserve the scene for the Crime Lab.[/quote]

Who is to say that the sack he saw wasn't the chicken bag?

Quote

Tony Fratini:   "100% agree that Detective Johnson did see CE 142. No question about it. Johnson was stationed where the Dr Pepper was located. He remained there until Studebaker had finished dusting the Dr Pepper bottle and chicken lunch sack. Alyea even filmed him doing this. "

 Actually what is the point you are trying to make, the detectives were incompetent? There is not one word in any of the statements that could possibly lead to the conclusion that the bag was not present in the SN.

Johnson even ID's the bag as being similar to the paper used on the books that he can see. If anything you can somewhat tell in their statements that they were proud they picked up on that observation.

Jack, Mooney was placed there to ensure nobody disturbed the crime scene, so who moved the bag before the photos were taken? Either Mooney was incompetent and let somebody move the bag or the DPD photographers were incompetent. Which would you rather choose?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 04, 2018, 09:29:03 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The claim being made is the bag was made after 2:00 PM by Studebaker.  The bag in the SN was seen by the detectives after their arrival at 1:00.

Mr. BELIN. About what time did you get there?
Mr. JOHNSON. Around 1 o'clock.
 

Weatherford was there at the same time as Mooney and before Studebaker first arrived.


"....I came down to the 6th floor and while searching this floor, Deputy Luke Mooney said, "here are some shells". I went over to where he was and saw 3 expended rifle shells, and a sack on the floor and a partially eaten piece of chicken on top of one of the cartons which was used as a sort of barracade, advising Mooney to preserve the scene for the Crime Lab"


Day took CE 139 to City Hall by ~2.00 pm and it was noted on a CSSS at 2.15 pm at City Hall.

CE 142 was constructed by Detective Studebaker after CE 139 was processed on the 6th floor by Day and before Day left with it at ~2.00 pm. Hence anytime between 1.22 pm - 2.00 pm.

Studebaker had ample time to fold and tape a paper bag.

CE 142 was seen by the Detectives (Montgomery and Johnson) at what time Jack?

Johnson was stationed by Fritz (who had entered into the SN, climbed over the boxes on the floor and picked up the spent hulls and failed to note CE 142) where the Chicken lunch sack and Dr Pepper bottle were located.

Johnson only moved to the SN after Studebaker had finished dusting the chicken lunch sack and the Dr Pepper bottle.

That meant that Studebaker had returned from the first floor with CE 142 close to ~2.00 pm.

Weatherford stating he saw a "sack on the floor" was about as useful and descriptive as someone saying they went into a library and they saw a book.

There is no timestamp when CE 142 was found Jack.

If Weatherford's observation was the "deal breaker" why wasnt he called up to testify and further why wasnt he shown CE 142 and the chicken lunch sack?

In essence, you have nothing.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 04, 2018, 09:39:22 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Weather ford. " I went over to where he was and saw 3 expended rifle shells, and a sack on the floor and a partially eaten piece of chicken on top of one of the cartons which was used as a sort of barracade, advising Mooney to preserve the scene for the Crime Lab.

Who is to say that the sack he saw wasn't the chicken bag?

Jack, Mooney was placed there to ensure nobody disturbed the crime scene, so who moved the bag before the photos were taken? Either Mooney was incompetent and let somebody move the bag or the DPD photographers were incompetent. Which would you rather choose?

Mooney was placed there to ensure nobody disturbed the crime scene, so who moved the bag before the photos were taken?

How do we know that someone moved the bag before Studebaker photographed the scene?.... There is a photo that was taken about 2:00 pm, that shows Studebaker photographing "something" of interest in that corner.

Could it be that Studebaker's photo flat out refutes the tale that a "gun case" was lying there???  Did Studebaker's photo show the lunch sack on the floor??...or perhaps just a book wrapper??
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 04, 2018, 10:22:40 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


Hill holding a piece of chicken out of the window absolutely did not happen and Hill can be seen in the photo he is holding his hat.

Hill was holding his hat not a piece of chicken while leaning out the window. Jim Ewell years later had this epiphany about Hill leaning out the window holding a piece of chicken. No. 1 it would be highly unprofessional. Not everything written 30 years later in No more Silence is beyond reproach.

Here is the genesis of the Hill story from Colin Crow's Bags Bones and Bungling thread from the old forum.

"Meanwhile Jerry Hill worked his way up to the sixth floor, leaned out an open window, and he had what was thought to be Oswald’s little fried chicken lunch. It was in a little pop box. Jerry was holding that box and holding up one of the chicken bones exclaiming to everybody that listened to him down on the street that the fried chicken was what he had been eating. About that time there was a commotion around one of the squad cars, and we could hear a radio saying that an officer had been shot in Oak Cliff."

============================================

In the same thread you and Colin were in complete agreement about the bag being found in the SN. Like Jim Ewell the whole story is now changing.

March 26th 2015

CC. The roughly 2 foot long package is thought by Johnson and Montgomery to be the package the rifle was transported in. They had not seen the rifle as they had not left the southeast corner of the sixth floor. The rifle was discovered in the northwest corner. Their speculation was that the rifle could fit in a 2 foot package and thought it worth saving. Did Montgomery find it in a more secluded place in the SN and after realizing it might be important decided to place it folded once in the SE corner near the pipes? Now ready to be "discovered" by Studebaker upon his eventual return to the SN.

You completely agrees with this statement.

March 26, 2015, 11:19:17 AM
Super Member
Posts: 7810


Colin,



Tony:

 "my analysis of the same events is confirmed by your analysis"

==================================

Weatherford's statement is the same as Montgomery's.

Maybe the other detectives not mentioning the bag, and the witnesses and DPD not mentioning the actions of Studebaker are two sides of the same coin. Nobody placed any importance to either. Not noticing a paper sack on the floor in an area where an abundant amount of the same type of paper is really proof the DPD was part of a conspiracy.

Jack,

how about this simple scenario:

Hill picked up the chicken lunch sack and chicken piece and commenced yelling to the Detectives on the street below.

He then dropped the chicken lunch sack and chicken piece on the ground and then leaned out the window and started waving his hat and hand. Allen hears him and takes a photo.

Why would Jim Ewell embellish a story about a chicken lunch sack and chicken piece? He heard Hill say that.

Now pay close attention - there is no doubt that CE 142, at some stage, was on the 6th floor and in the SE corner and that it was seen by several Detectives.

You go and definitively prove CE 142 was seen before 2 pm in the SE corner of the 6th floor.

What has Detective Montgomery making CE 142 got to do with any conspiracy and who fired at JFK?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 04, 2018, 10:42:29 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Mooney was placed there to ensure nobody disturbed the crime scene, so who moved the bag before the photos were taken?

How do we know that someone moved the bag before Studebaker photographed the scene?.... There is a photo that was taken about 2:00 pm, that shows Studebaker photographing "something" of interest in that corner.

Could it be that Studebaker's photo flat out refutes the tale that a "gun case" was lying there???  Did Studebaker's photo show the lunch sack on the floor??...or perhaps just a book wrapper??

By who Walt? We know that both Studebaker and Day went to the first floor shipping room with (supposedly) CE 142 and CE 139.

How then did CE 142 end up being in the possession of Studebaker so it was taken to the first floor shipping room?

This is incredulous - two crime scene Detectives move a paper bag (unknown who it was and why) - big enough to hold a rifle -from within the "SN" where there were spent hulls - then two photographs are taken with its absence, only to then take the paper bag to the first floor wrapping room to start collecting paper and tape samples in order to ascertain the origins of the paper bag because it may reveal where the assassin made the paper bag?

Then the paper bag was left behind and then returned back to the 6th floor. Studebaker still doesn't photograph it?

It is a complete BS story and the WC took it, hook, line and sinker.

Yet if Studebaker made it in the shipping room, it explained:

Why it wasnt initially seen in the SE corner of the 6th floor by 12 adults including those that had entered into the SN.

Why there was no in situ photo ever taken.

Why no one ever mentioned seeing it in the NW corner in the possession of either Day and Studebaker when they were processing the rifle.

Why both Day and Studebaker had stopped in the first floor shipping room instead of going directly to City Hall.

Why Day left CE 142 behind with Studebaker and not take it with him.

Why Day never looked inside CE 142.

How CE 142 now became visible on the 6th floor in the SE corner as seen by Montgomery and Johnson after Studebaker returned to the 6th floor with CE 142.

How the Detectives saw it in different locations and in different states of folding.

How the window sill piece was taken to City Hall - inside CE 142.

How CE 142 didn't appear to be dusted for prints as it was photographed in Montgomery's hands.

Why the FBI agent failed to associate CE 142 to CE 139.

Why the FBI agent failed to find anything external on CE 142.

The FBI agent finding a small piece of wood and candle wax material strongly indicated it may have held the weather strip as wax was often used in water proofing.



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 04, 2018, 11:02:56 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
By who Walt? We know that both Studebaker and Day went to the first floor shipping room with (supposedly) CE 142 and CE 139.

How then did CE 142 end up being in the possession of Studebaker so it was taken to the first floor shipping room?

This is incredulous - two crime scene Detectives move a paper bag (unknown who it was and why) - big enough to hold a rifle -from within the "SN" where there were spent hulls - then two photographs are taken with its absence, only to then take the paper bag to the first floor wrapping room to start collecting paper and tape samples in order to ascertain the origins of the paper bag because it may reveal where the assassin made the paper bag?

Then the paper bag was left behind and then returned back to the 6th floor. Studebaker still doesn't photograph it?

It is a complete BS story and the WC took it, hook, line and sinker.

Yet if Studebaker made it in the shipping room, it explained:

Why it wasnt initially seen in the SE corner of the 6th floor by 12 adults including those that had entered into the SN.

Why there was no in situ photo

Why no one ever mentioned seeing it in the NW corner in the possession of either Day and Studebaker when they were processing the rifle.

Why both Day and Studebaker stopped in the first floor shipping room

Why Day left it behind with Studebaker

Why Day never looked inside it

How it now becomes visible on the 6th floor in the SE corner as seen by Montgomery and Johnson after Studebaker returned to the 6th floor

Explained how the Detectives saw it in different places and in different states of folding

Explained how the window sill piece was taken to City Hall

Explained how CE 142 didn't look like it was dusted for prints as it was photographed in Montgomery's hands.


By who Walt? We know that both Studebaker and Day went to the first floor shipping room with (supposedly) CE 142 and CE 139.

You know more about it than I .....But her's what Studebaker testified.....


Mr. BALL. In the southeast corner of the building?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. It was a paper - I don't know what it was.
Mr. BALL. And it was folded, you say?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.

Mr. BALL. How long was it, approximately?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. I don't know - I picked it up and dusted it and they took it down there and sent it to Washington and that's the last I have seen of it, and I don't know.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Paul McBrearty on February 04, 2018, 11:32:10 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Day took CE 139 to City Hall by ~2.00 pm and it was noted on a CSSS at 2.15 pm at City Hall.

CE 142 was constructed by Detective Studebaker after CE 139 was processed on the 6th floor by Day and before Day left with it at ~2.00 pm. Hence anytime between 1.22 pm - 2.00 pm.

Studebaker had ample time to fold and tape a paper bag.

CE 142 was seen by the Detectives (Montgomery and Johnson) at what time Jack?

Johnson was stationed by Fritz (who had entered into the SN, climbed over the boxes on the floor and picked up the spent hulls and failed to note CE 142) where the Chicken lunch sack and Dr Pepper bottle were located.

Johnson only moved to the SN after Studebaker had finished dusting the chicken lunch sack and the Dr Pepper bottle.

That meant that Studebaker had returned from the first floor with CE 142 close to ~2.00 pm.

Weatherford stating he saw a "sack on the floor" was about as useful and descriptive as someone saying they went into a library and they saw a book.

There is no timestamp when CE 142 was found Jack.

If Weatherford's observation was the "deal breaker" why wasnt he called up to testify and further why wasnt he shown CE 142 and the chicken lunch sack?

In essence, you have nothing.

LOL. What a load of nonsense. No intelligent person is going to fall for this rubbish. You're really far out Tony. The fairytale continues.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 04, 2018, 11:46:51 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

By who Walt? We know that both Studebaker and Day went to the first floor shipping room with (supposedly) CE 142 and CE 139.

You know more about it than I .....But her's what Studebaker testified.....


Mr. BALL. In the southeast corner of the building?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. It was a paper - I don't know what it was.
Mr. BALL. And it was folded, you say?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes.

Mr. BALL. How long was it, approximately?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. I don't know - I picked it up and dusted it and they took it down there and sent it to Washington and that's the last I have seen of it, and I don't know.

Walt,

Detective Johnson saw Detective Montgomery pick up and unfold CE 142 - he said it three or four times.

Detective Montgomery denied ever doing so.

Detective Studebaker has NFI what happened to CE 142 yet Lt Day left it with him.

It is the three stooges in the SN with a paper bag.

And the beauty was that none of them were shown CE 142 in the WC testimonies!

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 05, 2018, 12:11:16 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
;D When you can't attack the hypothesis, attack the poster instead.

I believe I have the necessary "cognitive skills" to determine fancy from reality Paul - I had to defend my Honours and Doctorate dissertations in front of many University Professors as well as have 14 international scientific publications peer reviewed.

What have you done to accuse me Paul?

My hypothesis is not outlandish at all - we are talking about an adult (Studebaker) making a paper bag for non nefarious means.

Having said that -I appreciate your attention to my thread. Somehow I don't think it will reach > 270,000 views like the last one did.

It's what happens when dealing with religous zealots Tony.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 05, 2018, 12:16:20 AM
The real audience for this information are the 89 guests currently viewing.....not the WC shrills trying to debate. Maybe they will eventually contribute something.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Paul McBrearty on February 05, 2018, 12:26:13 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If you read the analysis these questions are either answered, irrelevant or strawman arguments. A waste of time article that does not cover all the available evidence.

Go on, have a go at least at answering one, I bet you can't for example how did Oswald's partial fingerprint and palm print get on CE-142 ?. The only possible way that could have occurred is that Oswald hands came into contact with the bag. No other possible explanation. What's wrong, can't handle the simple truth. A real problem for conspiracy theorists this one. The silence is deafening.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jerry Organ on February 05, 2018, 12:41:26 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Walt,

Detective Johnson saw Detective Montgomery pick up and unfold CE 142 - he said it three or four times.

Detective Montgomery denied ever doing so.


     Mr. BALL. You found the sack in the area marked 2 on
     Exhibit J to the Studebaker deposition. Did you pick
     the sack up?
    Mr. MONTGOMERY. Which sack are we talking about now?
    Mr. BALL. The paper sack?
    Mr. MONTGOMERY. The small one or the larger one?
    Mr. BALL. The larger one you mentioned that was in position 2.
    Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes.
    Mr. BALL. You picked it up?
    Mr. MONTGOMERY. Wait just a minute no; I didn't pick it up.
    I believe Mr. Studebaker did. We left it laying right there so
    they could check it for prints.

Montgomery initially admits picking up the paper bag. Then denies it. A little white lie saved him some potential grief. No one was going to suffer because of it.

Quote

Detective Studebaker has NFI what happened to CE 142 yet Lt Day left it with him.

It is the three stooges in the SN with a paper bag.

And the beauty was that none of them were shown CE 142 in the WC testimonies!

The bag was had been authenticated and in safe custody from day one. No need to show it to them. Its appearance had changed anyway through testing. They were talking about the SN area and didn't need to rip out the building's SE corner to show it to the witnesses.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 05, 2018, 01:25:04 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It's what happens when dealing with religous zealots Tony.

The WC's version of events was incomplete and fragmentary - it is almost impossible to establish a timeline of events especially when it came to CE 142.

Mr Ball and Mr Belin have to take the blame for this by only showing CE 142 to Lt Day. There was no time stamp when CE 142 was found. How can that be?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 05, 2018, 01:31:14 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
     Mr. BALL. You found the sack in the area marked 2 on
     Exhibit J to the Studebaker deposition. Did you pick
     the sack up?
    Mr. MONTGOMERY. Which sack are we talking about now?
    Mr. BALL. The paper sack?
    Mr. MONTGOMERY. The small one or the larger one?
    Mr. BALL. The larger one you mentioned that was in position 2.
    Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes.
    Mr. BALL. You picked it up?
    Mr. MONTGOMERY. Wait just a minute no; I didn't pick it up.
    I believe Mr. Studebaker did. We left it laying right there so
    they could check it for prints.

Montgomery initially admits picking up the paper bag. Then denies it. A little white lie saved him some potential grief. No one was going to suffer because of it.

The bag was had been authenticated and in safe custody from day one. No need to show it to them. Its appearance had changed anyway through testing. They were talking about the SN area and didn't need to rip out the building's SE corner to show it to the witnesses.

Authenticated? Neither Montgomery, Johnson nor Studebaker were shown it nor asked to ID their own signatures!

Don't you think one needs to show crime scene evidence to the person(s) who found it?

The FBI made a reconstructed bag (same dimensions as CE 142 using paper and tape from the TSBD) and not even that was shown to anyone.

What about a photo instead, Jerry?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 05, 2018, 04:05:00 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


(http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/11/10/19/2E4D3EE800000578-0-Emojis_are_a_fun_way_to_communicate_with_friends_But_are_they_re-m-24_1447185576534.jpg)

Exactly, the amount of crazy self serving conclusions in this thread is beyond belief.



JohnM

JohnM - your images exceed your ability to provide a quality response.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jerry Organ on February 05, 2018, 04:21:00 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
JohnM - your images exceed your ability to provide a quality response.

I was thinking the same about your OP.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 05, 2018, 04:21:14 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
JohnM - your images exceed your ability to provide a quality response.

Must be frustrating to the "true believers" that the assembled testimonies and documents from the official investigation fail to support the official story.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 05, 2018, 04:23:25 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I was thinking the same about your OP.

Ah Jerry,

still waiting for your 26" bag analysis and the 30" wooden strip.......can you please elaborate.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 05, 2018, 04:31:36 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I was thinking the same about your OP.

Jerry - this is why I know I am wasting my time here. Comments like that cement for me the role and MO that LNers like yourself play here on the forum - derailers and time wasters. You are not interested in any discussion or cordial exchange of ideas.

I have presented a thorough and in depth analysis of CE 142 and that is the crap that you serve "I was thinking the same about your OP?"

I will not be responding to any more of your garbage posts. 





Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Paul Ernst on February 05, 2018, 04:37:18 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Jerry - this is why I know I am wasting my time here. Comments like that cement for me the role and MO that LNers like yourself play here on the forum - derailers and time wasters. You are not interested in any discussion or cordial exchange of ideas.

I have presented a thorough and in depth analysis of CE 142 and that is the crap that you serve "I was thinking the same about your OP?"

I will not be responding to any more of your garbage posts.

Bravo Tony!!!

It make me thinking about some time of the past.

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4308/36043121752_c3fe9486d8_c.jpg)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 05, 2018, 04:44:55 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Bravo Tony!!!

I make me thinking about some time of the past.

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4308/36043121752_c3fe9486d8_c.jpg)

LNers have no where to go with CE 142 - the official documents are there for all to read in the one spot.

The conclusions of the WC in regards to CE 142 are not supported by the documents nor the testimonies.

At least I can place Detective Studebaker's hands on the very paper and tape that constructed CE 142.

No LNer, FBI agent or WC member could do the same with LHO.

From it's construction, transport, placement of a disassembled CE 139 inside it and transport to the TSBD was nothing but purely speculative. Not even the Detectives can reach a consensus on where it was found and who found it and why it wasnt photographed.

Every step in the chain can not be proven - not one.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Paul Ernst on February 05, 2018, 04:50:50 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
LNers have no where to go with CE 142 - the official documents are there for all to read in the one spot.

The conclusions of the WC in regards to CE 142 are not supported by the documents nor the testimonies.

At least I can place Detective Studebaker's hands on the very paper and tape that constructed CE 142.

No LNer, FBI agent or WC member could do the same with LHO.

From it's construction, transport, placement of a disassembled CE 139 inside it and transport to the TSBD was nothing but purely speculative. Not even the Detectives can reach a consensus on where it was found and who found it and why it wasnt photographed.

Every step in the chain can not be proven - not one.

Right Tony the whole investigation is a big farce, and only focust one 1 shooter!!!



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jerry Organ on February 05, 2018, 04:51:35 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Bravo Tony!!!

It make me thinking about some time of the past.

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4308/36043121752_c3fe9486d8_c.jpg)

See why Tony has taken a shine to you; you take things out of context and make it into something silly. Actually, when I wrote that I had stuff like this Ernst-collage in mind:

(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/doofus/doofus-great-debater.jpg)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 05, 2018, 05:00:46 AM
Well said Tony,

I know we both had reservations before re-joining the forum. I had always thought that reasonable people from any viewpoint could exchange ideas and learn. Relatively recently I have had to change my mind. I find this debate to attract individuals (on both sides) unwilling or unable to keep an open mind or even accept obvious conclusions that they perceive might lead to a doubt in their "belief".

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ambigamy/201403/why-won-t-they-listen-reason (https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ambigamy/201403/why-won-t-they-listen-reason)

Why Won’t They Listen To Reason?
Can't, Won't, Shouldn't: Three opposite interpretations that leave us guessing.
Jeremy E Sherman Ph.D
Posted Mar 04, 2014

We’ve all been there, talking to a wall, someone who no matter how hard we try, no matter what angle we take, dismisses or simply ignores what we’re saying. It’s hugely frustrating and puts us in a bind worth dissecting.

There are three broad interpretations for such impenetrability:

They can’t understand:  They’re not trying to give you a hard time. They just haven’t got the toolkit. They’re not stonewalling, they’re just tone deaf in your communications register.  Yes you’re talking to a wall, but not one they’ve built to keep you out.  They can’t help it. It’s not in their temperament, education or vocabulary to understand what you’re saying. When they say “You’re not making any sense,” it’s true though not about you but them. You’d make sense to someone who had the range to understand you.
They don’t want to understand:  Oh, they could understand you all right, if they wanted. They just won’t for their selfish, indulgent personal reasons. You’re feeding them inconvenient information, information that disappoints them, takes them down a peg, irritates them.  When they say, “You’re getting on my nerves” they may be pointing a finger at you, but it’s really about their nerves. They like them soothed and the truths you’re sharing aren’t having that effect. Maybe they’re lazy, maybe they like driving you crazy with their inattentiveness, maybe they are low-budget smart-asses, people who indulge in a know-it-all sense of authority on the cheap, knowing all while thinking very little. There are lots of them around these days, Hannity wannabes for example, people who like dressing themselves up as thought leaders without thinking.
They shouldn’t understand:  They could understand, and would if it were worth it, but though you think they should, they shouldn’t. What you’re saying is actually irrelevant, lower priority than you think it is, or not important to them given their perfectly honorable priorities, different from yours. 
The bind is that each of these interpretations point to a different response from you.

If they can’t understand, stop pushing them. Don’t corner the congenitally blind and force them to see. Accommodate them. Forgive them for they know not what they’re missing.

But if they don’t want to understand, push them harder. Corner them. Win the war of attrition against their lazy self-indulgence.  They owe you receptivity and they’re not paying up. Send in the collection agents and make them pay.

And if they shouldn’t listen, cut ties. Don’t accommodate and don’t push, just let them go their separate way, you focusing on what’s important to you; them focusing on what’s important to them, at least to the extent possible.

The bind may be as frustrating as the inattentiveness, not knowing whether to xxxx or go blind, throw a fit or turn away.

Especially that middle interpretation, the lazy indulgent one.  How can you forgive or walk away from people who are just being jerks?  In a free society we all can claim whatever authority they want. There’s no license or certification they have to earn in order to speak with self-congratulatory self-certainty.  They can just form any old opinion they want by whatever means and claim to have the final word. They may not be able to get away with it in certain fields where there are concrete consequences for having wrong opinions, but in politics, philosophy, religion, ethics, strategy, forecasting, therapy and a bunch of other big-picture soft-consequence fields, they can get away with claiming any authority.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 05, 2018, 05:08:58 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


I will not be responding to any more of your garbage posts.

Could be considered a tautology.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 05, 2018, 05:19:27 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Well said Tony,

I know we both had reservations before re-joining the forum. I had always thought that reasonable people from any viewpoint could exchange ideas and learn. Relatively recently I have had to change my mind. I find this debate to attract individuals (on both sides) unwilling or unable to keep an open mind or even accept obvious conclusions that they perceive might lead to a doubt in their "belief".

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ambigamy/201403/why-won-t-they-listen-reason (https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ambigamy/201403/why-won-t-they-listen-reason)

Why Won’t They Listen To Reason?
Can't, Won't, Shouldn't: Three opposite interpretations that leave us guessing.
Jeremy E Sherman Ph.D
Posted Mar 04, 2014

We’ve all been there, talking to a wall, someone who no matter how hard we try, no matter what angle we take, dismisses or simply ignores what we’re saying. It’s hugely frustrating and puts us in a bind worth dissecting.

There are three broad interpretations for such impenetrability:

They can’t understand:  They’re not trying to give you a hard time. They just haven’t got the toolkit. They’re not stonewalling, they’re just tone deaf in your communications register.  Yes you’re talking to a wall, but not one they’ve built to keep you out.  They can’t help it. It’s not in their temperament, education or vocabulary to understand what you’re saying. When they say “You’re not making any sense,” it’s true though not about you but them. You’d make sense to someone who had the range to understand you.
They don’t want to understand:  Oh, they could understand you all right, if they wanted. They just won’t for their selfish, indulgent personal reasons. You’re feeding them inconvenient information, information that disappoints them, takes them down a peg, irritates them.  When they say, “You’re getting on my nerves” they may be pointing a finger at you, but it’s really about their nerves. They like them soothed and the truths you’re sharing aren’t having that effect. Maybe they’re lazy, maybe they like driving you crazy with their inattentiveness, maybe they are low-budget smart-asses, people who indulge in a know-it-all sense of authority on the cheap, knowing all while thinking very little. There are lots of them around these days, Hannity wannabes for example, people who like dressing themselves up as thought leaders without thinking.
They shouldn’t understand:  They could understand, and would if it were worth it, but though you think they should, they shouldn’t. What you’re saying is actually irrelevant, lower priority than you think it is, or not important to them given their perfectly honorable priorities, different from yours. 
The bind is that each of these interpretations point to a different response from you.

If they can’t understand, stop pushing them. Don’t corner the congenitally blind and force them to see. Accommodate them. Forgive them for they know not what they’re missing.

But if they don’t want to understand, push them harder. Corner them. Win the war of attrition against their lazy self-indulgence.  They owe you receptivity and they’re not paying up. Send in the collection agents and make them pay.

And if they shouldn’t listen, cut ties. Don’t accommodate and don’t push, just let them go their separate way, you focusing on what’s important to you; them focusing on what’s important to them, at least to the extent possible.

The bind may be as frustrating as the inattentiveness, not knowing whether to xxxx or go blind, throw a fit or turn away.

Especially that middle interpretation, the lazy indulgent one.  How can you forgive or walk away from people who are just being jerks?  In a free society we all can claim whatever authority they want. There’s no license or certification they have to earn in order to speak with self-congratulatory self-certainty.  They can just form any old opinion they want by whatever means and claim to have the final word. They may not be able to get away with it in certain fields where there are concrete consequences for having wrong opinions, but in politics, philosophy, religion, ethics, strategy, forecasting, therapy and a bunch of other big-picture soft-consequence fields, they can get away with claiming any authority.

There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with someone's viewpoint - I welcome it.  :)

CE 142 has hit a raw nerve (again) - it is a paper bag people and all I am asking is who made it?

I can not find the answer in the WC nor WR.


Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 05, 2018, 05:22:15 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
At least you've please the person most important to you.

Bye-bye, dopey.

And make it all my posts on all topics. Thanks.

I tell you what Jerry - you throw in your membership and so will I.

Deal?

I can easily join another forum and discuss CE 142.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jerry Organ on February 05, 2018, 05:41:26 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I tell you what Jerry - you throw in your membership and so will I.

Deal?

I can easily join another forum and discuss CE 142.

And I was looking forward to enjoying your promise an hour ago not to respond.

I exchanged letters with Robert Cutler for awhile in the 1970s. He was one of those practical New Englanders who I have great respect for. His series of books often included trajectory analysis of other critics' proposals. Cutler wasn't afraid to show where their angles didn't work; he was among the first to show that the trajectory from the knoll was perpendicular to the head and would mean an exit to the left side of the head.

Unfortunately Bob became so invested in his Umbrella Man Dart theory that he couldn't bear to have anything negative said about it. The theory defined him. Richard Trask is cut from the same cloth as Cutler, but pursued a more academic and reasoned evaluation of the evidence.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 05, 2018, 05:46:51 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
And I was looking forward to enjoying your promise an hour ago not to respond.

I exchanged letters with Robert Cutler for awhile in the 1970s. He was one of those practical New Englanders who I have great respect for. His series of books often included trajectory analysis of other critics' proposals. Cutler wasn't afraid to show where their angles didn't work; he was among the first to show that the trajectory from the knoll was perpendicular to the head and would mean an exit to the left side of the head.

Unfortunately Bob became so invested in his Umbrella Man Dart theory that he couldn't bear to have anything negative said about it. The theory defined him. Richard Trask is cut from the same cloth as Cutler, but pursued a more academic and reasoned evaluation of the evidence.

Do you know me personally to call me dopey in a public forum? Does this insult promote cordial discussion?

Again - the offer is there - chuck in your membership and I will do the same.

I don't need to be here and like Colin mentioned - I too was VERY reluctant to re-join.

You have me wrong - if you can prove that LHO constructed CE 142 I would be the first person to congratulate you. It does not worry me at all. I am doing this as fun research.

Now you show me why and where I am wrong in my hypothesis that Detective Studebaker made the paper bag. 



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Ray Mitcham on February 05, 2018, 09:44:31 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Now you show me why and where I am wrong in my hypothesis that Detective Studebaker made the paper bag.

You might have a very. very, long wait, Tony.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 05, 2018, 09:48:02 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You might have a very. very, long wait, Tony.

I am still waiting from my initial CE 142 thread.  ;)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 05, 2018, 03:35:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Day took CE 139 to City Hall by ~2.00 pm and it was noted on a CSSS at 2.15 pm at City Hall.

CE 142 was constructed by Detective Studebaker after CE 139 was processed on the 6th floor by Day and before Day left with it at ~2.00 pm. Hence anytime between 1.22 pm - 2.00 pm.

Studebaker had ample time to fold and tape a paper bag.

CE 142 was seen by the Detectives (Montgomery and Johnson) at what time Jack?

Johnson was stationed by Fritz (who had entered into the SN, climbed over the boxes on the floor and picked up the spent hulls and failed to note CE 142) where the Chicken lunch sack and Dr Pepper bottle were located.

Johnson only moved to the SN after Studebaker had finished dusting the chicken lunch sack and the Dr Pepper bottle.

That meant that Studebaker had returned from the first floor with CE 142 close to ~2.00 pm.

Weatherford stating he saw a "sack on the floor" was about as useful and descriptive as someone saying they went into a library and they saw a book.

There is no timestamp when CE 142 was found Jack.

If Weatherford's observation was the "deal breaker" why wasnt he called up to testify and further why wasnt he shown CE 142 and the chicken lunch sack?

In essence, you have nothing.


Jack,

“how about this simple scenario:

Hill picked up the chicken lunch sack and chicken piece and commenced yelling to the Detectives on the street below.”



Tony,
How about this. You really do not have any proof of any kind for all the speculating that is being stated in this thread. The only answer to the proof provided is to demand even more proof. The whole story requires a specific timeline of when the detectives made their observations. Unfortunately they arrived earlier than your timeline. Montgomery, Johnson at 1:00 o’clock, and Weatherford at the same time as Mooney.


It is obvious why this Hill story has suddenly come up. Montgomery and Shelley both stating there was two locations for the pieces of chicken end the BRW story before it even started. Are you sure you are not just trying to hold that fictional BRW story together.

Hill never touched the evidence, he yelled out the window to send up the crime lab

Mr. HILL. There was the boxes. The boxes were stacked in sort of a three-sided shield.
That would have concealed from general view, unless somebody specifically walked up and looked over them, anyone who was in a sitting or crouched position between them and the window. In front of this window and to the left or east corner of the window, there were two boxes, cardboard boxes that had the words "Roller books," on them.
On top of the larger stack of boxes that would have been used for concealment. there was a chicken leg bone and a paper sack which appeared to have been about the size normally used for a lunch sack. I wouldn't know what the sizes were. It was a sack, I would say extended, it would probably be 12 inches high, 10 inches long, and about 4 inches thick.
Then, on the floor near the baseboard or against the baseboard of the south wall of the building, in front of the second window, in front of the, well, we would have to say second window from the east corner, were three spent shells.
This is actually the jacket that holds the powder and not the slug. At this point, I asked the deputy sheriff to guard the scene, not to let anybody touch anything, and I went over still further west to another window about the middle of the building on the south side and yelled down to the street for them to send us the crime lab. Not knowing or not getting any indication from the street that they heard me, I asked the deputies again to guard the scene and I would go down and make sure that the crime lab was en route.



==================================

“He then dropped the chicken lunch sack and chicken piece on the ground and then leaned out the window and started waving his hat and hand. Allen hears him and takes a photo.”


No, did not happen


------------------------------------------------------


Why would Jim Ewell embellish a story about a chicken lunch sack and chicken piece? He heard Hill say that.


No idea you will have to ask him but he did. Probably just makes good press. How come no else states the same story? Place was crawling with media and he is the only one?


===================================



Now pay close attention - there is no doubt that CE 142, at some stage, was on the 6th floor and in the SE corner and that it was seen by several Detectives.


Now pay close attention- Studebaker never made the bag and Montgomery, Johnson, Weatherford all stated they seen the bag in the SN before Studebaker returned from the tape room.


You go and definitively prove CE 142 was seen before 2 pm in the SE corner of the 6th floor.


 Weatherford arrived at approximately the same time as Mooney, Montgomery and Johnson arrived at 1:00 PM. All state the seen the bag. No other bag was found in the SN but CE 142.
You have constantly equated the lack of certain detectives of noting “a bag” being found in the SN as proof CE 142 was not present there until Studebaker made the bag in the tape room and brought it back to the 6th floor.

 
===========================================


What has Detective Montgomery making CE 142 got to do with any conspiracy and who fired at JFK?



Really, you can actually make a statement like that after accusing everyone associated with the investigation of lying, moving, and/or fabricating evidence? No one is safe from this paranoid delusion. The attorneys are not asking the right questions because they are covering up some imaginary piece of evidence, the detectives are fabricating and outright lying about the evidence, and even BWF and LMR are lying to protect themselves in some twisted rationalization.

The end all is then you are offended by what Jerry Organ said after having questioned the character of all these people. Deep Politics is a forum that does not permit opposing view. Maybe you can post this complete analysis there. Ultimately your avatar explains it all. It is not about the truth it is all about fiction and telling a fictional entertaining account of the events.



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Ray Mitcham on February 05, 2018, 04:19:40 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login



It is obvious why this Hill story has suddenly come up. Montgomery and Shelley both stating there was two locations for the pieces of chicken end the BRW story before it even started. Are you sure you are not just trying to hold that fictional BRW story together.

Hill never touched the evidence, he yelled out the window to send up the crime lab

Mr. HILL. There was the boxes. The boxes were stacked in sort of a three-sided shield.
That would have concealed from general view, unless somebody specifically walked up and looked over them, anyone who was in a sitting or crouched position between them and the window. In front of this window and to the left or east corner of the window, there were two boxes, cardboard boxes that had the words "Roller books," on them.
On top of the larger stack of boxes that would have been used for concealment. there was a chicken leg bone and a paper sack which appeared to have been about the size normally used for a lunch sack. I wouldn't know what the sizes were. It was a sack, I would say extended, it would probably be 12 inches high, 10 inches long, and about 4 inches thick.
Then, on the floor near the baseboard or against the baseboard of the south wall of the building, in front of the second window, in front of the, well, we would have to say second window from the east corner, were three spent shells.
This is actually the jacket that holds the powder and not the slug. At this point, I asked the deputy sheriff to guard the scene, not to let anybody touch anything, and I went over still further west to another window about the middle of the building on the south side and yelled down to the street for them to send us the crime lab. Not knowing or not getting any indication from the street that they heard me, I asked the deputies again to guard the scene and I would go down and make sure that the crime lab was en route.




Then who let somebody remove the bag before the crime scene was photographed, Jack?







 
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 05, 2018, 04:28:09 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Jack,

“how about this simple scenario:

Hill picked up the chicken lunch sack and chicken piece and commenced yelling to the Detectives on the street below.”



Tony,
How about this. You really do not have any proof of any kind for all the speculating that is being stated in this thread. The only answer to the proof provided is to demand even more proof. The whole story requires a specific timeline of when the detectives made their observations. Unfortunately they arrived earlier than your timeline. Montgomery, Johnson at 1:00 o’clock, and Weatherford at the same time as Mooney.


It is obvious why this Hill story has suddenly come up. Montgomery and Shelley both stating there was two locations for the pieces of chicken end the BRW story before it even started. Are you sure you are not just trying to hold that fictional BRW story together.

Hill never touched the evidence, he yelled out the window to send up the crime lab

Mr. HILL. There was the boxes. The boxes were stacked in sort of a three-sided shield.
That would have concealed from general view, unless somebody specifically walked up and looked over them, anyone who was in a sitting or crouched position between them and the window. In front of this window and to the left or east corner of the window, there were two boxes, cardboard boxes that had the words "Roller books," on them.
On top of the larger stack of boxes that would have been used for concealment. there was a chicken leg bone and a paper sack which appeared to have been about the size normally used for a lunch sack. I wouldn't know what the sizes were. It was a sack, I would say extended, it would probably be 12 inches high, 10 inches long, and about 4 inches thick.
Then, on the floor near the baseboard or against the baseboard of the south wall of the building, in front of the second window, in front of the, well, we would have to say second window from the east corner, were three spent shells.
This is actually the jacket that holds the powder and not the slug. At this point, I asked the deputy sheriff to guard the scene, not to let anybody touch anything, and I went over still further west to another window about the middle of the building on the south side and yelled down to the street for them to send us the crime lab. Not knowing or not getting any indication from the street that they heard me, I asked the deputies again to guard the scene and I would go down and make sure that the crime lab was en route.



==================================

“He then dropped the chicken lunch sack and chicken piece on the ground and then leaned out the window and started waving his hat and hand. Allen hears him and takes a photo.”


No, did not happen


------------------------------------------------------


Why would Jim Ewell embellish a story about a chicken lunch sack and chicken piece? He heard Hill say that.


No idea you will have to ask him but he did. Probably just makes good press. How come no else states the same story? Place was crawling with media and he is the only one?


===================================



Now pay close attention - there is no doubt that CE 142, at some stage, was on the 6th floor and in the SE corner and that it was seen by several Detectives.


Now pay close attention- Studebaker never made the bag and Montgomery, Johnson, Weatherford all stated they seen the bag in the SN before Studebaker returned from the tape room.


You go and definitively prove CE 142 was seen before 2 pm in the SE corner of the 6th floor.


 Weatherford arrived at approximately the same time as Mooney, Montgomery and Johnson arrived at 1:00 PM. All state the seen the bag. No other bag was found in the SN but CE 142.
You have constantly equated the lack of certain detectives of noting “a bag” being found in the SN as proof CE 142 was not present there until Studebaker made the bag in the tape room and brought it back to the 6th floor.

 
===========================================


What has Detective Montgomery making CE 142 got to do with any conspiracy and who fired at JFK?



Really, you can actually make a statement like that after accusing everyone associated with the investigation of lying, moving, and/or fabricating evidence? No one is safe from this paranoid delusion. The attorneys are not asking the right questions because they are covering up some imaginary piece of evidence, the detectives are fabricating and outright lying about the evidence, and even BWF and LMR are lying to protect themselves in some twisted rationalization.

The end all is then you are offended by what Jerry Organ said after having questioned the character of all these people. Deep Politics is a forum that does not permit opposing view. Maybe you can post this complete analysis there. Ultimately your avatar explains it all. It is not about the truth it is all about fiction and telling a fictional entertaining account of the events.

All l need is the time that CE 142 was found and who found it.  :)

Are you still going around saying that the sniper only fired 2 rounds and that everyone was wrong when they heard three distinct shots? That was you wasn't  it Jack?

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 05, 2018, 04:40:56 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Then who let somebody remove the bag before the crime scene was photographed, Jack?


LNers won't address the core issues Ray, but instead choose to ignore them. Go find one that would put up a post like I did about any piece of evidence.

The fact remains, that a piece of crime scene evidence "found" in the same location as the three spent hulls and rifle rest was not photographed by a Detective and experienced Lt. whose task was to photograph and document the crime scene.

CE142 was the only piece of crime scene evidence that had the selective ability of disappearing and then reappearing on demand.



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 05, 2018, 09:00:07 PM
Jack,

Montgomery and Johnson arrived at the 6th floor and reported to Fritz after the discovery of the shells by Mooney. They both confirm this.

Quoting a time of 1pm is useless here. It is the sequence of events in order that is important.

Weatherford simply provided a statement that mentioned a bag. Without clarification it is impossible to tell which bag he was referring to.



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 06, 2018, 01:46:39 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Jack, Montgomery and Johnson arrived at the 6th floor and reported to Fritz after the discovery of the shells by Mooney. They both confirm this.

Quoting a time of 1pm is useless here. It is the sequence of events in order that is important.

Correct - there was no time stamp when CE 142 was "discovered" in the SE corner of the 6th floor. We do know that the chicken lunch sack was discovered at ~ 1.15 pm prior to the arrival of Fritz, Boyd, Sims, Day, Studebaker, Johnson and Montgomery.

Weatherford

"I went over to where he was and saw 3 expended rifle shells, and a sack on the floor and a partially eaten piece of chicken on top of one of the cartons which was used as a sort of barracade, advising Mooney to preserve the scene for the Crime Lab."

Officer A. D. McCurley
Date: Nov. 22, 1963

"We were searching the 6th floor when Deputy Sheriff Mooney, who was also on the 6th floor, hollered that he had found the place where the assassin had fired from. I went over and saw 3 expended shells laying by the window that faced onto Elm Street, along with a half-eaten piece of chicken that was laying on a cardboard carton. It appeared as if the assassin had piled up a bunch of boxes to hide from the view of anyone who happened to come up on that floor and had arranged 3 other cartons of books next to the window as though to make a rifle rest. This area was roped off and guarded until Captain Will Fritz of Dallas Police Department Homicide Bureau carrived."


Mooney

Mr. MOONEY - There was one of them partially eaten. And there was a little small paper poke.
Mr. BALL - By poke, you mean a paper sack?
Mr. MOONEY - Right.
Mr. BALL - Where was that?
Mr. MOONEY - Saw the chicken bone was laying here. The poke was laying about a foot away from it.
Mr. BALL - On the same carton?
Mr. MOONEY - Yes, sir. In close relation to each other. But as to what was in the sack--it was kind of together, and I didn't open it. I didn't put my hands on it to open it. I only saw one piece of chicken.

Mr. BALL - How big a bag was it?
Mr. MOONEY - Well, as to the number--these bags are numbered, I understand. But it was--I don't know what the number you would call it, but it didn't stand more than that high.
Mr. BALL - About 12 inches?
Mr. MOONEY - About 8 to 10 inches, at the most.
Mr. BALL - What color was the bag?
Mr. MOONEY - It was brown. Just a regular paper bag. Just as a grocery store uses for their produce and what-have-you.

Mr. BALL - Did you see a paper bag at any other window?
Mr. MOONEY - No, sir; I didn't.

Mr. BALL - Can you take this and point out about where the crease was on 509?
Now, was there anything you saw over in the corner?
Mr. MOONEY - No, sir; I didn't see anything over in the corner. I did see this one partially eaten piece of fried chicken laying over to the right. It looked like he was facing--

Mooney was the first closest law enforcement officer to where CE 142 was meant to be in an untouched SN - he saw the spent hulls, the boxes on the floor, the crease on the top of the box, the chicken piece and the chicken lunch sack.

He didn't see any paper bag on the floor anywhere. There was no way Weatherford could see what Mooney didn't. Further Weatherford failed to mention the chicken lunch sack. In all likelihood, it was the chicken lunch sack that was 1 foot away from the chicken piece that he saw.

The arrival of Johnson and Montgomery

Mr. JOHNSON. When we first arrived, we asked--we walked into the building and there was a uniform officer on duty there at the door, and we asked him if Captain Fritz was there, and he said yes.
And we asked him where, and he said he went on up to the sixth floor.
So at that time we were interested really in contacting Captain Fritz for any particular assignment he might want to give us, so we went on up to the sixth floor, and he was there, and that is when he assigned L. D. Montgomery, my partner and myself to the scene where the shooting occurred.

Mr. BELIN. How soon after the hulls were found did you go over to see them?
Mr. JOHNSON. I couldn't say.
Mr. BELIN. Were you there when they actually found it?
Mr. JOHNSON. Well, Captain Fritz was already there. There is a possibility--I am pretty sure they already found that when we got up there.

Mr. BELIN. Do you know of your own personal knowledge whether anything prior to the time that they took the first set of pictures up had been moved there?
Mr. JOHNSON. No, sir; as far as I know, they hadn't been moved. They weren't supposed to have been, and that was our job to keep them out of there, and nobody came in there, I am pretty sure.

Montgomery

Mr. MONTGOMERY. I got there, I guess--it was about 12:40 or 12:45.

comment - Montgomery can not arrive before the SN was discovered by Mooney nor before Captain Fritz arrived to the 6th floor. He was out by at least 40 minutes.

Mr. BALL. And what did you do when you got there?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. I reported to the sixth floor there.
Mr. BALL. Did you take part in the search of the sixth floor?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Well, first I reported to Captain Fritz, my partner and I and he assigned us to this position over there where the boxes were.
Mr. BALL. Where was that?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. It would be what--the southeast corner of the building--over there from where the shooting took place.
Mr. BALL. Well, was that before the cartridges had been found or afterwards?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. No, sir; they had been found when we got there.

comment - Montgomery and Johnson arrived after 1.15 pm

Mr. BALL. When you got there they had been found already?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. What about the rifle, had it been found?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. No, Sir; it hadn't.
Mr. BALL. The rifle was found after you got there?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes.

comment - Montgomery and Johnson arrived after 1.15 pm and before 1.25 pm

Mr. BALL. Did you see anything else over in the southeast corner of that sixth floor?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Well, sir, as I say, there was a lot of boxes and there was a sack and there was this pieces of chicken.
Mr. BALL. Was there a piece of chicken over there?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes, sir--there was chicken bones and what not--it looked like somebody had been eating chicken there.
Mr. BALL. Where was that?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. It was right there with the boxes---right there on the floor.
Mr. BALL On the floor?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. All right.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Well, let me see, there was one piece of chicken on a box and there was a piece on the floor--just kind of scattered around right there.
Mr. BALL. Where was the paper sack?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Let's see--the paper sack--I don't recall for sure if it was on the floor or on the box, but I know it was just there----one of those pictures might show exactly where it was.

comment - what sack was he talking about?

Mr. BALL. Now, where was the Dr. Pepper bottle?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. It was over a little more to the west of that window.
Mr. BALL. There was a sack of chicken bones with that--near that Dr. Pepper bottle?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. No; the Dr. Pepper bottle, the best I can recall, was sitting over there by itself.
Mr. BALL. Where was the sack with the chicken in it?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. It was right around where the boxes were--where the hulls there were.

Mr. BALL. The picture was taken of the sack by Mr. Studebaker, and he said it was the third set of windows near the little two-wheel truck?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Over there by the Dr. Pepper bottle.
Mr. BALL. Correct.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. I was thinking it was right there--it was probably that sack I'm thinking about---the one we found on the floor there that was used.
Mr. BALL. Here are two pictures, which are Exhibits H and I in the Studebaker depositions, which show the paper sack and the Dr. Pepper bottle and a two-wheel truck, and that is in Exhibit H, and Exhibit I shows the Dr. Pepper bottle and a two-wheel truck.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Is this the sack right here, now?
Mr. BALL. That's right--do you remember that?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. I don't remember the sack being right there--I remember it was there somewhere, but exactly--I don't.
Mr. BALL. Evidently you don't know?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. No, sir.
Mr. BALL. Now, was there some more chicken some place there also?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes--there would be some more chicken over here around where the hulls were found.
Mr. BALL. Now, I will show you a picture of----
Mr. MONTGOMERY. I know there was one piece laying up on top of the box there.
Mr. BALL. I show you a picture which is Exhibit J, which shows some boxes in the picture that's in the southeast corner there.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Can you tell me where the chicken was?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. I believe it was right up on these boxes right along in there. There's some boxes coming along in there.
Mr. BALL. Coming along in there you mean it's outside of the view of the pictures?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes, sir; right along in here.
Mr. BALL. And that would be to the north, of that point?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. And what did you see on top of those boxes?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. There was one piece of chicken there.
Mr. BALL. Partially eaten?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes; I believe it was partially eaten---on that picture right there I was just looking at.
Mr. BALL. That's Exhibit J.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Right over here is where we found that long piece of paper that looked like a sack, that the rifle had been in.
Mr. BALL. Does that have a number--that area--where you found that long piece of paper?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. It's No. 2 right here.
Mr. BALL. You found the sack in the area marked 2 on Exhibit J to the Studebaker deposition. Did you pick the sack up?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Which sack are we talking about now?
Mr. BALL. The paper sack?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. The small one or the larger one?
Mr. BALL. The larger one you mentioned that was in position 2.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes.
Mr. BALL. You picked it up?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Wait just a minute no; I didn't pick it up. I believe Mr. Studebaker did. We left it laying right there so they could check it for prints.

Studebaker was standing on top of CE 142

Mr. STUDEBAKER. No prints, and then I was standing right there and I told Johnson and Montgomery that there should be a print, and I turned around and figured he might have been standing right in there, and I dusted all these poles here and there wasn't no prints on any of it and started dusting this big box, No. 1 here, and lifted the print off of that box.

Note

Mr. BELIN. Do you know who found it?

Mr. JOHNSON. I know that the first I saw of it, L. D. Montgomery, my partner, picked it up off the floor, and it was folded up, and he unfolded it.


Mr. BELIN. You were standing there when he picked it up?
Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, because the Crime Lab was already finished where I was, and I had already walked off to where he was.

Mr. BALL. You picked it up?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Wait just a minute no; I didn't pick it up. I believe Mr. Studebaker did. We left it laying right there so they could check it for prints.

Colin this is the best testimonial evidence that strongly suggested the first time that CE 142 was seen was when Studebaker had finished dusting the chicken lunch sack and Dr Pepper bottle when he was back from the first floor with CE 142. Day was still at City Hall.

Studebaker could have easily left it at the SN "on a box" as Montgomery stated in No More Silence.

"I don’t remember exactly where I found the brown paper that
Oswald had wrapped the rifle in. It was probably close to 36 inches
long with tape on it and no writing. I recall that it was stuffed
between the boxes, not lying out open on the floor as were the
shell casings
"

Wasn't it Lt Day who "found" CE 142 and wrote on it? Right  8)

Mr. DAY. It has my name on it, and it also has other writing that I put on there for the information of the FBI.
Mr. BELIN. Could you read what you wrote on there?
Mr. DAY. "Found next to the sixth floor window gun fired from. May have been used to carry gun. Lieutenant J. C. Day."
Mr. BELIN. When did you write that?
Mr. DAY. I wrote that at the time the sack was found before it left our possession.
Mr. BELIN. All right, anything else that you wrote on there?
Mr. DAY. When the sack was released on November 22 to the FBI about 11:45 p.m., I put further information to the FBI reading as follows: "FBI: Has been dusted with metallic magnetic powder on outside only. Inside has not been processed. Lieut J. C. Day."

How could Day write on CE 142 when he wasnt even present when it was "found"? 

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 06, 2018, 06:38:44 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
LNers won't address the core issues Ray, but instead choose to ignore them. Go find one that would put up a post like I did about any piece of evidence.

The fact remains, that a piece of crime scene evidence "found" in the same location as the three spent hulls and rifle rest was not photographed by a Detective and experienced Lt. whose task was to photograph and document the crime scene.

CE142 was the only piece of crime scene evidence that had the selective ability of disappearing and then reappearing on demand.


Quote
LNers won't address the core issues Ray, but instead choose to ignore them. Go find one that would put up a post like I did about any piece of evidence.

Get off of your high horse.

I'm getting tired of seeing you post garbage like this.

To even begin to buy into your theory, one must believe that Buell Frazier and Linnie Mae Randle lied about seeing Oswald with a longer package that morning... and that Frazier is lying about the entire curtain rod story, a story he still maintains to this day.

I don't buy into your story not because I "won't address the core issue", but because I will not accept that Frazier and Randle lied about seeing Oswald carry a bag that morning.

Your entire theory rests on Frazier and Randle (not to mention Bonnie Ray Williams) telling porky pies.

The truly amazing part is that you won't even consider that the reason others won't buy into your story is because they are unwilling to accept that Randle and Frazier lied about a bag.


Quote
The fact remains, that a piece of crime scene evidence "found" in the same location as the three spent hulls and rifle rest was not photographed by a Detective and experienced Lt. whose task was to photograph and document the crime scene.

"The fact remains" that Linnie Mae Randle and Buell Frazier said they saw Oswald with a long bag that morning.  The fact also remains that you haven't shown anything which proves they are lying.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 06, 2018, 07:25:37 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Get off of your high horse.

I'm getting tired of seeing you post garbage like this.

To even begin to buy into your theory, one must believe that Buell Frazier and Linnie Mae Randle lied about seeing Oswald with a longer package that morning... and that Frazier is lying about the entire curtain rod story, a story he still maintains to this day.

I don't buy into your story not because I "won't address the core issue", but because I will not accept that Frazier and Randle lied about seeing Oswald carry a bag that morning.

Your entire theory rests on Frazier and Randle (not to mention Bonnie Ray Williams) telling porky pies.

The truly amazing part is that you won't even consider that the reason others won't buy into your story is because they are unwilling to accept that Randle and Frazier lied about a bag.


"The fact remains" that Linnie Mae Randle and Buell Frazier said they saw Oswald with a long bag that morning.  The fact also remains that you haven't shown anything which proves they are lying.

Bill,

thanks for the reply - as I have always stated - I have the utmost respect for you and you know that over many years of cordial exchange.

My hypothesis is not reliant on any observation, or otherwise, made by LMR, BWF nor BRW on the 22/11/1963.

LHO may have been carrying his lunch in a small or large paper bag or he may have had no paper bag at all. What ever brother and sister saw, that morning and that evening wasn't CE 142.

My hypothesis focuses on when CE 142 came into existence - either on the 21/11/1963 or on the 22/11/1963.

I have presented my case to strongly suggest that CE 142 was constructed on the 22/11/163 by Detective Robert Lee Studebaker in the first floor shipping room for non-nefarious means.

Now you present your case that he didn't.  :)

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 06, 2018, 08:35:29 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
LHO may have been carrying his lunch in a small or large paper bag or he may have had no paper bag at all. What ever brother and sister saw, that morning and that evening wasn't CE 142.

Oswald may have carried his lunch in a large bag?  I'd have more respect for you if you just stick with calling Frazier and Randle liars.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tom Sorensen on February 06, 2018, 09:37:03 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
One could go with Vince Drain's report saying Truly furnished similar brown paper from the roll...

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10406#relPageId=132

So far no one out of LN camp has addressed Vince Drain's report.

Neither did the Commission.

For obvious reasons.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Mytton on February 06, 2018, 09:59:34 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So far no one out of LN camp has addressed Vince Drain's report.

Neither did the Commission.

For obvious reasons.




What's to address?, Oswald's rifle bag was touched multiple times by Oswald!

(https://s17.postimg.org/rlo5p64an/Oswaldsprintsonthebag.jpg)

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0AvdN1r1G0E/TelVpZr4NDI/AAAAAAAAAE4/eZjRsBaiDeo/s400/blanket+rifle+lee+framed+junie+june.jpg)



JohnM



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 06, 2018, 10:01:25 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
So far no one out of LN camp has addressed Vince Drain's report.

Neither did the Commission.

For obvious reasons.

Tom,

Which version?  ;D

There was only one place Roy saw a paper bag in Carl's posession that no one saw.

Any guesses?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 06, 2018, 10:09:44 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login



What's to address?, Oswald's rifle bag was touched multiple times by Oswald!

(https://s17.postimg.org/rlo5p64an/Oswaldsprintsonthebag.jpg)

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-0AvdN1r1G0E/TelVpZr4NDI/AAAAAAAAAE4/eZjRsBaiDeo/s400/blanket+rifle+lee+framed+junie+june.jpg)



JohnM

If those prints were LHO's for arguments sake, how do you explain that no one saw LHO with CE 142?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Mytton on February 06, 2018, 10:16:21 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If those prints were LHO's for arguments sake, how do you explain that no one saw LHO with CE 142?




Quote
If those prints were LHO's for arguments sake,

The prints were examined on the bag, so don't bring up your FBI data bank fingerprint nonsense because it's not relevant. The prints belong to Lee Harvey Oswald.

(https://s17.postimg.org/rlo5p64an/Oswaldsprintsonthebag.jpg)

Quote
how do you explain that no one saw LHO with CE 142?

Mr. BALL - Did you ever see Lee Oswald carry any sort of large package?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I didn't, but some of the fellows said they did.
Mr. BALL - Who said that?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, Bill Shelley, he told me that he thought he saw him carrying a fairly good-sized package.
Mr. BALL - When did Shelley tell you that?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, it was--the day after it happened.




JohnM
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Michael Capasse on February 06, 2018, 10:46:25 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login



What's to address?, Oswald's rifle bag was touched multiple times by Oswald!


JohnM

Too bad you can't prove it

Mr Ball :  Did you lift any prints?
Mr Studebaker: There wasn’t but just smudges on it — is all it was. There was one little ole piece of a print and I’m sure I put a piece of tape on it to preserve it … just a partial print.

Mr Ball: The print of a finger or palm or what?
Mr Studebaker:  You couldn’t tell, it was so small
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tom Sorensen on February 06, 2018, 10:47:31 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tom,

Which version?  ;D

There was only one place Roy saw a paper bag in Carl's posession that no one saw.

Any guesses?

Right!
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 06, 2018, 10:52:31 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login



The prints were examined on the bag, so don't bring up your FBI data bank fingerprint nonsense because it's not relevant. The prints belong to Lee Harvey Oswald.

(https://s17.postimg.org/rlo5p64an/Oswaldsprintsonthebag.jpg)

Mr. BALL - Did you ever see Lee Oswald carry any sort of large package?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I didn't, but some of the fellows said they did.
Mr. BALL - Who said that?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, Bill Shelley, he told me that he thought he saw him carrying a fairly good-sized package.
Mr. BALL - When did Shelley tell you that?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, it was--the day after it happened.




JohnM

JohnM - so now your using JED as your "star witness" on hearsay?  ;D

Do you think Shelley should have told the DP, FBI or WC about this startling revelation?

Mr. BALL - Did you see him from time to time during that day?
Mr. SHELLEY - I am sure I did. I do remember seeing him when I came down to. eat lunch about 10 to 12.

No mention of a 38 inch package with a bulging content inside?

Sorry - the only package that Shelley saw where the two rifles that Warren brought in on the Wednesday.

Mr. BALL. Do you recall seeing a couple of guns in the Texas School Book Depository Building on the 20th of November 1963?
Mr. SHELLEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Where?
Mr. SHELLEY. Just outside Mr. Truly's office on the will-call counter.
Mr. BALL. And how did they get there?
Mr. SHELLEY. Mr. Warren Caster had just purchased them and brought them in and stopped by to see us.
Mr. BALL. Did you handle the guns?
Mr. SHELLEY. I held the .22.
Mr. BALL. And was there another make of gun too---there was, wasn't there?
Mr. SHELLEY. Yes; I believe there was a .30-06 Mauser that had been converted. It was a foreign make converted to a .30-06.
Mr. BALL. Did you handle that?
Mr. SHELLEY. No.
Mr. BALL. What happened to the guns?
Mr. SHELLEY. Well, we looked them over, like you do any new toy, and he putts them back in the box and goes out of the door.
Mr. BALL. And did you ever see them again?
Mr. SHELLEY. No, sir.

I will ask you again - without mentioning that FBI fingerprinting experts do FU their craft - who saw LHO with CE 142?

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Mytton on February 06, 2018, 10:56:44 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Too bad you can't prove it

Mr Ball :  Did you lift any prints?
Mr Studebaker: There wasn’t but just smudges on it — is all it was. There was one little ole piece of a print and I’m sure I put a piece of tape on it to preserve it … just a partial print.

Mr Ball: The print of a finger or palm or what?
Mr Studebaker:  You couldn’t tell, it was so small



Quote
Too bad you can't prove it


WTF? You've been studying this case for close to half a century and you still don't know the evidence?


Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona, how did you proceed to conduct your examination for fingerprints on this object?
Mr. LATONA. Well, an effort was made to remove as much of the powder as possible. And then this was subjected to what is known as the iodine-fuming method, which simply means flowing iodine fumes, which are developed by what is known as an iodine-fuming gun--it is a very simple affair, in which there are a couple of tubes attached to each other, having in one of them iodine crystals. And by simply blowing through one end, you get iodine fumes.
The iodine fumes are brought in as close contact to the surface as possible And if there are any prints which contain certain fatty material or protein material, the iodine fumes simply discolor it to a sort of brownish color. And of course such prints as are developed are photographed for record purposes.
That was done in this case here, but no latent prints were developed.
The next step then was to try an additional method, by chemicals. This was subsequently processed by a 3-percent solution of silver nitrate. The processing with silver nitrate resulted in developing two latent prints. One is what we call a latent palmprint, and the other is what we call a latent fingerprint.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can you briefly explain the action of the silver nitrate?
Mr. LATONA. Silver nitrate solution in itself is colorless, and it reacts with the sodium chloride, which is ordinary salt which is found in the perspiration or sweat which is exuded by the sweat pores.
This material covers the fingers. When it touches a surface such as an absorbent material, like paper, it leaves an outline on the paper.
When this salt material, which is left by the fingers on the paper, is immersed in the silver nitrate solution, there is a combining, an immediate combining of--the elements themselves will break down, and they recombine into silver chloride and sodium nitrate. We know that silver is sensitive to light. So that material, after it has been treated with the silver nitrate solution, is placed under a strong light. We utilize a carbon arc lamp, which has considerable ultraviolet light in it. And it will immediately start to discolor the specimen. Wherever there is any salt material, it will discolor it, much more so than the rest of the object, and show exactly where the latent prints have been developed. It is simply a reaction of the silver nitrate with the sodium chloride.
That is all it is.




JohnM
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 06, 2018, 10:59:29 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Too bad you can't prove it

Mr Ball :  Did you lift any prints?
Mr Studebaker: There wasn’t but just smudges on it — is all it was. There was one little ole piece of a print and I’m sure I put a piece of tape on it to preserve it … just a partial print.

Mr Ball: The print of a finger or palm or what?
Mr Studebaker:  You couldn’t tell, it was so small

Michael,

when Day handed in CE 142 to Vincent Drain on the night of 22/11/1963, he knew there were no prints on it and that neither BWF and his sister had recognized it.

Studebaker did not place anything on CE 142 or else the FBI expert would have noted it. Not even Day wrote anything about Studebaker noting a smudge on CE 142.




Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 06, 2018, 11:01:29 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login



The prints were examined on the bag, so don't bring up your FBI data bank fingerprint nonsense because it's not relevant. The prints belong to Lee Harvey Oswald.

(https://s17.postimg.org/rlo5p64an/Oswaldsprintsonthebag.jpg)

Mr. BALL - Did you ever see Lee Oswald carry any sort of large package?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I didn't, but some of the fellows said they did.
Mr. BALL - Who said that?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, Bill Shelley, he told me that he thought he saw him carrying a fairly good-sized package.
Mr. BALL - When did Shelley tell you that?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, it was--the day after it happened.




JohnM

And now Mr Shelley did you see Oswald carrying any packages that day?

And now Mr Piper did you talk with Mr Dougherty after he arrived on the first floor?

Let.Day, why did you take CE142 to the first floor and then have it returned to the 6th floor?

If it was so obvious that it was used to transport the rifle when discovered as claimed why was it not photographed in situ?

We should start a new list......bleedin' obvious questions unasked by WC councel.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 06, 2018, 11:02:17 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login



WTF? You've been studying this case for close to half a century and you still don't know the evidence?


Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona, how did you proceed to conduct your examination for fingerprints on this object?
Mr. LATONA. Well, an effort was made to remove as much of the powder as possible. And then this was subjected to what is known as the iodine-fuming method, which simply means flowing iodine fumes, which are developed by what is known as an iodine-fuming gun--it is a very simple affair, in which there are a couple of tubes attached to each other, having in one of them iodine crystals. And by simply blowing through one end, you get iodine fumes.
The iodine fumes are brought in as close contact to the surface as possible And if there are any prints which contain certain fatty material or protein material, the iodine fumes simply discolor it to a sort of brownish color. And of course such prints as are developed are photographed for record purposes.
That was done in this case here, but no latent prints were developed.
The next step then was to try an additional method, by chemicals. This was subsequently processed by a 3-percent solution of silver nitrate. The processing with silver nitrate resulted in developing two latent prints. One is what we call a latent palmprint, and the other is what we call a latent fingerprint.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can you briefly explain the action of the silver nitrate?
Mr. LATONA. Silver nitrate solution in itself is colorless, and it reacts with the sodium chloride, which is ordinary salt which is found in the perspiration or sweat which is exuded by the sweat pores.
This material covers the fingers. When it touches a surface such as an absorbent material, like paper, it leaves an outline on the paper.
When this salt material, which is left by the fingers on the paper, is immersed in the silver nitrate solution, there is a combining, an immediate combining of--the elements themselves will break down, and they recombine into silver chloride and sodium nitrate. We know that silver is sensitive to light. So that material, after it has been treated with the silver nitrate solution, is placed under a strong light. We utilize a carbon arc lamp, which has considerable ultraviolet light in it. And it will immediately start to discolor the specimen. Wherever there is any salt material, it will discolor it, much more so than the rest of the object, and show exactly where the latent prints have been developed. It is simply a reaction of the silver nitrate with the sodium chloride.
That is all it is.




JohnM

Why didn't the DP find anything on CE 142 using the fancy new magnetic black powder and further how could Montgomery, Johnson and Studebaker sign and date CE 142 next to a partial print that none of them saw on 22/11/1963?

Mr. STUDEBAKER. Well, we have a gray powder that we use for lifting prints and use under an ultra - violet light and we have a black volcano powder that we use on white or grey surfaces, and then just recently we purchased new powder it's a magnetic powder. It's a new type of powder that just use something like a pen to lift your powder out of the jar that it's in and it will lift a print off of a paper better than your regular dusting powder. It's more accurate in lifting a print than anything I have ever seen. It's a new type powder - a magnetic powder is what it is, and they have a jet black a gray and a silver - gray and different types of powder in there that you use on different types surfaces.

Are you suggesting that the DP were potentially letting off criminals because they didn't know how to lift a print?

Who saw LHO with CE 142?

I am sure that Pat could add something about the "prints" on CE 142.  :)

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 06, 2018, 11:36:40 AM
(http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/08/0896-001.gif)

They waited in their car half a block from the Paine's house. for 40 minutes!!!

Wonder how far from the Randles......do you think Linnie May was watching out her kitchen window?

Did Buell go to the hospital after the arrival of Weatherford, Walthers and Oxford and the cops moved to the Paine's?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 06, 2018, 11:51:28 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login



The prints were examined on the bag, so don't bring up your FBI data bank fingerprint nonsense because it's not relevant. The prints belong to Lee Harvey Oswald.

(https://s17.postimg.org/rlo5p64an/Oswaldsprintsonthebag.jpg)

Mr. BALL - Did you ever see Lee Oswald carry any sort of large package?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I didn't, but some of the fellows said they did.
Mr. BALL - Who said that?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, Bill Shelley, he told me that he thought he saw him carrying a fairly good-sized package.
Mr. BALL - When did Shelley tell you that?
Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, it was--the day after it happened.




JohnM

Oh yes it is.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona, when you find an apparent dissimilarity between an inked and a latent print, how do you know that it is caused by absorption of the surface upon which the latent print is placed, or by failure of the finger to exude material, rather than by the fact that you have a different fingerprint?

Mr. LATONA. That is simply by sheer experience.

 :(

See

https://phys.org/news/2005-09-faulty-fingerprints-debunks-forensic-science.html

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 06, 2018, 02:57:05 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Then who let somebody remove the bag before the crime scene was photographed, Jack?


No idea but it wasn’t Det Hill. Hill told the WC where the chicken and sack were located and they were not dropped on the floor or waved out the window.










 
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 06, 2018, 03:01:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
All l need is the time that CE 142 was found and who found it.  :)

Are you still going around saying that the sniper only fired 2 rounds and that everyone was wrong when they heard three distinct shots? That was you wasn't  it Jack?

Both the WC and HSCA believed the media influenced the number of shots reported. I know this is not as important as a bag that if never found in no way changes the fact that the rifle belonging to LHO, and was matched to the bullets and shells, was found on the 6th floor next to LHO’s clip board. The same LHO seen by BWF carrying a long package into the TSBD.

David Von Pein:
"Mr. Connally was one of the best witnesses for trying to determine how many shots were fired. And that number was almost certainly three, not just two."

“Almost certainly three”---- doesn't that sound like someone who is confident there was three shots and wrote a book based on the common belief there was three shots.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2017/09/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1261.html


The eyewitnesses reported there was only two shots, only two shots is the answer. Explain where there was a third shot. Organ, Mason, Elliot, and Wasinsky all discussing three shots in the Bang....Band.. Bang thread. They all believe there was three shots and cannot even agree on the location of anything but the last shot. They describe shots one and two completely different.  If there was three shots everyone would know where they located. The only unanimous facts in the whole assassination is the eyewitnesses location of the first shot and the fact that the carcano takes 2.3 seconds to cycle which leads to these ridiculous shot speculations. The only one who gets it is Zeon Wasinsky. Either believe two shots or believe a conspiracy. The witness statements describing a double sound at the end does not support the action of the carcano.

Hard to figure what Joe Elliot is thinking other than he has no idea about the shot sequence.

Jerry Organ
Re: The shot sequence, bang......bang......bang?
« Reply #123 on: February 03, 2018, 05:24:24 PM »

Have you ever check out how many of those saying the "first shot" struck the President were also limiting their recollections to those shots they could connect something with?

Many "two shots" witnesses said they heard another shot but were reluctant or refused to place that extra shot.

Mary Woodward was standing on the sidewalk the car as it approached and was sure of three shots:
1) Did not hit the President; he looked around afterward
2) Struck the President
3) Head shot.
Phil Willis was standing near the curb on the opposite side of the street and he recalled three shots:
1) First shot caused Mrs. Kennedy to turn her head rightwards (she does this beginning in the Z170s); Willis thought Kennedy could have been reacting to a bullet strike in his 05 slide mainly because he (mistakenly) thought his slide (Z202) was synonymous with Z226.
Then we have the Connallys and John Ready begin their rightward head turns in the Z160s, and the Willis girl slowing and stopping.

Could mean something regarding the shots; could mean nothing.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2018, 07:37:58 PM by Jerry Organ »
 
--------------------------------------------------

 Andrew Mason
Re: The shot sequence, bang......bang......bang?
« Reply #124 on: February 05, 2018, 05:11:31 PM »


That is only a problem if the first shot was at z223. There is a great deal of consistent evidence that it was before z200.  JFK became clear of any visual obstruction from the SN when JFK was halfway between the lamppost on Elm and the Thornton Freeway sign, which is about z195.  Phil Willis took his photo at z202 which he said was a very short time after the first shot.  Betzner said he took his z186 photo just before the first shot.  Jack Ready said he turned to the rear in immediately in response to the first shot. He begins to turn at z199.  Rosemary Willis turns her head sharply to the rear between z202-204.  She said she looked back at that TSBD and saw pigeons flying from the roof.   

If the first shot was around z195 and the second shot at z271-272 (there is evidence of this as well), then there is no problem with Oswald firing all shots i.e. z195 + 4.2 seconds -> z271 + 2.3 seconds -> z313. 

----------------------------------------------------------------

Zeon Wasinsky

Re: The shot sequence, bang......bang......bang?
« Reply #120 on: February 03, 2018, 05:26:33 AM »

Mr. NORMAN. I believe it was his right arm, and I can't remember what the exact time was but I know I heard a shot, and then after I heard the shot, well, it seems as though the President, you know, slumped or something, and then another shot and I believe Jarman or someone told me, he said, "I believe someone is shooting at the President," and I think I made a statement "It is someone shooting at the President, and I believe it came from up above us."
Well, I couldn't see at all during the time but I know I heard a third shot fired, and I could also hear something sounded like the shell hulls hitting the floor and the ejecting of the rifle, it sounded as though it was to me.
Mr. BALL. How many shots did you hear?
Mr. NORMAN. Three.

Heard 1st shot. Saw President "slump" Heard 2 more shots. Harold Norman, closest ear witness to the shooter.

demonstrates shot timing of 3 shots fired in less than 5 seconds. Harold Norman, closest ear witness to the shooter.

Guess Norman must be mistaken on BOTH his observation AND his  memory of the shot spacing, according to WC since if the 1st shot caused the "slumping" then the 1st shot was at Z223 and that would mean Normans other observation, of hearing 3 shots in less than 5 seconds is also correct, since Z223 to Z313 is 4.8 seconds. That would make it not probable that the MC rifle was used.

So the WC must reject most of Normans observation except for hearing 3 shots and hearing shells hit the floor.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Joe Elliott

Re: The shot sequence, bang......bang......bang?
« Reply #126 on: Today at 03:04:46 AM »
No. The HSCA 1970’s ‘witnesses’ didn’t compare the muzzle blast of a Carcano with the backfires commonly produced by early 1960’s motorcycles travelling at slow speeds. They didn’t compare the muzzle blast with the fireworks one could legally buy in 1963 set off from various distances from the observer.

They only tested the loudness of a Carcano rifle. And assumed a motorcycle backfire could not be as loud. And assumed a 1963 firecracker could not be loud enough to be as loud, even if it was set off much closer than the rifle was.

If the HSCA observers were wrong, this isn’t a case of mishearing rifles, backfires and firecrackers. This was a case of not testing backfires and firecrackers at all and making assumptions that backfires and firecrackers could not be loud enough. Not errors of observations, but much more fundamental errors of judgment. Making unwarranted assumptions that scientist should never do. If they want to argue that rifle fire cannot be mistaken for backfires or firecrackers, they need to first run an experiment involving rifles, backfires and firecrackers, not just rifles.

However, looking up charts on how loud rifles, backfires and firecrackers really are, and noting that the loudness of a sound is greatly effected by the distance from the sound source, it is possible to estimate that a rifle 90 yards away, pointed in the general direction of the observer, would sound about as loud as a firecracker from 20 yards away. Making it plausible that a distracted witness, hearing a rifle from 90 yards away, might mistake it for something much more commonplace, a firecracker that is 20 yards away. Or a nearby motorcycle. And continue enjoying their brief close up view of the President and First Lady.




Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Ray Mitcham on February 06, 2018, 03:06:12 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


Well, despite Mooney protecting the site,  somebody must have moved it as it wasn't in any of the photographs.

(Or most probably as Tony Fratini has shown it wasn't there in the first place.)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 06, 2018, 03:11:06 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Jack,

Montgomery and Johnson arrived at the 6th floor and reported to Fritz after the discovery of the shells by Mooney. They both confirm this.

Quoting a time of 1pm is useless here. It is the sequence of events in order that is important.

Weatherford simply provided a statement that mentioned a bag. Without clarification it is impossible to tell which bag he was referring to.

Mooney is guarding the SN until the crime lab arrives, Weatherford arrives before the crime lab, Biffle notes he goes to the corner after Mooney finds the SN and looks at the bag with all the other detectives and before they found the rifle.

Mooney

Inside this cubby hole affair was three more boxes so arranged as to provide what appeared to be a rest for a rifle. On one of these cartons was a half-eaten piece of chicken. The minute that I saw the expended shells on the floor, I hung my head out of the half opened window and signaled to Sheriff Bill Decker and Captain Will Fritz who were outside the building and advised them to send up the Crime Lab Officers at once that I had located the area from which the shots had been fired. At this time, Officers Webstr, Victory, and McCurley came over to this spot and we guarded this spot until Crime Lab Officers got upstairs within a matter of a few minutes. We then turned this area over to Captain Fritz and his officers for processing.



Weatherford
"....I came down to the 6th floor and while searching this floor, Deputy Luke Mooney said, "here are some shells". I went over to where he was and saw 3 expended rifle shells, and a sack on the floor and a partially eaten piece of chicken on top of one of the cartons which was used as a sort of barracade, advising Mooney to preserve the scene for the Crime Lab




Taken from Biffle's notes  page 6 and 7:

It didn't take the policemen long to find the cartridges by the ambush window. We all stood around staring at the brown wrapping paper found nearby. It was a reasonable conclusion that it held the rifle.
An officer in the northwest corner of the room yelled: "Over here!"
I ran over, dodging down narrow alleys in the stacks of packing crates.
I was secure in the knowledge that my theory was materializing. They'd found the body of the gunman, I guessed.
I was let down when the policeman pointed among a jumble of boxes at the hidden rifle. The muzzle and the steel butt plate were barely visible.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 06, 2018, 03:12:24 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Michael,

when Day handed in CE 142 to Vincent Drain on the night of 22/11/1963, he knew there were no prints on it and that neither BWF and his sister had recognized it.

Studebaker did not place anything on CE 142 or else the FBI expert would have noted it. Not even Day wrote anything about Studebaker noting a smudge on CE 142.

Isn't there a scribbled note on the bag and Studebaker and Day's signature and date on that bag in the evidence photo that was taken on the night of 11/22/63 before the evidence was released to the FBI?

If they hadn't found anything to indicate the bag was in fact evidence....then why the note? and why even bother turning it over to the FBI?

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 06, 2018, 03:17:53 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
LNers won't address the core issues Ray, but instead choose to ignore them. Go find one that would put up a post like I did about any piece of evidence.

The fact remains, that a piece of crime scene evidence "found" in the same location as the three spent hulls and rifle rest was not photographed by a Detective and experienced Lt. whose task was to photograph and document the crime scene.

CE142 was the only piece of crime scene evidence that had the selective ability of disappearing and then reappearing on demand.


Brewer and Haygood both mention seeing the sack in the corner. Weatherford and Biffle both seen the sack before the arrival of the crime scene crew.


Mr. BELIN. Did you see anything else in the southeast corner?
Mr. BREWER. There was a paper, relatively long paper sack there.
Mr. BELIN. Where was that?
Mr. BREWER. It was there In the southeast corner.
Mr. BELIN. Under the window?
Mr. BREWER. No, sir. To the left of it. To the east of it.
Mr. BELIN. To the left as you faced the window?
Mr. BREWER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN. Did the window come right up next to the corner there, do you remember?
Mr. BREWER. No, sir; it didn't come up next to the corner. It was offset.
Mr. BELIN. Can you remember how far at all, or not?
Mr. BREWER. No, sir; I don't remember the exact distance of it.
Mr. BELIN. Was any part of the paper sack under the window, If you remember or not? That long paper sack?
Mr. BREWER. No, sir.
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember anything about what the sack looked like?
Mr. BREWER. Well, it was assumed at the time that it was the sack that the rifle was wrapped up in when it was brought into the building, and it appeared that it could have been used for that.
Mr. BELIN. Well, you mean you assumed that before you found the rifle?
Mr. BREWER. Yes, sir; I suppose. That was discussed.


Mr. BELIN. See any long bags which would be a foot or foot and a half or more long?
Mr. HAYGOOD. Yes; just a plain brown paper bag with tape in the corner.
Mr. BELIN. What tape?
Mr. HAYGOOD. Yes; there was just brown paper tape on it. Just a brown paper bag with paper tape. It had been taped up.
Mr. BELIN. How long was that, if you can remember?
Mr. HAYGOOD. The exact length, I couldn't say. It was approximately rifle length.
Mr. BELIN. Would this have been right under the window, or to the east or west of the window, if you remember?
Mr. HAYGOOD. As I remember, it was directly in the corner, in the southeast corner.
Mr. BELIN. Well, as you remember, was the window directly in the southeast corner, or was the window a little bit to the west of that corner, if you remember?
Mr. HAYGOOD. The window at that location faces south, on the southeast corner.
Mr. BELIN. About how far from the east corner of the building is the window?
Mr. HAYGOOD. Well, it is just approximately like that, and then the corner here. Like the window would be there, and then it would be a corner.
Mr. BELIN. As far as the window in this room from that corner [indicating in room]?
Mr. HAYGOOD. I wouldn't even attempt to say the approximate distance of the window from the corner. I don't know.
Mr. BELIN. Well, if you don't know, that is what I want to find out.
Mr. HAYGOOD. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. Was the bag right under the window?
Mr. HAYGOOD. It was in the corner.
Mr. BELIN. Not under the window?
Mr. HAYGOOD. No; it was in the corner of the building, the southeast corner.
Mr. BELIN. Anything else you noticed up there?
Mr. HAYGOOD. That is all.
Mr. BELIN. Now, where were you when you saw the when you heard a rifle had been found?
Mr. HAYGOOD. On the floor there, best as I can remember, and I went to that same location as the other one, just like I stated on the other one where the shells was found.


Biffle
Before the rifle was found.
Taken from Biffle's notes  page 6 and 7:

It didn't take the policemen long to find the cartridges by the ambush window. We all stood around staring at the brown wrapping paper found nearby. It was a reasonable conclusion that it held the rifle.
An officer in the northwest corner of the room yelled: "Over here!"    
I ran over, dodging down narrow alleys in the stacks of packing crates. I was secure in the knowledge that my theory was materializing. They'd found the body of the gunman, I guessed.
I was let down when the policeman pointed among a jumble of boxes at the hidden rifle. The muzzle and the steel butt plate were barely visible.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 06, 2018, 05:38:07 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Both the WC and HSCA believed the media influenced the number of shots reported. I know this is not as important as a bag that if never found in no way changes the fact that the rifle belonging to LHO, and was matched to the bullets and shells, was found on the 6th floor next to LHO’s clip board. The same LHO seen by BWF carrying a long package into the TSBD.
David Von Pein:
"Mr. Connally was one of the best witnesses for trying to determine how many shots were fired. And that number was almost certainly three, not just two."

“Almost certainly three”---- doesn't that sound like someone who is confident there was three shots and wrote a book based on the common belief there was three shots.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2017/09/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-1261.html


The eyewitnesses reported there was only two shots, only two shots is the answer. Explain where there was a third shot. Organ, Mason, Elliot, and Wasinsky all discussing three shots in the Bang....Band.. Bang thread. They all believe there was three shots and cannot even agree on the location of anything but the last shot. They describe shots one and two completely different.  If there was three shots everyone would know where they located. The only unanimous facts in the whole assassination is the eyewitnesses location of the first shot and the fact that the carcano takes 2.3 seconds to cycle which leads to these ridiculous shot speculations. The only one who gets it is Zeon Wasinsky. Either believe two shots or believe a conspiracy. The witness statements describing a double sound at the end does not support the action of the carcano.

Hard to figure what Joe Elliot is thinking other than he has no idea about the shot sequence.

Jerry Organ
Re: The shot sequence, bang......bang......bang?
« Reply #123 on: February 03, 2018, 05:24:24 PM »

Have you ever check out how many of those saying the "first shot" struck the President were also limiting their recollections to those shots they could connect something with?

Many "two shots" witnesses said they heard another shot but were reluctant or refused to place that extra shot.

Mary Woodward was standing on the sidewalk the car as it approached and was sure of three shots:
1) Did not hit the President; he looked around afterward
2) Struck the President
3) Head shot.
Phil Willis was standing near the curb on the opposite side of the street and he recalled three shots:
1) First shot caused Mrs. Kennedy to turn her head rightwards (she does this beginning in the Z170s); Willis thought Kennedy could have been reacting to a bullet strike in his 05 slide mainly because he (mistakenly) thought his slide (Z202) was synonymous with Z226.
Then we have the Connallys and John Ready begin their rightward head turns in the Z160s, and the Willis girl slowing and stopping.

Could mean something regarding the shots; could mean nothing.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2018, 07:37:58 PM by Jerry Organ »
 
--------------------------------------------------

 Andrew Mason
Re: The shot sequence, bang......bang......bang?
« Reply #124 on: February 05, 2018, 05:11:31 PM »


That is only a problem if the first shot was at z223. There is a great deal of consistent evidence that it was before z200.  JFK became clear of any visual obstruction from the SN when JFK was halfway between the lamppost on Elm and the Thornton Freeway sign, which is about z195.  Phil Willis took his photo at z202 which he said was a very short time after the first shot.  Betzner said he took his z186 photo just before the first shot.  Jack Ready said he turned to the rear in immediately in response to the first shot. He begins to turn at z199.  Rosemary Willis turns her head sharply to the rear between z202-204.  She said she looked back at that TSBD and saw pigeons flying from the roof.   

If the first shot was around z195 and the second shot at z271-272 (there is evidence of this as well), then there is no problem with Oswald firing all shots i.e. z195 + 4.2 seconds -> z271 + 2.3 seconds -> z313. 

----------------------------------------------------------------

Zeon Wasinsky

Re: The shot sequence, bang......bang......bang?
« Reply #120 on: February 03, 2018, 05:26:33 AM »

Mr. NORMAN. I believe it was his right arm, and I can't remember what the exact time was but I know I heard a shot, and then after I heard the shot, well, it seems as though the President, you know, slumped or something, and then another shot and I believe Jarman or someone told me, he said, "I believe someone is shooting at the President," and I think I made a statement "It is someone shooting at the President, and I believe it came from up above us."
Well, I couldn't see at all during the time but I know I heard a third shot fired, and I could also hear something sounded like the shell hulls hitting the floor and the ejecting of the rifle, it sounded as though it was to me.
Mr. BALL. How many shots did you hear?
Mr. NORMAN. Three.

Heard 1st shot. Saw President "slump" Heard 2 more shots. Harold Norman, closest ear witness to the shooter.

demonstrates shot timing of 3 shots fired in less than 5 seconds. Harold Norman, closest ear witness to the shooter.

Guess Norman must be mistaken on BOTH his observation AND his  memory of the shot spacing, according to WC since if the 1st shot caused the "slumping" then the 1st shot was at Z223 and that would mean Normans other observation, of hearing 3 shots in less than 5 seconds is also correct, since Z223 to Z313 is 4.8 seconds. That would make it not probable that the MC rifle was used.

So the WC must reject most of Normans observation except for hearing 3 shots and hearing shells hit the floor.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Joe Elliott

Re: The shot sequence, bang......bang......bang?
« Reply #126 on: Today at 03:04:46 AM »
No. The HSCA 1970’s ‘witnesses’ didn’t compare the muzzle blast of a Carcano with the backfires commonly produced by early 1960’s motorcycles travelling at slow speeds. They didn’t compare the muzzle blast with the fireworks one could legally buy in 1963 set off from various distances from the observer.

They only tested the loudness of a Carcano rifle. And assumed a motorcycle backfire could not be as loud. And assumed a 1963 firecracker could not be loud enough to be as loud, even if it was set off much closer than the rifle was.

If the HSCA observers were wrong, this isn’t a case of mishearing rifles, backfires and firecrackers. This was a case of not testing backfires and firecrackers at all and making assumptions that backfires and firecrackers could not be loud enough. Not errors of observations, but much more fundamental errors of judgment. Making unwarranted assumptions that scientist should never do. If they want to argue that rifle fire cannot be mistaken for backfires or firecrackers, they need to first run an experiment involving rifles, backfires and firecrackers, not just rifles.

However, looking up charts on how loud rifles, backfires and firecrackers really are, and noting that the loudness of a sound is greatly effected by the distance from the sound source, it is possible to estimate that a rifle 90 yards away, pointed in the general direction of the observer, would sound about as loud as a firecracker from 20 yards away. Making it plausible that a distracted witness, hearing a rifle from 90 yards away, might mistake it for something much more commonplace, a firecracker that is 20 yards away. Or a nearby motorcycle. And continue enjoying their brief close up view of the President and First Lady.

Hi Jack,

Its fun coming up with a hypothesis isn't it? Why dont you commence a new thread, as l am sure many would like to discuss your two shot theory.

I agree about the influence of the media. That chicken lunch and Dr Pepper were mistaken to belonging to the assassin. Pity that BRW never mentioned that he was actually on the 6th floor eating his chicken lunch in his first day report to the DP. What do you think would of happened to him?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 06, 2018, 05:52:17 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


The Chicken lunch sack and half eaten chicken piece ABSOLUTELY were moved from their initial location within the SN. They were moved further west by Hill. A reporter isn't going to be randomly making up a story about two items that just happened to be on the 6th floor at the same time that Hill stuck his head out of a window adjacent to the SN.

The movement of these items explained how there were contrasting testimonies of where they were seen. It also assisted BRW big time. But that's for another thread.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 06, 2018, 06:05:11 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Brewer and Haygood both mention seeing the sack in the corner. Weatherford and Biffle both seen the sack before the arrival of the crime scene crew.


Mr. BELIN. Did you see anything else in the southeast corner?
Mr. BREWER. There was a paper, relatively long paper sack there.
Mr. BELIN. Where was that?
Mr. BREWER. It was there In the southeast corner.
Mr. BELIN. Under the window?
Mr. BREWER. No, sir. To the left of it. To the east of it.
Mr. BELIN. To the left as you faced the window?
Mr. BREWER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BELIN. Did the window come right up next to the corner there, do you remember?
Mr. BREWER. No, sir; it didn't come up next to the corner. It was offset.
Mr. BELIN. Can you remember how far at all, or not?
Mr. BREWER. No, sir; I don't remember the exact distance of it.
Mr. BELIN. Was any part of the paper sack under the window, If you remember or not? That long paper sack?
Mr. BREWER. No, sir.
Mr. BELIN. Do you remember anything about what the sack looked like?
Mr. BREWER. Well, it was assumed at the time that it was the sack that the rifle was wrapped up in when it was brought into the building, and it appeared that it could have been used for that.
Mr. BELIN. Well, you mean you assumed that before you found the rifle?
Mr. BREWER. Yes, sir; I suppose. That was discussed.


Mr. BELIN. See any long bags which would be a foot or foot and a half or more long?
Mr. HAYGOOD. Yes; just a plain brown paper bag with tape in the corner.
Mr. BELIN. What tape?
Mr. HAYGOOD. Yes; there was just brown paper tape on it. Just a brown paper bag with paper tape. It had been taped up.
Mr. BELIN. How long was that, if you can remember?
Mr. HAYGOOD. The exact length, I couldn't say. It was approximately rifle length.
Mr. BELIN. Would this have been right under the window, or to the east or west of the window, if you remember?
Mr. HAYGOOD. As I remember, it was directly in the corner, in the southeast corner.
Mr. BELIN. Well, as you remember, was the window directly in the southeast corner, or was the window a little bit to the west of that corner, if you remember?
Mr. HAYGOOD. The window at that location faces south, on the southeast corner.
Mr. BELIN. About how far from the east corner of the building is the window?
Mr. HAYGOOD. Well, it is just approximately like that, and then the corner here. Like the window would be there, and then it would be a corner.
Mr. BELIN. As far as the window in this room from that corner [indicating in room]?
Mr. HAYGOOD. I wouldn't even attempt to say the approximate distance of the window from the corner. I don't know.
Mr. BELIN. Well, if you don't know, that is what I want to find out.
Mr. HAYGOOD. Yes.
Mr. BELIN. Was the bag right under the window?
Mr. HAYGOOD. It was in the corner.
Mr. BELIN. Not under the window?
Mr. HAYGOOD. No; it was in the corner of the building, the southeast corner.
Mr. BELIN. Anything else you noticed up there?
Mr. HAYGOOD. That is all.
Mr. BELIN. Now, where were you when you saw the when you heard a rifle had been found?
Mr. HAYGOOD. On the floor there, best as I can remember, and I went to that same location as the other one, just like I stated on the other one where the shells was found.


Biffle
Before the rifle was found.
Taken from Biffle's notes  page 6 and 7:

It didn't take the policemen long to find the cartridges by the ambush window. We all stood around staring at the brown wrapping paper found nearby. It was a reasonable conclusion that it held the rifle.
An officer in the northwest corner of the room yelled: "Over here!"    
I ran over, dodging down narrow alleys in the stacks of packing crates. I was secure in the knowledge that my theory was materializing. They'd found the body of the gunman, I guessed.
I was let down when the policeman pointed among a jumble of boxes at the hidden rifle. The muzzle and the steel butt plate were barely visible.

There is no proof they saw CE 142. FRITZ stated that he never saw it and that it was recovered later and that he wasn't there. How can BIFFLE, HEYGOOD and BREWER see CE 142 when 12 others didn't including Alyea who was filming crime scene evidence including Fritz standing in the SN?

IF they saw CE 142 do you think someone should have informed the Captain of it? Maybe even lt Day or Studebaker?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 06, 2018, 06:19:07 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Isn't there a scribbled note on the bag and Studebaker and Day's signature and date on that bag in the evidence photo that was taken on the night of 11/22/63 before the evidence was released to the FBI?

If they hadn't found anything to indicate the bag was in fact evidence....then why the note? and why even bother turning it over to the FBI?

Walt,

It isn't clear when Day actually wrote on CE 142 nor CE 677. I believe Day handed it in because it was shown to BWF and LMR as a prop. There was an FBI report that stated that LHO may have thrown out the paper bag that BWF saw him with. It clearly wasn't CE 142.

I didn't think Day was expecting the FBI to find partials on it do you?

Also I am convinced that FRITZ had shown CE 142 to LHO otherwise how else was he to know both the size and shape of the bag that he never saw in the first place?

Didn't Day "lock it up and no one saw it"?

Yeah, right.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 06, 2018, 06:48:39 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Walt,

It isn't clear when Day actually wrote on CE 142 nor CE 677. I believe Day handed it in because it was shown to BWF and LMR as a prop. There was an FBI report that stated that LHO may have thrown out the paper bag that BWF saw him with. It clearly wasn't CE 142.

I didn't think Day was expecting the FBI to find partials on it do you?

Also I am convinced that FRITZ had shown CE 142 to LHO otherwise how else was he to know both the size and shape of the bag that he never saw in the first place?

Didn't Day "lock it up and no one saw it"?

Yeah, right.

Tony.... I thought that you had pointed out that Day and Studebaker had written a note on a bag dated 11/22/63 and that bag is shown in the evidence photo for 11/22/63.....  And I thought you had pointed out that they just happened to write the note adjacent to the spot where the FBI found a print.  ( But the DPD didn't know that print was there when they wrote the note and released the sack to the FBI. )    The story is not believable.....   
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 06, 2018, 08:36:11 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tony.... I thought that you had pointed out that Day and Studebaker had written a note on a bag dated 11/22/63 and that bag is shown in the evidence photo for 11/22/63.....  And I thought you had pointed out that they just happened to write the note adjacent to the spot where the FBI found a print.  ( But the DPD didn't know that print was there when they wrote the note and released the sack to the FBI. )    The story is not believable.....

Day wrote directly on CE 142 (instead of tagging it) and three Detectives (Montgomery, Studebaker and Johnson) signed it next to a partial print that they could not have seen. None of the Detectives were asked to ID CE 142.

Both Day and Studebaker wrote on CE 677.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Michael Capasse on February 06, 2018, 09:06:57 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login



Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona, how did you proceed to conduct your examination for fingerprints on this object?
Mr. LATONA. Well, an effort was made to remove as much of the powder as possible. And then this was subjected to what is known as the iodine-fuming method, which simply means flowing iodine fumes, which are developed by what is known as an iodine-fuming gun--it is a very simple affair, in which there are a couple of tubes attached to each other, having in one of them iodine crystals. And by simply blowing through one end, you get iodine fumes.
The iodine fumes are brought in as close contact to the surface as possible And if there are any prints which contain certain fatty material or protein material, the iodine fumes simply discolor it to a sort of brownish color. And of course such prints as are developed are photographed for record purposes.
That was done in this case here, but no latent prints were developed.
The next step then was to try an additional method, by chemicals. This was subsequently processed by a 3-percent solution of silver nitrate. The processing with silver nitrate resulted in developing two latent prints. One is what we call a latent palmprint, and the other is what we call a latent fingerprint.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can you briefly explain the action of the silver nitrate?
Mr. LATONA. Silver nitrate solution in itself is colorless, and it reacts with the sodium chloride, which is ordinary salt which is found in the perspiration or sweat which is exuded by the sweat pores.
This material covers the fingers. When it touches a surface such as an absorbent material, like paper, it leaves an outline on the paper.
When this salt material, which is left by the fingers on the paper, is immersed in the silver nitrate solution, there is a combining, an immediate combining of--the elements themselves will break down, and they recombine into silver chloride and sodium nitrate. We know that silver is sensitive to light. So that material, after it has been treated with the silver nitrate solution, is placed under a strong light. We utilize a carbon arc lamp, which has considerable ultraviolet light in it. And it will immediately start to discolor the specimen. Wherever there is any salt material, it will discolor it, much more so than the rest of the object, and show exactly where the latent prints have been developed. It is simply a reaction of the silver nitrate with the sodium chloride.
That is all it is.


JohnM

LOL!!
...and somehow you think conflicting statements will help your case
Hilarious !!

Mr Ball :  Did you lift any prints?
Mr Studebaker: There wasn’t but just smudges on it — is all it was. There was one little ole piece of a print and I’m sure I put a piece of tape on it to preserve it … just a partial print.

Mr Ball: The print of a finger or palm or what?
Mr Studebaker:  You couldn’t tell, it was so small
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Mytton on February 06, 2018, 10:06:12 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
LOL!!
...and somehow you think conflicting statements will help your case
Hilarious !!

Mr Ball :  Did you lift any prints?
Mr Studebaker: There wasn’t but just smudges on it — is all it was. There was one little ole piece of a print and I’m sure I put a piece of tape on it to preserve it … just a partial print.

Mr Ball: The print of a finger or palm or what?
Mr Studebaker:  You couldn’t tell, it was so small



Don't you know anything???, the Dallas Police were only using dusting powder but the FBI were using more advanced techniques, but surely after spending wasting so much of your life on this case you must have learnt something?

Anyway as usual you fail to present all the evidence, naughty naughty!

Mr. BALL. What is the technique of lifting a print, as you call it?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Well, it's just using the regular dusting powder that we have and if you find something that you want to dust, you dust for the print. We used on this special case up there on those boxes and things, we have a special powder that we used on that.


And here's Latona describing what prints of Oswald were recovered from Oswald's rifle bag.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, could you tell us what portion of the palm of Lee Harvey Oswald was reproduced on the paper bag, Exhibit 626?
Mr. LATONA. The portion of the palm which was identified was of the right palm, and it is a portion which is sometimes referred to as the heel. It would be the area which is near the wrist on the little-finger side. I have a photograph here which has a rough drawing on it showing the approximate area which was identified.
The CHAIRMAN. Which hand did you say?
Mr. LATONA. The right hand.
Mr. EISENBERG. That little finger, is that sometimes called the ulnar side?
Mr. LATONA. The ulnar side; yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. Is this a true photograph made by you?
Mr. LATONA. This is a true photograph of one of the exhibits you have received.
Mr. EISENBERG. That is to say, the exhibit showing the right palmprint, which is marked 629?
Mr. LATONA. That's correct.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this photograph admitted into evidence as 631?
The CHAIRMAN. It may be admired.
(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 631 and received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Do you have another photograph there?
Mr. LATONA. I have here a photograph which is a slight enlargement of the latent palmprint developed on the bag. It has a red circle drawn around it showing the palmprint which was developed.
Mr. EISENBERG. Is that a true photograph made by you?
Mr. LATONA. This is. It is approximately a time-and-a-half enlargement of the palmprint which I developed on the paper bag.
Mr. EISENBERG. May I have that admitted, Mr. Chairman, as 632?
The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted by that number.
(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 632 and received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Having reference to the paper bag, Exhibit 626, Mr. Latona, could you show us where on that bag this portion of the palm, the ulnar portion of the palm, of Lee Harvey Oswald was found?
Mr. LATONA. This little red arrow which I have placed on the paper bag shows the palmprint as it was developed on the wrapper.
The CHAIRMAN. Is it visible to the naked eye?
Mr. LATONA. Yes; it is. I think you can see it with the use of this hand magnifier.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, could you mark that arrow "A"--the arrow you have Just referred to on Exhibit 626, pointing to the portion of the palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald?
The CHAIRMAN. What is the number of the exhibit that it is on?
Mr. EISENBERG. That is 626.
Mr. LATONA. May I--I tell you, I am going to furnish you a copy of this, but I cannot make a copy unless I have it.
Mr. EISENBERG. We can lend it to you for that purpose.
The CHAIRMAN. You may have it to make the copy.
Mr. LATONA. And I will send you the copy. Thank you.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, I believe you said you also found a fingerprint of Lee Harvey Oswald on this paper bag, 626.
Mr. LATONA. Yes; I did.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can you tell us what finger and what portion of the finger of Lee Harvey Oswald you identified that print as being?
Mr. LATONA. The fingerprint which was developed on the paper bag was identified as the right--as the left index fingerprint of Lee Harvey Oswald. I also have a slight enlargement of it, if you care to see it.
Mr. EISENBERG. You are showing us a true photograph of the actual fingerprint?
Mr. LATONA. As it appeared on the bag, slightly enlarged.
Mr. EISENBERG. May I have that admitted as 633, Mr. Chairman?
The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted.
(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 633 and received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. You are holding another photograph, Mr. Latona?
Mr. LATONA. I have here a photograph of the fingerprint card, of the one which I just took back, and it is actually a true reproduction of the front of the card. That was Exhibit 630. This one here is a true reproduction of the front of Exhibit 630.
Mr. EISENBERG. And have you circled on that, the photograph which you are holding, the left index finger?
Mr. LATONA. That's right.
Mr. EISENBERG. And would you show that to the Chief Justice? That is a true reproduction, Mr. Latona?
Mr. LATONA. Yes; it is.




JohnM
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Michael Capasse on February 06, 2018, 10:43:50 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


Don't you know anything???, the Dallas Police were only using dusting powder but the FBI were using more advanced techniques, but surely after spending wasting so much of your life on this case you must have learnt something?

Anyway as usual you fail to present all the evidence, naughty naughty!

Mr. BALL. What is the technique of lifting a print, as you call it?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Well, it's just using the regular dusting powder that we have and if you find something that you want to dust, you dust for the print. We used on this special case up there on those boxes and things, we have a special powder that we used on that.


And here's Latona describing what prints of Oswald were recovered from Oswald's rifle bag.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, could you tell us what portion of the palm of Lee Harvey Oswald was reproduced on the paper bag, Exhibit 626?
Mr. LATONA. The portion of the palm which was identified was of the right palm, and it is a portion which is sometimes referred to as the heel. It would be the area which is near the wrist on the little-finger side. I have a photograph here which has a rough drawing on it showing the approximate area which was identified.
The CHAIRMAN. Which hand did you say?
Mr. LATONA. The right hand.
Mr. EISENBERG. That little finger, is that sometimes called the ulnar side?
Mr. LATONA. The ulnar side; yes, sir.
Mr. EISENBERG. Is this a true photograph made by you?
Mr. LATONA. This is a true photograph of one of the exhibits you have received.
Mr. EISENBERG. That is to say, the exhibit showing the right palmprint, which is marked 629?
Mr. LATONA. That's correct.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, may I have this photograph admitted into evidence as 631?
The CHAIRMAN. It may be admired.
(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 631 and received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Do you have another photograph there?
Mr. LATONA. I have here a photograph which is a slight enlargement of the latent palmprint developed on the bag. It has a red circle drawn around it showing the palmprint which was developed.
Mr. EISENBERG. Is that a true photograph made by you?
Mr. LATONA. This is. It is approximately a time-and-a-half enlargement of the palmprint which I developed on the paper bag.
Mr. EISENBERG. May I have that admitted, Mr. Chairman, as 632?
The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted by that number.
(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 632 and received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. Having reference to the paper bag, Exhibit 626, Mr. Latona, could you show us where on that bag this portion of the palm, the ulnar portion of the palm, of Lee Harvey Oswald was found?
Mr. LATONA. This little red arrow which I have placed on the paper bag shows the palmprint as it was developed on the wrapper.
The CHAIRMAN. Is it visible to the naked eye?
Mr. LATONA. Yes; it is. I think you can see it with the use of this hand magnifier.
Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Latona, could you mark that arrow "A"--the arrow you have Just referred to on Exhibit 626, pointing to the portion of the palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald?
The CHAIRMAN. What is the number of the exhibit that it is on?
Mr. EISENBERG. That is 626.
Mr. LATONA. May I--I tell you, I am going to furnish you a copy of this, but I cannot make a copy unless I have it.
Mr. EISENBERG. We can lend it to you for that purpose.
The CHAIRMAN. You may have it to make the copy.
Mr. LATONA. And I will send you the copy. Thank you.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, I believe you said you also found a fingerprint of Lee Harvey Oswald on this paper bag, 626.
Mr. LATONA. Yes; I did.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can you tell us what finger and what portion of the finger of Lee Harvey Oswald you identified that print as being?
Mr. LATONA. The fingerprint which was developed on the paper bag was identified as the right--as the left index fingerprint of Lee Harvey Oswald. I also have a slight enlargement of it, if you care to see it.
Mr. EISENBERG. You are showing us a true photograph of the actual fingerprint?
Mr. LATONA. As it appeared on the bag, slightly enlarged.
Mr. EISENBERG. May I have that admitted as 633, Mr. Chairman?
The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted.
(The item referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 633 and received in evidence.)
Mr. EISENBERG. You are holding another photograph, Mr. Latona?
Mr. LATONA. I have here a photograph of the fingerprint card, of the one which I just took back, and it is actually a true reproduction of the front of the card. That was Exhibit 630. This one here is a true reproduction of the front of Exhibit 630.
Mr. EISENBERG. And have you circled on that, the photograph which you are holding, the left index finger?
Mr. LATONA. That's right.
Mr. EISENBERG. And would you show that to the Chief Justice? That is a true reproduction, Mr. Latona?
Mr. LATONA. Yes; it is.




JohnM

Mr Studebaker: There wasn’t but just smudges on it
and once again conflicting statements prove nothing to your case
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Mytton on February 06, 2018, 11:18:04 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Mr Studebaker: There wasn’t but just smudges on it
and once again conflicting statements prove nothing to your case



Read and learn why Studebaker couldn't see anything significant and why the FBI used a completely different methodology for print removal on the paper bag. On second thoughts you're too far gone, you can't teach an Old Dog new tricks! Hahahaha!

Mr. EISENBERG. When you had received it, could you tell whether any previous examination had been conducted on it?
Mr. LATONA. When I received this exhibit, 626, the brown wrapper, it had been treated with black dusting powder, black fingerprint powder. There was nothing visible in the way of any latent prints on there at that particular time.
Mr. EISENBERG. Were you informed whether any fingerprints had been developed by means of the fingerprint powder?
Mr. LATONA. No; I determined that by simply examining the wrapper at that particular time.
Mr. EISENBERG. Could you briefly describe the powder process?
Mr. LATONA. The powdering process is merely the utilizing of a fingerprint powder which is applied to any particular surface for purposes of developing any latent prints which my be on such a surface.
Now, we use powder in the FBI only on objects which have a hard, smooth, nonabsorbent finish, such as glass, tile, various types of highly polished metals and the like.
In the FBI we do not use powder on paper, cardboard, unfinished wood, or various types of cloth. The reason is that the materials are absorbent. Accordingly, when any finger which has on it perspiration or sweat comes in contact with an absorbent material, the print starts to become absorbed into the surface. Accordingly,. when an effort is made to develop latent prints by the use of a powder, if the surface is dry, the powder will not adhere.
On the other hand, where the surface is a hard and smooth object, with a nonabsorbent material, the perspiration or sweat which may have some oil in it at that time may remain there as moisture. Accordingly, when the dry powder is brushed across it, the moisture in the print will retain the powder giving an outline of the impression itself.
These powders come in various colors. We utilize a black and a gray. The black powder is used on objects which are white or light to give a resulting contrast of a black print on a white background. We use the gray powder on objects which are black or dark in order to give you a resulting contrast of a white print on a dark or black background.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona, how did you proceed to conduct your examination for fingerprints on this object?
Mr. LATONA. Well, an effort was made to remove as much of the powder as possible. And then this was subjected to what is known as the iodine-fuming method, which simply means flowing iodine fumes, which are developed by what is known as an iodine-fuming gun--it is a very simple affair, in which there are a couple of tubes attached to each other, having in one of them iodine crystals. And by simply blowing through one end, you get iodine fumes.
The iodine fumes are brought in as close contact to the surface as possible And if there are any prints which contain certain fatty material or protein material, the iodine fumes simply discolor it to a sort of brownish color. And of course such prints as are developed are photographed for record purposes.
That was done in this case here, but no latent prints were developed.
The next step then was to try an additional method, by chemicals. This was subsequently processed by a 3-percent solution of silver nitrate. The processing with silver nitrate resulted in developing two latent prints. One is what we call a latent palmprint, and the other is what we call a latent fingerprint.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can you briefly explain the action of the silver nitrate?
Mr. LATONA. Silver nitrate solution in itself is colorless, and it reacts with the sodium chloride, which is ordinary salt which is found in the perspiration or sweat which is exuded by the sweat pores.
This material covers the fingers. When it touches a surface such as an absorbent material, like paper, it leaves an outline on the paper.
When this salt material, which is left by the fingers on the paper, is immersed in the silver nitrate solution, there is a combining, an immediate combining of--the elements themselves will break down, and they recombine into silver chloride and sodium nitrate. We know that silver is sensitive to light. So that material, after it has been treated with the silver nitrate solution, is placed under a strong light. We utilize a carbon arc lamp, which has considerable ultraviolet light in it. And it will immediately start to discolor the specimen. Wherever there is any salt material, it will discolor it, much more so than the rest of the object, and show exactly where the latent prints have been developed. It is simply a reaction of the silver nitrate with the sodium chloride.
That is all it is.
Mr. EISENBERG. Do you frequently find that the silver nitrate develops a print in a paper object which the iodine fuming cannot develop?
Mr. LATONA. Yes; I would say that is true, considerably so. We have more success with silver nitrate than we do with the iodine fumes.
The reason we use both is because of the fact that this material which is exuded by the fingers may fall into one of two main types--protein material and salt material. The iodine fumes will develop protein material. Silver nitrate will develop the salt material.
The reason we use both is because we do not know what was in the subject's fingers or hands or feet. Accordingly, to insure complete coverage, we use both methods. And we use them in that sequence. The iodine first, then the silver nitrate. The iodine is used first because the iodine simply causes a temporary physical change. It will discolor, and then the fumes, upon being left in the open air, will disappear, and then the color will dissolve. Silver nitrate, on the other hand, causes a chemical change and it will permanently affect the change. So if we were to use the silver nitrate process first, then we could not use the iodine fumes. On occasion we have developed fingerprints and palmprints with iodine fumes which failed to develop with the silver nitrate and vice versa.




JohnM
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 06, 2018, 11:18:57 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Day wrote directly on CE 142 (instead of tagging it) and three Detectives (Montgomery, Studebaker and Johnson) signed it next to a partial print that they could not have seen. None of the Detectives were asked to ID CE 142.

Both Day and Studebaker wrote on CE 677.


signed it next to a partial print that they could not have seen.

Are we supposed to believe those detectives just happened to sign at the spot the FBI developed a print??

I'd say the liars signed it after they knew where the print was located......
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Mytton on February 06, 2018, 11:39:31 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Mr Studebaker: There wasn’t but just smudges on it
and once again conflicting statements prove nothing to your case


"Enter the FBI Crime Lab. On September 6, 1933—almost precisely 70 years ago--and using a then state-of-the-art technology, now called 'Latent Fingerprint Identification,' it raised incriminating fingerprints from surfaces that couldn't be dusted for prints."
https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/stories/2003/september/hamm090803



JohnM
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 07, 2018, 12:05:50 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


Excellent point some of these innocent people are still alive and to be subjected to all these outlandish accusations without a shred of evidence all in the name of FUN is absolutely despicable.



JohnM

So when you JohnM insult, belittle, use derogatory remarks, put up inappropriate GIFs, accuse Colin Crow of crashing the previous forum and basically make fun of other posters - that's ok because you are a WC defender?

I am glad my thread jolted you from your LNer comfort zone.



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 07, 2018, 12:08:28 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

"Enter the FBI Crime Lab. On September 6, 1933—almost precisely 70 years ago--and using a then state-of-the-art technology, now called 'Latent Fingerprint Identification,' it raised incriminating fingerprints from surfaces that couldn't be dusted for prints."
https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/news/stories/2003/september/hamm090803



JohnM

No one technique is 100% foolproof.

So according to you, the DP were inept to do fingerprinting - is that right?

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Michael Capasse on February 07, 2018, 12:13:02 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
No one technique is 100% foolproof.

So according to you, the DP were inept to do fingerprinting - is that right?

..also consider the amount of finger prints that would not need silver nitrate
in smuggling, constructing, carrying and opening that bag....there are none of those

Puking up the history of silver nitrate in fingerprinting = proves nothing
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 07, 2018, 12:14:49 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


Read and learn why Studebaker couldn't see anything significant and why the FBI used a completely different methodology for print removal on the paper bag. On second thoughts you're too far gone, you can't teach an Old Dog new tricks! Hahahaha!

Mr. EISENBERG. When you had received it, could you tell whether any previous examination had been conducted on it?
Mr. LATONA. When I received this exhibit, 626, the brown wrapper, it had been treated with black dusting powder, black fingerprint powder. There was nothing visible in the way of any latent prints on there at that particular time.
Mr. EISENBERG. Were you informed whether any fingerprints had been developed by means of the fingerprint powder?
Mr. LATONA. No; I determined that by simply examining the wrapper at that particular time.
Mr. EISENBERG. Could you briefly describe the powder process?
Mr. LATONA. The powdering process is merely the utilizing of a fingerprint powder which is applied to any particular surface for purposes of developing any latent prints which my be on such a surface.
Now, we use powder in the FBI only on objects which have a hard, smooth, nonabsorbent finish, such as glass, tile, various types of highly polished metals and the like.
In the FBI we do not use powder on paper, cardboard, unfinished wood, or various types of cloth. The reason is that the materials are absorbent. Accordingly, when any finger which has on it perspiration or sweat comes in contact with an absorbent material, the print starts to become absorbed into the surface. Accordingly,. when an effort is made to develop latent prints by the use of a powder, if the surface is dry, the powder will not adhere.
On the other hand, where the surface is a hard and smooth object, with a nonabsorbent material, the perspiration or sweat which may have some oil in it at that time may remain there as moisture. Accordingly, when the dry powder is brushed across it, the moisture in the print will retain the powder giving an outline of the impression itself.
These powders come in various colors. We utilize a black and a gray. The black powder is used on objects which are white or light to give a resulting contrast of a black print on a white background. We use the gray powder on objects which are black or dark in order to give you a resulting contrast of a white print on a dark or black background.
Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona, how did you proceed to conduct your examination for fingerprints on this object?
Mr. LATONA. Well, an effort was made to remove as much of the powder as possible. And then this was subjected to what is known as the iodine-fuming method, which simply means flowing iodine fumes, which are developed by what is known as an iodine-fuming gun--it is a very simple affair, in which there are a couple of tubes attached to each other, having in one of them iodine crystals. And by simply blowing through one end, you get iodine fumes.
The iodine fumes are brought in as close contact to the surface as possible And if there are any prints which contain certain fatty material or protein material, the iodine fumes simply discolor it to a sort of brownish color. And of course such prints as are developed are photographed for record purposes.
That was done in this case here, but no latent prints were developed.
The next step then was to try an additional method, by chemicals. This was subsequently processed by a 3-percent solution of silver nitrate. The processing with silver nitrate resulted in developing two latent prints. One is what we call a latent palmprint, and the other is what we call a latent fingerprint.
Mr. EISENBERG. Can you briefly explain the action of the silver nitrate?
Mr. LATONA. Silver nitrate solution in itself is colorless, and it reacts with the sodium chloride, which is ordinary salt which is found in the perspiration or sweat which is exuded by the sweat pores.
This material covers the fingers. When it touches a surface such as an absorbent material, like paper, it leaves an outline on the paper.
When this salt material, which is left by the fingers on the paper, is immersed in the silver nitrate solution, there is a combining, an immediate combining of--the elements themselves will break down, and they recombine into silver chloride and sodium nitrate. We know that silver is sensitive to light. So that material, after it has been treated with the silver nitrate solution, is placed under a strong light. We utilize a carbon arc lamp, which has considerable ultraviolet light in it. And it will immediately start to discolor the specimen. Wherever there is any salt material, it will discolor it, much more so than the rest of the object, and show exactly where the latent prints have been developed. It is simply a reaction of the silver nitrate with the sodium chloride.
That is all it is.
Mr. EISENBERG. Do you frequently find that the silver nitrate develops a print in a paper object which the iodine fuming cannot develop?
Mr. LATONA. Yes; I would say that is true, considerably so. We have more success with silver nitrate than we do with the iodine fumes.
The reason we use both is because of the fact that this material which is exuded by the fingers may fall into one of two main types--protein material and salt material. The iodine fumes will develop protein material. Silver nitrate will develop the salt material.
The reason we use both is because we do not know what was in the subject's fingers or hands or feet. Accordingly, to insure complete coverage, we use both methods. And we use them in that sequence. The iodine first, then the silver nitrate. The iodine is used first because the iodine simply causes a temporary physical change. It will discolor, and then the fumes, upon being left in the open air, will disappear, and then the color will dissolve. Silver nitrate, on the other hand, causes a chemical change and it will permanently affect the change. So if we were to use the silver nitrate process first, then we could not use the iodine fumes. On occasion we have developed fingerprints and palmprints with iodine fumes which failed to develop with the silver nitrate and vice versa.




JohnM

If Studebaker had actually dusted it in situ with BLACK magnetic powder, can you explain why CE 142 looks clean as in Montgomery's hands?

Can you explain why this event wasnt filmed by Tom Alyea?

Can you explain why there was no fingerprint tape on CE 142?

Can you explain why Studebaker - after dusting it for prints - would fail to photograph it?

Can you explain why Day would leave dusted crime scene evidence behind and not take it with him?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 07, 2018, 12:19:52 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
..also consider the amount of finger prints that would not need silver nitrate
in smuggling, constructing, carrying and opening that bag....there are none of those

Puking the history of silver nitrate in fingerprinting = proves nothing

CE 142 should of had more prints on it than I have had hot dinners. We now have a paper bag that despite it's construction and transportation and carrying an 8 pound rifle had two tiny partials on it and it took the might of the FBI with silver nitrate to "find" them. I guess if the evidence wasnt seized by the FBI - LHO walks because they couldn't find anything on it and no witness saw him with it. Further Day forgets to photograph the lift he took from the disassembled CE 139.

Any other complications?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Michael Capasse on February 07, 2018, 12:35:47 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Any other complications?


plenty... here's another...
He smuggled the materials out in the gray jacket he left in Irving
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 07, 2018, 12:52:09 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
plenty... here's another...
He smuggled the materials out in the gray jacket he left in Irving

He likely asked Troy West to hold his jacket while he constructed CE 142 in situ.  ;D
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 07, 2018, 12:42:39 PM
Can someone explain to me the following, it is the official story from the testimonies as far as I can tell.

Day and Studebaker were initially assigned to the SN. Studebaker takes a couple of photos while Day dusts the shells with the help of Sims. When the rifle is found a few minutes later Day and Studebaker are called to that position on the opposite side of the sixth floor. Photos are taken again by Studebaker and Day lifts the rifle, assists Fritz with ejecting the live round and does a preliminary dust for prints.

Day then realises that he needs to take the rifle to the crime lab to further process. At that stage he and Studebaker leave for the first floor with the rifle and the bag. Presumably to take the "evidence" to HQ. Day then notices the tape is the same as that on the bag and decides to get samples.

He then proceeds to the crime lab with the rifle. Why does Studebaker return to the sixth floor with the bag and samples? What has changed from the original intention? Why would "evidence" be removed and returned to the scene without ever photographing?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 07, 2018, 02:46:41 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Can someone explain to me the following, it is the official story from the testimonies as far as I can tell.

Day and Studebaker were initially assigned to the SN. Studebaker that’s a couple of photos while Day dusts the shells with the help of Sims. When the rifle is found a few minutes later Day and Studebaker are called to that position on the opposite side of the sixth floor. Photos are taken again by Studebaker and Day lifts the rifle, assists Fritz with ejecting the live round and does a preliminary dust for prints.

Day then realises that he needs to take the rifle to the crime lab to further process. At that stage he and Studebaker leave for the first floor with the rifle and the bag. Presumably to take the "evidence" to HQ. Day then notices the tape is the same as that on the bag and decides to get samples.

He then proceeds to the crime lab with the rifle. Why does Studebaker return to the sixth floor with the bag and samples? What has changed from the original intention? Why would "evidence" be removed and returned to the scene without ever photographing?


"Day then realises that he needs to take the rifle to the crime lab to further process. At that stage he and Studebaker leave for the first floor with the rifle and the bag. Presumably to take the "evidence" to HQ. Day then notices the tape is the same as that on the bag and decides to get samples."



At least you are finally admitting the bag was found on the 6th floor in the SN. Real progress.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 07, 2018, 02:48:51 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Hi Jack,

Its fun coming up with a hypothesis isn't it? Why dont you commence a new thread, as l am sure many would like to discuss your two shot theory.

I agree about the influence of the media. That chicken lunch and Dr Pepper were mistaken to belonging to the assassin. Pity that BRW never mentioned that he was actually on the 6th floor eating his chicken lunch in his first day report to the DP. What do you think would of happened to him?


I thought you wanted to discuss the number of shots or why bring it up.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 07, 2018, 02:54:13 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The Chicken lunch sack and half eaten chicken piece ABSOLUTELY were moved from their initial location within the SN. They were moved further west by Hill. A reporter isn't going to be randomly making up a story about two items that just happened to be on the 6th floor at the same time that Hill stuck his head out of a window adjacent to the SN.

The movement of these items explained how there were contrasting testimonies of where they were seen. It also assisted BRW big time. But that's for another thread.

Hill stated to the WC where they were found. You are stating he lied to the WC and in full view of everyone else on the 6th floor moved the evidence because somehow he knew that would be important to BRW's statement?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 07, 2018, 03:00:04 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Day wrote directly on CE 142 (instead of tagging it) and three Detectives (Montgomery, Studebaker and Johnson) signed it next to a partial print that they could not have seen. None of the Detectives were asked to ID CE 142.

Both Day and Studebaker wrote on CE 677.

The FBI is all about being 100% positive to ID anything( the bullet from the Walker shooting was a little less and they would not say positively it was a match). How can anyone say 100% certain about a brown paper sack. That is why they wrote on it.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Martin Weidmann on February 07, 2018, 03:59:21 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

"Day then realises that he needs to take the rifle to the crime lab to further process. At that stage he and Studebaker leave for the first floor with the rifle and the bag. Presumably to take the "evidence" to HQ. Day then notices the tape is the same as that on the bag and decides to get samples."


At least you are finally admitting the bag was found on the 6th floor in the SN. Real progress.


At least you are finally admitting the bag was found on the 6th floor in the SN. Real progress.

Could you please point out where Colin admitted that, because I can't find it.

All I see him do is ask a question based on the official story from the testimonies... 
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 07, 2018, 05:07:17 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Day wrote directly on CE 142 (instead of tagging it) and three Detectives (Montgomery, Studebaker and Johnson) signed it next to a partial print that they could not have seen. None of the Detectives were asked to ID CE 142.

Both Day and Studebaker wrote on CE 677.

Day wrote directly on CE 142 (instead of tagging it) and three Detectives (Montgomery, Studebaker and Johnson) signed it next to a partial print that they could not have seen. None of the Detectives were asked to ID CE 142.

Both Day and Studebaker wrote on CE 677.



Detectives Montgomery, Studebaker, and Johnson, signed it next to a partial print that they could not have seen.


I'm confused....   How did CE 677 enter the evidence stream?....   And what are the odds of three detectives signing the bag at a location on the sack where a print was found AFTER they signed the sack?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 07, 2018, 06:40:31 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I thought you wanted to discuss the number of shots or why bring it up.

I do, but in your own separate thread. Should make for an interesting debate.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 07, 2018, 06:49:06 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

"Day then realises that he needs to take the rifle to the crime lab to further process. At that stage he and Studebaker leave for the first floor with the rifle and the bag. Presumably to take the "evidence" to HQ. Day then notices the tape is the same as that on the bag and decides to get samples."



At least you are finally admitting the bag was found on the 6th floor in the SN. Real progress.

That's not what Colin was saying. He recalled the WC's version of events not his personal opinion.

He wants to know why Detective Studebaker returned CE 142 BACK to the crime scene.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 07, 2018, 07:03:35 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Day wrote directly on CE 142 (instead of tagging it) and three Detectives (Montgomery, Studebaker and Johnson) signed it next to a partial print that they could not have seen. None of the Detectives were asked to ID CE 142.

Both Day and Studebaker wrote on CE 677.



Detectives Montgomery, Studebaker, and Johnson, signed it next to a partial print that they could not have seen.


I'm confused....   How did CE 677 enter the evidence stream?....   And what are the odds of three detectives signing the bag at a location on the sack where a print was found AFTER they signed the sack?

Excellent question Walt. CE 677 was not on the same CSSS form as the chicken lunch sack and CE 142 was yet appeared on the FBI inventory list. Day handed CE 677 to Drain on the evening of 22/11/1963.

It was odd that none of the three Detectives were shown CE 142. The FBI expert made no mention of these signatures next to the partial print.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 07, 2018, 07:13:18 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Excellent question Walt. CE 677 was not on the same CSSS form as the chicken lunch sack and CE 142 was yet appeared on the FBI inventory list. Day handed CE 677 to Drain on the evening of 22/11/1963.

It was odd that none of the three Detectives were shown CE 142. The FBI expert made no mention of these signatures next to the partial print.

How many sacks were found to have Lee Oswald's prints on them?  Two?---Three?   .......How many of the sacks were found to have evidence that a rifle had been in the sack?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 07, 2018, 07:13:40 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Hill stated to the WC where they were found. You are stating he lied to the WC and in full view of everyone else on the 6th floor moved the evidence because somehow he knew that would be important to BRW's statement?

Hill did not lie, he failed to disclose that he moved the chicken lunch sack and chicken piece. At that stage he had no idea who BRW was. Mooney told the WC where these items were originally found.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 07, 2018, 07:21:11 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
How many sacks were found to have Lee Oswald's prints on them?  Two?---Three?   .......How many of the sacks were found to have evidence that a rifle had been in the sack?

The FBI found two partials on CE 142 and there was no evidence that CE 139 was ever inside it.

The chicken lunch sack and Dr Pepper bottle did not have LHO's prints on them. Neither were handed over to the FBI.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 07, 2018, 07:35:44 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The FBI found two partials on CE 142 and there was no evidence that CE 139 was ever inside it.

The chicken lunch sack and Dr Pepper bottle did not have LHO's prints on them. Neither were handed over to the FBI.

The chicken lunch sack, ( The Viceroy cigarette Package) and Dr Pepper bottle did not have LHO's prints on them. Neither were handed over to the FBI.

Of course that evidence wasn't handed over to he FBI.....  Because it would have identified the person who actually used that hidden cubby hole .....and then they would have had to question Charlie Givens .....But they didn't want Charlie to admit that he had constructed the hide away so that he could loaf, and eat, drink, and smoke out of sight of the boss.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 07, 2018, 07:48:02 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The chicken lunch sack, ( The Viceroy cigarette Package) and Dr Pepper bottle did not have LHO's prints on them. Neither were handed over to the FBI.

Of course that evidence wasn't handed over to he FBI.....  Because it would have identified the person who actually used that hidden cubby hole .....and then they would have had to question Charlie Givens .....But they didn't want Charlie to admit that he had constructed the hide away so that he could loaf, and eat, drink, and smoke out of sight of the boss.

It also would have placed BRW in the SN. It took months before the FBI took prints from the TSBD workers who were on the 6th floor. By that stage no one cared.

How was BRW going to explain his presence on the 6th floor within 5 minutes of the shots being fired?

Yet, Day holds onto the lunch sack, Dr Pepper and the window sill strip!

You are correct Walt, the SN was not constructed by any assassin.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 07, 2018, 10:13:59 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
At least you are finally admitting the bag was found on the 6th floor in the SN. Real progress.

Could you please point out where Colin admitted that, because I can't find it.

All I see him do is ask a question based on the official story from the testimonies...


I never knew Day refers to himself as "Day" and/or "he". My mistake or is Colin subconsciously admitting he agrees the bag was found in the SN just the way the detectives said it was. Don't worry I won't tell Tony that Collin has switched teams.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 07, 2018, 10:17:21 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I never knew Day refers to himself as "Day" and/or "he". My mistake or is Colin subconsciously admitting he agrees the bag was found in the SN just the way the detectives said it was. Don't worry I won't tell Tony that Collin has switched teams.

No problems at all  :)

Colin hasn't "switched" to any "team" Jack - he is asking tough questions, like I am.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Martin Weidmann on February 07, 2018, 10:35:43 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I never knew Day refers to himself as "Day" and/or "he". My mistake or is Colin subconsciously admitting he agrees the bag was found in the SN just the way the detectives said it was. Don't worry I won't tell Tony that Collin has switched teams.

Does this really need to be explained to you?

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 08, 2018, 02:37:16 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
To even begin to buy into your theory, one must believe that Buell Frazier and Linnie Mae Randle lied about seeing Oswald with a longer package that morning... and that Frazier is lying about the entire curtain rod story, a story he still maintains to this day.

I don't understand why Tony's theory requires Frazier or Randle to be lying about anything.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 08, 2018, 02:51:19 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Oh yes it is.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, Mr. Latona, when you find an apparent dissimilarity between an inked and a latent print, how do you know that it is caused by absorption of the surface upon which the latent print is placed, or by failure of the finger to exude material, rather than by the fact that you have a different fingerprint?

Mr. LATONA. That is simply by sheer experience.

 :(

See

https://phys.org/news/2005-09-faulty-fingerprints-debunks-forensic-science.html

And it's also a shame that the silver nitrate was allowed to destroy the existing prints so that their subjective analysis can never be verified or replicated, but trust them, they're from the FBI.  Nothing to see here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Mayfield (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Mayfield)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 03:30:03 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't understand why Tony's theory requires Frazier or Randle to be lying about anything.

I'm not surprised.

I suppose you think there's nothing strange or coincidental about Randle and Frazier seeing Oswald carry a longer bag that morning even though Frazier stated that he never saw Oswald carry such a bag before on any previous morning.  In other words, If Frazier and Randle are not lying about seeing Oswald carry a longer bag, then Oswald just happens to carry a longer bag, for the first time, THAT particular morning.

Yeah, right.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 08, 2018, 03:55:58 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

"Day then realises that he needs to take the rifle to the crime lab to further process. At that stage he and Studebaker leave for the first floor with the rifle and the bag. Presumably to take the "evidence" to HQ. Day then notices the tape is the same as that on the bag and decides to get samples."



At least you are finally admitting the bag was found on the 6th floor in the SN. Real progress.

JED.....I wonder.....could it be?

Of course not he only heard one shot.....
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 08, 2018, 05:55:32 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Does this really need to be explained to you?

Yes, start with the part where Day and Studebaker have taken the rifle and the bag from the SN on the 6th floor to the first floor and Day then notices the tape is the same as that on the bag and decides to get samples.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 07:41:28 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't understand why Tony's theory requires Frazier or Randle to be lying about anything.

Hi John,

it doesn't. What LMR and BWF saw or didn't see that morning was immaterial to the events in the first floor shipping room involving Det. Studebaker and Lt. Day.

All of the testimonial evidence strongly suggested that whatever LMR and BWF "saw" - it wasnt a 38 inch paper bag.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 07:48:28 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
And it's also a shame that the silver nitrate was allowed to destroy the existing prints so that their subjective analysis can never be verified or replicated, but trust them, they're from the FBI.  Nothing to see here.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Mayfield (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandon_Mayfield)

Unfortunately, fingerprints are not as "iron clad" and "foolproof" as everyone was led to believe. Back in 63 - NO ONE was going to challenge the FBI on their findings. Just read the FBI experts testimony - he gave a massive spiel on just how good the FBI were and what a massive data bank they had etc, etc.

Studies have been done to suggest that errors can and do occur. Mayfield was just one case. There are many.

There is no way they can be re-examined now - the bag turns dark brown in sunlight.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 09:22:23 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yes, start with the part where Day and Studebaker have taken the rifle and the bag from the SN on the 6th floor to the first floor and Day then notices the tape is the same as that on the bag and decides to get samples.

It is very simple Jack.

Here is my likely scenario:

After the rifle was found at ~1.25 pm and then processed by Lt Day (including being photographed in situ and dusted for prints) Captain Fritz asked Lt Day to immediately bring in the rifle (CE 139) to City Hall. At around the same time Mr Truly came onto the 6th floor and revealed to Captain Fritz that LHO was not present when he did a roll call.

Lt Day - having nothing to wrap CE 139 in - asked Mr Truly (or Mr Truly volunteered) if they had some paper to wrap CE 139 in.

Truly, Day (with CE 139) and Studebaker make their way to the first floor wrapping room. Truly shows them where the wrapping tables are.

Day (while holding CE 139) asks Studebaker to make a paper bag (CE 142) to place CE 139 in so it could be carried to City Hall.

Day changes his mind, since he had already dusted CE 139 and had difficulties obtaining a print - he did this for fear of smudging any potential print on the rifle. (He made this very point in No More Silence)

Day leaves the TSBD with CE 139 and was accompanied by an FBI agent to City Hall. Mr Truly sees Lt Day leave with CE 139.

Day leaves the paper bag with Studebaker who folds it up and takes it back up to the 6th floor and continues with the processing of the SN by himself. Montgomery and Johnson are on the 6th floor and now mention seeing the paper bag. Johnson sees the paper bag for the first time after Studebaker finished dusting the chicken lunch sack and Dr Pepper bottle and heads off to the SN. This was filmed by Tom Alyea. He did not mention seeing the paper bag (CE 142) on the 6th floor.

The paper bag is instead used to place the window sill strip (~ 30 inches) removed from the window of the SN.

Montgomery takes out CE 142 while holding one end of the window sill strip in it at 3.00 pm.

Johnson takes out the chicken lunch sack (obviously dusted and has an ID tag on it), the Dr Pepper bottle and the Viceroy cigarette packet.

That is it - it is about a Detective who made a paper bag (CE 142) for non nefarious means. It had nothing to do with a conspiracy nor to frame anyone.

The FBI and the WC were not able to prove that LHO had constructed any paper bag prior to 22/11/1963.

I mentioned Detective Robert Lee Studebaker because he was the last known person who had his hands on the very paper and tape that CE 142 was constructed from (forensically proven by the FBI) and that only one 38 inch bag was handed over to the FBI that evening.


Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 12:13:39 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Day (while holding CE 139) asks Studebaker to make a paper bag (CE 142) to place CE 139 in so it could be carried to City Hall.

Day changes his mind,

I find this hard to swallow.

In my opinion, when you decided that Day first asked Studebaker to make a bag to place the rifle in, you were stuck (since obviously the rifle was not placed inside for transport to the Day's office).  The only way out of your jam was to simply conclude that "Day changes his mind".

My "likely scenario" here is that Day would not ask for a bag to be made in one instant and then change his mind the next because he didn't want to smudge potential prints.  If that was the reason "Day changes his mind", then it would have occurred to him the very instant that he thought of having a bag made to place the rifle inside it.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Richard Smith on February 08, 2018, 12:30:13 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It is very simple Jack.

Here is my likely scenario:

After the rifle was found at ~1.25 pm and then processed by Lt Day (including being photographed in situ and dusted for prints) Captain Fritz asked Lt Day to immediately bring in the rifle (CE 139) to City Hall. At around the same time Mr Truly came onto the 6th floor and revealed to Captain Fritz that LHO was not present when he did a roll call.

Lt Day - having nothing to wrap CE 139 in - asked Mr Truly (or Mr Truly volunteered) if they had some paper to wrap CE 139 in.

Truly, Day (with CE 139) and Studebaker make their way to the first floor wrapping room. Truly shows them where the wrapping tables are.

Day (while holding CE 139) asks Studebaker to make a paper bag (CE 142) to place CE 139 in so it could be carried to City Hall.

Day changes his mind, since he had already dusted CE 139 and had difficulties obtaining a print - he did this for fear of smudging any potential print on the rifle. (He made this very point in No More Silence)

Day leaves the TSBD with CE 139 and was accompanied by an FBI agent to City Hall. Mr Truly sees Lt Day leave with CE 139.

Day leaves the paper bag with Studebaker who folds it up and takes it back up to the 6th floor and continues with the processing of the SN by himself. Montgomery and Johnson are on the 6th floor and now mention seeing the paper bag. Johnson sees the paper bag for the first time after Studebaker finished dusting the chicken lunch sack and Dr Pepper bottle and heads off to the SN. This was filmed by Tom Alyea. He did not mention seeing the paper bag (CE 142) on the 6th floor.

The paper bag is instead used to place the window sill strip (~ 30 inches) removed from the window of the SN.

Montgomery takes out CE 142 while holding one end of the window sill strip in it at 3.00 pm.

Johnson takes out the chicken lunch sack (obviously dusted and has an ID tag on it), the Dr Pepper bottle and the Viceroy cigarette packet.

That is it - it is about a Detective who made a paper bag (CE 142) for non nefarious means. It had nothing to do with a conspiracy nor to frame anyone.

The FBI and the WC were not able to prove that LHO had constructed any paper bag prior to 22/11/1963.

I mentioned Detective Robert Lee Studebaker because he was the last known person who had his hands on the very paper and tape that CE 142 was constructed from (forensically proven by the FBI) and that only one 38 inch bag was handed over to the FBI that evening.

Wow.  So how do you explain Oswald's prints on the bag?  Or that no one came forward and cleared this up but instead created the impression that the bag was constructed and used by Oswald to carry the rifle?  That sounds a whole lot like a frame up or conspiracy scenario.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 12:38:20 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I find this hard to swallow.

In my opinion, when you decided that Day first asked Studebaker to make a bag to place the rifle in, you were stuck (since obviously the rifle was not placed inside for transport to the Day's office).  The only way out of your jam was to simply conclude that "Day changes his mind".

My "likely scenario" here is that Day would not ask for a bag to be made in one instant and then change his mind the next because he didn't want to smudge potential prints.  If that was the reason "Day changes his mind", then it would have occurred to him the very instant that he thought of having a bag made to place the rifle inside it.

I don't agree with you Bill and in fact, Carl almost came clean in his oral history in No More Silence.

Keep in mind, he was in the first floor wrapping room where he was shown paper and tape rolls by Mr Truly. He had CE 139 with him. Detective Studebaker was ordered by Lt Day to take paper and tape samples.

"At that time, just through casual observation, it didn’t look
too promising. It wasn’t the place to try to do any fingerprint
work since it’s a rather lengthy process
and we had other things to
do. So I decided to carry the gun back to the office at City Hall,
store it under lock and key, examine it under ideal conditions, and
get to it when I could. I didn’t have anything to wrap it up with at
the time
, so I carried it out making sure that I didn’t touch
anything other than the strap
.

Besides, you had to be careful in wrapping stuff because if there were any prints, you’re liable to smear them just from the wrapping.

Now how can you have the situation where he was in a wrapping room with plenty of paper and tape (Studebaker took paper and tape) and then declare "I didn’t have anything to wrap it up with at the time" and in the same sentence mention "Besides, you had to be careful in wrapping stuff because if there were any prints, you’re liable to smear them just from the wrapping."

That is damning and that came straight from Lt Carl Day himself.

It wasnt the length of the paper bag that gave the game away - it was the width. That paper bag was constructed in the presence of an assembled CE 139.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 12:53:02 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Wow.  So how do you explain Oswald's prints on the bag?  Or that no one came forward and cleared this up but instead created the impression that the bag was constructed and used by Oswald to carry the rifle?  That sounds a whole lot like a frame up or conspiracy scenario.

Possibilities -

1) LHO was shown CE 142 by Captain Fritz on Friday evening (who had never seen CE 142 previously) to challenge him about what BWF saw that morning. How did Fritz know about the size and shape of CE 142 if Fritz never saw it? CE 142 was shown to BWF, so why not to LHO?

Mr. BALL. And you asked him the size and shape of the sack, didn't you?
Mr. FRITZ. He never admitted bringing the sack. I showed him the size probably in asking him if he brought a sack that size and he denied it. He said he brought his lunch was all he brought.
Mr. BALL. Didn't he say when you asked him the size and shape of the sack that he had with him, he said, "I don't recall, it may have been a small sack or a large sack. You don't always find one that fits your sandwiches," something like that.

We now have three people who denied seeing CE 142 - LHO, BWF and LMR.  ;D

2) The prints are not LHO's and can now not be rechecked.

3) The prints were transferred onto the paper bag passively from another source.

Even if the prints did belong to LHO, it meant that at some stage he touched the paper but it did not indicate who had constructed the paper bag.

Clean this up? On the evening of 22/11/1963, Studebaker and Day knew there were no identifiable prints on CE 142.

It was the FBI who found the latents.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Richard Smith on February 08, 2018, 12:57:53 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Possibilities -

1) LHO was shown CE 142 by Captain Fritz on Friday evening (who had never seen CE 142 previously) to challenge him about what BWF saw that morning. How did Fritz know about the size and shape of CE 142 if Fritz never saw it? CE 142 was shown to BWF, so why not to LHO?

2) The prints are not LHO's and can now not be rechecked.

3) The prints were transferred onto the paper bag passively from another source.

Even if the prints did belong to LHO, it meant that at some stage he touched the paper but it did not indicate who had constructed the paper bag.

Clean this up? On the evening of 22/11/1963, Studebaker and Day knew there were no identifiable prints on CE 142.

It was the FBI who found the latents.

No.  That sounds a whole lot like a conspiracy or frame up which you indicated you were not suggesting.  And the notion that Oswald happened to touch the exact same paper used by the DPD to make the bag is so wildly improbable as to defy discussion.  Lastly, why didn't the DPD just clear the matter up by explaining that they made the bag?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 01:09:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
No.  That sounds a whole lot like a conspiracy or frame up which you indicated you were not suggesting.  And the notion that Oswald happened to touch the exact same paper used by the DPD to make the bag is so wildly improbable as to defy discussion. Lastly, why didn't the DPD just clear the matter up by explaining that they made the bag?

How many times do I have to say this Richard?

CE 142 was constructed for totally non-nefarious purposes. It was not against the law to construct a paper bag Richard. Neither Studebaker nor Day had any knowledge about how and who brought in CE 139. They were not going to make a paper bag to frame a "potential future assassin" by the name of Lee Harvey Oswald.

How was Studebaker or Day going to explain the partials on it?  8)

Mr. DAY. There is a legible print on it now. They were on there when it was returned to me from the FBI on November 24.

I have answered all your questions - now answer one of mine.

When was CE 142 found in the SE corner of the 6th floor and by whom?

Does this indicated to you that Lt Carl Day even saw it on the 6th floor?

No More Silence

"Also found on the sixth floor, as I recall, near the shell area,
was a paper bag. It should have been photographed, but for some
reason, apparently wasn’t.
The story that I received later was that
when this man came to work that morning he was carrying
something wrapped in shipping or wrapping paper or brown roll
paper.

comment - so clearly he had no idea about LHO and what LMR and BWF had seen that morning


In the shipping room on the first floor, there were one or
two rolls of that paper. We took the end pieces off those rolls for
possible comparison with the bag that was found.
It would have
been a tedious job, but on other cases I’ve had occasion to match
the ends of two pieces of paper. If you can find the right place,
they’ll match up, even if it’s torn off.
We had possession of that
bag, but I didn’t have a chance to work with it due to events that
later occurred.


So despite being told to take CE 139 to City Hall for storage and safe keeping, we have Studebaker and Day collecting non evidence when they supposedly had THE paper bag with them already?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Richard Smith on February 08, 2018, 01:32:57 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
How many times do I have to say this Richard?

CE 142 was constructed for totally non-nefarious purposes. It was not against the law to construct a paper bag Richard. Neither Studebaker nor Day had any knowledge about how and who brought in CE 139. They were not going to make a paper bag to frame a "potential future assassin" by the name of Lee Harvey Oswald.

How was Studebaker or Day going to explain the partials on it?  8)

Mr. DAY. There is a legible print on it now. They were on there when it was returned to me from the FBI on November 24.

I have answered all your questions - now answer one of mine.

When was CE 142 found in the SE corner of the 6th floor and by whom?

Does this indicated to you that Lt Carl Day even saw it on the 6th floor?

No More Silence

"Also found on the sixth floor, as I recall, near the shell area,
was a paper bag. It should have been photographed, but for some
reason, apparently wasn’t.
The story that I received later was that
when this man came to work that morning he was carrying
something wrapped in shipping or wrapping paper or brown roll
paper.

comment - so clearly he had no idea about LHO and what LMR and BWF had seen that morning


In the shipping room on the first floor, there were one or
two rolls of that paper. We took the end pieces off those rolls for
possible comparison with the bag that was found.
It would have
been a tedious job, but on other cases I’ve had occasion to match
the ends of two pieces of paper. If you can find the right place,
they’ll match up, even if it’s torn off.
We had possession of that
bag, but I didn’t have a chance to work with it due to events that
later occurred.


So despite being told to take CE 139 to City Hall for storage and safe keeping, we have Studebaker and Day collecting non evidence when they supposedly had THE paper bag with them already?

This is simple.  Why didn't the DPD just clear up the matter by indicating that they made the bag if that was the case?  I understand your premise that they didn't make it with the intent to frame Oswald.  But why would they continue to allow that to be the conclusion drawn if they knew it was not true and that they had constructed the bag?  Don't you think someone would have mentioned that? 
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 01:45:45 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't agree with you Bill and in fact, Carl almost came clean in his oral history in No More Silence.

Keep in mind, he was in the first floor wrapping room where he was shown paper and tape rolls by Mr Truly. He had CE 139 with him. Detective Studebaker was ordered by Lt Day to take paper and tape samples.

"At that time, just through casual observation, it didn’t look
too promising. It wasn’t the place to try to do any fingerprint
work since it’s a rather lengthy process
and we had other things to
do. So I decided to carry the gun back to the office at City Hall,
store it under lock and key, examine it under ideal conditions, and
get to it when I could. I didn’t have anything to wrap it up with at
the time
, so I carried it out making sure that I didn’t touch
anything other than the strap
.

Besides, you had to be careful in wrapping stuff because if there were any prints, you’re liable to smear them just from the wrapping.

Now how can you have the situation where he was in a wrapping room with plenty of paper and tape (Studebaker took paper and tape) and then declare "I didn’t have anything to wrap it up with at the time" and in the same sentence mention "Besides, you had to be careful in wrapping stuff because if there were any prints, you’re liable to smear them just from the wrapping."

That is damning and that came straight from Lt Carl Day himself.

It wasnt the length of the paper bag that gave the game away - it was the width. That paper bag was constructed in the presence of an assembled CE 139.


Quote
That is damning and that came straight from Lt Carl Day himself.

No.  It's not damning.

I haven't seen anything which suggests that the idea of wrapping the rifle in paper from the shipping room work station ever entered Day's mind.  It's only damning if Day originally had the idea to wrap the rifle. 

You're using circular reasoning.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 01:48:33 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It wasnt the length of the paper bag that gave the game away - it was the width. That paper bag was constructed in the presence of an assembled CE 139.

What makes you say this?  In your opinion, what is the width of CE-142 and what is the measurement of the assembled CE-139 from the top of the scope to the bottom of the stock?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 01:50:41 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
This is simple.  Why didn't the DPD just clear up the matter by indicating that they made the bag if that was the case?  I understand your premise that they didn't make it with the intent to frame Oswald.  But why would they continue to allow that to be the conclusion drawn if they knew it was not true and that they had constructed the bag?  Don't you think someone would have mentioned that?

Progress  ;D

There was one little "issue" for Lt Day - when CE 142 came back from the FBI on the 24th (Lee Harvey Oswald was now killed) it had partials that they stated came from LHO.

Do I have to say any more?

Detective Studebaker has a clear conscious in the making of the paper bag - he did absolutely nothing wrong. They had a rifle, were in the wrapping room and he folded up a piece of paper and taped it. Day became concerned about potentially destroying prints and decided to walk straight out the front door with CE 139.

Instead of the throwing the paper bag away, it was used to transport crime scene evidence in it.

Unfortunately for Day, he now had to be very "evasive" about his true purpose of going to the wrapping room.

How CE 142 was handled, as a crime piece of evidence, made no sense for the reasons I covered in my OP.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 02:02:50 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Possibilities -

1) LHO was shown CE 142 by Captain Fritz on Friday evening (who had never seen CE 142 previously) to challenge him about what BWF saw that morning. How did Fritz know about the size and shape of CE 142 if Fritz never saw it? CE 142 was shown to BWF, so why not to LHO?

Mr. BALL. And you asked him the size and shape of the sack, didn't you?
Mr. FRITZ. He never admitted bringing the sack. I showed him the size probably in asking him if he brought a sack that size and he denied it. He said he brought his lunch was all he brought.
Mr. BALL. Didn't he say when you asked him the size and shape of the sack that he had with him, he said, "I don't recall, it may have been a small sack or a large sack. You don't always find one that fits your sandwiches," something like that.

We now have three people who denied seeing CE 142 - LHO, BWF and LMR.  ;D

2) The prints are not LHO's and can now not be rechecked.

3) The prints were transferred onto the paper bag passively from another source.

Even if the prints did belong to LHO, it meant that at some stage he touched the paper but it did not indicate who had constructed the paper bag.

Clean this up? On the evening of 22/11/1963, Studebaker and Day knew there were no identifiable prints on CE 142.

It was the FBI who found the latents.


Quote
Even if the prints did belong to LHO, it meant that at some stage he touched the paper but it did not indicate who had constructed the paper bag.

At some stage he touched the paper?  When would that have been?  If the prints did belong to Oswald, in your scenario, there is no way that Oswald could have touched that paper.  You hypothesize that that paper came fresh off the roll.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 02:06:10 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

No.  It's not damning.

I haven't seen anything which suggests that the idea of wrapping the rifle in paper from the shipping room work station ever entered Day's mind.  It's only damning if Day originally had the idea to wrap the rifle. 

You're using circular reasoning.

Oh yes it is - that's coming straight from Lt Day.

Why would Day ever mention wrapping anything up then? He just gave the very reason why it wasnt a good idea to wrap CE 139 up while being in a wrapping room with copious amounts of paper available to him.

You do not want to admit the bleeding obvious Bill.

Day was stuck with going to the wrapping room to start collecting non-evidence despite having the crime scene evidence in his possession already.  To make matters even more incredulous, we have a seasoned crime scene Detective have no clue who moved CE 142 in situ, why it wasnt photographed in situ and why he didn't look inside it and why he wrote 39 words directly on it and why he left it behind only to allow Studebaker to take it back up to the crime scene so it could have been potentially damaged.

You find this just all normal for a seasoned Detective? Nothing seems to arouse your suspicions?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 02:07:20 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

At some stage he touched the paper?  When would that have been?  If the prints did belong to Oswald, in your scenario, there is no way that Oswald could have touched that paper.  You hypothesize that that paper came fresh off the roll.

When do you think Fritz saw CE 142 on 22/11/1963?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 02:07:43 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
This is simple.  Why didn't the DPD just clear up the matter by indicating that they made the bag if that was the case?  I understand your premise that they didn't make it with the intent to frame Oswald.  But why would they continue to allow that to be the conclusion drawn if they knew it was not true and that they had constructed the bag?  Don't you think someone would have mentioned that?

Richard, it's not only Day and Studebaker.  Tony Fratini also has Roy Truly present and with knowledge that a bag was created after the fact.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 02:09:45 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
What makes you say this?  In your opinion, what is the width of CE-142 and what is the measurement of the assembled CE-139 from the top of the scope to the bottom of the stock?

Bill some research and we can exchange notes.

If you were trying to conceal a dissembled CE 139 as much as possible would you make it the width that CE 142 was?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 02:12:15 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Oh yes it is - that's coming straight from Lt Day.

Why would Day ever mention wrapping anything up then? He just gave the very reason why it wasnt a good idea to wrap CE 139 up while being in a wrapping room with copious amounts of paper available to him.

You do not want to admit the bleeding obvious Bill.

Day was stuck with going to the wrapping room to start collecting non-evidence despite having the crime scene evidence in his possession already.  To make matters even more incredulous, we have a seasoned crime scene Detective have no clue who moved CE 142 in situ, why it wasnt photographed in situ and why he didn't look inside it and why he wrote 39 words directly on it and why he left it behind only to allow Studebaker to take it back up to the crime scene so it could have been potentially damaged.

You find this just all normal for a seasoned Detective? Nothing seems to arouse your suspicions?


Quote
Oh yes it is -

No.  Unless, you're using circular reasoning.


Quote
Why would Day ever mention wrapping anything up then?

That's just it.  Day did not ever mention wrapping up anything.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 02:12:37 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Richard, it's not only Day and Studebaker.  Tony Fratini also has Roy Truly present and with knowledge that a bag was created after the fact.

Mr Roy Truly definitely was present in the shipping room and he showed them where the paper and tape rolls were. The second part you just made it up. Truly was not asked anything about what happened in the shipping room. Pity.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 02:14:58 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Bill some research and we can exchange notes.

If you were trying to conceal a dissembled CE 139 as much as possible would you make it the width that CE 142 was?

This is like pulling teeth, for some reason.

Your measurements, please?

You made the claim comparing the width of the bag with the measurement of the rifle (top to bottom), now will you provide the measurements you're working with already?  Sheesh.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 02:19:13 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

No.  Unless, you're using circular reasoning.


That's just it.  Day did not ever mention wrapping up anything.

Houston we have a problem.  ;D

"I didn’t have anything to wrap it up with at
the time
, so I carried it out making sure that I didn’t touch
anything other than the strap. Besides, you had to be careful in
wrapping stuff because if there were any prints, you’re liable to
smear them just from the wrapping."


He mentioned wrap/wrapping three times in one paragraph.

So what was he doing with an assembled CE 139 and supposedly CE 142 in a wrapping room?

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 02:20:51 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
This is like pulling teeth, for some reason.

Your measurements, please?

You made the claim comparing the width of the bag with the measurement of the rifle (top to bottom), now will you provide the measurements you're working with already?  Sheesh.

I have them - you do some leg work and we can compare. All the info you need is easily available.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 02:21:53 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Mr Roy Truly definitely was present in the shipping room and he showed them where the paper and tape rolls were. The second part you just made it up. Truly was not asked anything about what happened in the shipping room. Pity.

I'm not the one making things up.

Roy Truly lived until 1985.  You don't think he was aware that the Warren Commission concluded that it was most likely that Lee Oswald carried the rifle in a large bag that morning?

Are you really saying that Truly knew a bag was made by Studebaker but never told anyone about it, ever?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 02:25:44 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Houston we have a problem.  ;D

"I didn’t have anything to wrap it up with at
the time
, so I carried it out making sure that I didn’t touch
anything other than the strap. Besides, you had to be careful in
wrapping stuff because if there were any prints, you’re liable to
smear them just from the wrapping."


He mentioned wrap/wrapping three times in one paragraph.


Quote
Houston we have a problem.

No, Tony.  No problem on my end.

Explain how any of that can be confused with Day ever mentioning actually considering wrapping up the rifle.

Day clearly said that he did not have anything to wrap up the rifle with.  This is not to be confused with Day considering wrapping the rifle in paper from the shipping area, or wrapping it with anything else, for that matter.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 02:26:20 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I have them - you do some leg work and we can compare. All the info you need is easily available.

Yep.  Like pulling teeth.  No thanks.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 02:29:31 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I'm not the one making things up.

Roy Truly lived until 1985.  You don't think he was aware that the Warren Commission concluded that it was most likely that Lee Oswald carried the rifle in a large bag that morning?

Are you really saying that Truly knew a bag was made by Studebaker but never told anyone about it, ever?

Why didn't the WC simply ask him Bill, what he did or didn't see? I wasnt down there - but he was.

Your like DVP - creating a false argument then expressing "surprise and shock to your own questions".

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 02:30:29 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yep.  Like pulling teeth.  No thanks.

Wait - we have access to the same published material  :) You cant spent 10 minutes?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 02:34:14 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Why didn't the WC simply ask him Bill, what he did or didn't see? I wasnt down there - but he was.

Your like DVP - creating a false argument then expressing "surprise and shock to your own questions".

Your theory has Truly seeing Studebaker make a bag, right?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 02:38:15 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

No, Tony.  No problem on my end.

Explain how any of that can be confused with Day ever mentioning actually considering wrapping up the rifle.

Day clearly said that he did not have anything to wrap up the rifle with.  This is not to be confused with Day considering wrapping the rifle in paper from the shipping area, or wrapping it with anything else, for that matter.

Lt Day gave a valid reason why it wasnt a good idea to wrap up the rifle.

What do you think they wrap crime scene evidence in to protect it? Glad wrap?

Here we have Lt Day mention wrapping again"

"Well, that meant that I had to take the gun through the
crowd. I didn’t want to wrap it up and really didn’t realize what
kind of crowd he was talking about down there. I thought there
were just a few people hanging around like there usually was. So I
just picked the gun up by the strap again and went on the elevator
with him down to the third floor."

Why mention wrapping - again? Was it because it was SOP?

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 02:43:23 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Your theory has Truly seeing Studebaker make a bag, right?

No it doesn't.

Just check out my OP and the FBI report(s) written by Vincent Drain. Truly was in the shipping room when Studebaker and Day were there - what he saw - I do not know. The WC never asked him.


Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 02:44:07 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Lt Day gave a valid reason why it wasnt a good idea to wrap up the rifle.

What do you think they wrap crime scene evidence in to protect it? Glad wrap?

Here we have Lt Day mention wrapping again"

"Well, that meant that I had to take the gun through the
crowd. I didn’t want to wrap it up and really didn’t realize what
kind of crowd he was talking about down there. I thought there
were just a few people hanging around like there usually was. So I
just picked the gun up by the strap again and went on the elevator
with him down to the third floor."

Why mention wrapping - again? Was it because it was SOP?

Again, how is any of that supposed to suggest that Day ever considered wrapping the rifle and therefore, ordered Studebaker to make a bag?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 02:50:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
No it doesn't.

Just check out my OP and the FBI report(s) written by Vincent Drain. Truly was in the shipping room when Studebaker and Day were there - what he saw - I do not know. The WC never asked him.

Truly stated that he personally supervised and aided Day when the paper and tape SAMPLES were taken from the shipping table.  Truly didn't mention a bag being constructed, most likely because one was not.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 02:53:26 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Why didn't the WC simply ask him Bill, what he did or didn't see? I wasnt down there - but he was.

Correct, Truly was there... and not one mention of a bag being constructed.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 02:55:13 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Again, how is any of that supposed to suggest that Day ever considered wrapping the rifle and therefore, ordered Studebaker to make a bag?

It is simple and a question you can not answer - if Studebaker and Day had both CE 139 and CE 142 in their possession - why did both men stop off in the first floor shipping room to start collection non-evidence at that time of the investigation when neither knew who and how CE 139 was taken into the TSBD?

Now if you remark - "well in CE 142 of course" - then why wasnt it photographed in situ and then left behind only to be returned back to the 6th floor with Studebaker?

Whereas what I am suggesting, was that the reason they went to the shipping room was to wrap CE 139 in a paper bag.

Day clearly stated years later why it wasnt actually a good idea to wrap it up in paper as he had commenced processing it.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 08, 2018, 02:55:27 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It is very simple Jack.

Here is my likely scenario:

After the rifle was found at ~1.25 pm and then processed by Lt Day (including being photographed in situ and dusted for prints) Captain Fritz asked Lt Day to immediately bring in the rifle (CE 139) to City Hall. At around the same time Mr Truly came onto the 6th floor and revealed to Captain Fritz that LHO was not present when he did a roll call.

Lt Day - having nothing to wrap CE 139 in - asked Mr Truly (or Mr Truly volunteered) if they had some paper to wrap CE 139 in.

Truly, Day (with CE 139) and Studebaker make their way to the first floor wrapping room. Truly shows them where the wrapping tables are.

Day (while holding CE 139) asks Studebaker to make a paper bag (CE 142) to place CE 139 in so it could be carried to City Hall.

Day changes his mind, since he had already dusted CE 139 and had difficulties obtaining a print - he did this for fear of smudging any potential print on the rifle. (He made this very point in No More Silence)

Day leaves the TSBD with CE 139 and was accompanied by an FBI agent to City Hall. Mr Truly sees Lt Day leave with CE 139.

Day leaves the paper bag with Studebaker who folds it up and takes it back up to the 6th floor and continues with the processing of the SN by himself. Montgomery and Johnson are on the 6th floor and now mention seeing the paper bag. Johnson sees the paper bag for the first time after Studebaker finished dusting the chicken lunch sack and Dr Pepper bottle and heads off to the SN. This was filmed by Tom Alyea. He did not mention seeing the paper bag (CE 142) on the 6th floor.

The paper bag is instead used to place the window sill strip (~ 30 inches) removed from the window of the SN.

Montgomery takes out CE 142 while holding one end of the window sill strip in it at 3.00 pm.

Johnson takes out the chicken lunch sack (obviously dusted and has an ID tag on it), the Dr Pepper bottle and the Viceroy cigarette packet.

That is it - it is about a Detective who made a paper bag (CE 142) for non nefarious means. It had nothing to do with a conspiracy nor to frame anyone.

The FBI and the WC were not able to prove that LHO had constructed any paper bag prior to 22/11/1963.

I mentioned Detective Robert Lee Studebaker because he was the last known person who had his hands on the very paper and tape that CE 142 was constructed from (forensically proven by the FBI) and that only one 38 inch bag was handed over to the FBI that evening.



Day has the bag from the SN with him when he goes to the first floor tape room. So then what happened to the bag taken to the 1st floor tape room by Day and Studebaker that was used for the tape and paper comparison? The bag originally found in the SN? Where is it?

Collin:

"Day then realises that he needs to take the rifle to the crime lab to further process. At that stage he and Studebaker leave for the first floor with the rifle and the bag. Presumably to take the "evidence" to HQ. Day then notices the tape is the same as that on the bag and decides to get samples."

Mr. DAY. On the first floor of the Texas School Book Depository, and I noticed from their wrapping bench there was paper and tape of a similar--the tape was of the same width as this. I took the bag over and tried it, and I noticed that the tape was the same width as on the bag.

Mr. DAY. I directed one of the officers standing by me, I don't know which, to get a piece of the tape and a piece of the paper from the wrapping bench.

--------------------------------------------------------

"The FBI and the WC were not able to prove that LHO had constructed any paper bag prior to 22/11/1963."



The FBI and the WC could not "prove" it, but now you are "proving" Studebaker constructed a bag and then destroys the original bag referenced by Day and then somehow puts LHO finger prints on the new bag? Can you see the reason for the skepticism here?


-------------------------------------------------------------


That is it - it is about a Detective who made a paper bag (CE 142) for non nefarious means. It had nothing to do with a conspiracy nor to frame anyone.



It has everything to do with proving a conspiracy



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 03:03:52 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Correct, Truly was there... and not one mention of a bag being constructed.

Truly wasnt asked what he saw or didn't see in the wrapping room and he may well have been to one side of the floor when Studebaker and Day were at the wrapping table. Mr Truly only saw CE 139 as it was being taken out of the building by Day. He doesn't mention seeing it in the wrapping room - yet we know it was there.



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 03:04:28 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It is simple and a question you can not answer - if Studebaker and Day had both CE 139 and CE 142 in their possession - why did both men stop off in the first floor shipping room to start collection non-evidence at that time of the investigation when neither knew who and how CE 139 was taken into the TSBD?

Now if you remark - "well in CE 142 of course" - then why wasnt it photographed in situ and then left behind only to be returned back to the 6th floor with Studebaker?

Whereas what I am suggesting, was that the reason they went to the shipping room was to wrap CE 139 in a paper bag.

Day clearly stated years later why it wasnt actually a good idea to wrap it up in paper as he had commenced processing it.


Quote
Day clearly stated years later why it wasnt actually a good idea to wrap it up in paper as he had commenced processing it.

Day wanted to make a bag in order to transport the rifle , had Studebaker actually begin to make the bag and THEN, once construction of the bag was under way, Day decided to NOT use the bag to transport the rifle.  This is what you're saying?  And you're saying that this is what Day stated years later?  Cite?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 03:05:25 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


Day has the bag from the SN with him when he goes to the first floor tape room. So then what happened to the bag taken to the 1st floor tape room by Day and Studebaker that was used for the tape and paper comparison? The bag originally found in the SN? Where is it?

Collin:

"Day then realises that he needs to take the rifle to the crime lab to further process. At that stage he and Studebaker leave for the first floor with the rifle and the bag. Presumably to take the "evidence" to HQ. Day then notices the tape is the same as that on the bag and decides to get samples."

Mr. DAY. On the first floor of the Texas School Book Depository, and I noticed from their wrapping bench there was paper and tape of a similar--the tape was of the same width as this. I took the bag over and tried it, and I noticed that the tape was the same width as on the bag.

Mr. DAY. I directed one of the officers standing by me, I don't know which, to get a piece of the tape and a piece of the paper from the wrapping bench.

--------------------------------------------------------

"The FBI and the WC were not able to prove that LHO had constructed any paper bag prior to 22/11/1963."



The FBI and the WC could not "prove" it, but now you are "proving" Studebaker constructed a bag and then destroys the original bag referenced by Day and then somehow puts LHO finger prints on the new bag? Can you see the reason for the skepticism here?


-------------------------------------------------------------


That is it - it is about a Detective who made a paper bag (CE 142) for non nefarious means. It had nothing to do with a conspiracy nor to frame anyone.



It has everything to do with proving a conspiracy

Have you actually read my OP?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 03:09:04 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Truly wasnt asked what he saw or didn't see in the wrapping room and he may well have been to one side of the floor when Studebaker and Day were at the wrapping table. Mr Truly only saw CE 139 as it was being taken out of the building by Day. He doesn't mention seeing it in the wrapping room - yet we know it was there.


Quote
Truly wasnt asked what he saw or didn't see in the wrapping room and he may well have been to one side of the floor when Studebaker and Day were at the wrapping table.

But that is not what Truly said.  He said that he supervised and aided Day.  No mention of them making a bag, only collecting samples.


Quote
Mr Truly only saw CE 139 as it was being taken out of the building by Day. He doesn't mention seeing it in the wrapping room - yet we know it was there.

This in no way means that Truly would have seen a bag being made by Studebaker and then never speak of it.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 03:09:10 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Day wanted to make a bag in order to transport the rifle , had Studebaker actually begin to make the bag and THEN, once construction of the bag was under way, Day decided to NOT use the bag to transport the rifle.  This is what you're saying?  And you're saying that this is what Day stated years later?  Cite?

Of course not Bill, if you read my OP you would have realized that.

My hypothesis is clear and simple to follow.

Now disprove it. That is all I am requesting.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 03:12:47 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Of course not Bill, if you read my OP you would have realized that.

My hypothesis is clear and simple to follow.

Now disprove it. That is all I am requesting.


Quote
Of course not Bill,

But that is what you said.

"Day clearly stated years later why it wasnt actually a good idea to wrap it up in paper as he had commenced processing it." - Tony Fratini

I'm asking for a cite.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 03:25:51 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

But that is not what Truly said. He said that he supervised and aided Day.  No mention of them making a bag, only collecting samples.


This in no way means that Truly would have seen a bag being made by Studebaker and then never speak of it.

It wasnt Day who constructed the paper bag.

Does Mr Truly mention CE 139 and CE 142 (a 38 inch paper bag) as being in the first floor shipping room in the presence of Studebaker and Day?

That's a big NO, hence you can not discount Studebaker having made it in situ in the shipping room. Truly never mentions either item being in the shipping room but we know they were there.

Mr. TRULY. Yes; and I saw a rifle being carried from the building.
Mr. BALL. In other words, a rifle was found on the sixth floor?
Mr. TRULY. Yes.
Mr. BALL. You saw that in place on the sixth floor?
Mr. TRULY. No; I did not.
Mr. BALL. You didn't?
Mr. TRULY. I only saw the rifle as they were going out the front door.

You can effectively rule out Mr Truly as harming my hypothesis. That leaves just two people knowing the origins of CE 142 one of which wasnt shown CE 142 during their WC testimony. Want to guess?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 03:28:03 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

But that is what you said.

"Day clearly stated years later why it wasnt actually a good idea to wrap it up in paper as he had commenced processing it." - Tony Fratini

I'm asking for a cite.

Houston, the rockets have just blown up. Sorry Bill - I can not help you any further.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 03:39:37 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Houston, the rockets have just blown up. Sorry Bill - I can not help you any further.

So no cite for something you claimed?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 08, 2018, 03:40:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Houston, the rockets have just blown up. Sorry Bill - I can not help you any further.

You're a wise man Tony......You know that debating a person who refuses to accept facts is an exercise in futility.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 03:40:59 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Of course not Bill, if you read my OP you would have realized that.

My hypothesis is clear and simple to follow.

Now disprove it. That is all I am requesting.

Why do you think others have to disprove a hypothesis which has not been proven?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 03:43:23 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You're a wise man Tony......You know that debating a person who refuses to accept facts is an exercise in futility.

You don't even possess the capability to decipher plain text that is right in front of your eyes... and you want to talk about facts?  Now THAT is funny.

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,180.60.html
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Anderson on February 08, 2018, 04:16:59 PM
Who mentioned facts here??? It's pretty obvious by the conflicting evidence there are no facts here or rather there is no way to determine the facts by studying the evidence. All matters ''paper bag'' are a xxxx pile. We all know that. We don't know why it's all a xxxx pile but it is. DPD were not professional when it came to physical evidence that much is clear to everybody.

Considering the official version cannot be proven, demanding alternate theories be disproven is beyond stupid.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 08, 2018, 04:20:58 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Who mentioned facts here??? It's pretty obvious by the conflicting evidence there are no facts here or rather there is no way to determine the facts by studying the evidence. All matters ''paper bag'' are a xxxx pile. We all know that. We don't know why it's all a xxxx pile but it is. DPD were not professional when it came to physical evidence that much is clear to everybody.

Considering the official version cannot be proven, demanding alternate theories be disproven is beyond stupid.

It's not just here in this thread....  Mr Brown has developed a reputation ......
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 08, 2018, 04:28:01 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It's not just here in this thread....  Mr Brown has developed a reputation ......

I'll let my posting history and your posting history speak for themselves and others can determine which one of us has the "reputation".

You're hijacking Tony's thread.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 08, 2018, 11:21:23 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Why do you think others have to disprove a hypothesis which has not been proven?

If one is going to "challenge", in any way, the official WC version of events in regards to the origins of CE 142 one has to provide a viable alternative.

I believe that I have.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 09, 2018, 02:25:15 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Why do you think others have to disprove a hypothesis which has not been proven?

Because that's how it works.....hypotheses can never be proven....only disproven.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Mytton on February 09, 2018, 02:36:47 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Because that's how it works.....hypotheses can never be proven....only disproven.




This is particularly startling and noteworthy when one stops to realize that those making the allegation of conspiracy necessarily have the burden of proof. I mean, it makes no sense for A to say to B, “I allege that there is a conspiracy here. Now you prove there isn’t.” The alleger always, by definition, has the burden of proof. To say that those alleging a conspiracy in the Kennedy assassination have not met their burden of proof would be the understatement of the millennium. Here, the absence of any credible evidence of a conspiracy is bad enough for the conspiracy theorists, but, as demonstrated on these pages, there is much, much evidence pointing irresistibly in the direction of no conspiracy
RHVB





JohnM


Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 09, 2018, 02:45:31 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login



This is particularly startling and noteworthy when one stops to realize that those making the allegation of conspiracy necessarily have the burden of proof. I mean, it makes no sense for A to say to B, “I allege that there is a conspiracy here. Now you prove there isn’t.” The alleger always, by definition, has the burden of proof. To say that those alleging a conspiracy in the Kennedy assassination have not met their burden of proof would be the understatement of the millennium. Here, the absence of any credible evidence of a conspiracy is bad enough for the conspiracy theorists, but, as demonstrated on these pages, there is much, much evidence pointing irresistibly in the direction of no conspiracy
RHVB





JohnM

What the hell are you rambling on about? And in bold too, impressive.

Tony's hypothesis is that CE142 was made by a member of the DPD after the discovery of the rifle. Nothing more.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 09, 2018, 02:48:12 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
What the hell are you rambling on about? And in bold too, impressive.

Tony's hypothesis is that CE142 was made by a member of the DPD after the discovery of the rifle. Nothing more.

Correct.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 09, 2018, 08:12:53 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Houston, the rockets have just blown up. Sorry Bill - I can not help you any further.

No source = Speculation
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jack Nessan on February 09, 2018, 02:34:17 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Have you actually read my OP?


Yes, and I also read this earlier post too. It  makes this a very valid statement and the pretense that this hypothesis is somehow benign completely false.


TF: That is it - it is about a Detective who made a paper bag (CE 142) for non nefarious means. It had nothing to do with a conspiracy nor to frame anyone.


It has everything to do with proving a conspiracy


 Tony Fratini
⦁   Full Member
ImageImageImage
Image
⦁   Posts: 153
⦁   Mr. FRITZ. I wasn't there when that was recovered.
⦁   
Image
Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
«Reply #65 on: January 31, 2018, 12:27:50 AM »

I believe CE 142 could be the potential card that brings the WC deck crashing down.





===============================================================


There was no answer in the OP to what happened to the original bag. The bag found in the SN and used by Day and Studebaker to compare to the paper and tape disappears and is then replaced in the narrative by insinuating Studebaker made a different bag in full view of all the people in the tape room.


Day has the bag from the SN with him when he goes to the first floor tape room. So then what happened to the bag taken to the 1st floor tape room by Day and Studebaker that was used for the tape and paper comparison? The bag originally found in the SN? Where is it?

Collin:

"Day then realises that he needs to take the rifle to the crime lab to further process. At that stage he and Studebaker leave for the first floor with the rifle and the bag. Presumably to take the "evidence" to HQ. Day then notices the tape is the same as that on the bag and decides to get samples."

Mr. DAY. On the first floor of the Texas School Book Depository, and I noticed from their wrapping bench there was paper and tape of a similar--the tape was of the same width as this. I took the bag over and tried it, and I noticed that the tape was the same width as on the bag.

Mr. DAY. I directed one of the officers standing by me, I don't know which, to get a piece of the tape and a piece of the paper from the wrapping bench.

--------------------------------------------------------

"The FBI and the WC were not able to prove that LHO had constructed any paper bag prior to 22/11/1963."




The FBI and the WC could not "prove" it, but now you are "proving" Studebaker constructed a bag and then destroys the original bag referenced by Day and then somehow puts LHO finger prints on the new bag? Can you see the reason for the skepticism here?


Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Richard Smith on February 09, 2018, 03:03:59 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Progress  ;D

There was one little "issue" for Lt Day - when CE 142 came back from the FBI on the 24th (Lee Harvey Oswald was now killed) it had partials that they stated came from LHO.

Do I have to say any more?

Detective Studebaker has a clear conscious in the making of the paper bag - he did absolutely nothing wrong. They had a rifle, were in the wrapping room and he folded up a piece of paper and taped it. Day became concerned about potentially destroying prints and decided to walk straight out the front door with CE 139.

Instead of the throwing the paper bag away, it was used to transport crime scene evidence in it.

Unfortunately for Day, he now had to be very "evasive" about his true purpose of going to the wrapping room.

How CE 142 was handled, as a crime piece of evidence, made no sense for the reasons I covered in my OP.

That has more twisted logic than a pretzel.  Why would the DPD send a bag to the FBI that they knew in your tale had no connection to the crime?  If there was no frame up or conspiracy, why would the FBI find Oswald's prints on this bag?  If there was a conspiracy or frame up involving the FBI, why wouldn't they claim to find Oswald's prints on the rifle which would seemingly be more important than the bag?  And then to top it off Studebacker decides not clear the matter up for some unknown reason.   He could make the same argument you made - even if wildly improbable bordering on the incredible - that Oswald must have touched by coincidence the same paper used to make the bag.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 09, 2018, 03:26:38 PM
In my opinion, this is a list of people who had to have lied on some level (if one were to accept the hypothesis that Day and Studebaker made CE-142 after the fact).

1.  J.C. Day
2.  Robert Studebaker
3.  Roy Truly
4.  L.D. Montgomery
5.  Marvin Johnson
6.  Linnie Mae Randle
7.  Buell Frazier
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Richard Smith on February 09, 2018, 04:09:08 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
In my opinion, this is a list of people who had to have lied on some level (if one were to accept the hypothesis that Day and Studebaker made CE-142 after the fact).

1.  J.C. Day
2.  Robert Studebaker
3.  Roy Truly
4.  L.D. Montgomery
5.  Marvin Johnson
6.  Linnie Mae Randle
7.  Buell Frazier

I would add the FBI since they claimed to find Oswald's prints on the bag.  The explanation that Oswald might have touched the same paper used to make the bag is so wildly improbable as to be discounted. 
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 09, 2018, 04:25:24 PM
Stombaugh tested fibers found inside CE-142 and found that they matched fibers from the blanket found in the Paine garage, which was used to store Oswald's rifle.

This is not to say as a fact that the fibers found inside the bag definitely came from the blanket from the garage, but they were in fact a match.  If the fibers found in the bag did not originate from the blanket in the garage, then they somehow found their way inside the bag from another source, even though the hypothesis of this thread is that the bag was created after the assassination, taken to the Dallas police lab and then to the FBI lab in Washington.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 09, 2018, 04:51:00 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Stombaugh tested fibers found inside CE-142 and found that they matched fibers from the blanket found in the Paine garage, which was used to store Oswald's rifle.

This is not to say as a fact that the fibers found inside the bag definitely came from the blanket from the garage, but they were in fact a match.  If the fibers found in the bag did not originate from the blanket in the garage, then they somehow found their way inside the bag from another source, even though the hypothesis of this thread is that the bag was created after the assassination, taken to the Dallas police lab and then to the FBI lab in Washington.

As I recall there was a single fiber found in the paper sack and NONE found on the rifle.....  Do you consider this to be probable??    The rifle was allegedly stored in the blanket for several months but not a single blanket fiber adhered to the rifle ......  Preposterous!    AND...there are photos that show the blanket in contact with the paper sack before the FBI received the evidence.     
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 09, 2018, 05:08:00 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
AND...there are photos that show the blanket in contact with the paper sack before the FBI received the evidence.   

No.

The photo (just one, by the way) was taken after Stombaugh's FBI analysis had already been completed and therefore, the photo does nothing to raise the question of contamination.

Try again.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 09, 2018, 05:34:04 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Here, the absence of any credible evidence of a conspiracy is bad enough for the conspiracy theorists, but, as demonstrated on these pages, there is much, much evidence pointing irresistibly in the direction of no conspiracy
RHVB[/b]

LOL.  Only because Bugliosi finds a ring in a cup to be irresistible.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 09, 2018, 05:43:54 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Stombaugh tested fibers found inside CE-142 and found that they matched fibers from the blanket found in the Paine garage, which was used to store Oswald's rifle.

There is no evidence that the blanket found in the Paine garage was used to store Oswald's rifle.  Only that Marina said she saw part of a wooden stock in that blanket that she took to be a rifle about 6 weeks earlier.

Quote
This is not to say as a fact that the fibers found inside the bag definitely came from the blanket from the garage,

(https://emojipedia-us.s3.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/emoji-one/104/thumbs-up-sign_1f44d.png)

Quote
If the fibers found in the bag did not originate from the blanket in the garage, then they somehow found their way inside the bag from another source, even though the hypothesis of this thread is that the bag was created after the assassination, taken to the Dallas police lab and then to the FBI lab in Washington.

(https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/evidence-from-the-assassination-of-president-kennedy-in-1963-includes-picture-id576877656)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 09, 2018, 05:48:21 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
There is no evidence that the blanket found in the Paine garage was used to store Oswald's rifle.  Only that Marina said she saw part of a wooden stock in that blanket that she took to be a rifle about 6 weeks earlier.

(https://emojipedia-us.s3.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/emoji-one/104/thumbs-up-sign_1f44d.png)

(https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/evidence-from-the-assassination-of-president-kennedy-in-1963-includes-picture-id576877656)

Marina stated that she saw a rifle in the blanket, not just a wooden stock.

As for posting the photo after my comments about the blanket fibers being found inside the bag, what is your point?  That photo was taken after Stombaugh's FBI analysis had already been completed and therefore, the photo does nothing to raise the question of contamination.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 09, 2018, 06:35:15 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Marina stated that she saw a rifle in the blanket, not just a wooden stock.

Marina said a lot of things.  How did she determine that it was a rifle in the blanket when it was rolled up and tied?

Mr. RANKIN. When was that?
Mrs. OSWALD. About a week after I came from New Orleans.
Mr. RANKIN. And then you found that the rifle was in the blanket, did you?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, 1 saw the wooden part of it, the wooden stock.

Ruth Paine's English was better.

Mrs. PAINE - My recollection of that is that she opened the blanket and saw a portion of what she judged to be a rifle, having known already that her husband had one.

Sounds like Marina made an assumption.  Just like you are.

Keep in mind that Marina didn't even know a rifle from a shotgun.

Mr. RANKIN. In Russia did you have a rifle or a shotgun?
Mrs. OSWALD. I don't know the difference. One and the other shoots. You men. That is your business.

Quote
As for posting the photo after my comments about the blanket fibers being found inside the bag, what is your point?  That photo was taken after Stombaugh's FBI analysis had already been completed and therefore, the photo does nothing to raise the question of contamination.

This is based on the claim that the piece of tape on the blanket in the photo has Stombaugh's initials on it.  I don't see them in this photo, but even if it's true, why would you assume that the police were any less careless with their evidence handling prior to the evidence being first released to the FBI?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 09, 2018, 06:38:30 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
This is based on the claim that the piece of tape on the blanket in the photo has Stombaugh's initials on it.  I don't see them in this photo, but even if it's true, why would you assume that the police were any less careless with their evidence handling prior to the evidence being first released to the FBI?

I don't have to assume a single thing.  The photo was taken AFTER Stombaugh completed his analysis and that is that.  The photo in no way suggests contamination.  Now, if you can post a photo of the blanket near the bag taken BEFORE Stombaugh received them, then you'd have something.  Posting the photo you ended up posting means absolutely nothing.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 09, 2018, 06:40:41 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
There is no evidence that the blanket found in the Paine garage was used to store Oswald's rifle.  Only that Marina said she saw part of a wooden stock in that blanket that she took to be a rifle about 6 weeks earlier.

(https://emojipedia-us.s3.amazonaws.com/thumbs/120/emoji-one/104/thumbs-up-sign_1f44d.png)

(https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/evidence-from-the-assassination-of-president-kennedy-in-1963-includes-picture-id576877656)

There is no evidence that the blanket found in the Paine garage was used to store Oswald's rifle.

Are you aware that there are reports that Marina referred to the rifle as being in a paper wrapper inside the blanket...and Mike Paine also referred to a paper sack containing "something" inside the blanket..

I know this is contrary to the official tale....but it is true....and it might explain why there was not a single blanket fiber found on the rifle....



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 09, 2018, 06:45:32 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't have to assume a single thing.  The photo was taken AFTER Stombaugh completed his analysis and that is that.

Yeah?  Prove it.  You were just as confident about your "inverted caret".
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 09, 2018, 07:24:03 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Marina stated that she saw a rifle in the blanket, not just a wooden stock.

As for posting the photo after my comments about the blanket fibers being found inside the bag, what is your point?  That photo was taken after Stombaugh's FBI analysis had already been completed and therefore, the photo does nothing to raise the question of contamination.

This same photo is printed in Jesse Curry's J book JFK  Assassinaion File..... Stange how the photo in Curry's book is so much lighter than this photo....

(https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/evidence-from-the-assassination-of-president-kennedy-in-1963-includes-picture-id576877656)

And in Curry's book the paper bag is not stained dark  as The FBI reported had happened in processing the bag....

There are many other discrepancies in the photo that indicate it was taken on 11/22/63.....
At the bottom and below the revolver, and on the right side of the crease on the sack....There is a note written on the sack dated 11/22/63 and signed by JC Day......
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 09, 2018, 10:18:45 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Marina said a lot of things.  How did she determine that it was a rifle in the blanket when it was rolled up and tied?

Mr. RANKIN. When was that?
Mrs. OSWALD. About a week after I came from New Orleans.
Mr. RANKIN. And then you found that the rifle was in the blanket, did you?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, 1 saw the wooden part of it, the wooden stock.


Marina Oswald, affidavit, 11/22/63

"I opened the blanket and saw a rifle in it."
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 09, 2018, 10:20:23 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
No source = Speculation

Lt Day himself in an oral history in No More Silence mentioned why wrapping the rifle up was not a good idea. Now why would Day even mention anything about wrapping things up? How could he say that he had nothing to wrap up the rifle in when he was in a wrapping room where there was ample paper and tape? There is a disconnect in his logic.

Speculation - yes the WC used it liberally, especially when it came to CE 142.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 09, 2018, 10:30:23 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Yes, and I also read this earlier post too. It  makes this a very valid statement and the pretense that this hypothesis is somehow benign completely false.


TF: That is it - it is about a Detective who made a paper bag (CE 142) for non nefarious means. It had nothing to do with a conspiracy nor to frame anyone.


It has everything to do with proving a conspiracy


 Tony Fratini
⦁   Full Member
ImageImageImage
Image
⦁   Posts: 153
⦁   Mr. FRITZ. I wasn't there when that was recovered.
⦁   
Image
Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
«Reply #65 on: January 31, 2018, 12:27:50 AM »

I believe CE 142 could be the potential card that brings the WC deck crashing down.





===============================================================


There was no answer in the OP to what happened to the original bag. The bag found in the SN and used by Day and Studebaker to compare to the paper and tape disappears and is then replaced in the narrative by insinuating Studebaker made a different bag in full view of all the people in the tape room.


Day has the bag from the SN with him when he goes to the first floor tape room. So then what happened to the bag taken to the 1st floor tape room by Day and Studebaker that was used for the tape and paper comparison? The bag originally found in the SN? Where is it?

Collin:

"Day then realises that he needs to take the rifle to the crime lab to further process. At that stage he and Studebaker leave for the first floor with the rifle and the bag. Presumably to take the "evidence" to HQ. Day then notices the tape is the same as that on the bag and decides to get samples."

Mr. DAY. On the first floor of the Texas School Book Depository, and I noticed from their wrapping bench there was paper and tape of a similar--the tape was of the same width as this. I took the bag over and tried it, and I noticed that the tape was the same width as on the bag.

Mr. DAY. I directed one of the officers standing by me, I don't know which, to get a piece of the tape and a piece of the paper from the wrapping bench.

--------------------------------------------------------

"The FBI and the WC were not able to prove that LHO had constructed any paper bag prior to 22/11/1963."




The FBI and the WC could not "prove" it, but now you are "proving" Studebaker constructed a bag and then destroys the original bag referenced by Day and then somehow puts LHO finger prints on the new bag? Can you see the reason for the skepticism here?

There was no original bag referenced by Lt Day - he had to make something up to explain why he and Studebaker decided to stop in the first floor shipping room despite having the paper bag and rifle with them. If there was an "original bag" he would have photographed it in situ. No one did nor can anyone explain where it went.

No "original bag" was lost, destroyed or replaced - there was only one paper bag made by Studebaker - CE 142.

Discussions between Colin and myself should not be taken out of context Jack Nessan.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 09, 2018, 10:37:37 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't have to assume a single thing.  The photo was taken AFTER Stombaugh completed his analysis and that is that.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yeah?  Prove it.  You were just as confident about your "inverted caret".

That photo is Warren Commission Exhibit 738.  It's a photo of the items turned over to the FBI (for the 2nd time) by the Dallas Police Department on 11/26/63.

From J.C. Day's Warren Commission testimony, when asked about CE-738...

"Yes, sir. This is a photograph of most of the evidence that was returned to the FBI the second time on November 26, 1963. It was released to Agent Vince Drain at 2 p.m., November 26th."

Stombaugh testified that he analyzed the blanket on the 23rd and stapled a piece of evidence tape onto it and put his initials "PMS" and the date "11/23/63" on the tape.  This would be three days BEFORE the photo that you posted (CE-738) was taken.

I believe the thin white strip on the bottom right corner of the blanket is the evidence tape that Stombaugh stapled to the blanket.

Since the photo you posted was taken three days AFTER Stombaugh analyzed the blanket and found the fibers, you were wrong to post the photo as if it even remotely hinted at contamination.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 09, 2018, 10:39:02 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Lt Day himself in an oral history in No More Silence mentioned why wrapping the rifle up was not a good idea. Now why would Day even mention anything about wrapping things up? How could he say that he had nothing to wrap up the rifle in when he was in a wrapping room where there was ample paper and tape? There is a disconnect in his logic.

Speculation - yes the WC used it liberally, especially when it came to CE 142.

You cannot quote Day ever saying that he considered wrapping the rifle.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Mytton on February 09, 2018, 10:49:39 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Marina said a lot of things.  How did she determine that it was a rifle in the blanket when it was rolled up and tied?

Mr. RANKIN. When was that?
Mrs. OSWALD. About a week after I came from New Orleans.
Mr. RANKIN. And then you found that the rifle was in the blanket, did you?
Mrs. OSWALD. Yes, 1 saw the wooden part of it, the wooden stock.





How could anyone on the planet not recognize that this is a rifle?

(https://s17.postimg.org/wqedxdlsf/end_oswald_rifle_zpsn1ihngvu.jpg)

It's just like trying to claim that the following piece of exposed steel and plastic is not a car.

(https://s17.postimg.org/ulu0warvj/car_under_sheet_zpspd1ru9bs.jpg)



JohnM
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 09, 2018, 10:52:28 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
How could anyone on the planet not recognize that this is a rifle?

(https://s17.postimg.org/wqedxdlsf/end_oswald_rifle_zpsn1ihngvu.jpg)

It's just like trying to claim that the following piece of exposed steel and plastic is not a car.

(https://s17.postimg.org/ulu0warvj/car_under_sheet_zpspd1ru9bs.jpg)

JohnM

(https://i.imgur.com/L4b2UjM.gif)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 09, 2018, 11:19:31 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
That photo is Warren Commission Exhibit 738.  It's a photo of the items turned over to the FBI (for the 2nd time) by the Dallas Police Department on 11/26/63.

From J.C. Day's Warren Commission testimony, when asked about CE-738...

"Yes, sir. This is a photograph of most of the evidence that was returned to the FBI the second time on November 26, 1963. It was released to Agent Vince Drain at 2 p.m., November 26th."

Stombaugh testified that he analyzed the blanket on the 23rd and stapled a piece of evidence tape onto it and put his initials "PMS" and the date "11/23/63" on the tape. This would be three days BEFORE the photo that you posted (CE-738) was taken.

I believe the thin white strip on the bottom right corner of the blanket is the evidence tape that Stombaugh stapled to the blanket.

Since the photo you posted was taken three days AFTER Stombaugh analyzed the blanket and found the fibers, you were wrong to post the photo as if it even remotely hinted at contamination.

What about this photo of CE 142 being in close proximity with the blanket? Paper being electrostatic an easily pick up stray fibers.

(https://preview.ibb.co/er0j0c/Slide16.gif) (https://ibb.co/jF4Bfc)

You do not how the items were transported by Drain and cross contamination could have easily taken place. Further the FBI expert could not definitively associate CE 142 to any blanket.

If CE 142 was crime scene evidence why did Montgomery place an object inside it and carry the paper bag opened and upside down so that anything inside it could fall out?

Why didn't Montgomery fold it and hold it at the edge like Johnson did with the chicken lunch sack?

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 09, 2018, 11:23:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
(https://i.imgur.com/L4b2UjM.gif)

You mean just like Michael Paine envisioning he felt "camping gear" inside it despite moving it several times?

What is your proof that CE 139 was in the blanket on 21/11/1963?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 09, 2018, 11:34:52 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You cannot quote Day ever saying that he considered wrapping the rifle.

Correct - but I can quote why he didn't want to. Which is what I have been saying all along Bill.

"I didn’t have anything to wrap it up with at
the time, so I carried it out making sure that I didn’t touch
anything other than the strap. Besides, you had to be careful in
wrapping stuff because if there were any prints, you’re liable to
smear them just from the wrapping
."

That "wrapping stuff" was reference to CE 139 - that was the only thing that he was carrying with him, Bill.

He had also dusted CE 139 in situ trying to find prints on it.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 09, 2018, 11:37:46 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
What about this photo of CE 142 being in close proximity with the blanket? Paper being electrostatic an easily pick up stray fibers.

(https://preview.ibb.co/er0j0c/Slide16.gif) (https://ibb.co/jF4Bfc)

You do not how the items were transported by Drain and cross contamination could have easily taken place. Further the FBI expert could not definitively associate CE 142 to any blanket.

If CE 142 was crime scene evidence why did Montgomery place an object inside it and carry the paper bag opened and upside down so that anything inside it could fall out?

Why didn't Montgomery fold it and hold it at the edge like Johnson did with the chicken lunch sack?


Quote
What about this photo of CE 142 being in close proximity with the blanket? Paper being electrostatic an easily pick up stray fibers.

(https://preview.ibb.co/er0j0c/Slide16.gif) (https://ibb.co/jF4Bfc)

What about it?  Is CE-142 in that photo?  When was that photo even taken?


Quote
You do not how the items were transported by Drain and cross contamination could have easily taken place.

No.

You and Iacoletti do not get to play that game.

If you feel evidence was contaminated, then show it.

Hollow claims like yours above mean absolutely nothing.


Quote
Further the FBI expert could not definitively associate CE 142 to any blanket.

I've already stated that.  Still, the fibers found inside the bag (CE-142) were a match with fibers from the blanket.


Quote
If CE 142 was crime scene evidence why did Montgomery place an object inside it and carry the paper bag opened and upside down so that anything inside it could fall out?

Why didn't Montgomery fold it and hold it at the edge like Johnson did with the chicken lunch sack?

You'd have to ask Montgomery those questions.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 09, 2018, 11:39:58 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Correct - but I can quote why he didn't want to. Which is what I have been saying all along Bill.

"I didn’t have anything to wrap it up with at
the time, so I carried it out making sure that I didn’t touch
anything other than the strap. Besides, you had to be careful in
wrapping stuff because if there were any prints, you’re liable to
smear them just from the wrapping
."

That "wrapping stuff" was reference to CE 139 - that was the only thing that he was carrying with him, Bill.

He had also dusted CE 139 in situ trying to find prints on it.


Quote
Correct - but I can quote why he didn't want to. Which is what I have been saying all along Bill.

You said more than that many pages back.  I can go look and post it if need be.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 09, 2018, 11:50:25 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
That has more twisted logic than a pretzel. Why would the DPD send a bag to the FBI that they knew in your tale had no connection to the crime? If there was no frame up or conspiracy, why would the FBI find Oswald's prints on this bag?  If there was a conspiracy or frame up involving the FBI, why wouldn't they claim to find Oswald's prints on the rifle which would seemingly be more important than the bag? And then to top it off Studebacker decides not clear the matter up for some unknown reason.   He could make the same argument you made - even if wildly improbable bordering on the incredible - that Oswald must have touched by coincidence the same paper used to make the bag.

CE 142 was used as a visual prop to show BWF and LMR (and possibly LHO by Fritz).

CE 142 was connected to the crime because it contained the window sill piece removed from the SN's window.

We do not know if Fritz had shown the paper bag to LHO on the night of 22/11/1963.

We can not recheck the prints for accuracy.

Lt Day effectively removed the (old) prints from the rifle and forgot to disclose this to Drain.

The prints on CE 142 were important to associate LHO with the assassination events. However the FBI couldn't associate CE 142 with the CE 139 nor the blanket.

How was Studebaker going to account for LHO's partials on it?

even if wildly improbable bordering on the incredible

Yet you believe the WC's version of events despite no one seeing LHO with CE 142?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 09, 2018, 11:55:46 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

What about it?  Is CE-142 in that photo?  When was that photo even taken?


No.

You and Iacoletti do not get to play that game.

If you feel evidence was contaminated, then show it.

Hollow claims like yours above mean absolutely nothing.


I've already stated that.  Still, the fibers found inside the bag (CE-142) were a match with fibers from the blanket.


You'd have to ask Montgomery those questions.

If you have to ask, you haven't read my OP.

Here is another photo clearly showing an unstained CE 142 taken inside the FBI crime lab

Does that paper bag looked like it contained an 8 pound disassembled CE 139 to you? Do you see a tapered and taped end to it like Dan Rather tried to demonstrate? The bag is dead flat.

(https://preview.ibb.co/d6Z5Ox/Slide7.gif) (https://ibb.co/g42EGH)

Does CE 142 looked stained with silver nitrate to you?

Does the blanket contain a label with a signature on it?

Someone from the FBI took that photo of the evidence in the FBI crime lab.

Yet - Bill - you can not disprove cross contamination had taken place can you?

Still, the fibers found inside the bag (CE-142) were a match with fibers from the blanket.

So where did those fibers come from - the rifle or the blanket that CE 142 was placed next to?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 10, 2018, 12:07:45 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Marina Oswald, affidavit, 11/22/63

"I opened the blanket and saw a rifle in it."

Marina also said that Lee was going to go take a look at Nixon.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 10, 2018, 12:11:58 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I believe the thin white strip on the bottom right corner of the blanket is the evidence tape that Stombaugh stapled to the blanket.

Of course you do.  That doesn't make it true.  There's nothing in the photo that timestamps when it was taken.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 10, 2018, 12:18:42 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
How could anyone on the planet not recognize that this is a rifle?

That argument might make sense if that was anything like what Marina saw, and if Marina knew anything about rifles to begin with.

Quote
It's just like trying to claim that the following piece of exposed steel and plastic is not a car.

You made the same bogus argument in the old forum once too.  It's more like seeing this and assuming that it's a car.

(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/bitofsteel.jpg)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 10, 2018, 12:22:15 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As I recall there was a single fiber found in the paper sack and NONE found on the rifle.....  Do you consider this to be probable??    The rifle was allegedly stored in the blanket for several months but not a single blanket fiber adhered to the rifle ......  Preposterous!    AND...there are photos that show the blanket in contact with the paper sack before the FBI received the evidence.   

There were either 3 or 4 fibres found. Amazingly The FBI  expert did not state the exact number when testifying. One was brown and three green. Not inconsistent with the blanket but given the common nature of these types of fibre and the existence of many other types of fibre on the blanket was not considered by the expert to be definitive.

He obtained these fibres by holding the bag and tapping to release. There is no way to determine whether they originated from the inside or outside. One wonders how many fibres were lost in the bizarre method used by Montgomery to transport the bag. Worth noting that no shirt fibres were found considering the method Frazier claimed Oswald transported the bag. Also that no fibres from the blanket were found on the rifle as I recall.

Could someone from the LN camp please provide a reasoning for Day and Studebaker leaving the 6th floor with the rifle and bag just before 2pm? What was their intention at that point?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 10, 2018, 12:22:58 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If you feel evidence was contaminated, then show it.

If you feel that the fibers in CE142 came from the Oswald blanket, then show it.

Then show that there was ever a rifle in CE142 or that Oswald carried CE142 into the building.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 10, 2018, 12:44:50 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

What about it?  Is CE-142 in that photo?  When was that photo even taken?


No.

You and Iacoletti do not get to play that game.

If you feel evidence was contaminated, then show it.

Hollow claims like yours above mean absolutely nothing.


I've already stated that.  Still, the fibers found inside the bag (CE-142) were a match with fibers from the blanket.


You'd have to ask Montgomery those questions.

(https://preview.ibb.co/er0j0c/Slide16.gif) (https://ibb.co/jF4Bfc)

 Is CE-142 in that photo?

Yes, It is lying on the blanket.....

 When was that photo even taken?

Obviously it was taken at the DPD before the FBI stained the sack......It was taken on 11/22/63
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 10, 2018, 01:23:46 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

  Is CE-142 in that photo?


Looks like it to me.....were you looking for gorillas instead?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 10, 2018, 01:42:08 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If you have to ask, you haven't read my OP.

Here is another photo clearly showing an unstained CE 142 taken inside the FBI crime lab

Does that paper bag looked like it contained an 8 pound disassembled CE 139 to you? Do you see a tapered and taped end to it like Dan Rather tried to demonstrate? The bag is dead flat.

(https://preview.ibb.co/d6Z5Ox/Slide7.gif) (https://ibb.co/g42EGH)

Does CE 142 looked stained with silver nitrate to you?

Does the blanket contain a label with a signature on it?

Someone from the FBI took that photo of the evidence in the FBI crime lab.

Yet - Bill - you can not disprove cross contamination had taken place can you?

Still, the fibers found inside the bag (CE-142) were a match with fibers from the blanket.

So where did those fibers come from - the rifle or the blanket that CE 142 was placed next to?


Quote
If you have to ask, you haven't read my OP.

I'm asking again.  Is CE-142 even in that photo?  When was that photo taken?  These are important questions that need to be answered if you're going to allege possible contamination.  But, in fairness to you, at least you're not posting a photo that we know was taken three days AFTER Stombaugh analyzed the bag and blanket.


Quote
Here is another photo clearly showing an unstained CE 142 taken inside the FBI crime lab.

When was that photo taken and how do we know that is CE-142?  What is the source of that photo?


Quote
Yet - Bill - you can not disprove cross contamination had taken place can you?

There's that dumb game again.

I'm not playing.

Do you have proof of contamination or not?  I really do want to know; it's the reason I'm asking the above questions.


Quote
Does CE 142 looked stained with silver nitrate to you?

Is that CE-142?  What is the source of that photo?


Quote
Does the blanket contain a label with a signature on it?

I have no idea and neither do you.  No one can see all of the blanket in that photo.  Roughly 40% of the surface area of the blanket can be seen in that photo.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 10, 2018, 01:51:49 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
In my opinion, this is a list of people who had to have lied on some level (if one were to accept the hypothesis that Day and Studebaker made CE-142 after the fact).

1.  J.C. Day
2.  Robert Studebaker
3.  Roy Truly
4.  L.D. Montgomery
5.  Marvin Johnson
6.  Linnie Mae Randle
7.  Buell Frazier

1.  J.C. Day

Was never asked if he saw Studebaker make CE 142 ala Hosty never admitting that he destroyed a note from LHO because no one asked him. Very likely never saw CE 142 on the 6th floor.

2.  Robert Studebaker

Was never asked during his WC testimony why he was in the first floor shipping room collecting paper and tape samples.

3.  Roy Truly

Did not see CE 139 nor CE 142 in the shipping room. Was not asked why he showed Day the first floor shipping room.

4.  L.D. Montgomery

Saw CE 142 on the 6th floor in the presence of Studebaker - had no idea about its origins.

5.  Marvin Johnson

Saw CE 142 on the 6th floor in the presence of Montgomery and Studebaker - had no idea about its origins.

6.  Linnie Mae Randle

Never saw LHO with CE 142. Failed to recognize CE 142 on the night of 22/11/1963.

7.  Buell Frazier

Never saw LHO with CE 142. Failed to recognize CE 142 on the night of 22/11/1963.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Mytton on February 10, 2018, 01:58:31 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
That argument might make sense if that was anything like what Marina saw, and if Marina knew anything about rifles to begin with.

You made the same bogus argument in the old forum once too.  It's more like seeing this and assuming that it's a car.

(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/bitofsteel.jpg)




Quote
That argument might make sense if that was anything like what Marina saw, and if Marina knew anything about rifles to begin with.

Marina saw Oswald's rifle on numerous occasions.

Quote
You made the same bogus argument in the old forum once too.  It's more like seeing this and assuming that it's a car.

(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/bitofsteel.jpg)

Intellectual honesty ≠ Iccy



JohnM
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 10, 2018, 02:05:05 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I'm asking again.  Is CE-142 even in that photo? When was that photo taken?  These are important questions that need to be answered if you're going to allege possible contamination.  But, in fairness to you, at least you're not posting a photo that we know was taken three days AFTER Stombaugh analyzed the blanket.


When was that photo taken and how do we know that is CE-142?  What is the source of that photo?


There's that dumb game again.

I'm not playing.

Do you have proof of contamination or not?  I really do want to know; it's the reason I'm asking the above questions.


Is that CE-142?  What is the source of that photo?


I have no idea and neither do you.  No one can see all of the blanket in that photo.  Roughly 40% of the surface area of the blanket can be seen in that photo.

Bill, really?

(https://preview.ibb.co/gHqMfc/Slide208.jpg) (https://ibb.co/fbXpYx)

(https://preview.ibb.co/kuMPYx/Slide210.jpg) (https://ibb.co/mSxytx)

(https://preview.ibb.co/ntea6H/Slide211.jpg) (https://ibb.co/kTmzYx)

Now we know the paper bag (CE 142) in the FBI crime lab photo wasnt processed for fingerprints because it did not have the stickers on it that the heavily stained CE 142 had placed there by the FBI expert.

That photo very likely was done on the night of 22/11/1963 or in the early hours of 23/11/1963.

Note the FBI never received the chicken lunch sack, Dr Pepper bottle nor the window sill piece (handed over 6 days later).



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 10, 2018, 02:11:38 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Marina also said that Lee was going to go take a look at Nixon.

Unrelated to Marina seeing a rifle in the blanket.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 10, 2018, 02:13:59 AM
Could someone from the LN camp please provide a reasoning for Day and Studebaker leaving the 6th floor with the CE139 and CE142 just before 2pm? What was their intention at that point?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 10, 2018, 02:14:26 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Of course you do.  That doesn't make it true.  There's nothing in the photo that timestamps when it was taken.

It's Warren Commission Exhibit 738.  Day was shown the photo and testified that the photo was taken on November 26th as they were sending off the evidence to the FBI for the 2nd time.  November 26th would be three days AFTER Stombaugh analyzed the blanket and found the fibers inside.

That photo you posted does nothing at all to suggest contamination of evidence.

Unless you're going to add this to the list of things that Day was lying about.  Are you?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 10, 2018, 02:16:09 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I'm asking again.  Is CE-142 even in that photo?  When was that photo taken?  These are important questions that need to be answered if you're going to allege possible contamination.  But, in fairness to you, at least you're not posting a photo that we know was taken three days AFTER Stombaugh analyzed the blanket.


When was that photo taken and how do we know that is CE-142?  What is the source of that photo?


There's that dumb game again.

I'm not playing.

Do you have proof of contamination or not?  I really do want to know; it's the reason I'm asking the above questions.


Is that CE-142?  What is the source of that photo?


I have no idea and neither do you.  No one can see all of the blanket in that photo.  Roughly 40% of the surface area of the blanket can be seen in that photo.

What was amazing though - Lt Day had to be prompted about the bag in the photo - he mentioned everything else except for the stained CE 142. See my OP.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 10, 2018, 02:22:35 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If you feel evidence was contaminated, then show it.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
If you feel that the fibers in CE142 came from the Oswald blanket, then show it.

Then show that there was ever a rifle in CE142 or that Oswald carried CE142 into the building.

I have no idea whether the fibers found in the bag came from the blanket, but they were indeed a match to the blanket fibers.  You quoted my post but you did not respond to it's content.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 10, 2018, 02:23:59 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It's Warren Commission Exhibit 738.  Day was shown the photo and testified that the photo was taken on November 26th as they were sending off the evidence to the FBI for the 2nd time.  November 26th would be three days AFTER Stombaugh analyzed the blanket and found the fibers inside.

That photo you posted does nothing at all to suggest contamination of evidence.

Unless you're going to add this to the list of things that Day was lying about.  Are you?

But mine clearly does open up the possibility of cross contamination.

(https://preview.ibb.co/fpaJtx/Slide53.jpg) (https://ibb.co/gDTtRH)

Maybe the FBI should have followed Montgomery looking for fibers that fell out from CE 142?

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 10, 2018, 02:25:32 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I have no idea whether the fibers found in the bag came from the blanket, but they were indeed a match to the blanket fibers.  You quoted my post but you did not respond to it's content.

Neither did the FBI expert, Bill.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 10, 2018, 02:30:37 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
But mine clearly does open up the possibility of cross contamination.

(https://preview.ibb.co/fpaJtx/Slide53.jpg) (https://ibb.co/gDTtRH)

I agree with you, IF that is CE-142 and that photo was taken before Stombaugh analyzed both blanket and bag.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 10, 2018, 02:33:49 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I have no idea whether the fibers found in the bag came from the blanket, but they were indeed a match to the blanket fibers.  You quoted my post but you did not respond to it's content.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Neither did the FBI expert, Bill.

(Yawn)

Tony, I've said at least three times now that no one can say that the fibers found inside the bag came from that blanket and only from that blanket.  This an impossible thing to say, however they did match and therefore, could have come from that blanket.

How many more times are you going to feel the need to point that out?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 10, 2018, 02:45:20 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
(Yawn)

Tony, I've said at least three times now that no one can say that the fibers found inside the bag came from that blanket and only from that blanket.  This an impossible thing to say, however they did match and therefore, could have come from that blanket.

How many more times are you going to feel the need to point that out?

Bill,

you can not associate CE 142 to CE 139, the shirt and the blanket.

Cross contamination remains a viable proposition for the origins of any fibers.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 10, 2018, 02:47:39 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I agree with you, IF that is CE-142 and that photo was taken before Stombaugh analyzed both blanket and bag.

NO - it IS CE 142 and there was nothing to indicate it had been sprayed with Silver Nitrate and the finger print sticker is not on it.

Mr. LATONA. This little red arrow which I have placed on the paper bag shows the palmprint as it was developed on the wrapper.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 10, 2018, 02:54:22 AM
While we are talking about prints....check out what the FBI expert said about writing on evidence?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Mytton on February 10, 2018, 03:33:27 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You mean just like Michael Paine envisioning he felt "camping gear" inside it despite moving it several times?

What is your proof that CE 139 was in the blanket on 21/11/1963?



Michael Paine thought something was wrapped in the blanket, the blanket was empty on the 22nd.

Marina saw a rifle wrapped in the blanket, the blanket was empty on the 22nd.

At Oswald place of work on the 22nd a rifle was found which was directly linked to Oswald.



JohnM
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 10, 2018, 03:51:41 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


Michael Paine thought something was wrapped in the blanket, the blanket was empty on the 22nd.

Marina saw a rifle wrapped in the blanket, the blanket was empty on the 22nd.

At Oswald place of work on the 22nd a rifle was found which was directly linked to Oswald.

JohnM

When was it last know that "something" was in the blanket?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Mytton on February 10, 2018, 04:00:02 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
When was it last know that "something" was in the blanket?




Define your criteria for whatever length of time to be significant, a minute, an hour, a day, a month or a year and then explain why?



JohnM
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 10, 2018, 05:27:43 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login



Define your criteria for whatever length of time to be significant, a minute, an hour, a day, a month or a year and then explain why?



JohnM

Who was the last person to see CE 139 inside the blanket prior to 22/11/1963? What was the date?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 10, 2018, 05:59:15 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
While we are talking about prints....check out what the FBI expert said about writing on evidence?

https://archives.fbi.gov/archives/about-us/lab/forensic-science-communications/fsc/july2000/deedric4.htm#Evidence%20Collection

Evidence Collection
The following are suggestions for collecting evidence from crime scenes such as houses, apartments, and vehicles:

Photograph all evidence prior to removing it.

Remove larger items or debris from carpeting or walk areas prior to other examinations. Consider wearing disposable booties.
Collect large items, such as clothing, and place them in separate paper bags. Keep an accurate evidence log. One person should collect and bag the items while another person labels the bags and records the items in the log.
Do not place all clothing items from a suspect in one paper bag, nor all items from a victim in another bag. Bag each item separately.
Never put suspect items and victim items in contact with one another. The person collecting the suspect’s items should not be the same person that collects the victim’s items. If this must occur, personnel must change their clothing and collect the evidence at a different time to avoid contamination.
Bedding should be carefully handled to avoid loss of hairs and fibers. Each item should be placed in a separate bag.
Floor surfaces should be vacuumed for possible trace evidence. Some crime scene investigators use tape to secure trace evidence; however, tape is generally difficult to work with at the scene and in the laboratory. Smaller surfaces such as chairs and car seats can be taped or vacuumed.
Ensure that carpet, pet hair, and other standards that might have transferred to a suspect or victim are collected.
Always process for fingerprints after collecting trace evidence.
Collect all possible known fiber samples from a vehicle. These may be obtained from the carpet, door panels, headliner, seats, floor mats, and trunk.


CE 142 should have been photographed, documented where it was located on a map and placed into a larger paper bag and then tagged. [Writing directly on crime scene evidence meant Lt Day altered it.]

None of that was done.

CE 139 was photographed, documented on a map and should have been placed into a paper bag and then tagged.

That was why Day and Studebaker headed for the wrapping room, they did not have a large paper bag to place the rifle in.

Day should never have dusted the rifle in situ and this may have resulted in him carrying it by the strap to protect what he started doing.

None of the correct procedures were done for CE 142 unless of course it was non crime scene evidence.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 10, 2018, 06:43:06 AM
Tony,

What is the source of the photo you posted showing the blanket with a bag, that may or may not be CE-142?  Where did you get it?  Also, do you know when that photo was taken?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 10, 2018, 06:44:33 AM
Mr. EISENBERG. And could you briefly outline your qualifications as a fingerprint expert?
Mr. LATONA. Well, I have been with the Federal Bureau of Investigation for a little more than 32 years. I started in the identification division as a student fingerprint classifier, and since that time I have worked myself up into where I am now supervisor of the latent fingerprint section.
Mr. EISENBERG. Could you approximate the number of fingerprint examinations you have made?
Mr. LATONA. Frankly, no. There have been so many in that time that I would not be able to give even a good guess.
Mr. EISENBERG. Would the figure run in the thousands or hundreds?
Mr. LATONA. So far as comparisons are concerned, in the millions.


If he did just 2 million it would mean he did more than 30 estimations an hour every working day for 32 years.


I think he was correct in saying he could not even give a good guess.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 10, 2018, 06:52:04 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Mr. EISENBERG. And could you briefly outline your qualifications as a fingerprint expert?
Mr. LATONA. Well, I have been with the Federal Bureau of Investigation for a little more than 32 years. I started in the identification division as a student fingerprint classifier, and since that time I have worked myself up into where I am now supervisor of the latent fingerprint section.
Mr. EISENBERG. Could you approximate the number of fingerprint examinations you have made?
Mr. LATONA. Frankly, no. There have been so many in that time that I would not be able to give even a good guess.
Mr. EISENBERG. Would the figure run in the thousands or hundreds?
Mr. LATONA. So far as comparisons are concerned, in the millions.


If he did just 2 million it would mean he did more than 30 estimations an hour every working day for 32 years.


I think he was correct in saying he could not even give a good guess.


Quote
I think he was correct in saying he could not even give a good guess.

LOL
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 10, 2018, 07:02:48 AM
Mr. Stombaugh, I now hand you a homemade paper bag, Commission Exhibit 142, which parenthetically has also received another Exhibit No. 626, and ask you whether you are familiar with this item?
Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I am.
Mr. EISENBERG. Does that have your mark on it?
Mr. STOMBAUGH. At the time I examined this, it was to be treated for latent fingerprints subsequent to my examination, and in a case like this I will not put a mark on the item itself because my mark might cover a latent fingerprint which is later brought up, and therefore obscure it.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 10, 2018, 07:11:02 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Mr. Stombaugh, I now hand you a homemade paper bag, Commission Exhibit 142, which parenthetically has also received another Exhibit No. 626, and ask you whether you are familiar with this item?
Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I am.
Mr. EISENBERG. Does that have your mark on it?
Mr. STOMBAUGH. At the time I examined this, it was to be treated for latent fingerprints subsequent to my examination, and in a case like this I will not put a mark on the item itself because my mark might cover a latent fingerprint which is later brought up, and therefore obscure it.

Right.

Stombaugh analyzed the bag BEFORE the silver nitrate was applied by Latona.

So how do we know, in Tony's photo which shows a bag (the bag?) and blanket touching, that Stombaugh hadn't already examined the bag by the time the photo was taken?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tom Sorensen on February 10, 2018, 08:25:36 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

If he did just 2 million it would mean he did more than 30 estimations an hour every working day for 32 years.


Would that qualify as "astronomical"?

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 10, 2018, 08:40:50 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Right.

Stombaugh analyzed the bag BEFORE the silver nitrate was applied by Latona.

So how do we know, in Tony's photo which shows a bag (the bag?) and blanket touching, that Stombaugh hadn't already examined the bag by the time the photo was taken?

The paper bag is CE 142. I have shown it. Do you think evidence is normally photographed after it is processed in any manner or before?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 10, 2018, 08:45:15 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Mr. Stombaugh, I now hand you a homemade paper bag, Commission Exhibit 142, which parenthetically has also received another Exhibit No. 626, and ask you whether you are familiar with this item?
Mr. STOMBAUGH. Yes; I am.
Mr. EISENBERG. Does that have your mark on it?
Mr. STOMBAUGH. At the time I examined this, it was to be treated for latent fingerprints subsequent to my examination, and in a case like this I will not put a mark on the item itself because my mark might cover a latent fingerprint which is later brought up, and therefore obscure it.

If CE 142 was crime scene evidence, a senior and experienced crime scene Detective, broke two procedures - writing on it and not photographing it.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 10, 2018, 08:45:29 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Right.

Stombaugh analyzed the bag BEFORE the silver nitrate was applied by Latona.

So how do we know, in Tony's photo which shows a bag (the bag?) and blanket touching, that Stombaugh hadn't already examined the bag by the time the photo was taken?

Would be totally unprofessional to allow two independent pieces of evidence to contact, even post processing, in my view. If Ruby did nothing he saved much embarrassment of an Oswald trial.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 10, 2018, 09:10:08 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Would be totally unprofessional to allow two independent pieces of evidence to contact, even post processing, in my view. If Ruby did nothing he saved much embarrassment of an Oswald trial.

It is like doing a PCR without changing pipette tips. You just do not do it.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 10, 2018, 11:11:27 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The paper bag is CE 142. I have shown it. Do you think evidence is normally photographed after it is processed in any manner or before?

Is your source for the photo top secret?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 10, 2018, 11:13:30 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Would be totally unprofessional to allow two independent pieces of evidence to contact, even post processing, in my view. If Ruby did nothing he saved much embarrassment of an Oswald trial.

I can agree with that.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 10, 2018, 11:18:17 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Is your source for the photo top secret?

The two FBI CRIME lab photos showing CE 142 were from NARA, John Hunt collection. They were found in a book called No Case to Answer by Ian Griggs.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 10, 2018, 11:21:11 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The two FBI CRIME lab photos showing CE 142 were from NARA, John Hunt collection. They were found in a book called No Case to Answer by Ian Griggs.

Thank you.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 10, 2018, 02:55:11 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The two FBI CRIME lab photos showing CE 142 were from NARA, John Hunt collection. They were found in a book called No Case to Answer by Ian Griggs.

FWIW....I believe the photo was taken in the DPD lab  and  not the FBI crime lab.....
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 10, 2018, 03:04:58 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I agree with you, IF that is CE-142 and that photo was taken before Stombaugh analyzed both blanket and bag.

The red circle is at the open end of the sack.....Lt J.C. Day's note should be on the sack right at the left side of the red circle....

(https://preview.ibb.co/fpaJtx/Slide53.jpg) (https://ibb.co/gDTtRH)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 10, 2018, 07:51:25 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
But, in fairness to you, at least you're not posting a photo that we know was taken three days AFTER Stombaugh analyzed the bag and blanket.

Who's "we"?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 10, 2018, 07:54:46 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Intellectual honesty ≠ Iccy

Where's your intellectual honesty, showing the entire stock of a rifle?  Marina peeked in the end of a rolled up blanket tied up with string.  At best she saw the bottom edge of something wooden.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 10, 2018, 07:56:20 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Unrelated to Marina seeing a rifle in the blanket.

Related to a bogus argument that if Marina said something, it must be true.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 10, 2018, 08:05:14 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It's Warren Commission Exhibit 738.  Day was shown the photo and testified that the photo was taken on November 26th as they were sending off the evidence to the FBI for the 2nd time.  November 26th would be three days AFTER Stombaugh analyzed the blanket and found the fibers inside.

That photo you posted does nothing at all to suggest contamination of evidence.

Unless you're going to add this to the list of things that Day was lying about.  Are you?

Day already shot his credibility with his magic palmprint on a card story.  But I'm asking a reasonable question.  How did Day verify that he took this photo when he thought he did?  He was testifying about it 5 months later.  Your position that his recollection is either completely accurate or he's lying is just a false dichotomy.  And "a cop said it, so it must be true" is not evidence.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 10, 2018, 08:06:59 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I have no idea whether the fibers found in the bag came from the blanket, but they were indeed a match to the blanket fibers.  You quoted my post but you did not respond to it's content.

Why do you respond to your lack of conclusive evidence by trying to shift the burden?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 10, 2018, 08:10:54 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Michael Paine thought something was wrapped in the blanket, the blanket was empty on the 22nd.

Was somebody murdered with camping equipment?

Quote
Marina saw a rifle wrapped in the blanket, the blanket was empty on the 22nd.

Marina saw a piece of wooden stock that she took to be a rifle about 6 weeks earlier.  What happened to that piece of wood in the intervening 6 weeks is anybody's guess.

Quote
At Oswald place of work on the 22nd a rifle was found which was directly linked to Oswald.

LOL.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 10, 2018, 08:30:01 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Was somebody murdered with camping equipment?

Marina saw a piece of wooden stock that she took to be a rifle about 6 weeks earlier.  What happened to that piece of wood in the intervening 6 weeks is anybody's guess.

LOL.

Was somebody murdered with camping equipment?"

>Paine guessed at camping equipment but couldn't commit to it; was left wondering.

Marina saw a piece of wooden stock that she took to be a rifle about 6 weeks earlier.  What happened to that piece of wood in the intervening 6 weeks is anybody's guess.
>No, it's any conspiracy monger's guess.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Iacoletti on February 10, 2018, 08:42:23 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Marina saw a piece of wooden stock that she took to be a rifle about 6 weeks earlier.  What happened to that piece of wood in the intervening 6 weeks is anybody's guess.
>No, it's any conspiracy monger's guess.

Right, because when an LNer wants to believe that C2766 was in that blanket on November 21st, then by golly C2766 was in that blanket.  Who needs evidence?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 10, 2018, 09:25:31 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The red circle is at the open end of the sack.....Lt J.C. Day's note should be on the sack right at the left side of the red circle....

(https://preview.ibb.co/fpaJtx/Slide53.jpg) (https://ibb.co/gDTtRH)

Walt,

If you check my OP, I have a diagram showing where Lt Day wrote on CE 142 (FBI crime lab photo).

Reproduced here:

(https://preview.ibb.co/f78DD7/Slide26.gif) (https://ibb.co/mQDPLn)

Lt. Day and Det. Studebaker did the same thing to CE 677 (non-crime scene evidence) - wrote directly on it.

(https://preview.ibb.co/kp5PmS/Slide4.gif) (https://ibb.co/jJDYfn)

The importance of those photos (FBI crime lab) is that it showed the opposite side of the paper bag that Montgomery was holding. They are all pictures of the same paper bag - CE 142.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 10, 2018, 11:15:26 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Right, because when an LNer wants to believe that C2766 was in that blanket on November 21st, then by golly C2766 was in that blanket.  Who needs evidence?

LOL

If anyone has a need to be right here, it's you.


Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 10, 2018, 11:23:55 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Could someone from the LN camp please provide a reasoning for Day and Studebaker leaving the 6th floor with the CE139 and CE142 just before 2pm? What was their intention at that point?

Still no ideas?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 10, 2018, 11:31:19 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Walt,

If you check my OP, I have a diagram showing where Lt Day wrote on CE 142 (FBI crime lab photo).

Reproduced here:

(https://preview.ibb.co/f78DD7/Slide26.gif) (https://ibb.co/mQDPLn)

Lt. Day and Det. Studebaker did the same thing to CE 677 (non-crime scene evidence) - wrote directly on it.

(https://preview.ibb.co/kp5PmS/Slide4.gif) (https://ibb.co/jJDYfn)

The importance of those photos (FBI crime lab) is that it showed the opposite side of the paper bag that Montgomery was holding. They are all pictures of the same paper bag - CE 142.

Tony, there is a note written by JC DAY  on 11/22/63 at the bottom side of the bag in the photo. That writing is directly beneath the trigger of the revolver in this photo.....

 I think we are in agreement.....

(https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/evidence-from-the-assassination-of-president-kennedy-in-1963-includes-picture-id576877656)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 11, 2018, 12:12:46 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tony, there is a note written by JC DAY  on 11/22/63 at the bottom side of the bag in the photo. That writing is directly beneath the trigger of the revolver in this photo.....

 I think we are in agreement.....

(https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/evidence-from-the-assassination-of-president-kennedy-in-1963-includes-picture-id576877656)

The question for me is - when did Lt Day write both comments on CE 142? We know he wrote on it when he was at City Hall. He stated that he wrote the first comment in situ on the 6th floor. If he did, it seriously begs the question as to why he didn't do the next logical step - take a photograph of CE 142.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Chapman on February 11, 2018, 05:45:14 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Why do you respond to your lack of conclusive evidence by trying to shift the burden?

On the other hand, a goodly number of 'inconclusive' findings also couldn't be ruled out
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 11, 2018, 07:15:23 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Could someone from the LN camp please provide a reasoning for Day and Studebaker leaving the 6th floor with the CE139 and CE142 just before 2pm? What was their intention at that point?

Anyone?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Pat Speer on February 11, 2018, 09:47:18 AM
A couple of points...

The photo of the bag on top of the blanket was discovered by John Hunt at the National Archives. Hunt had spent a number of weeks at the archives, scanning the contents of the FBI's bulky files on the assassination. The bulky files are basically odds and ends files. They contain hundreds of photos, most of which have never been published. Among the objects Hunt discovered in the bulky files were a number of photos of Specter at the single-bullet theory re-enactment, an x-ray of the Harper fragment, and a photo of the largest bullet fragment found in JFK's skull before the bullet was broken into pieces for testing. He also found some photos of the bag in the FBI crime lab, two of which have been presented in this thread, one of which was given to researcher Ian Griggs for use in Griggs' book No Case to Answer. Hunt also supplied a number of photos to Larry Sturdivan for use in his book The JFK Myths. Hunt was also allowed to scan the lift pulled off the rifle.

Now here's the weird part. Hunt had hundreds of scans, most of which have never seen the light of day. I spoke to him at the 2004 and 2005 Lancer Conferences, and exchanged several emails with him for a spell, when we were both active members of the Ed Forum, The JFK Lancer Forum, and subsequently this forum. Hunt was adamant that his plan was to make all these scans available to the research community. But, for some reason, that never happened. At one point, 2008 or so, I contacted him and told him I thought I could find some other researchers to pool their money, and send him 2,000 dollars or so in exchange for access to his scans, which we would then put up online. He acted insulted and said he'd have the scans online within a few months. Nothing happened. I never heard from him after that. Since that time, to my knowledge, he has written an essay or two, and backed out of an appearance at a Lancer Conference.

Now, I have no idea why he's kept such a low profile. Nor do I know why he continues to sit on his scans. But I suspect it's threads like this one, where people appear to fight just for the sake of fighting.

It's all a bit much.

It's obvious that there are severe problems with the bag as a piece of evidence. Ian Griggs wrote about this. I built upon that. With his original thread, Tony Fratini built upon what I had written. In 2015, moreover, I revisited the bag and found even more problems, namely that the Warren Report blew a bunch of smoke at America when it claimed the positioning of the prints on CE 142 supported that Oswald had carried his rifle into the building as described by Frazier--that is, with his right palm at the base and his left hand on the side. As demonstrated in my online presentation The Fingerprints of Myth, this reversed the location of the prints. In truth, the palm print was toward the middle of the bag, with the hand facing down, and the fingerprint was near the bottom.

(https://sites.google.com/a/patspeer.com/www2/_/rsrc/1505858768561/chapter-4c/Screen%20Shot%202017-09-19%20at%201.09.04%20PM.png)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 11, 2018, 10:55:10 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
A couple of points...

The photo of the bag on top of the blanket was discovered by John Hunt at the National Archives. Hunt had spent a number of weeks at the archives, scanning the contents of the FBI's bulky files on the assassination. The bulky files are basically odds and ends files. They contain hundreds of photos, most of which have never been published. Among the objects Hunt discovered in the bulky files were a number of photos of Specter at the single-bullet theory re-enactment, an x-ray of the Harper fragment, and a photo of the largest bullet fragment found in JFK's skull before the bullet was broken into pieces for testing. He also found some photos of the bag in the FBI crime lab, two of which have been presented in this thread, one of which was given to researcher Ian Griggs for use in Griggs' book No Case to Answer. Hunt also supplied a number of photos to Larry Sturdivan for use in his book The JFK Myths. Hunt was also allowed to scan the lift pulled off the rifle.

Now here's the weird part. Hunt had hundreds of scans, most of which have never seen the light of day. I spoke to him at the 2004 and 2005 Lancer Conferences, and exchanged several emails with him for a spell, when we were both active members of the Ed Forum, The JFK Lancer Forum, and subsequently this forum. Hunt was adamant that his plan was to make all these scans available to the research community. But, for some reason, that never happened. At one point, 2008 or so, I contacted him and told him I thought I could find some other researchers to pool their money, and send him 2,000 dollars or so in exchange for access to his scans, which we would then put up online. He acted insulted and said he'd have the scans online within a few months. Nothing happened. I never heard from him after that. Since that time, to my knowledge, he has written an essay or two, and backed out of an appearance at a Lancer Conference.

Now, I have no idea why he's kept such a low profile. Nor do I know why he continues to sit on his scans. But I suspect it's threads like this one, where people appear to fight just for the sake of fighting.

It's all a bit much.

It's obvious that there are severe problems with the bag as a piece of evidence. Ian Griggs wrote about this. I built upon that. With his original thread, Tony Fratini built upon what I had written. In 2015, moreover, I revisited the bag and found even more problems, namely that the Warren Report blew a bunch of smoke at America when it claimed the positioning of the prints on CE 142 supported that Oswald had carried his rifle into the building as described by Frazier--that is, with his right palm at the base and his left hand on the side. As demonstrated in my online presentation The Fingerprints of Myth, this reversed the location of the prints. In truth, the palm print was toward the middle of the bag, with the hand facing down, and the fingerprint was near the bottom.

(https://sites.google.com/a/patspeer.com/www2/_/rsrc/1505858768561/chapter-4c/Screen%20Shot%202017-09-19%20at%201.09.04%20PM.png)

Thank you Pat.

Anyone care to explain how LHO carried CE 142 with the print distribution as shown by Pat?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 11, 2018, 01:01:02 PM
Again, how do we know the photo showing the bag laying on top of the blanket was taken before Stombaugh anaylzed the bag?  It has yet to be shown that anyone should accept the idea of evidence contamination.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Lloyd Morris on February 11, 2018, 05:51:47 PM
As a young LEO in the late 1970's [the period during the HSCA hearings] with access to a crime lab, we constructed several examples of CE 142 made from the same type of wrapping paper and tape found in the shipping department of the TSBD.
   
We broke down a Mannlicher–Carcano 6.5×52mm Model 91/38 and placed it in the bags, carried them around a bit as the WC says LHO did and then opened the bags and assembled the rifles. We did this about a half a dozen times. Then we tested the bags for fingerprints with both silver nitrate fumes and standard finger print dusting powder.

The results were consistent and conclusive. Their were dozens of fingerprints [ours] on the inside and outside of the bag, every time, no exceptions. In addition, there were always marks, creases, tiny holes or even small tears in the bags made by the sharp edges of the rifle parts. Often you could see these with the naked eye, but their were always clearly visible under modest magnification. Again there were no exceptions to this. No matter how carefully we packaged or carried the rifle there was always some visible physical evidence the disassembled rifle had been carried in the bag.



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Mytton on February 11, 2018, 06:04:34 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Thank you Pat.

Anyone care to explain how LHO carried CE 142 with the print distribution as shown by Pat?


The bag didn't make itself, during construction Oswald could have left those prints at any time.



JohnM
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 11, 2018, 06:15:31 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The question for me is - when did Lt Day write both comments on CE 142? We know he wrote on it when he was at City Hall. He stated that he wrote the first comment in situ on the 6th floor. If he did, it seriously begs the question as to why he didn't do the next logical step - take a photograph of CE 142.

There is a coy of this evidence photo in Jesse Curry's book JFK Assassination File that is lighter than the photo seen here....  The sack is not yet stained by the FBI....  therefore the photo had to have been taken on 11/22/63....
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Lloyd Morris on February 11, 2018, 06:19:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The bag didn't make itself, during construction Oswald could have left those prints at any time.

JohnM

But why weren't there several dozen fingerprints/palm prints on the inside and outside of the bag? Why was there no evidence of marks, creases, small holes or tears in the bag from the many sharp edges and hard pointed parts of the rifle?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Mytton on February 11, 2018, 06:34:22 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
But why weren't there several dozen fingerprints/palm prints on the inside and outside of the bag? Why was there no evidence of marks, creases, small holes or tears in the bag from the many sharp edges and hard pointed parts of the rifle?

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
But why weren't there several dozen fingerprints/palm prints on the inside and outside of the bag? Why was there no evidence of marks, creases, small holes or tears in the bag from the many sharp edges and hard pointed parts of the rifle?

Not all prints can be identified and as prints start covering other prints identification is hampered. The bag was made of paper and required standard enhancing to recover prints.
The bag seen being carried from the depository could hardly be called pristine.



JohnM


Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Lloyd Morris on February 11, 2018, 07:15:29 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Not all prints can be identified and as prints start covering other prints identification is hampered. The bag was made of paper and required standard enhancing to recover prints.
The bag seen being carried from the depository could hardly be called pristine.

JohnM

John,

You are right, DPD did an extremely poor job of handling the physical evidence even by the law
enforcement standards of 1963. There is no question they failed to document, collect, preserve and analyze the assassination evidence properly. The FBI scarcely did any better.  Your comment on how the bag was carried from the TSBD is a classic example of DPD's complete disregard for anything close to acceptable police procedure.

Carrying the bag in this manner, would not however erase or obscure the dozens of finger and palm prints which would have been left on the inside of the bag and on the tape during construction or somehow mended the creases, marks, small tears or holes made by the hard edges and points of the rifle as it was carried in the bag.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 11, 2018, 08:10:49 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
But why weren't there several dozen fingerprints/palm prints on the inside and outside of the bag? Why was there no evidence of marks, creases, small holes or tears in the bag from the many sharp edges and hard pointed parts of the rifle?

Me thinks you know the answer to the questions.....

why weren't there several dozen fingerprints/palm prints on the inside and outside of the bag?

Whoever constructed the sack was wearing surgical gloves like those experienced detectives use to handle evidence.....

Why was there no evidence of marks, creases, small holes or tears in the bag from the many sharp edges and hard pointed parts of the rifle?

The answer is obvious....  There never was a disassembled rifle in that paper sack......
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Mytton on February 11, 2018, 08:23:43 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
John,

You are right, DPD did an extremely poor job of handling the physical evidence even by the law
enforcement standards of 1963. There is no question they failed to document, collect, preserve and analyze the assassination evidence properly. The FBI scarcely did any better.  Your comment on how the bag was carried from the TSBD is a classic example of DPD's complete disregard for anything close to acceptable police procedure.

Carrying the bag in this manner, would not however erase or obscure the dozens of finger and palm prints which would have been left on the inside of the bag and on the tape during construction or somehow mended the creases, marks, small tears or holes made by the hard edges and points of the rifle as it was carried in the bag.




Quote
Your comment on how the bag was carried from the TSBD is a classic example of DPD's complete disregard for anything close to acceptable police procedure.

From your example the officer appears to be preserving any possible prints on the bag and sure some fibers may have fallen out but fortunately some fibers were left which matched Oswalds blanket.
Btw can you cite any of the "Police Procedures" and not your opinion from the applicable time period that supports your dramatic objections?

Quote
would not however erase or obscure the dozens of finger and palm prints which would have been left on the inside of the bag

Again I see wild speculation, have you ever examined any objects for fingerprints?

Here is an example of a Warren Commission Exhibit which is covered in prints but only one is legible, meaning in the real world a lot of items are also covered in prints but extracting "perfect" prints is a little different to TV crime shows.

(https://s17.postimg.org/5jahmv6tb/WH_Vol17_0160b1.jpg)



JohnM
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Mytton on February 11, 2018, 08:28:31 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
or somehow mended the creases, marks, small tears or holes made by the hard edges and points of the rifle as it was carried in the bag.





The bag was excessively creased, folded and stained so determining which of these hundreds of creases were left by the rifle would be impossible.

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-eSB3HYpevE0/T3oIdYEqRtI/AAAAAAAAHJM/qCyDjxVjJUw/s1600/LD-Montgomery-Holds-Brown-Paper-Bag.jpg)



JohnM
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Pat Speer on February 11, 2018, 08:49:01 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login



From your example the officer appears to be preserving any possible prints on the bag and sure some fibers may have fallen out but fortunately some fibers were left which matched Oswalds blanket.
Btw can you cite any of the "Police Procedures" and not your opinion from the applicable time period that supports your dramatic objections?

Again I see wild speculation, have you ever examined any objects for fingerprints?

Here is an example of a Warren Commission Exhibit which is covered in prints but only one is legible, meaning in the real world a lot of items are also covered in prints but extracting "perfect" prints is a little different to TV crime shows.

(https://s17.postimg.org/5jahmv6tb/WH_Vol17_0160b1.jpg)



JohnM

The FBI photo cited by John M as an example of the difficulty one has in IDing prints is Exhibit 1A for whitewash in the Kennedy assassination.

The circled print was ID'ed as a print from Oswald's right index finger within a week of the assassination. The prints on both sides of it were also considered legible...yet went unidentified for 9 months, and were only then ID'ed after WC counsel Wesley Liebeler raised a major stink and demanded the FBI at least try to ID the numerous unidentified prints on the sniper's nest boxes. As it turned out, the prints conveniently book-ending Oswald's print belonged to DPD detective Robert Studebaker, who carried the boxes from the sniper's nest.

In most any other case in U.S. history, that is, in a case where the FBI was trying to do its job, elimination prints would have been taken of everyone handling the boxes, and provided the FBI, in December, not August.

I mean, just think about it. Several witnesses claimed to see someone other than Oswald in the sniper's nest. And here were multiple prints on these boxes from someone other than Oswald. And yet the FBI took NO interest in finding out whose prints these were. That spells out W-h-i-t-e-w-a-s-h. (It turned out the bulk of the prints belonged to Studebaker and an FBI clerk named Forrest Lucy.)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 11, 2018, 08:54:09 PM
Could someone from the LN camp please provide the reasoning for Day and Studebaker leaving the 6th floor with the CE139 and CE142 just before 2pm? What was their intention at that point?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Lloyd Morris on February 11, 2018, 08:59:48 PM
"Again I see wild speculation, have you ever examined any objects for fingerprints?"

                                                                             -John Mytton




John,

If you are asking me if I have ever been trained and examined an object for fingerprints, the answer is yes.

My Associates Degree is in Criminalistics and Forensics Science, and my BS is in Criminal Justice [my graduate degree is in Public Administration] I graduated from the PA State Police Academy Basic Law Enforcement Training (BLET) and took additional training at the Pittsburg Police Academy.

Cyril Wecht was the Allegheny County Coroner then and would lecture and teach on general subjects relating to evidence collection at crime scenes, forensic pathology and would occasionally discuss the JFK assassination if you were interested. This was during the HSCA hearings. Like most criminal investigators of my generation, I have also taken a few dozen, week long continuing education courses in the methods and process of preservation, collection and analysis of physical evidence [including fingerprints] over the years.

This is probably about the average for a LEO who became a criminal investigator in the 1970s and worked in the field.  Like most criminal investigators, I can not count the number of times I have "examined [as you say] an object for fingerprints".

If you have any doubt the DPD completely mishandled the physical evidence just refer to Charles O'Hara's
Fundamentals of Criminal Investigation First edition. Even by the rather loose standards of 1963 the DPD grossly mishandled the evidence.

The proper procedure to handle CE 142, even in 1963, would have been to take multiple photographs from different angles and heights of the bag in the position and location it was found, draw a crime scene sketch referencing the bag to it surroundings, then wearing gloves carefully fold the bag as few times as possible to place it in a large plastic evidence bag marked with the date, time, location, investigating officer and sign the evidence bag with the officers name and rank.

Documentation of chain of custody would commence and each person who had the evidence bag in their possession would mark the bag with their name, rank and department and reference the time and date the bag was in their custody in their supplemental report.

Of course, none of this was done with CE 142. A similar and disturbing pattern was followed with the rest of the physical evidence.  Because of the lack of a credible and verifiable chain of custody of the physical evidence alone, very little of the so called "proof of Oswalds guilt" based upon the physical evidence would have actually been admissible in court.

 
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 11, 2018, 09:10:11 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The FBI photo cited by John M as an example of the difficulty one has in IDing prints is Exhibit 1A for whitewash in the Kennedy assassination.

The circled print was ID'ed as a print from Oswald's right index finger within a week of the assassination. The prints on both sides of it were also considered legible...yet went unidentified for 9 months, and were only then ID'ed after WC counsel Wesley Liebeler raised a major stink and demanded the FBI at least try to ID the numerous unidentified prints on the sniper's nest boxes. As it turned out, the prints conveniently book-ending Oswald's print belonged to DPD detective Robert Studebaker, who carried the boxes from the sniper's nest.

In most any other case in U.S. history, that is, in a case where the FBI was trying to do its job, elimination prints would have been taken of everyone handling the boxes, and provided the FBI, in December, not August.

I mean, just think about it. Several witnesses claimed to see someone other than Oswald in the sniper's nest. And here were multiple prints on these boxes from someone other than Oswald. And yet the FBI took NO interest in finding out whose prints these were. That spells out W-h-i-t-e-w-a-s-h. (It turned out the bulk of the prints belonged to Studebaker and an FBI clerk named Forrest Lucy.)

Pat, one only has to ask why the lunch sack was not forwarded to the FBI on the first night along with the other evidence. For some days it was believed that it was the assassin's. It was dusted on site as is clearly evident in the photo with Johnson leaving the TSBD at 3pm. Day's excise for it not being forwarded was it did not contain Oswald's prints. How did he know at that point that Oswald was the shooter or that the bag did not belong to an accomplice? The reasoning provided does not stand scrutiny.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jerry Organ on February 11, 2018, 09:30:03 PM
(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-wVNSjg7C1oY/WbSPPPnv9ZI/AAAAAAABBAc/dZSWhFWykZwMwZXZkHY9UC2Burj2QwdQgCLcBGAs/s1600/Oswald%2Bin%2Bthe%2Belevator.jpg)  (http://static1.uk.businessinsider.com/image/59f21636e92e2c290d23078e-480/lee-harvey-oswald.jpg)  (https://i.ytimg.com/vi/U4kWJy8uJPs/hqdefault.jpg)

(http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.2431145.1447262209!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/article_750/oswald-charged-murder.jpg)  (https://i.pinimg.com/originals/9e/de/ce/9edece39ea30d8ba02f1b739147dfa5b.png)

Oswald wasn't much of a sweater.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Pat Speer on February 11, 2018, 09:33:02 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Pat, one only has to ask why the lunch sack was not forwarded to the FBI on the first night along with the other evidence. For some days it was believed that it was the assassin's. It was dusted on site as is clearly evident in the photo with Johnson leaving the TSBD at 3pm. Day's excise for it not being forwarded was it did not contain Oswald's prints. How did he know at that point that Oswald was the shooter or that the bag did not belong to an accomplice? The reasoning provided does not stand scrutiny.

That is a good point, Colin. I looked into this at one point and came to realize that Day, by his own admission, did not know that the lunch sack belonged to Bonnie Ray Williams until the 25th.

So why the heck didn't he send the lunch sack to the FBI on the night of the 22nd?

The other bag, CE 142, was supposedly unsuccessfully dusted for prints. And yet it was sent to the FBI for more detailed processing. So why not the lunch sack? 

My suspicion is that they found prints on the sack but couldn't match them to Oswald. So, bye bye sack! And bye bye bottle!

 suspc
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: John Mytton on February 11, 2018, 09:34:44 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The FBI photo cited by John M as an example of the difficulty one has in IDing prints is Exhibit 1A for whitewash in the Kennedy assassination.

The circled print was ID'ed as a print from Oswald's right index finger within a week of the assassination. The prints on both sides of it were also considered legible...yet went unidentified for 9 months, and were only then ID'ed after WC counsel Wesley Liebeler raised a major stink and demanded the FBI at least try to ID the numerous unidentified prints on the sniper's nest boxes. As it turned out, the prints conveniently book-ending Oswald's print belonged to DPD detective Robert Studebaker, who carried the boxes from the sniper's nest.

In most any other case in U.S. history, that is, in a case where the FBI was trying to do its job, elimination prints would have been taken of everyone handling the boxes, and provided the FBI, in December, not August.

I mean, just think about it. Several witnesses claimed to see someone other than Oswald in the sniper's nest. And here were multiple prints on these boxes from someone other than Oswald. And yet the FBI took NO interest in finding out whose prints these were. That spells out W-h-i-t-e-w-a-s-h. (It turned out the bulk of the prints belonged to Studebaker and an FBI clerk named Forrest Lucy.)



Quote
I mean, just think about it. Several witnesses claimed to see someone other than Oswald in the sniper's nest. And here were multiple prints on these boxes from someone other than Oswald. And yet the FBI took NO interest in finding out whose prints these were.

Well to be fair, the murder weapon C2766 which contained Oswald's prints, matching fibers and was found at his work, did belong to Oswald.



JohnM



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Martin Weidmann on February 11, 2018, 09:47:38 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Well to be fair, the murder weapon C2766 which contained Oswald's prints, matching fibers and was found at his work, did belong to Oswald.

JohnM

There is nothing fair about that biased propaganda statement
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 11, 2018, 10:01:11 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
That is a good point, Colin. I looked into this at one point and came to realize that Day, by his own admission, did not know that the lunch sack belonged to Bonnie Ray Williams until the 25th.

So why the heck didn't he send the lunch sack to the FBI on the night of the 22nd?

The other bag, CE 142, was supposedly unsuccessfully dusted for prints. And yet it was sent to the FBI for more detailed processing. So why not the lunch sack? 

My suspicion is that they found prints on the sack but couldn't match them to Oswald. So, bye bye sack! And bye bye bottle!

 suspc

I suspect that it was the lunch sack that was processed by Studebaker on site and tagged with the partial. It certainly appears that only the lunchsack was dusted in the TSBD. At that time they had no idea how many shooters/spotters were involved. The sack and bottle should have been sent to the FBI.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 11, 2018, 10:08:42 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


Well to be fair, the murder weapon C2766 which contained Oswald's prints, matching fibers and was found at his work, did belong to Oswald.

JohnM

There never were any identifiable prints on the rifle.....It had been wiped clean.   ( Lee Oswald would have known that he had left a paper trail that a blind man could follow so there would have been no reason for him to wipe the rifle clean....

The tuft of fibers found on the rifle may have matched the shirt that Lee was wearing AT THE THEATER...but he had changed shirts in his room at 1:00pm....  So the fibers had to have been deposited on the rifle AFTER both the rifle and the shirt were in the hands of the authorities...
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 11, 2018, 10:26:54 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Again, how do we know the photo showing the bag laying on top of the blanket was taken before Stombaugh anaylzed the bag?  It has yet to be shown that anyone should accept the idea of evidence contamination.

The problem for you Bill is that you can not definitively rule it out. When Lt Day handed over the crime scene evidence to Drain, did he ensure that each item was placed in a separate clean bag?

You have a clear photograph that showed CE 142 in contact with the blanket, hence you can't rule out cross contamination.

Further there were not enough fibers to associate CE 142 to the blanket.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 11, 2018, 10:35:50 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
As a young LEO in the late 1970's [the period during the HSCA hearings] with access to a crime lab, we constructed several examples of CE 142 made from the same type of wrapping paper and tape found in the shipping department of the TSBD.
   
We broke down a Mannlicher–Carcano 6.5×52mm Model 91/38 and placed it in the bags, carried them around a bit as the WC says LHO did and then opened the bags and assembled the rifles. We did this about a half a dozen times. Then we tested the bags for fingerprints with both silver nitrate fumes and standard finger print dusting powder.

The results were consistent and conclusive. Their were dozens of fingerprints [ours] on the inside and outside of the bag, every time, no exceptions. In addition, there were always marks, creases, tiny holes or even small tears in the bags made by the sharp edges of the rifle parts. Often you could see these with the naked eye, but their were always clearly visible under modest magnification. Again there were no exceptions to this. No matter how carefully we packaged or carried the rifle there was always some visible physical evidence the disassembled rifle had been carried in the bag.

The FBI expert commented on this

Mr. CADIGAN. No; I don't see actually, I don't know the condition of the rifle. If it were in fact contained in this bag, it could have been wrapped in cloth or just the metal parts wrapped in a thick layer of cloth, or if the gun was in the bag, perhaps it wasn't moved too much. I did observe some scratch marks and abrasions but was unable to associate them with this gun. The scratch marks in the paper could come from any place. They could have come from many places. There were no marks on this bag that I could say were caused by that rifle or any other rifle or any other given instrument.

No cloth was found on the 6th floor.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 11, 2018, 10:41:48 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The bag didn't make itself, during construction Oswald could have left those prints at any time.

JohnM

How do you account for the fact that the distribution of the partial prints on CE 142 bears no association to the manner LMR and BWF saw LHO carrying the paper bag? He was carrying an 8 pound rifle, so his prints should have been plastered all over the paper bag - they weren't.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 11, 2018, 10:52:56 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
But why weren't there several dozen fingerprints/palm prints on the inside and outside of the bag? Why was there no evidence of marks, creases, small holes or tears in the bag from the many sharp edges and hard pointed parts of the rifle?

Simple - there never was any rifle disassembled in 12 pieces inside CE 142.

The FBI expert completely ignored his own negative findings because the FBI and WC had no other alternative to explain how LHO got the rifle to the TSBD.

Despite not being able to associate CE 139 with CE 142 the FBI and WC accepted that it was.



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 11, 2018, 10:58:34 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Not all prints can be identified and as prints start covering other prints identification is hampered. The bag was made of paper and required standard enhancing to recover prints.
The bag seen being carried from the depository could hardly be called pristine.


JohnM

I am speculating that Detective Studebaker, folded it up after he made it and took back up to the crime scene which you have to admit was a dirty and dusty work site.

The scrunching on the bottom could be explained by Montgomery trying to close the end of the bag but then held the bottom of the window sill piece instead.

The wrapping tables looked anything but pristine - stains could easily be transferred onto CE 142.



Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 11, 2018, 11:03:07 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login




The bag was excessively creased, folded and stained so determining which of these hundreds of creases were left by the rifle would be impossible.

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-eSB3HYpevE0/T3oIdYEqRtI/AAAAAAAAHJM/qCyDjxVjJUw/s1600/LD-Montgomery-Holds-Brown-Paper-Bag.jpg)

JohnM

There were no identifying marks inside CE 142 to indicate that it had any weapon in it.

The FBI did find scratch marks inside and the FBI expert said it was done by a hard object.

Would you consider a flat piece of wood a hard object?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 11, 2018, 11:09:09 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
"Again I see wild speculation, have you ever examined any objects for fingerprints?"

                                                                             -John Mytton




John,

If you are asking me if I have ever been trained and examined an object for fingerprints, the answer is yes.

My Associates Degree is in Criminalistics and Forensics Science, and my BS is in Criminal Justice [my graduate degree is in Public Administration] I graduated from the PA State Police Academy Basic Law Enforcement Training (BLET) and took additional training at the Pittsburg Police Academy.

Cyril Wecht was the Allegheny County Coroner then and would lecture and teach on general subjects relating to evidence collection at crime scenes, forensic pathology and would occasionally discuss the JFK assassination if you were interested. This was during the HSCA hearings. Like most criminal investigators of my generation, I have also taken a few dozen, week long continuing education courses in the methods and process of preservation, collection and analysis of physical evidence [including fingerprints] over the years.

This is probably about the average for a LEO who became a criminal investigator in the 1970s and worked in the field.  Like most criminal investigators, I can not count the number of times I have "examined [as you say] an object for fingerprints".

If you have any doubt the DPD completely mishandled the physical evidence just refer to Charles O'Hara's
Fundamentals of Criminal Investigation First edition. Even by the rather loose standards of 1963 the DPD grossly mishandled the evidence.

The proper procedure to handle CE 142, even in 1963, would have been to take multiple photographs from different angles and heights of the bag in the position and location it was found, draw a crime scene sketch referencing the bag to it surroundings, then wearing gloves carefully fold the bag as few times as possible to place it in a large plastic evidence bag marked with the date, time, location, investigating officer and sign the evidence bag with the officers name and rank.

Documentation of chain of custody would commence and each person who had the evidence bag in their possession would mark the bag with their name, rank and department and reference the time and date the bag was in their custody in their supplemental report.

Of course, none of this was done with CE 142. A similar and disturbing pattern was followed with the rest of the physical evidence.  Because of the lack of a credible and verifiable chain of custody of the physical evidence alone, very little of the so called "proof of Oswalds guilt" based upon the physical evidence would have actually been admissible in court.

Lloyd,

would you agree then that CE 142 was treated like non-crime scene evidence?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 11, 2018, 11:24:02 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
That is a good point, Colin. I looked into this at one point and came to realize that Day, by his own admission, did not know that the lunch sack belonged to Bonnie Ray Williams until the 25th.

So why the heck didn't he send the lunch sack to the FBI on the night of the 22nd?

The other bag, CE 142, was supposedly unsuccessfully dusted for prints. And yet it was sent to the FBI for more detailed processing. So why not the lunch sack? 

My suspicion is that they found prints on the sack but couldn't match them to Oswald. So, bye bye sack! And bye bye bottle!

 suspc

Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; there was a sack of some chicken bones and a bottle brought into the identification bureau. I think I still have that sack and bottle down there. The chicken bones, I finally threw them away that laid around there. In my talking to the men who were working on that floor, November 25, they stated, one of them stated, he had eaten lunch over there.
Mr. McCLOY. Someone other than Oswald?
Mr. DAY. Yes, sir; so I discarded it, or disconnected it with being with Oswald. Incidentally, Oswald's fingerprints were not on the bottle. I checked that.
Mr. McCLOY. They were not on the bottle?
Mr. DAY. No, sir.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11640&relPageId=90&search=lunch_sack

As you said, both the chicken lunch sack and Dr Pepper bottle should have been handed in to Vincent Drain, same with the window sill piece.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Lloyd Morris on February 12, 2018, 01:04:31 AM

Tony,

I would agree that CE 142 was handled in a way inconsistent with established police practices [forget best practices] for law enforcement in 1963. In addition, the official history of CE 142 along with it's highly questionable chain of evidence can not be proven with any thing close to certainty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. The fact that CE 142 was carried out of the TSBD the way it was and "processed" as evidence suggests to me those involved with CE142 were certain of what the results would be.

In my mind, how much of the callous disregard for basic police procedures relating to evidence collection was deliberate and how much was hubris; pride and stubbornness and arrogance is up for debate. I think it was a mixture of both at least at the evidence collection level of DPD.

Lloyd
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 01:36:07 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tony,

I would agree that CE 142 was handled in a way inconsistent with established police practices [forget best practices] for law enforcement in 1963. In addition, the official history of CE 142 along with it's highly questionable chain of evidence can not be proven with any thing close to certainty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. The fact that CE 142 was carried out of the TSBD the way it was and "processed" as evidence suggests to me those involved with CE142 were certain of what the results would be.

In my mind, how much of the callous disregard for basic police procedures relating to evidence collection was deliberate and how much was hubris; pride and stubbornness and arrogance is up for debate. I think it was a mixture of both at least at the evidence collection level of DPD.

Lloyd

Thank you.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Bill Brown on February 12, 2018, 01:44:27 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Again, how do we know the photo showing the bag laying on top of the blanket was taken before Stombaugh anaylzed the bag?  It has yet to be shown that anyone should accept the idea of evidence contamination.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
The problem for you Bill is that you can not definitively rule it out. When Lt Day handed over the crime scene evidence to Drain, did he ensure that each item was placed in a separate clean bag?

You have a clear photograph that showed CE 142 in contact with the blanket, hence you can't rule out cross contamination.

Further there were not enough fibers to associate CE 142 to the blanket.


Quote
The problem for you Bill is that you can not definitively rule it out.

No.  You have this totally backwards.

YOU are the one who alleged (earlier in this thread) contamination and therefore the problem is YOURS

If you're going to bring up evidence contamination (like you did many pages back) then it's not for me to rule it out, it is up to you to prove contamination occurred.


Quote
When Lt Day handed over the crime scene evidence to Drain, did he ensure that each item was placed in a separate clean bag?

Again, that is up to you to answer.


Quote
You have a clear photograph that showed CE 142 in contact with the blanket, hence you can't rule out cross contamination.

If that photo was taken AFTER Stombaugh examined the blanket, then that photo means absolutely nothing, regarding contamination.  All you've done is post the photo.  You haven't shown that it was taken BEFORE Stombaugh analyzed the bag and found the fibers.


Quote
Further there were not enough fibers to associate CE 142 to the blanket.

I'm not sure what that is supposed to prove.

Fibers removed from inside the bag match the fibers from the blanket.  Whether it was six fibers or dozens of them, they matched fibers from the blanket.


Look Tony.  This is real simple.  Earlier in this thread, I mentioned that fibers found inside the bag were a match with test fibers removed from the blanket.  Then, for some reason, Iacoletti posted a photo showing the bag in contact with the blanket.  But, that photo was taken three days AFTER Stombaugh analyzed both.  Then you posted a different photo showing the bag in contact with the blanket.  You need to support the photo.

Just running around claiming "you can't prove it's not possible" isn't how it works.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 02:01:12 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

No.  You have this totally backwards.

YOU are the one who alleged (earlier in this thread) contamination and therefore the problem is YOURS

If you're going to bring up evidence contamination (like you did many pages back) then it's not for me to rule it out, it is up to you to prove contamination occurred.


Again, that is up to you to answer.


If that photo was taken AFTER Stombaugh examined the blanket, then that photo means absolutely nothing, regarding contamination.  All you've done is post the photo.  You haven't shown that it was taken BEFORE Stombaugh analyzed the bag and found the fibers.


I'm not sure what that is supposed to prove.

Fibers removed from inside the bag match the fibers from the blanket.  Whether it was six fibers or dozens of them, they matched fibers from the blanket.


Look Tony.  This is real simple.  Earlier in this thread, I mentioned that fibers found inside the bag were a match with test fibers removed from the blanket.  Then, for some reason, Iacoletti posted a photo showing the bag in contact with the blanket.  But, that photo was taken three days AFTER Stombaugh analyzed both.  Then you posted a different photo showing the bag in contact with the blanket.  You need to support the photo.

Just running around claiming "you can't prove it's not possible" isn't how it works.

Only in your mind Bill.

No FBI expert stated conclusively where the fibers came from and you can not discount the possibility of cross contamination occurring.

Mr. EISENBERG. Now, in your mind what do you feel about the origin of the fibers you found in the bag?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. I didn't find enough fibers in the bag to form an opinion on those.
Now if I would have found, say 15 or 20 fibers and all 15 or 20 matched the fibers from the blanket, then I could say, "Yes, I feel that these very easily could have come from the blanket." But I didn't. I only found two of the many types.

The first mistake was Montgomery placing an object inside CE 142 and holding it upside down.

The second mistake was Lt Day failing to examine the inside of CE 142 in situ.

The third mistake was failing to photograph it in situ and to carefully transport it.

Since we have CE 142 going from the DP to the FBI - how do you know what transpired between both locations?

Did they collated the evidence together or separately?

You are now clutching at straws Bill.

That photo of CE 142 in the FBI crime lab was very important. There could well be more.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Lloyd Morris on February 12, 2018, 02:44:27 AM
John,

You asked if I "have ever examined any objects for fingerprints" and accused me of "wild speculation"

So if someone disagrees with you, your response is to label them a "kook theorist" and attempt to insult them with an unfounded opinion absent of any knowledge or facts.  I explained my background, training and experience all of which is easily verifiable and certainly relevant to your question.

We can leave it up to the other members here to decide if my response to you on page 49 of this thread was a "conspiracy diatribe repeated parrot like" or honest effort to explain something about the assassination relating to CE 142.

I am willing to bet even those who disagree with me would find your tasteless and unfounded comments sad and unfortunate.  That you choose to insult rather than honestly discuss and debate says a lot about you and the lack of proof so evident in your posts.

If that is the best you can do, I feel sorry for you.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 03:19:23 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


Yep, if the shoe fits.
Look Tony I'm sick and tired of these members who suddenly when being defeated bring out the I'm an "expert" in whatever category is currently being debated as a last ditch attempt to gain some cred because if you are an actual expert why the need to boast, it's better to just let your mouth do the talking and win by your own actual expert analysis.

Btw if Morris does have all those degrees and certificates then sure let him take a photo of his awards wall and I'll happily apologize but until then like our other photogrammetrist/nuclear scientist who spouts BS, I'll treat Morris with the contempt that he deserves.

JohnM

JohnM you are not the forum's owner nor filter on who should post and what they post on.

It was obvious that CE 142 wasnt handled like crime scene evidence should have been handled. Lt Day and Detective Studebaker had left themselves wide open for severe criticism and skepticism, especially when it came to CE 142.

Since when do we have to show our "credentials" to post here on a public forum?

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 03:25:45 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tony,

I would agree that CE 142 was handled in a way inconsistent with established police practices [forget best practices] for law enforcement in 1963. In addition, the official history of CE 142 along with it's highly questionable chain of evidence can not be proven with any thing close to certainty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. The fact that CE 142 was carried out of the TSBD the way it was and "processed" as evidence suggests to me those involved with CE142 were certain of what the results would be.

In my mind, how much of the callous disregard for basic police procedures relating to evidence collection was deliberate and how much was hubris; pride and stubbornness and arrogance is up for debate. I think it was a mixture of both at least at the evidence collection level of DPD.

Lloyd

Lloyd,  what is  the chain of evidence for the sack and what specifically do you find problematic in it? Would a chain of custody even be required to get the bag admitted into court as evidence and, if so, would it need to be perfect in order to exceed the reasonable doubt standard?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Lloyd Morris on February 12, 2018, 03:30:13 AM
"Again I see wild speculation, have you ever examined any objects for fingerprints?"

                                                                             -John Mytton


John,

If you are asking me if I have ever been trained and examined an object for fingerprints, the answer is yes.

My Associates Degree is in Criminalistics and Forensics Science, and my BS is in Criminal Justice [my graduate degree is in Public Administration] I graduated from the PA State Police Academy Basic Law Enforcement Training (BLET) and took additional training at the Pittsburg Police Academy.

Cyril Wecht was the Allegheny County Coroner then and would lecture and teach on general subjects relating to evidence collection at crime scenes, forensic pathology and would occasionally discuss the JFK assassination if you were interested. This was during the HSCA hearings. Like most criminal investigators of my generation, I have also taken a few dozen, week long continuing education courses in the methods and process of preservation, collection and analysis of physical evidence [including fingerprints] over the years.

This is probably about the average for a LEO who became a criminal investigator in the 1970s and worked in the field.  Like most criminal investigators, I can not count the number of times I have "examined [as you say] an object for fingerprints".

If you have any doubt the DPD completely mishandled the physical evidence just refer to Charles O'Hara's
Fundamentals of Criminal Investigation First edition. Even by the rather loose standards of 1963 the DPD grossly mishandled the evidence.

The proper procedure to handle CE 142, even in 1963, would have been to take multiple photographs from different angles and heights of the bag in the position and location it was found, draw a crime scene sketch referencing the bag to it surroundings, then wearing gloves carefully fold the bag as few times as possible to place it in a large plastic evidence bag marked with the date, time, location, investigating officer and sign the evidence bag with the officers name and rank.

Documentation of chain of custody would commence and each person who had the evidence bag in their possession would mark the bag with their name, rank and department and reference the time and date the bag was in their custody in their supplemental report.

Of course, none of this was done with CE 142. A similar and disturbing pattern was followed with the rest of the physical evidence.  Because of the lack of a credible and verifiable chain of custody of the physical evidence alone, very little of the so called "proof of Oswalds guilt" based upon the physical evidence would have actually been admissible in court.

 






Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 03:47:31 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

If you have any doubt the DPD completely mishandled the physical evidence just refer to Charles O'Hara's
Fundamentals of Criminal Investigation First edition. Even by the rather loose standards of 1963 the DPD grossly mishandled the evidence.

Lloyd, Fundamentals of Criminal Investigation First edition was published in 1966. Among local crime investigators , how widespread was the use of the fundamentals laid out in the book in 1963?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Lloyd Morris on February 12, 2018, 03:50:56 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Lloyd,  what is  the chain of evidence for the sack and what specifically do you find problematic in it? Would a chain of custody even be required to get the bag admitted into court as evidence and, if so, would it need to be perfect in order to exceed the reasonable doubt standard?

Tim,

Four very good questions.

I will try to post the official chain of custody of CE142 as it exists from DPD to the FBI tomorrow. Like most things with the JFK assassination it has evolved a bit over time and presenting a balanced view based on the actual statements and documentation will take some time to put together. With most of the physical evidence of the assassination there are substantial gaps in the timeline and sudden appearances of damning evidence that defines a rational explanation.

Thanks,

Lloyd
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 03:53:58 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Lloyd, Fundamentals of Criminal Investigation First edition was published in 1966. Among local crime investigators , how widespread was the use of the fundamentals laid out in the book in 1963?

Tim,

Lt Day knew what his crime scene duties were.

Mr. DAY. The past 7 years I have been--I have had immediate supervision of the crime-scene search section. It is our responsibility to go to the scene of the crime, take photographs, check for fingerprints, collect any other evidence that might be available, and primarily we are to assist the investigators with certain technical parts of the investigation.

Mr. BELIN. Do you carry any equipment of any kind with you when you go there?

Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. We have a station wagon equipped with fingerprint equipment, cameras, containers, various other articles that might be needed at the scene of the crime.

Do you think CE 142 was "processed" as it should have been?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 04:01:10 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Lloyd, Fundamentals of Criminal Investigation First edition was published in 1966. Among local crime investigators , how widespread was the use of the fundamentals laid out in the book in 1963?

Don't you mean 1956?

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=11vDCAAAQBAJ&pg=PR4&lpg=PR4&dq=Fundamentals+of+Criminal+Investigation+First+edition&source=bl&ots=w7CG9I7bdb&sig=aMSSJrLx_u7f--XKNnVe1KF7LKs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwihrdrDvZ_ZAhVKgLwKHSH2D0sQ6AEIWDAJ#v=onepage&q=Fundamentals%20of%20Criminal%20Investigation%20First%20edition&f=true

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Lloyd Morris on February 12, 2018, 04:05:05 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Lloyd, Fundamentals of Criminal Investigation First edition was published in 1966. Among local crime investigators , how widespread was the use of the fundamentals laid out in the book in 1963?

Another very good question. I became a police officer in 1975 and was trained by the generation of detectives and criminal investigators who were of the WW2 and Korea war generation. They had been using the basic crime scene techniques and criminalistic's procedures Charles O'Hara wrote about in his first addition since the late forties and early fifties. O'Hara didn't really advance the art as much as codified it.

I have manual from the NY State Police dated 1938 that outlines the proper handling of evidence. With the exception of using paper bags instead of plastic evidence bags the procedure for collecting most evidence was pretty much identical to O'Hara's Fundamentals of Criminal Investigation first edition.

No matter whether you believe and accept the WC version of the assassination or believe it was a conspiracy we all would be much closer to the truth had the DPD and the FBI handled the physical evidence properly.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 04:07:15 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tim,

Lt Day knew what his crime scene duties were.

Mr. DAY. The past 7 years I have been--I have had immediate supervision of the crime-scene search section. It is our responsibility to go to the scene of the crime, take photographs, check for fingerprints, collect any other evidence that might be available, and primarily we are to assist the investigators with certain technical parts of the investigation.

Mr. BELIN. Do you carry any equipment of any kind with you when you go there?

Mr. DAY. Yes, sir. We have a station wagon equipped with fingerprint equipment, cameras, containers, various other articles that might be needed at the scene of the crime.

Do you think CE 142 was "processed" as it should have been?

Tony, with the exception that it wasn't photographed before it was picked up, it was processed as it should have been by the standard of the day.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 04:07:53 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Don't you mean 1956?

https://books.google.com.au/books?id=11vDCAAAQBAJ&pg=PR4&lpg=PR4&dq=Fundamentals+of+Criminal+Investigation+First+edition&source=bl&ots=w7CG9I7bdb&sig=aMSSJrLx_u7f--XKNnVe1KF7LKs&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwihrdrDvZ_ZAhVKgLwKHSH2D0sQ6AEIWDAJ#v=onepage&q=Fundamentals%20of%20Criminal%20Investigation%20First%20edition&f=true

I stand corrected.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 04:14:14 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Another very good question. I became a police officer in 1975 and was trained by the generation of detectives and criminal investigators who were of the WW2 and Korea war generation. They had been using the basic crime scene techniques and criminalistic's procedures Charles O'Hara wrote about in his first addition since the late forties and early fifties. O'Hara didn't really advance the art as much as codified it.

I have manual from the NY State Police dated 1938 that outlines the proper handling of evidence. With the exception of using paper bags instead of plastic evidence bags the procedure for collecting most evidence was pretty much identical to O'Hara's Fundamentals of Criminal Investigation first edition.

Lloyd, I don't doubt that the recommendations existed well before 1963. I'm just wondering how widespread their use was in 1963.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Jerry Organ on February 12, 2018, 04:18:58 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Lloyd, I don't doubt that the recommendations existed well before 1963. I'm just wondering how widespread their use was in 1963.

I wonder what year plastic evidence collection bags specifically for police were manufactured? And what working forensic expert thinks it uncommon that police officers move things before the crime lab get there?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 04:19:48 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tony, with the exception that it wasn't photographed before it was picked up, it was processed as it should have been by the standard of the day.

Tim,

CE 142 wasnt documented where it was found on a map of the 6th floor drawn up by Detective Studebaker, it was directly written on by Lt Day, it wasn't immediately taken to city Hall by Lt. Day, it was returned to the 6th floor by Detective Studebaker and it was taken outside by Detective Montgomery held upside down. Further only Lt Day was shown CE 142 during the WC testimonies.

Do you call this "the standard of the day"?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 04:22:33 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I wonder what year plastic evidence collection bags specifically for police were manufactured? And what working forensic expert thinks it uncommon that police officers move things before the crime lab get there?

Who moved CE 142 in an untouched SN?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 04:26:04 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I stand corrected.

This was written some 7 years prior to the assassination. Do you think Lt Day was completely unaware of what to do at a crime scene?

(https://preview.ibb.co/h64E5n/ohara.jpg) (https://ibb.co/fnBu5n)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Lloyd Morris on February 12, 2018, 04:28:20 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Lloyd, I don't doubt that the recommendations existed well before 1963. I'm just wondering how widespread their use was in 1963.

I think they were pretty widespread based upon the generation of training officers and detectives that came before me. All of these old coppers who came on the job in the 1940s and 1950s took pride in the details and most carried around a copy of O'Hara's Fundamentals of Criminal Investigation in their car or crime scene case.

The DPD Detectives knew how to handle evidence properly but either didn't care because they thought the case against LHO was solid and proper handling wasn't needed or worse had an agenda to frame LHO. Personally, I think it was some of both.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 04:29:09 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tim,

CE 142 wasnt documented where it was found on a map of the 6th floor drawn up by Detective Studebaker, it was directly written on by Lt Day, it wasn't immediately taken to city Hall by Lt. Day, it was returned to the 6th floor by Detective Studebaker and it was taken outside by Detective Montgomery held upside down. Further only Lt Day was shown CE 142 during the WC testimonies.

Do you call this "the standard of the day"?

Tony, please document each of the steps that you just described.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 04:30:18 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login




Don't threaten me boy, you have supplied all your "details" on a Public Forum, now support your claim on the same Public Forum! and if you can't follow through then perhaps you should take your own advice.



JohnM

Are you serious JohnM? It was YOU that called into question his credentials.

Please don't turn my thread into your personal war with other posters.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 04:31:14 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tony, please document each of the steps that you just described.

I have in my OP  :)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 04:35:54 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I think they were pretty widespread based upon the generation of training officers and detectives that came before me. All these guys all took pride in the details and carried around a copy of O'Hara's Fundamentals of Criminal Investigation in their car or crime scene case.

I don't doubt that the officers and detectives that you worked with applied the standards laid out in O'Hara's book. But 12 years is a long time. Their attention to detail in 1975 may not have been near that level in 1963.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 04:37:24 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I have in my OP  :)

Ugh...Do you have a Reader's Digest version?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 04:39:49 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Ugh...Do you have a Reader's Digest version?

Yes - me  :)

I just summed it up for you.

How has the weather been? Above -10 yet?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 04:41:30 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Yes - me  :)

I just summed it up for you.

How has the weather been? Above -10 yet?

It's a scorcher here Tony. 9 degrees.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Lloyd Morris on February 12, 2018, 04:45:37 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I don't doubt that the officers and detectives that you worked with applied the standards laid out in O'Hara's book. But 12 years is a long time. Their attention to detail in 1975 may not have been near that level in 1963.

Fair enough, it certainly is possible. I did meet Jim Leavelle several years ago at a conference in Dallas. He had absolutely no doubts that LHO committed the assassination just as the WC described it. He was quite knowledgable about criminalistics and crime scene investigations in spite of having retired many years earlier.
I wish I had asked him your questions.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Rob Caprio on February 12, 2018, 04:48:07 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Again, how do we know the photo showing the bag laying on top of the blanket was taken before Stombaugh anaylzed the bag?  It has yet to be shown that anyone should accept the idea of evidence contamination.

LOL! Wasn't the alleged original bag "contaminated" by the FBI?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 04:49:59 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It's a scorcher here Tony. 9 degrees.

Global Warming Tim?

We had a "mild" 43 degrees Celsius the other day.

Have you worked out who moved CE 142 from the SN and the time it was found?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Rob Caprio on February 12, 2018, 04:50:46 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

The bag didn't make itself, during construction Oswald could have left those prints at any time.



JohnM

And your evidence for LHO making the bag is?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 04:53:13 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login


FK'n Oath!
 

Well DUH, if he's who he says he is on a public Forum then prove it on a Public Forum!

The boast was made in this thread and we will finish this argument in this thread.

Btw what are you worrying about you and the prolific Colin probably already own way more than half the posts in this thread and tomorrow you with Colin will again drown us in a plethora of posts and this conflict will be pages away.



JohnM

JohnM,

why don't you send a PM instead and sort it out?

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Rob Caprio on February 12, 2018, 04:58:14 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login




The bag was excessively creased, folded and stained so determining which of these hundreds of creases were left by the rifle would be impossible.

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-eSB3HYpevE0/T3oIdYEqRtI/AAAAAAAAHJM/qCyDjxVjJUw/s1600/LD-Montgomery-Holds-Brown-Paper-Bag.jpg)



JohnM

Please explain this.

Mr. EISENBERG. Did you notice any bulges or creases or folds apart from the fold used in making of the bag?

Mr. STOMBAUGH. No; I didn't. I noticed that one end of the bag had been torn.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Rob Caprio on February 12, 2018, 05:07:18 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

No.  You have this totally backwards.

YOU are the one who alleged (earlier in this thread) contamination and therefore the problem is YOURS

If you're going to bring up evidence contamination (like you did many pages back) then it's not for me to rule it out, it is up to you to prove contamination occurred.


Again, that is up to you to answer.


If that photo was taken AFTER Stombaugh examined the blanket, then that photo means absolutely nothing, regarding contamination.  All you've done is post the photo.  You haven't shown that it was taken BEFORE Stombaugh analyzed the bag and found the fibers.


I'm not sure what that is supposed to prove.

Fibers removed from inside the bag match the fibers from the blanket.  Whether it was six fibers or dozens of them, they matched fibers from the blanket.


Look Tony.  This is real simple.  Earlier in this thread, I mentioned that fibers found inside the bag were a match with test fibers removed from the blanket.  Then, for some reason, Iacoletti posted a photo showing the bag in contact with the blanket.  But, that photo was taken three days AFTER Stombaugh analyzed both.  Then you posted a different photo showing the bag in contact with the blanket.  You need to support the photo.

Just running around claiming "you can't prove it's not possible" isn't how it works.

Hilarious. This is one of the main main tactics of the LNers.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 05:33:04 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Fair enough, it certainly is possible. I did meet Jim Leavelle several years ago at a conference in Dallas. He had absolutely no doubts that LHO committed the assassination just as the WC described it. He was quite knowledgable about criminalistics and crime scene investigations in spite of having retired many years earlier.
I wish I had asked him your questions.

Lloyd, how fortunate for you that you got to meet Leavelle. I see him as a rather decent guy. There are a few here that don't feel the same though.

Acknowledging that much of the evidence was not handled with the level of care employed by you and your "elders", do you believe that items like CE-142 would be denied from being admitted as evidence in a court of law in 1964?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 05:37:05 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Global Warming Tim?

We had a "mild" 43 degrees Celsius the other day.

Have you worked out who moved CE 142 from the SN and the time it was found?

Tony, there is no way that I could tolerate 43 degrees Celcius. Minus 43 , yes.

On my way to read the OP.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 05:44:35 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tony, there is no way that I could tolerate 43 degrees Celcius. Minus 43 , yes.

On my way to read the OP.

I look forward to answering your questions.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 05:53:03 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tim,

CE 142 wasnt documented where it was found on a map of the 6th floor drawn up by Detective Studebaker, it was directly written on by Lt Day, it wasn't immediately taken to city Hall by Lt. Day, it was returned to the 6th floor by Detective Studebaker and it was taken outside by Detective Montgomery held upside down. Further only Lt Day was shown CE 142 during the WC testimonies.

Do you call this "the standard of the day"?

Tony, I'm have difficulty reading the text in your jpegs there. You claim that CE-142 was brought down to the wrapping table and then returned to the 6th floor by Studebaker. I recall seeing this from you before but I can't remember the sourcing that you provided. If it's in the OP I can't see it. Could you please provide it for me now?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 05:56:02 AM
Nevermind. I see it.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Lloyd Morris on February 12, 2018, 05:57:54 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Lloyd, how fortunate for you that you got to meet Leavelle. I see him as a rather decent guy. There are a few here that don't feel the same though.

Acknowledging that much of the evidence was not handled with the level of care employed by you and your "elders", do you believe that items like CE-142 would be denied from being admitted as evidence in a court of law in 1964?

I believe what became CE 142 would have been admitted in a courtroom in the Kennedy assassination in Dallas, Texas in 1964 regardless of the questions about the integrity the chain of custody or how CE 142 was processed and handled by the DPD. Not much would have stopped a conviction of LHO given the circumstances he faced in 1964.

Noted lawyers on both sides of the JFK assassination have argued the admissibility of physical evidence like
CE 142 and the prosecutions use of critical physical evidence with a questionable chain of custody or other serious problems would have been part of the legal basis for granting a new trial on appeal.

What do you think? Do you believe it would have been admissible?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 06:01:30 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tim,

CE 142 wasnt documented where it was found on a map of the 6th floor drawn up by Detective Studebaker, it was directly written on by Lt Day, it wasn't immediately taken to city Hall by Lt. Day, it was returned to the 6th floor by Detective Studebaker and it was taken outside by Detective Montgomery held upside down. Further only Lt Day was shown CE 142 during the WC testimonies.

Do you call this "the standard of the day"?

Tony,

In answer to your question, Yes, I do call that "the standard of the day".
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 06:04:02 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Tony,

In answer to your question, Yes, I do call that "the standard of the day".

Why then did Lt Day and Det. Studebaker bring a camera for?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 06:15:38 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I believe what became CE 142 would have been admitted in a courtroom in the Kennedy assassination in Dallas, Texas in 1964 regardless of the questions about the integrity the chain of custody or how CE 142 was processed and handled by the DPD. Not much would have stopped a conviction of LHO given the circumstances he faced in 1964.

Noted lawyers on both sides of the JFK assassination have argued the admissibility of physical evidence like
CE 142 and the prosecutions use of critical physical evidence with a questionable chain of custody or other serious problems would have been part of the legal basis for granting a new trial on appeal.

What do you think? Do you believe it would have been admissible?

Lloyd, I do believe that it would be admissible. As would pretty much all of the evidence.   Many believers in conspiracy like to argue that most of the evidence would be excluded due to imperfect chains of custody. However, from what I've learned through researching this case , and the Tippit case, is that incomplete chains of custody rarely , if ever, keep items from being admitted as evidence. Even today. Particularly if the items are non-fungible.

I've also learned that establishing a chain of custody is not the only means of getting items admitted as evidence. Many of the items from the Kennedy and Tippit cases would not need chains of custody presented at all. The rifle, revolver, shell casings, the bullet, etc.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 06:17:33 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Why then did Lt Day and Det. Studebaker bring a camera for?

I already noted that one exception Tony. A mistake was made. It happens.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 07:01:34 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I already noted that one exception Tony. A mistake was made. It happens.

Oh, Ok then Tim - nothing to be concerned about then. Silly me  :)

Do you happen to know why Mooney and Captain Fritz (for starters) failed to see the paper bag on the floor in the SE corner?

Luke Mooney, No More Silence

"Fritz arrived a few moments later taking the same route
through the stacks of boxes that I had
. He was the first man to
reach down and pick up one of the shell casings to see what caliber
it was. I had secured the area before he had arrived, thus nothing
had been disturbed until that time
. After that, I don’t know what
happened to the casings.
I left Fritz in charge while Deputy Boone and I began looking
for the weapon."

Just two more "mistakes" Tim?

Mr. BALL - Can you take this and point out about where the crease was on 509?
Now, was there anything you saw over in the corner?
Mr. MOONEY - No, sir; I didn't see anything over in the corner.

Mr. DULLES. When was the paper bag covering that apparently he brought the rifle in, was that discovered in the sixth floor about the same time?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; that was recovered a little later. I wasn't down there when that was found.
Mr. DULLES. It was recovered on the sixth floor, was it not?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I believe so. We can check here and see. I believe it was. But I wasn't there when that was recovered.


Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 07:07:13 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Who was at and in the "SN" and didn't see CE 142 in situ?

 
Detective in the homicide and robbery bureau for the Dallas Police Department (since August 2, 1948) Richard M. Sims

Mr. BALL. Did you ever see a paper bag?
Mr. SIMS. Well, we saw some wrappings--a brown wrapping there.
Mr. BALL. Where did you see it?
Mr. SIMS. It was there by the hulls.
Mr. BALL. Was it right there near the hulls?
Mr. SIMS. As well as I remember--of course, I didn't pay too much attention at that time, but it was, I believe, by the east side of where the boxes were piled up---that would be a guess--I believe that's where it was.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 07:09:40 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Oh, Ok then Tim - nothing to be concerned about then. Silly me  :)

Do you happen to know why Mooney and Captain Fritz (for starters) failed to see the paper bag on the floor in the SE corner?

Luke Mooney, No More Silence

"Fritz arrived a few moments later taking the same route
through the stacks of boxes that I had
. He was the first man to
reach down and pick up one of the shell casings to see what caliber
it was. I had secured the area before he had arrived, thus nothing
had been disturbed until that time
. After that, I don’t know what
happened to the casings.
I left Fritz in charge while Deputy Boone and I began looking
for the weapon."

Just two more "mistakes" Tim?

Mr. BALL - Can you take this and point out about where the crease was on 509?
Now, was there anything you saw over in the corner?
Mr. MOONEY - No, sir; I didn't see anything over in the corner.

Mr. DULLES. When was the paper bag covering that apparently he brought the rifle in, was that discovered in the sixth floor about the same time?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; that was recovered a little later. I wasn't down there when that was found.
Mr. DULLES. It was recovered on the sixth floor, was it not?
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; I believe so. We can check here and see. I believe it was. But I wasn't there when that was recovered.

Not seeing the bag was not a mistake. Mooney and Fritz just never noticed it, that's all.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 07:13:14 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Mr. BALL. Did you ever see a paper bag?
Mr. SIMS. Well, we saw some wrappings--a brown wrapping there.
Mr. BALL. Where did you see it?
Mr. SIMS. It was there by the hulls.
Mr. BALL. Was it right there near the hulls?
Mr. SIMS. As well as I remember--of course, I didn't pay too much attention at that time, but it was, I believe, by the east side of where the boxes were piled up---that would be a guess--I believe that's where it was.


You forgot to add this:

Mr. SIMS. Yes, sir; they did. I was going back and forth, from the wrapper to the hulls.


How was he doing this Tim, when the "wrapper" and the hulls were behind a barricade of book boxes and were separated by several feet?

I read his report and he went between the rifle location and to where the hulls were - in fact he went to get Lt Day to come and photograph the just found CE 139.

If he saw a wrapper, he saw the chicken lunch sack that was initially at the SN where the hulls were located.

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 07:15:50 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Not seeing the bag was not a mistake. Mooney and Fritz just never noticed it, that's all.

You do realize that both men had to step on CE 142 to get into the SN don't you?

FBI expert find any footprints on CE 142?

Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 07:16:43 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You forgot to add this:

Mr. SIMS. Yes, sir; they did. I was going back and forth, from the wrapper to the hulls.


How was he doing this Tim, when the "wrapper" and the hulls were behind a barricade of book boxes and were separated by several feet?

I read his report and he went between the rifle location and to where the hulls were - in fact he went to get Lt Day to come and photograph the just found CE 139.

If he saw a wrapper, he saw the chicken lunch sack that was initially at the SN where the hulls were located.

What was the lunch sack doing on the east side of where the boxes were stacked up? Who else besides Sims saw it there?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tim Nickerson on February 12, 2018, 07:18:48 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You do realize that both men had to step on CE 142 to get into the SN don't you?

FBI expert find any footprints on CE 142?

Well, that's new to me. How in the world did you come up with that one?
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 07:54:22 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
What was the lunch sack doing on the east side of where the boxes were stacked up? Who else besides Sims saw it there?

It was left there by BRW because that was where he left the remnants of his lunch - at the SN.

It was seen by Mooney, Hill, McCurley and Weatherford.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Tony Fratini on February 12, 2018, 08:01:15 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Well, that's new to me. How in the world did you come up with that one?

Facing Elm Street - the right hand side of the barricade was boxed in (L-shape) - you had to enter the SN from the LHS closest to the SE corner.

It was Det. Studebaker who took the boxes down on the LHS so he could take a photo of the hulls on the floor from the West looking East.

Check out from 22.18 and note where the agent comes out from.


Now you tell me how Mooney and Fritz missed seeing CE 142 on the floor near the two pipes?

Mr. McCLOY. When you went up to the sixth floor from which Oswald apparently had fired these shots, what did it look like there, what was the--how were things arranged there? Was there anything in the nature of a gun rest there or anything that could be used as a gun rest?
Mr. FRITZ. You mean up in the corner where he shot from, from the window?
Mr. McCLOY. Yes.
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir; there were some boxes stacked there and I believe one box, one small box I believe was in the window, and another box was on the floor. There were some boxes stacked to his right that more or less blinded him from the rest of the floor. If anyone else had been on the floor I doubt if they could have seen where he was sitting.


(https://preview.ibb.co/jVoNan/Slide109.jpg) (https://ibb.co/mYGm1S)
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Colin Crow on February 12, 2018, 08:23:04 AM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
What was the lunch sack doing on the east side of where the boxes were stacked up? Who else besides Sims saw it there?

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,175.0.html (https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,175.0.html)

Only the guys who got there early. Hill most likely moved it closer to the second set of windows....ie to the west of the SN barrier.
Title: Re: Who constructed CE 142 - Lee Harvey Oswald or a Detective from the DP?
Post by: Walt Cakebread on February 12, 2018, 12:33:08 PM
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Facing Elm Street - the right hand side of the barricade was boxed in (L-shape) - you had to enter the SN from the LHS closest to the SE corner.

It was Det. Studebaker who took the boxes down on the LHS so he could take a photo of the hulls on the floor from the West looking East.

Check out from 22.18 and note where the agent comes out from.


Now you tell me how Mooney and Fritz missed seeing CE 142 on the floor near the two pipes?

Mr. McCLOY. When you went up to the sixth floor from which Oswald apparently had fired these shots, what did it look like there, what was the--how were things arranged there? Was there anything in the nature of a gun rest there or anything that could be used as a gun rest?
Mr. FRITZ. You mean up in the corner where he shot from, from the window?
Mr. McCLOY. Yes.
Mr. FRITZ. Yes, sir;