Two ways on how NOT to frame Oswald
1) Don't place him behind the limo, and then claim the shots came from the front
2) See #1
The plan would have worked perfectly if Dal-Tex shooter hit JFK in the back of his skull. Wide turn onto Elm jostled everyone, causing shooter to miss his head.
The catch is the back-front thing...
Make sense please.
When did the people who framed Oswald ever claim that shots came from the front? You're making even less sense than usual.
Until your proof of a frame-up shows up, I'll continue to deal with those who claim frontal assault
The man Ruby killed was a patsy. JFK was killed by shots from the front.
Two ways on how NOT to frame OswaldHow ignorant. JFK was blasted in the head by a shooter behind the stockade fence. Those who reported that and a film showing the deed were just simply ignored. You are just trolling around aimlessly with no other apparent purpose in life. Pitiful. My insincere condolences.
1) Don't place him behind the limo, and then claim the shots came from the front
2) See #1
The man Ruby killed was a patsy. JFK was killed by shots from the front.You are illustrating exactly Bill Chapman's point of how NOT to make Oswald a patsy!
How ignorant. JFK was blasted in the head by a shooter behind the stockade fence. Those who reported that and a film showing the deed were just simply ignored. You are just trolling around aimlessly with no other apparent purpose in life. Pitiful. My insincere condolences.What is this "film showing the deed"?
How to frame Mr Oswald NOT as a sixth floor shooter BUT as the supplier of a rifle used in the assassination:
1: Get him to bring curtain rods to work in a long, folded-at-the-top bag
2: Don't worry about the fact that he'll probably go outside to watch the Presidential parade.
Thumb1:
Why would he go out to watch the motorcade when he probably already had the best view
How ignorant. JFK was blasted in the head by a shooter behind the stockade fence. Those who reported that and a film showing the deed were just simply ignored. You are just trolling around aimlessly with no other apparent purpose in life. Pitiful. My insincere condolences.
(http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/Smileys/default2/popcorn_eating.gif)
Oswald was a good enough shot to get lucky
How ignorant. JFK was blasted in the head by a shooter behind the stockade fence. Those who reported that and a film showing the deed were just simply ignored. You are just trolling around aimlessly with no other apparent purpose in life. Pitiful. My insincere condolences.
(http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/Smileys/default2/popcorn_eating.gif)
LOL
You are illustrating exactly Bill Chapman's point of how NOT to make Oswald a patsy!
Contradictions are not a problem on the far shores of the lunacy fringe...
As long as you are 100% Oswald probably did it.... :D
A few more examples of conspirator mistakes in the effort to frame Oswald:
1. Dropping a wallet with the fake ID Alek Hidell name at the Tippet shooting scene. This is a mistake, because many people will be asking how Oswald or anyone else could have been so retarded to have dropped his wallet at the scene, let alone one with a fake ID that links to an MC rifle found at the TSBD.
2. Trying to set up Oswald P.O. Box with an alternate name Alek Hidell, also a mistake as above. Skeptics will immediately wonder why Oswald would have rifle sent to his own P.O box instead of just creating an entirely different P.O.Box at a post office in another city and just for Alex Hidell period.
3. Overusing the Alek Hidell name is too obvious to connect Oswald with letters from Russia, then an order form for a rifle, and then the wallet dropped at the scene. Its the same unnecessary suspicion aroused as in 1 and 2 above, which the public will question.
4. Speeding up the process of framing Oswald by J.Edgar Hoover directing that the public must be convinced of "no conspiracy" was not a good idea. It only caused the skeptical public to become more skeptical.
5. The SE window 6th floor gunman using an MC rifle, should have left the rifle there at the window, instead of placing it between boxes near the staircase, trying to make it seem like the shooter used the staircase to go down to the 2nd floor lunchroom, where they had Oswald waiting for a phone call or contact. The conspirators should have realized the potential for some employee like Dorothy Garner on the 4th floor, to be out and standing by near the rear staircase as early as 30 sec post shots, thus foiling any probable staircase escape concept.
6. IF the MC rifle actually did belong to Oswald, then it was a mistake for the conspirators to wait until the very night before to steal it from either Oswalds boarding room or the Paines garage. Granted, they were trying to minimize risk Oswald might fing the rifle missing if it were stolen a day or 2 beforehand, and might report it stolen, thus tharting their plans. However, the conspirators should have at least attempted to check out the rifle during the few hours they had it, to see if the scope was aligned, and if not, try to replace it with a better scope, or remove it. Leaving it behind, with a misaligned scope, only makes the public more skeptical and or confused.
7. If the MC rifle did not belong to Oswald, then the conspirators make a WHOLE LOT of mistakes in their effort to make it look like Oswald ordered the rifle from a magazine, and the crude handwriting trying to link to letters and the stamps on the money order, etc, and lack of fingerprints.
You're making 2 lazy assumptions, Mr Mason:
Lazy Assumption #1!
Mr Oswald was set up as a/the shooter.
Lazy Assumption #2!
The people who set Mr Oswald up as a confederate in the assassination of JFK were the same people who framed him after the event as a lone wolf gunman.
Stop making lazy assumptions, Mr Mason------it's getting old!
Thumb1:
So which set of conspirators were trying to frame Oswald as a lone gunman? The pre event set of conspirators, or the post event set of conspirators?
And where the pre and post event set of conspirators aware of each others efforts, or not? If they were, then they chose not to cooperate with each other, if your premise 2 is correct, since one or the other set is NOT intending to set up Oswald as a shooter.
So which set of conspirators were trying to frame Oswald as a lone gunman? The pre event set of conspirators, or the post event set of conspirators?
And where the pre and post event set of conspirators aware of each others efforts, or not? If they were, then they chose not to cooperate with each other, if your premise 2 is correct, since one or the other set is NOT intending to set up Oswald as a shooter.
A few more examples of conspirator mistakes in the effort to frame Oswald:
1. Dropping a wallet with the fake ID Alek Hidell name at the Tippet shooting scene. This is a mistake, because many people will be asking how Oswald or anyone else could have been so retarded to have dropped his wallet at the scene, let alone one with a fake ID that links to an MC rifle found at the TSBD.
2. Trying to set up Oswald P.O. Box with an alternate name Alek Hidell, also a mistake as above. Skeptics will immediately wonder why Oswald would have rifle sent to his own P.O box instead of just creating an entirely different P.O.Box at a post office in another city and just for Alex Hidell period.
3. Overusing the Alek Hidell name is too obvious to connect Oswald with letters from Russia, then an order form for a rifle, and then the wallet dropped at the scene. Its the same unnecessary suspicion aroused as in 1 and 2 above, which the public will question.
4. Speeding up the process of framing Oswald by J.Edgar Hoover directing that the public must be convinced of "no conspiracy" was not a good idea. It only caused the skeptical public to become more skeptical.
5. The SE window 6th floor gunman using an MC rifle, should have left the rifle there at the window, instead of placing it between boxes near the staircase, trying to make it seem like the shooter used the staircase to go down to the 2nd floor lunchroom, where they had Oswald waiting for a phone call or contact. The conspirators should have realized the potential for some employee like Dorothy Garner on the 4th floor, to be out and standing by near the rear staircase as early as 30 sec post shots, thus foiling any probable staircase escape concept.
6. IF the MC rifle actually did belong to Oswald, then it was a mistake for the conspirators to wait until the very night before to steal it from either Oswalds boarding room or the Paines garage. Granted, they were trying to minimize risk Oswald might fing the rifle missing if it were stolen a day or 2 beforehand, and might report it stolen, thus tharting their plans. However, the conspirators should have at least attempted to check out the rifle during the few hours they had it, to see if the scope was aligned, and if not, try to replace it with a better scope, or remove it. Leaving it behind, with a misaligned scope, only makes the public more skeptical and or confused.
7. If the MC rifle did not belong to Oswald, then the conspirators make a WHOLE LOT of mistakes in their effort to make it look like Oswald ordered the rifle from a magazine, and the crude handwriting trying to link to letters and the stamps on the money order, etc, and lack of fingerprints.
5. The SE window 6th floor gunman using an MC rifle, should have left the rifle there at the window, instead of placing it between boxes near the staircase, trying to make it seem like the shooter used the staircase to go down to the 2nd floor lunchroom,
" The SE window 6th floor gunman using an MC rifle, should have left the rifle there at the window, " That's true ....HOWEVER I believe the rifle was already hidden at the time of the shooting..... Lee had been told that there would be fire crackers set off and the spectators would believe they had heard were gun shots
And in fact you may recall that many folks thought the first explosion was a firecracker or a motorcycle backfire...... later they accepted that the sound they had heard was probably a gun shot....
instead of placing it between boxes near the staircase,
The rifle was NOT!...between boxes near the staircase when Boone discovered the rifle....It had been carefully hidden beneath a pallet of book boxes 15 feet 4 inches from the north wall NOT 8 feet from the north wall.....
trying to make it seem like the shooter used the staircase to go down to the 2nd floor lunchroom,
Yes that was the plan....The stage production that was intended to make it appear that the arch Villain Lee Harrrrrvey Ossssswald BOOOO! HISSSS! had dashed by that site and hastily dumped the gun as he fled..... And it's amazing that some gullible suckers still believe that BS.
It's bad enough that you continuously fabricate this crap but to do the same fabrication over and over and over again shows just how demented you really are. Have the nurse wheel you out on the porch once in a while.
You'll need to extract your head to see DPD detective Studebaker's map, but when yo do you'll see that the rifle was found 5 feet from the west wall 15 feet 4 inches from the north wall. The phony in situ photos show the rifle about 10 feet from that north wall and jammed between boxes .....
Defected to Russia
Chairman of FPFC
Plotters actually over-sold him as a "commie" IMO
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth340211/m1/1/med_res)
Rifle location was about 15 feet from the interior of the north wall (in above photo, look through stairway on left to the brick wall, which is the building's north wall). Rifle was found on the floor below the three opened boxes at right (only two are visible) next to the tall stack on the right edge of the photo.
The roughly ten-foot distance would be from the wooden wall on the right, which is a partition for the ascending stairway to the seventh floor.
Thank You, Jerry... I sincerely appreciate the opportunity to discus this aspect of the case.
Rifle location was about 15 feet from the interior of the north wall
Detective Robert Studebaker MEASURED the distance as 5 feet from the west wall and 15 feet 4 inches from the north wall with the muzzle pointing east. You know that this is true, because you've posted Studebaker's map.
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth340211/m1/1/med_res)
(in above photo, look through stairway on left to the brick wall, which is the building's north wall).
Yes, We agree on that point......
Rifle was found on the floor below the three opened boxes at right (only two are visible) next to the tall stack on the right edge of the photo.
NO!...That's NOT correct.....But that IS the location where the DPD placed the rifle to stage the phony in situ photo.
The roughly ten-foot distance would be from the wooden wall on the right, which is a partition for the ascending stairway to the seventh floor.
The south end of the wooden partition was about 8 feet from the north wall (LOOK at Studebaker's map) and the aisle was about 2 feet wide
and the rifle in the phony in situ photo was on the south side of that aisle or about 11 feet from the north wall..... In reality the rifle was about four feet further south ( and four feet down) than the place where the rifle was placed for the fake photo.....
The south side of the brick column that has the "Stairway sign posted on it is about 11 feet from the north wall......
| (http://i68.tinypic.com/n1zbbs.jpg) | (http://i65.tinypic.com/25hfwoo.jpg) |
Apparently he was ?Chairman? of one, as he was the only member in New Orleans. You don?t know this?
The map shows nothing ending eight feet from the north wall. The descending stairway, as portrayed on the map. seems to begin about ten feet from the north wall, The aisle on the map is about four-and-a-third feet. Could be four feet but drawn on the map too roughly. So a foot-and-a-half-or-so for the boxes gets you to 15' 4".
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338942/m1/1/high_res/)
The map has the descending stairs begin about ten feet from the north wall. The brick column (with the Stairway sign) begins a bit south from where the descending stairs begin. The center of the brick column seems to correspond to the six wooden pillars that go east-to-west across the sixth floor). So the north edge of the column is about eleven feet from the north wall.
(http://i68.tinypic.com/n1zbbs.jpg) (http://i65.tinypic.com/25hfwoo.jpg)
The center of the brick column seems to correspond to the six wooden pillars that go east-to-west across the sixth floor). So the north edge of the column is about eleven feet from the north wall.
No, the south side of the wood support pillars were 13 feet from the north wall and the overhead beam was at the center of that brick column....IOW the boxes that formed the south wall of the aisle were on the south side of the pillar and those boxes were about 16 inches across....( see the box at the base of the twenty inch wide brick column) then there was another row of boxes that were about 12 inches across ( narrow width) there was a wooden pallet on the floor at 15 feet from the north wall.... That's where the rifle was discovered...(See DP #12 on page 174 of 1st Day Evidence.)
Apparently he was ?Chairman? of one, as he was the only member in New Orleans. You don?t know this?Not even "Chairman". He said in the radio debate with Bringuier in New Orleans that he was Secretary.
(http://i68.tinypic.com/1zmjnk4.jpg)
A crop from DP #12 is shown in the upper-right of the graphic above (DP #12 shows the "Stair Way" sign on the brick column). I think the south end of the brick column is getting about the 15 foot mark.
The brick column is centered on the wooden posts and the map suggests they were centered on the 13 foot mark; the brick column is a lot wider than the posts, so a foot-foot wide brick column will get its south edge to the 15 foot mark. Another four inches or so and there's the rifle.
The nearest pallet southward from the stairway (Pallet 1) is 18 or 19 feet from the north wall.
Apparently the conspiracy allegation is that "they" framed him for the assassination because they wanted to blame Castro to justify an invasion.
But then "they" also conducted a fake investigation - the Warren Commission - that cleared Castro of any involvement. Yes, the same people who framed him in order to remove Castro also said Castro was innocent of any involvement.
That makes no sense but in conspiracy world it doesn't have to make sense; it just has to feed a conspiracy belief.
The brick column is centered on the wooden posts and the map suggests they were centered on the 13 foot mark; the brick column is a lot wider than the posts, so a foot-foot wide brick column will get its south edge to the 15 foot mark.
No, the wooden posts ( pillars) were not centered on the 13 foot mark the south side of those post were on the thirteen foot mark....
and the row of boxes were stacked in line with the south side of the post....
the boxes were about 16 inches X 12 inches....( see the box at the base of the brick column which is two and a half bricks across and use the bricks as a scale.) so 13 feet plus 1 foot 4 inches puts the south edge of the boxes at 14 foot 4 inches. this is where the DPD placed the rifle to stage the phony in situ photo.......then there is a box which is 12 inches across and then the pallet on the floor....THAT is where the rifle was laying on the floor when Boone discovered it....
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338942/m1/1/high_res/)
Rightly-or-wrongly, the map (which is the only thing I have to go by) shows the majority of the wooden posts (that go east-to-west from the rifle location) centered on the 13-foot mark from the north wall. Maybe someone at the museum could go measure it.
(http://i63.tinypic.com/11uwbb9.jpg)
The arrowed boxes above are not where the rifle was located, but they appear to be a bit south of the box by the wooden post. The tall stack (it has the label "Looking West" on it in the graphic above) was to the east of the rifle location and it seems to be further south of the box by the wooden post and maybe the arrowed boxes in between.
Where the rifle lay on the floor appears to be in the 15 to 15 1/2 foot range.
Sort of. But the row of boxes veered towards the southwest. The box that is beside the wooden post is not even in line with the south side of the post. There's a gap.
There a box (which I labelled "E") that's as long as those in the tall stack. It seem to be short in DP #12 because of perspective.
So Boone thought the rifle was underneath a pallet?
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338942/m1/1/high_res/)
Rightly-or-wrongly, the map (which is the only thing I have to go by) shows the majority of the wooden posts (that go east-to-west from the rifle location) centered on the 13-foot mark from the north wall. Maybe someone at the museum could go measure it.
(http://i63.tinypic.com/11uwbb9.jpg)
The arrowed boxes above are not where the rifle was located, but they appear to be a bit south of the box by the wooden post. The tall stack (it has the label "Looking West" on it in the graphic above) was to the east of the rifle location and it seems to be further south of the box by the wooden post and maybe the arrowed boxes in between.
Where the rifle lay on the floor appears to be in the 15 to 15 1/2 foot range.
Sort of. But the row of boxes veered towards the southwest. The box that is beside the wooden post is not even in line with the south side of the post. There's a gap.
There a box (which I labelled "E") that's as long as those in the tall stack. It seem to be short in DP #12 because of perspective.
So Boone thought the rifle was underneath a pallet?
Jeryy Look at the map.... The south side of the wooden pillar was 13 feet from the north wall.
The pillars are 6"X6" .
And that dimension provides a scale for the box that is abutted to the south side of the pillar..... The south side of that box was NOT 14 feet 10 inches from the north wall....it was about 14 feet from the north wall or about 1 foot 4 inches north of the spot where Boone and Weitzman discovered the rifle ON THE FLOOR beneath the wooden pallet.
Apparently the conspiracy allegation is that "they" framed him for the assassination because they wanted to blame Castro to justify an invasion. But then "they" also conducted a fake investigation - the Warren Commission - that cleared Castro of any involvement. Yes, the same people who framed him in order to remove Castro also said Castro was innocent of any involvement.
That makes no sense but in conspiracy world it doesn't have to make sense; it just has to feed a conspiracy belief.
I see the posts as a group centered on 13'. But OK.
Map says the wooden posts are 9 1/2" square.
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338668/m1/1/high_res/)
If the wooden pillars are six inches square, then that makes the light switches on the one shown above very small, about 1.3 x 2.5 inches.
"Beneath the wooden pallet." LOL!
"I was on the floor looking under the flat at the same time
he was looking on the top side and we saw the gun"
Anything that goes against the WCR, I guess. It's just a good-faith report by some old statesmen and young ambitious attorneys; it did nothing to you.
I see the posts as a group centered on 13'. But OK.
Map says the wooden posts are 9 1/2" square.
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338668/m1/1/high_res/)
If the wooden pillars are six inches square, then that makes the light switches on the one shown above very small, about 1.3 x 2.5 inches.
"Beneath the wooden pallet." LOL!
"I was on the floor looking under the flat at the same time
he was looking on the top side and we saw the gun"
Anything that goes against the WCR, I guess. It's just a good-faith report by some old statesmen and young ambitious attorneys; it did nothing to you.
(http://i68.tinypic.com/1zmjnk4.jpg)
A crop from DP #12 is shown in the upper-right of the graphic above (DP #12 shows the "Stair Way" sign on the brick column). I think the south end of the brick column is getting about the 15 foot mark.
The brick column is centered on the wooden posts and the map suggests they were centered on the 13 foot mark; the brick column is a lot wider than the posts, so a foot-foot wide brick column will get its south edge to the 15 foot mark. Another four inches or so and there's the rifle.
The nearest pallet southward from the stairway (Pallet 1) is 18 or 19 feet from the north wall.
I see the posts as a group centered on 13'. But OK.
Map says the wooden posts are 9 1/2" square.
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338668/m1/1/high_res/)
If the wooden pillars are six inches square, then that makes the light switches on the one shown above very small, about 1.3 x 2.5 inches.
"Beneath the wooden pallet." LOL!
"I was on the floor looking under the flat at the same time
he was looking on the top side and we saw the gun"
Anything that goes against the WCR, I guess. It's just a good-faith report by some old statesmen and young ambitious attorneys; it did nothing to you.
"Beneath the wooden pallet." LOL!
YES!!...."Beneath the wooden pallet." ... Isn't that the place that Studebaker is focusing his camera? If the rifle hadn't been found there at the 15 foot 4 inch mark why would Studebaker have depicted that he was directly east of the rifle ( the rifle pointed right at his feet ) when he snapped DP #12?
Notice where Detective Studebaker was standing when he took DP 12 and DP 13
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338942/m1/1/high_res/)
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338668/m1/1/high_res/)
This is DP #12 .....And Studebaker was facing the west side wall of the sixth floor when he took DP 12 and DP 13. He was in line with the north edge of the wooden pallet on the floor ....and it was beneath the north edge of that pallet where Seymour Weitzman spotted the rifle.....15 feet 4 inches from the north wall. ( We can be certain that this spot is 15 feet 4 inches from the north wall by looking at the west wall in the background.....and taking note that the brick column just to the right of the north edge of the window. The map shows us that that brick column was at 13 feet from the north wall and the window was a couple of feet further south.
"Beneath the wooden pallet." LOL!
YES!!...."Beneath the wooden pallet." ... Isn't that the place that Studebaker is focusing his camera? If the rifle hadn't been found there at the 15 foot 4 inch mark why would Studebaker have depicted that he was directly east of the rifle ( the rifle pointed right at his feet ) when he snapped DP #12?
Notice where Detective Studebaker was standing when he took DP 12 and DP 13
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338942/m1/1/high_res/)
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338668/m1/1/high_res/)
This is DP #12 .....And Studebaker was facing the west side wall of the sixth floor when he took DP 12 and DP 13. He was in line with the north edge of the wooden pallet on the floor ....and it was beneath the north edge of that pallet where Seymour Weitzman spotted the rifle.....15 feet 4 inches from the north wall. ( We can be certain that this spot is 15 feet 4 inches from the north wall by looking at the west wall in the background.....and taking note that the brick column just to the right of the north edge of the window. The map shows us that that brick column was at 13 feet from the north wall and the window was a couple of feet further south.
taking note that the brick column just to the right of the north edge of the window. The map shows us that that brick column was at 13 feet from the north wall
The north edge of the window is 15 feet from the north wall.......
Since i'm getting no feed back, I can only hope that I'm making myself clear. The point is:....The rifle was found laying on the floor 15 feet 4 inches from the north wall. It was NOT found where the official in situ photos depict it. This not speculation ...it is a provable fact. which is substantiated by Tom Alyea's video which shows Detective Day grab the leather sling of the rifle and hoist it from the floor.
taking note that the brick column just to the right of the north edge of the window. The map shows us that that brick column was at 13 feet from the north wall
The north edge of the window is 15 feet from the north wall.......
Since i'm getting no feed back, I can only hope that I'm making myself clear. The point is:....The rifle was found laying on the floor 15 feet 4 inches from the north wall. It was NOT found where the official in situ photos depict it. This not speculation ...it is a provable fact. which is substantiated by Tom Alyea's video which shows Detective Day grab the leather sling of the rifle and hoist it from the floor.
Until your proof of a frame-up shows up, I'll continue to deal with those who claim a frontal assault.
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth338942/m1/1/high_res/)
Rightly-or-wrongly, the map (which is the only thing I have to go by) shows the majority of the wooden posts (that go east-to-west from the rifle location) centered on the 13-foot mark from the north wall. Maybe someone at the museum could go measure it.
(http://i63.tinypic.com/11uwbb9.jpg)
The arrowed boxes above are not where the rifle was located, but they appear to be a bit south of the box by the wooden post. The tall stack (it has the label "Looking West" on it in the graphic above) was to the east of the rifle location and it seems to be further south of the box by the wooden post and maybe the arrowed boxes in between.
Where the rifle lay on the floor appears to be in the 15 to 15 1/2 foot range.
Sort of. But the row of boxes veered towards the southwest. The box that is beside the wooden post is not even in line with the south side of the post. There's a gap.
There a box (which I labelled "E") that's as long as those in the tall stack. It seem to be short in DP #12 because of perspective.
So Boone thought the rifle was underneath a pallet?
| (http://i68.tinypic.com/n1zbbs.jpg) | (http://i65.tinypic.com/25hfwoo.jpg) |
Where the rifle lay on the floor appears to be in the 15 to 15 1/2 foot range.
Yes you're right....And thank you for being honest. Studebaker said the rifle was 15 feet 4 inches from the north wall....
(http://i68.tinypic.com/n1zbbs.jpg) (http://i65.tinypic.com/25hfwoo.jpg)
If you look closely you'll notice that Studebaker wrote the word "Gun" twice....and one of the inscriptions is not very visible. and it is in a slightly different spot than the more legible "Gun"... The less visible "Gun" seems to be a bit further from the north wall than 15 feet 4 inches.
Mr. WEITZMAN - After that, we entered the building and started to search floor to floor and we started on the first floor, second floor, third floor and on up, when we got up to the fifth or sixth floor, I forget, I believe it was the sixth floor, the chief deputy or whoever was in charge of the floor, I forget the officer's name, from the sheriff's office, said he wanted that floor torn apart. He wanted that gun and it was there somewhere,
Mr. WEITZMAN - After that, we entered the building and started to search floor to floor and we started on the first floor, second floor, third floor and on up, when we got up to the fifth or sixth floor, I forget, I believe it was the sixth floor, the chief deputy or whoever was in charge of the floor, I forget the officer's name, from the sheriff's office, said he wanted that floor torn apart. He wanted that gun and it was there somewhere, so myself and another officer from the sheriff's department, I can't remember his name, he and I proceeded until we----
Mr. BALL - Was his name Boone?
Mr. WEITZMAN - That is correct, Boone and I, and as he was looking over the rear section of the building, I would say the northwest corner, I was on the floor looking under the flat at the same time he was looking on the top side and we saw the gun, I would say, simultaneously and I said, "There it is" and he started hollering, "We got it." It was covered with boxes. It was well protected as far as the naked eye because I would venture to say eight or nine of us stumbled over that gun a couple times before we thoroughly searched the building.
Imo, this statement from Weitzman implies he was looking THROUGH the open space under the pallet of boxes ("the flat"), and that's why he saw the rifle on the floor on the south side of row of boxes that Boone was leaning over, hence both of them seeing the rifle about the same time.
Apparently some 8 or 9 people passed by that gap between the pallet of boxes and the wall of boxes closest to the staircase, and did not see the rifle. Weitzman suggests it was "covered with boxes" and was "well protected"
...and how exactly did he know that a gun was there somewhere?
Mr. WEITZMAN - After that, we entered the building and started to search floor to floor and we started on the first floor, second floor, third floor and on up, when we got up to the fifth or sixth floor, I forget, I believe it was the sixth floor, the chief deputy or whoever was in charge of the floor, I forget the officer's name, from the sheriff's office, said he wanted that floor torn apart. He wanted that gun and it was there somewhere, so myself and another officer from the sheriff's department, I can't remember his name, he and I proceeded until we----
Mr. BALL - Was his name Boone?
Mr. WEITZMAN - That is correct, Boone and I, and as he was looking over the rear section of the building, I would say the northwest corner, I was on the floor looking under the flat at the same time he was looking on the top side and we saw the gun, I would say, simultaneously and I said, "There it is" and he started hollering, "We got it." It was covered with boxes. It was well protected as far as the naked eye because I would venture to say eight or nine of us stumbled over that gun a couple times before we thoroughly searched the building.
Imo, this statement from Weitzman implies he was looking THROUGH the open space under the pallet of boxes ("the flat"), and that's why he saw the rifle on the floor on the south side of row of boxes that Boone was leaning over, hence both of them seeing the rifle about the same time.
Apparently some 8 or 9 people passed by that gap between the pallet of boxes and the wall of boxes closest to the staircase, and did not see the rifle. Weitzman suggests it was "covered with boxes" and was "well protected"
Question:... If the rifle had been discovered about 14 feet from the north wall and jammed between boxes of books, as depicted by the official in situ photo ....
Would Deputy Boone have needed a powerful flashlight to see it?
Not sure the rifle was under the palette and then moved from there and placed scope side up, but if so, that could explain Wietzman having serous depression problem later in his life. Its seems strange to me that Wietzman would have serious depression problem just for making an honest mistake misidentifying the MC rifle as a Mauser. So I have to suspect something else was bothering him worse than that.
They admitted that some of the boxes were moved to make it easier for Alyea to film and for the photo of the MC rifle laying on the floor, so I have to wonder if "moving some" means actually "unstacking the 2nd parallel row of boxes"
The width of the gap required, between 2 parallel walls of fairly heavy boxes, to make it easy for an MC rifle wooden stock with an OFFSET left scope, to slide down all the way to the floor just from gravity, is how wide?
Then there is the wiping the stock, scope, trigger, clean of any prints, and also gripping the rifle by the scope probably with a rag or his shirt, so not to leave print on the scope, while the gunman or MC rifle 'holder" is trying to get it in that gap and if it has to be pushed down or slides on it on?
This seems to me like it would take longer time than just 3 seconds like the Beyond Conspriacy video showing a guy just placing a rifle in a BIG GAP of about 6 inches between just 2 single boxes laying on the floor :D
Not sure the rifle was under the palette and then moved from there and placed scope side up, but if so, that could explain Wietzman having serous depression problem later in his life. Its seems strange to me that Wietzman would have serious depression problem just for making an honest mistake misidentifying the MC rifle as a Mauser. So I have to suspect something else was bothering him worse than that.
They admitted that some of the boxes were moved to make it easier for Alyea to film and for the photo of the MC rifle laying on the floor, so I have to wonder if "moving some" means actually "unstacking the 2nd parallel row of boxes"
The width of the gap required, between 2 parallel walls of fairly heavy boxes, to make it easy for an MC rifle wooden stock with an OFFSET left scope, to slide down all the way to the floor just from gravity, is how wide?
Then there is the wiping the stock, scope, trigger, clean of any prints, and also gripping the rifle by the scope probably with a rag or his shirt, so not to leave print on the scope, while the gunman or MC rifle 'holder" is trying to get it in that gap and if it has to be pushed down or slides on it on?
This seems to me like it would take longer time than just 3 seconds like the Beyond Conspriacy video showing a guy just placing a rifle in a BIG GAP of about 6 inches between just 2 single boxes laying on the floor :D
Not sure the rifle was under the palette and then moved from there and placed scope side up, but if so, that could explain Wietzman having serous depression problem later in his life. Its seems strange to me that Wietzman would have serious depression problem just for making an honest mistake misidentifying the MC rifle as a Mauser. So I have to suspect something else was bothering him worse than that.
They admitted that some of the boxes were moved to make it easier for Alyea to film and for the photo of the MC rifle laying on the floor, so I have to wonder if "moving some" means actually "unstacking the 2nd parallel row of boxes"
The width of the gap required, between 2 parallel walls of fairly heavy boxes, to make it easy for an MC rifle wooden stock with an OFFSET left scope, to slide down all the way to the floor just from gravity, is how wide?
Then there is the wiping the stock, scope, trigger, clean of any prints, and also gripping the rifle by the scope probably with a rag or his shirt, so not to leave print on the scope, while the gunman or MC rifle 'holder" is trying to get it in that gap and if it has to be pushed down or slides on it on?
This seems to me like it would take longer time than just 3 seconds like the Beyond Conspriacy video showing a guy just placing a rifle in a BIG GAP of about 6 inches between just 2 single boxes laying on the floor :D
Question:... If the rifle had been discovered about 14 feet from the north wall and jammed between boxes of books, as depicted by the official in situ photo ....
Would Deputy Boone have needed a powerful flashlight to see it?
Name your shooter
Question:... If the rifle had been discovered about 14 feet from the north wall and jammed between boxes of books, as depicted by the official in situ photo ....
Would Deputy Boone have needed a powerful flashlight to see it?
OK.... so nobody had the balls to answer that question..... I'll try another.
If the rifle had been jammed between the boxes as depicted in the official in situ photo....
Would Seymour Weitzman have been able to see it while being down on the floor and looking beneath the boxes?
You are asking a good question Walt, how could Wietzman have seen the rifle laying on the floor when he was looking through/under the palette, if the rifle were in between the 2 STACKED WALLS of boxes in the narrow gap that only Boone could have seen INTO from ABOVE??
They had NOT moved the boxes out of the way to get the photo at this time. The boxes were moved only AFTER Boone shined his light and looked into the narrow gap, right?
You are asking a good question Walt, how could Wietzman have seen the rifle laying on the floor when he was looking through/under the palette, if the rifle were in between the 2 STACKED WALLS of boxes in the narrow gap that only Boone could have seen INTO from ABOVE??
They had NOT moved the boxes out of the way to get the photo at this time. The boxes were moved only AFTER Boone shined his light and looked into the narrow gap, right?
| (http://i68.tinypic.com/n1zbbs.jpg) | (http://i65.tinypic.com/25hfwoo.jpg) |
(http://i68.tinypic.com/n1zbbs.jpg) (http://i65.tinypic.com/25hfwoo.jpg)
Notice the notation of " CARTONS HERE NOT SHOWN" Well there WERE CARTONS there when Weitzman saw the rifle....His head would have been in the position of the Letter "N" at the end of the word "SHOWN" It should be obvious that Weitzman could NOT have seen the rifle if if had been jammed betwen the boxes as it is depicted in the fake in situ photo. The "cartons not shown" would have been in his line of sight.....
Notice that the camera was pointing directly west when Studebaker snapped DP # 12...... Studebaker was in the same aisle that Seymour Weitzman was in when he spotted the rifle beneath the pallet.... IF the rifle had been jammed between the boxes Weitzman could not have seen the rifle because he would have been at an angle to the rifle ( if it had been there)
I suspect that the ORIGINAL configuration of the 2nd row of boxes was NOT in disarray as in the photo of the rifle on the floor. That disarray was from UNSTACKING the boxes so as to allow for the photo to be taken.
Therefore, IF the original condition was 2 parallel walls of stacked boxes with only a very narrow gap between, that would explain having gone past these boxes as many as EIGHT times and failed to see the rifle.
Not until Boone actually got a light and shined it in the NARROW gap between those 2 parallel WALLS of stacked boxes, was the rifle actually seen by Boone. Imo, Weitzman is "embellishing" his sighting of the rifle to coincide with Boone spotting it 1st, even though that would be impossible to have seen the rifle from the other side of the pallete of boxes Wietzman was peering under/through.
Imo, the original arrangement of the boxes was 2 rows of parallel walls of boxes, which is implied by Wietzmans own statement that the rifle was "well hidden" and "covered with boxes".
The configuration of the boxes as presented in the photo of the rifle on the floor is NOT a "well hidden, covered by boxes" condition, imho, and I doubt seriously that if that had been the actual original configuration that they would have missed seeing the rifle EIGHT TIMES passing by it.
Was this imaginary location that you refer to, 15 feet 4 inches from the north wall? Detective Studebaker measured the distnce from the north wall to the rifle ....15' 4"..... The "pillar" shown in the drawing was 13 feet from the north wall.... and that means the rifle in the drawing is only about 14 feet from the north wall...Obviously that IS NOT where Studebaker saw the rifle on the floor....
Not sure exactly what you are suggesting Walt. Are you suggesting Studebaker would exaggerate, fabricate, rearrange, add or subtract, from the original condition of these 2 rows of boxes, much as was done at the SN window, with the paper bag not being photographed?
If so,, IM SHOCKED!!! :D
(http://i68.tinypic.com/n1zbbs.jpg) (http://i65.tinypic.com/25hfwoo.jpg)
Notice the notation of " CARTONS HERE NOT SHOWN" Well there WERE CARTONS there when Weitzman saw the rifle....His head would have been in the position of the Letter "N" at the end of the word "SHOWN" It should be obvious that Weitzman could NOT have seen the rifle if if had been jammed betwen the boxes as it is depicted in the fake in situ photo. The "cartons not shown" would have been in his line of sight.....
Notice that the camera was pointing directly west when Studebaker snapped DP # 12...... Studebaker was in the same aisle that Seymour Weitzman was in when he spotted the rifle beneath the pallet.... IF the rifle had been jammed between the boxes Weitzman could not have seen the rifle because he would have been at an angle to the rifle ( if it had been there)
| (http://i68.tinypic.com/n1zbbs.jpg) | (http://i65.tinypic.com/25hfwoo.jpg) |
(http://i68.tinypic.com/n1zbbs.jpg) (http://i65.tinypic.com/25hfwoo.jpg)
Notice the notation of " CARTONS HERE NOT SHOWN" Well there WERE CARTONS there when Weitzman saw the rifle....His head would have been in the position of the Letter "N" at the end of the word "SHOWN"
His head would have been in the position of the Letter "N" at the end of the word "SHOWN"
I had hoped that someone would challenge the above..... Because Weitzman's head would NOT have been in the position of the letter "N" ...... Weitzman would have been a few feet further east ..... But that changes nothing.....The boxes would have been between him and the rifle if the rifle had bee jammed between the boxes as depicted in the phony in situ photos. Weitzman could not have seen through those boxes..... But he could easily have seen the rifle beneath the wooden pallet...